ANSWERS: 7
  • Yes, I think the seat belt law is one example of the government acting as parent-surrogate. While I fully support using a seat belt and always do so in a car, I don't think it's the government's business to force me to do so.
  • I'm more concerned with the air bag law being an effect of the nany state. Smaller people have been killed by it. The statistics used by the people who pushed and lobbied for the air bag law were manipulated. They wanted the nanny state to be extended and used statistics projecting people being saved with air bags versus people NOT WEARING SEAT BELTS who would have been hurt or killed - but they neglected to mention that critical fact. The honest statistics taking into account that most people wear seat belts show a very small number of saves, and as I recall statistically less than the not insignificant number of small people killed by air bags. I know my answer does not directly address your question but I believe the philosophy is connected to your question.
  • Not really. It's sometimes good. Children become parentless if their parents crash and die so there's nothing wrong to do what you can against accidents. But I always use the seat belt, not because I was forced by government/parliament/parents/police, but for safety reasons.
  • I don't think so. It's there to reduce death risk while travelling. What's wrong with that?
  • You think the seat belt law is bad, what about the car seat law? I know it's okay because it saves lives but it's so annoying. I do it, cause I love my kids.
  • You think the seat belt law is bad, what about the car seat law? I know it's okay because it saves lives but it's so annoying. I do it, cause I love my kids.
  • 2-5-2017 Just because something is a good idea that doesn't mean it should be a law.

Copyright 2018, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy