On 7 May 2013, at 20:32, Bob W <[email protected]> wrote: > On 7 May 2013, at 17:39, Bill <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 07/05/2013 9:02 AM, Gerrit Visser wrote: >>> But if it is covered by insurance, it is still 'public' money. Insurance >>> companies get their money from... you guessed it.. people like you and me. >>> My premiums go to pay for someone else's incident. >>> Its not like the person who had the incident is taking responsibility and >>> paying the expenses themselves. >> An insurance company has the option of opting out and letting you die. A >> public health care system doesn't have that privilege. As for Mr Walkdens >> rather weak arguments, one could use the same talking points to decry seat >> belt use. > > Which indeed I do. > > B
Just to expand on that - i disagree with compulsion in wearing seat-belts just as I do with cycle helmets and the compulsory wearing of anything by anyone. Adults in full possession of the facts and their faculties should be free to do whatever they want as long as they don't limit enjoyment of the same rights by others. I do, in fact, buckle up when I'm in the car because 1. the arguments in favour are much stronger than those against 2. The stupid law says I have to 3. The driver is liable for the passengers, so if I'm driving I set an example, if I'm not I don't have the right to push the responsibility onto the driver These are fundamentally different from the cycle helmet arguments. B > >> The point is, we limit injury when we can. >> >> No we don't. If we did there'd be no cars on the road, and no fat people slumped in their couches eating McDos and supersize Cokes between drags on their Marlboros. People are free to eat themselves to death at our expense, they should be free to crack their heads on the pavement ditto. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
