4 ms·

>Should seatbelts be a personal choice too? Do they infringe on your "liberty"? Yes and Yes. Now you get it.

by quantumBerry 5y ago

nicetryguy 5y ago
Your ignorance is disgusting. A Darwin award awaits you.
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  Ignorance apparently is wearing a seatbelt because of your own personal decisions and risk analysis instead of some nitwit with a badge and a gun threatening to take what you've rightfully earned.
  - nicetryguy 5y ago
    Ok. Say you do crash without wearing a seatbelt and smash your head against a windshield and sustain a head injury and survive. You're going to use additional medical resources and require months of physical therapy. You're going to drain the time and money of your family who has to now support your incapicated state. You may never be able to talk or walk again and become a drain on society for the rest of your days. The world has more people in it than you and your selfish decisions affect alot more people than just yourself.
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      So which are you arguing against, public healthcare or the mandates that hospitals admit emergency patients regardless of ability to pay?
      - nicetryguy 5y ago
        Neither. You should consider other people for a change.
        quantumBerry 5y ago
        > Neither. You should consider other people for a change. And your hypocritical argument is on the selfish belief that you believe society owes you something (supporting your healthcare) when you make a mistake. That is your argument not mine. I believe liberty means you can choose not to wear a seatbelt, and society can choose not to support your mistake. Personally I do not wear a seatbelt while riding a motorcycle, and if I am permanently disfigured or mentally damaged I hope that If I'm unable to on my own that my wife would help me put a swift and terminal end to my misery, but I don't believe I am owed that luxury by her or anyone else. Rather any support should be voluntary (through trade or voluntary charity). Your argument is rooted in a belief that people are owed something (either public healthcare, or at a bare minimum mandatory admission by hospital even if they cannot pay.) Because of that belief you seek to modify the behavior of others because of your selfish desire to minimize the cost of supporting them in the event of accident. The simple solution is to simply remove the support of society to remove that cost. You cannot possibly legislate the risk out of life.
        nicetryguy 5y ago
        > if I am permanently disfigured or mentally damaged I hope that If I'm unable to on my own that my wife would help me put a swift and terminal end to my misery What about her misery? That will be permanent. Did that ever occur to you? > You cannot possibly legislate the risk out of life. You can sure as hell hedge against it. Does waiting at red lights and following traffic signals infringe your freedom to get from point A to point B faster? According to your infallible view of the rules and regulations of society we should just have four way free-for-alls and accept the risks of piloting tons of steel at unregulated speeds hurling towards each other and accept the inevitable consequences of mass death on a daily basis. I cannot prescribe to your worldview. I believe in road signs, traffic lights, and people being punished for breaking these rules with my tax dollars. I believe i am entitled by the government to a right to travel to point A to point B without legitimately fearing for my life on a daily basis. "Well some accidents happen so that means that traffic lights and road signs are completely useless. It's just the government infringing on my ability to hit an accelerator whenever i damn well please." Give me a break. You are narrow headed, selfish, foolish, and wrong.

>Should seatbelts be a personal choice too? Do they infringe on your "liberty"? Yes and Yes. Now you get it.

nicetryguy 5y ago

Your ignorance is disgusting. A Darwin award awaits you.

quantumBerry 5y ago
Ignorance apparently is wearing a seatbelt because of your own personal decisions and risk analysis instead of some nitwit with a badge and a gun threatening to take what you've rightfully earned.
- nicetryguy 5y ago
  Ok. Say you do crash without wearing a seatbelt and smash your head against a windshield and sustain a head injury and survive. You're going to use additional medical resources and require months of physical therapy. You're going to drain the time and money of your family who has to now support your incapicated state. You may never be able to talk or walk again and become a drain on society for the rest of your days. The world has more people in it than you and your selfish decisions affect alot more people than just yourself.
  - quantumBerry 5y ago
    So which are you arguing against, public healthcare or the mandates that hospitals admit emergency patients regardless of ability to pay?
    - nicetryguy 5y ago
      Neither. You should consider other people for a change.
      - quantumBerry 5y ago
        > Neither. You should consider other people for a change. And your hypocritical argument is on the selfish belief that you believe society owes you something (supporting your healthcare) when you make a mistake. That is your argument not mine. I believe liberty means you can choose not to wear a seatbelt, and society can choose not to support your mistake. Personally I do not wear a seatbelt while riding a motorcycle, and if I am permanently disfigured or mentally damaged I hope that If I'm unable to on my own that my wife would help me put a swift and terminal end to my misery, but I don't believe I am owed that luxury by her or anyone else. Rather any support should be voluntary (through trade or voluntary charity). Your argument is rooted in a belief that people are owed something (either public healthcare, or at a bare minimum mandatory admission by hospital even if they cannot pay.) Because of that belief you seek to modify the behavior of others because of your selfish desire to minimize the cost of supporting them in the event of accident. The simple solution is to simply remove the support of society to remove that cost. You cannot possibly legislate the risk out of life.
        nicetryguy 5y ago
        > if I am permanently disfigured or mentally damaged I hope that If I'm unable to on my own that my wife would help me put a swift and terminal end to my misery What about her misery? That will be permanent. Did that ever occur to you? > You cannot possibly legislate the risk out of life. You can sure as hell hedge against it. Does waiting at red lights and following traffic signals infringe your freedom to get from point A to point B faster? According to your infallible view of the rules and regulations of society we should just have four way free-for-alls and accept the risks of piloting tons of steel at unregulated speeds hurling towards each other and accept the inevitable consequences of mass death on a daily basis. I cannot prescribe to your worldview. I believe in road signs, traffic lights, and people being punished for breaking these rules with my tax dollars. I believe i am entitled by the government to a right to travel to point A to point B without legitimately fearing for my life on a daily basis. "Well some accidents happen so that means that traffic lights and road signs are completely useless. It's just the government infringing on my ability to hit an accelerator whenever i damn well please." Give me a break. You are narrow headed, selfish, foolish, and wrong.