How seat belts made a mockery of the Constitution

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


OK, so you got to choose something that I like and make it a crime. Will you allow me to choose something you like and make it a criminal act?
Would you agree to me passing a law making it is a crime to be gay? Gay men rape little boys and I find that a lot more offensive than a person not wearing a seat belt.
You obviously agree to error on the side of caution and if there is a chance of saving someone by passing a seat belt law, then using that same logic it is acceptable to save a child from being raped by passing a law making homosexuality a crime.
Now you just go ahead and tell me how "it's different". Tell me how I am comparing apples and oranges and you are most assuredly the superior person,




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Motorhead
Whatever your Constitutional views, seat belts save lives. That's all that should matter.

This is the 21st Century, think realistically. There's more traffic on the roads than ever before, more powerful and faster traffic than ever before, more people driving under the influence of drink or drugs than ever before, more road rage and anti-social/inconsiderate driving than ever before.

And all often taking places on roads that were designed during a much more sedate, polite and traffic free era.

That alone is enough to justfy seatbelt use under simple common sense.


No it is not, you sir are sadly mistaken. No single life is more important than the freedom to make your own decisions. This is why so many people died creating this nation. They could have created it any way imaginable, but they chose to write a Bill of Rights and base our nation around that.
Just because it is the 21st century does not mean that liberty is obsolete, and that forcing your will on others is righteous



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
I don't think anybody is arguing the fact seat belts save lives. I'm all for safety equipment and wear a seat belt myself. I also think it should be mandatory for children.

But I also believe in freedom. The freedom for adults to make decisions, even poor ones.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Here is what I conclude from this based on the postings.
Those who tend to favor big government will focus on the seat belt and make the conversation into a discussion of seat belt safety instead of a discussion of what was intended, the 10th Amendment and the Federal Branch's continual encroachment on it

I did not come here to argue if seat belts are safe, I did not come here to ask if seat belts save lives. All of you who replied to me knew that, you are smart people, So when I see you skirting the question which is clearly about 1 thing, and turning it into something completely off topic, It makes me suspect you are fully aware that a violation has occurred and you slide into Debbie Wasserman Shultz mode.
I will try to ask again

Here is the words of the Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Here is the question

If the people of a state vote on an issue, and the issue does not violate the Bill of Rights. Does the Federal Branch have the power to overrule the will of the People and force the state it to comply with them using any means they deem to be effective

Yes or No?
There is no grey area.
There is no depends on the circumstance.
Repeal the 10th Amendment or abide by it



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:17 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Well again, the seat belt laws really are not a good analogy for government intrusion.


As another poster pointed out, the roads on which we drive are provided by the government; publicly funded through taxes and tolls. Therefore, the government has the right and power to set and enforce the rules by which we drive, i.e. seat belt laws, speed limits, etc. There is no constitutional issue in this case. Now, if you happened to have a spread of land of several thousand acres, and decided to build a system of roads on it to make it easier for you to maintain your property, the government would have no say-so as to whether you wear seat belts or how fast you drive.....as long as it is on your roads, and not public ones.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 04:44 AM
link   
The government should make tobacco illegal.

The government should make alcohol illegal.

The government should make Candy illegal

The government should make McDonalds illegal

The government should make Knives illegal

The government should make non-safety scissors illegal.

You see how totally stupid that train of thought is? Every single one of those things I mentioned can kill you. Why not make them illegal?

It's not the government's job, or any of their business to tell people how to take care of themselves. If I don't want to wear a seat belt, it's nobody's business but my own.

Driving on the highway, yes that makes perfect sense to wear a seat belt, and I would do so even if it wasn't forced. When I'm going 70mph I'd prefer all the help I can get keep myself inside the car during a wreck.

When I'm driving around my neighborhood to go to the corner store, or a neighbors house, or something like that? I never wear a seat belt. You aren't going fast enough to justify it in my opinion. Plus with airbags, how exactly are you going to get flung from the car? The airbag is right in front of you, considering they have enough strength to break people's noses and what not, how are you going to overcome the airbag and fly out of the windshield?

I'm an adult, not a child, nobody has a right to tell me what to do unless I'm putting someone elses safety at risk, or they are paying me for my time. Other than that, there is absolutely no reason anyone should have the authority to dictate what I'm doing. Butt the eff out, it seems most of the country are still a bunch of children that still need parents (government) to control everything they do. Can't you grow up and make your own choices for once?
edit on 3-8-2012 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Hugues de Payens
 


Roads are not provided by the government, they are provided by US. I am the one that pays gas tax, registration and other taxes or fees to drive. I pay state and federal income tax.

The government isn't paying for it, I AM, YOU ARE. It's OUR roads, not the governments, so I don't see why they should have authority to force you to do anything UNLESS you are putting OTHER people's lives in danger.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 05:55 AM
link   
Your intellect should dictate your actions: For example wearing a seat belt when driving a vehicle.

I don't know if terms like "Medical insurance" ring any bell, no ?

So just because you think it's a good idea not to wear a seat belt while driving, I should be forced to pay more and more insurance fees each month because of the morons not wanting to wear a seat belt, thus suffering more severe ( and therewith costly ) injuries ?

Your OP reveals a lot about your state of mind. Please don't wear a seatbelt and drive against a tree. Win win situation for you and the whole society. Thank you.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:33 AM
link   
"The People and their property have a right to be secure in the belief that they do not have to strap themselves into their carriages and that the government will have no right without a warrant to seize, search or detain the carriage. The people are free to drive their carriage on public roads without government interference."

though I agree with the OP I think many are nick-picking on the drivers license issue being a privilege. I doubt that our forefathers would have thought that the US would have developed into the democratic feudal society we have become...... freedom is not free nor risk-free!

today with our society and economic base so spread out and dependent on consumerism a car is a necessity in rural areas since the government has set up standards demanding we live by their standards like having elec, water and or sewage... which all are dependent if you can really afford them...



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by dubiousone
*snip*


If the founding fathers would have seen the impact of political parties and corporations they would have banned them in the Constitution. We should go back to restricting corporations to their original laws... limit the lebgth a corporation can exist and "only for the public good"

corporations and crony capitalism is what is killing this country but few see it!

 

Mod edit: Removed quote of actioned post.
edit on 4-8-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:40 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
Why do you have to wear a seatbelt? For one, as others have mentioned, driving is a privelage, not a right and you are driving on government roads.


Sorry what?
I can drive anything i own if i want to?
Owning it is a priviledge, using it isn't.

And about those roads, "government roads" ... hmmm, same as the government rain in Oregon? Roads don't belong to the government, they belong to the local community for the free passage of all. But seriously, does that mean that the govt owns the air that aeroplanes fly in too? Big difference between having guardianship over something and owning it. Same difference as government managing your environment, and telling you what to do.



When there is an accident requring an ambulance service, on average it costs your municipality 50,000 for that incident.
When there is a fatality, it is almost a million dollars.
Just the stupid 20 percent who don't wear sealtbelts cost the nations billions a year.
But seatbelts save about 15,000 people per year. The number of fataltiies is also dropping due to increased safety measures in cars.


Four unsubstantiated statements in a row.
Please provide ANY evidence for your claims.



Now, it is silly to compare sending people to war, as they volunteered.


So you can volunteer to go kill people and die a glorious martyr death for the oil supply, but you may NOT volunteer to leave a seatbelt off ....
help me here?



4700 soldiers have died in Iraq. That means in the 9 years since the Iraq war was started, 4700 soldiers have died, but 135,000 people have been saved by seatbelts.


Documented civilian deaths from violence
107,789 – 117,776
www.iraqbodycount.org...

Unofficially:
Number Of Iraqis Slaughtered In US War And Occupation Of Iraq "1,455,590"
costofwar.com...

Would you like to discuss real numbers?



Money flows both ways and so does extortion.
...
I will not pay for your stupidity.


I think you are terribly confused ... about a number of things. You're admitting to happily paying for criminal politicians, but you want to get nasty with someone who has just been in a car accident?




posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ronnieray123
 


Unfortunately you agreed to follow these codes & statues when you gave up your right to freely travel on the common way in exchange for state permission to drive. You contracted with the state. You applied for & received a driver's license & registered & licensed your car.

If you no longer wish to be ruled under these private laws, expatriate. Though, be warned, it is a tough road far less traveled. www.notmygovernment.us...



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ronnieray123
 


I never wore seatbelts until they passed a law requiring it. In 2005 I had an accident. A head on collision in a Ford Ranger pickup truck. Had I not been wearing a seatbelt I would be dead right now. Instead of death I got 3 broken ribs and some bruises. Say what you will, but I would not have been wearing the belt had they not passed the law. So to me it was a good thing what they did.

Just like Obamacare. Had that not passed I would not have been able to get my blood pressure meds. Before it was passed I had to pay $100 for each doctor visit. Now it is free for me. I do not have $100 to spend at a doctor. So I would be dead from another stroke.

Sometimes these laws we all hate actually do help people. I am one of them.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I have one simple question.
Where does the Government get the authority to grant us "Privileges"?



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ronnieray123
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


OK, so you got to choose something that I like and make it a crime. Will you allow me to choose something you like and make it a criminal act?
Would you agree to me passing a law making it is a crime to be gay? Gay men rape little boys and I find that a lot more offensive than a person not wearing a seat belt.
You obviously agree to error on the side of caution and if there is a chance of saving someone by passing a seat belt law, then using that same logic it is acceptable to save a child from being raped by passing a law making homosexuality a crime.
Now you just go ahead and tell me how "it's different". Tell me how I am comparing apples and oranges and you are most assuredly the superior person,


Not wearing a seatbelt is a hobby for you? I didn't choose the law, it is jsut a law for good reason. You just sound like an inbred moron, or 12. I haven't decided which.

And on top of being a moron, your a bigotted moron. Pedophiles rape little boys. Gay men just have same sex partners.

And the fact that you are trying to link the two is just funny, and a stretch. and have nothing to do with each other.

Because you are acting like a baby that government is telling you that you have to wear a seat belt and like a 6 year old, you don't want someone in authority telling you what you have to do with your car.

Please go see a doctor about some lithium.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by ronnieray123
 


Where in the Bill of Rights does it say that you are protected from not having to wear seat belts?

If anything, the BOR gaurentees Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happieness. So by presserving your life, they uphold the BOR.
edit on 3-8-2012 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by DiabolusFireDragon
 


Not when those poor decisions cost everyone else money.



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by ronnieray123
 


Yes, because your freedom ends when mine begins. But when your freedom starts costing me money, in taxes, in higher insurance premiums, and higher medical bills, than that is just theft.





top topics
 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join