you are trying to paint the issue as all or nothing. from terry Liberty parker:
"A person's self-absorbed assertion of liberty that disregards justified rights of other persons is irresponsible, to say the least." it can easily be argued that not having seat belt laws and anti drug laws creates a cost to society from the by products of people hurting themselves and others in the process, and that cost infriges on the rights of others. thus anti drug laws and seat belt laws and restriction on serving alcohol to drunks are justified simply in that the rights of others being violated and exposed to the costs and abuses from the above. Vic mark robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Vic, > > I am not arguing that a lot of people don't agree it's the > state's job to protect them from themselves. I AM arguing that > such "protection" is not constitutional or libertarian. I AM > arguing that it's a violation of our basic freedom (to live as we > want as long as we don't directly violate any one else's). I AM > arguing that your argument consists of a common logical fallacy: > popularity is no justification or proof of anything other than > popularity. If you think seatbelt and helmet laws don't violate > freedoms, go ahead and break them and get yourself pulled over - > we will await your report on how the things you were forced to do > (and not do) and moneys you were forced to pay were not > violations of your freedoms. > > > > -Mark > > > > PS: You win. After careful consideration, I changed my mind. In > fact, I have some more ideas to force-protect people from > themselves even better. I think there should also be helmet laws > for cars. It's been proven over and over that helmets reduce > injuries from automobile accidents, and full-face helmets reduce > even more. After that, we should not stop. Similar studies exist > for full fire suits and HANS Devices. That's just the driving > requirements; let's not forget the prohibitions. Safety would be > certainly be increased by outlawing all non-fireproof clothing, > all radios and stereos, all talking, any speed over 20mph, all > night driving, any gas tanks over 5-gallon capacity, all open > windows (bees can fly in), and (of course) all cell phones and > tinted windows. Yeah, I'll be calling my congressman to get right > on these things right away - NOT. > > (Now who is out on a limb?) > > > > > > _____ > > > > > seat belt and helmet laws are another reason why you loose public > support. no one thinks that seat belt laws are a violation of > your > freedoms. it comes down to the simple question does the state > have the > right to prevent you hurting yourself and people overwhelmingly > say yes. > > the LP is out on a limb with this issue. > > Vic > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 1.2 million kids a year are victims of human trafficking. Stop slavery. http://us.click.yahoo.com/U6CDDD/izNLAA/cUmLAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
