h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

My point is that as soon as you use a commonly provided health service, your body is no longer solely your own. You have responsibilities. More to the point, not wearing a seatbelt can kill other people in the car - and has done. {Though I appreciate that nobody shares cars in america, so it isn't an issue... }

The government is likely to have access to a wider array of information than a single accident involving Larry - as you will no doubt know, a sample of one is invariably inconclusive. Personally I suspect that wearing seatbelts is the sensible choice in all driving condition...

However, this is a philosophical thread, so we can ignore reality... And I do see your point - that from a libertarian perspective the argument against seatbelt laws is a good one. From my own perspective this is a 'needs of the many' thing, and the truck driver can go and invest in a quick-release seatbelt if it concerns him so much. But I do at least see your point now...

Well, I was trying to make another, more subtle point, but I don't think you noticed it. The kinds of accidents that are likely to be worse with a seatbelt are the kind that don't occur in urban areas. Statistically, those kinds of accidents are insignificant, because the overwhelming majority of automobiles drive an overwhelming majority of their miles in an urban environment. Among people who drive quite frequently away from strip-malls and freeways are at a high risk for these kinds of accidents... but that information hasn't been disseminated by the government. In short, I don't think they've told the whole story.

And just so you know that these things do happen, the Fox network here shows reality shows that involve police chases, and, although I've watched very few of them, I can recall two instances where people were saved by being thrown. One instance involved a truck that went off a bridge and into a gully... one passenger was found in a high tree with a few broken bones, and the rest were down in the gully and very seriously injured. Another one I saw involved a truck that went out of control, slippd over to the shoulder, and rolled. On the first roll, the passenger was deposited on the ground , and escaped with minor injuries. The truck continued to roll extremely violently, and I believe the caved roof would have crushed the head and neck of anyone strapped into the normal position.

"From my own perspective this is a 'needs of the many' thing." - This, I believe, addresses the crux of our disagreement on this subject, and, furthermore, the central difference between socialism and libertarianism. Socialists and libertarians both agree on the needs of the many, but the libertarian staunchly defends the rights of the few from being superceded by the public good. If we place public good over private good, then everyone suffers the loss of private good in some aspect or another, which then defeats the public good. Did that make any sense?

Basically what I'm saying is that, when you try to make everyone happy, you end up making nobody happy. Look at pop music and American sitcoms for examples. And so, in my opinion, all we can really do is grant people the right to do their own thing, and the responsibility to suffer the consequences.