But your example makes my point........ through force of knowing what is better for me (a passive restraint system) the auto industry then was forced to capitulate and provide seatbelts. So seatbelts might have been designed by the private sector, but it wasn't the market that instituted their installation.
I'm not saying that seatbelts are not a good idea. They are. But forcing me to wear one, and making it a crime if I don't, is not a good idea. Eating my vegetables is a good idea. Perhaps that can be a crime too if I don't. Just because something is a good idea doesn't mean it needs to be a law. We haven't progressed to that stage of thinking in this state, and I don't think we will. Hell, I'll soon have to sign my "papers" if I have a little nasal congestion. Anyway, to bring this closer to Minneapolis or Minnesota, of course we all know that failure to wear a seat belt was formerly a secondary offense (one for which you could not be pulled over for that infraction only). Of course that's changed........to be able to be pulled over for doing something that might or might not be in MY self-interest is silly. And think of how many other doors that opens for the police who will swear that they saw the driver without their seatbelt on...... before they ran him for warrants. It's early and I've had no coffee yet. Mike Thompson Windom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Bonham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "mpls-issues" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2005 1:22 AM Subject: Re: [Mpls] How quickly we get used to a smoke-freeenvironment(but not to Hooters) > > >Try as I might, I cannot think of a better moniker than "nanny-state" to > >describe > >. . . > > those ridiculous seat belt laws > >. . . > >Mike Thompson > >Windom > > But Mike, the whole idea of 'seat belts' came from your > private sector, the automobile manufacturers. It was pushed by them > as a cheap way to avoid the proposed 'air bags', and their lobbying > power forced it in over the objections of auto safety agencies. And > they managed to sneak a little goodie into the law, making it hard > for people injured by unsafe auto designs to sue the manufacturer. > > Eventually, the automobile manufactures came up with the idea of > making these a special 'safety' option, that they could get people to > pay extra for. > > If only they had thought of that in the 1960's, think how many lives > would have been saved on our highways! > > Tim Bonham, Ward 12, Standish-Ericsson > > > REMINDERS: > 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > > REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
