Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyD
The relevance of this is, were it not law to wear a motorcycle helmet I'd probably not wear mine if I were going to the store for a carton of milk. Not that I don't STRONGLY believe in helmet laws but out of my own cynicism that I'd just plain get lazy on some days and day #(%* it, I dont want to find my helmet under my pile of clothes.
|
I am strongly opposed to most "nanny" laws.
As stupid as people as a collective may be, unless the results of their actions have a direct physical impact on another person, I feel that they should be free to screw up their own life as much as they would like.... Helmet laws, even anti-smoking laws. Let the BUSINESS decide. If someone doesn't like smoke, they can chose to take their business to one that does not allow smoking. I can understand the frustration of some, but when it really got too extreme was when smoking was banned in BARS.
People love to bring up the financial implications of people who act contrary to these "nanny" laws, but in actuality, while they may quote millions of dollars a year to keep these people alive, those numbers are a drop in the fiscal bucket of the state and federal budgets.
There's over 300 million Americans... how much do people honestly think it costs them, as an individual, to keep an injured person alive?
$20 per year? Likely not even that. Of all of the things that our tax money is used for, THAT is one thing that doesn't bother me.
Anyways, surprisingly, California does not require helmets for bicycle riders over 18.