2 ms·
You could argue the same about people playing sports instead of safely exercising in a gym. And what about those consuming drugs? An argument to ban all drugs.
by cm2187 3y ago
You could argue the same about people playing sports instead of safely exercising in a gym. And what about those consuming drugs? An argument to ban all drugs. If that's the standard there are a ton of activities you will curb or ban.
- dghlsakjg 3y agoWe have required safety gear to participate in most sports leagues too…
- onedognight 3y agoThese rules are sponsored by “Big Shin-guard” and everybody knows it.
- jtbayly 3y agoBy law?
- dghlsakjg 3y agoWell you won’t be allowed to participate, and could be trespassed if you refuse to follow the rules… so kinda
- jtbayly 3y agoThat's not remotely "by law." If I could start a league tomorrow where shin-guards were optional, would the police come knocking or not? If not, there's no law. There's private rules. The whole question under debate is whether actual laws are necessary for this situation. I fail to see how appealing to voluntary association rules have any bearing on the question.
- dghlsakjg 3y agoYou wouldn’t be allowed to use public fields without insurance, and no one is going to insure you if your whole thing is “no safety gear”. So you would have to use a private field. So the practical effect is identical to seatbelts; you can absolutely operate without seatbelts/shin guards, but only in completely private facilities.