▲ 177 ▼ The fake libertarian starterpack (lemmy.world) submitted 3 years ago by HLMenckenFan@lemmy.world to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 243 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 7 points 3 years ago (1 child) Not wearing a seatbelt can harm your passengers in an accident. Based on that alone it's reasonable imo permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) It could then be argued that it would only be required under the circumstances in which the lack of a seatbelt would create a situation where the safety of others is threatened, and those affected do not consent to the risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So, whenever you are driving and could possibly get in a wreck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I would say that such a law, when being written, should maintain the original mindset as described in this comment of mine. What I mean by this is to say "whenever you are driving" does not cover the situations in which there would never be (or, at least, extremely unlikely to be) any harm to another except yourself, or those consenting. An example of this woud be offroading -- perhaps you were implying for such laws to only apply when driving on public roads, but this wasn't specified explicitly, so I'm making assumptions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, you are correct in both statements. I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios, I meant specifically public roads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child) It could then be argued that it would only be required under the circumstances in which the lack of a seatbelt would create a situation where the safety of others is threatened, and those affected do not consent to the risk. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So, whenever you are driving and could possibly get in a wreck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I would say that such a law, when being written, should maintain the original mindset as described in this comment of mine. What I mean by this is to say "whenever you are driving" does not cover the situations in which there would never be (or, at least, extremely unlikely to be) any harm to another except yourself, or those consenting. An example of this woud be offroading -- perhaps you were implying for such laws to only apply when driving on public roads, but this wasn't specified explicitly, so I'm making assumptions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, you are correct in both statements. I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios, I meant specifically public roads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So, whenever you are driving and could possibly get in a wreck. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I would say that such a law, when being written, should maintain the original mindset as described in this comment of mine. What I mean by this is to say "whenever you are driving" does not cover the situations in which there would never be (or, at least, extremely unlikely to be) any harm to another except yourself, or those consenting. An example of this woud be offroading -- perhaps you were implying for such laws to only apply when driving on public roads, but this wasn't specified explicitly, so I'm making assumptions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, you are correct in both statements. I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios, I meant specifically public roads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) I would say that such a law, when being written, should maintain the original mindset as described in this comment of mine. What I mean by this is to say "whenever you are driving" does not cover the situations in which there would never be (or, at least, extremely unlikely to be) any harm to another except yourself, or those consenting. An example of this woud be offroading -- perhaps you were implying for such laws to only apply when driving on public roads, but this wasn't specified explicitly, so I'm making assumptions. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, you are correct in both statements. I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios, I meant specifically public roads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) Yes, you are correct in both statements. I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios, I meant specifically public roads. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) I was not thinking of the more fringe scenarios Unfortunately, the contention around many laws lies within the gray rather than the black, and white. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LukeMedia@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago You are correct, though I am not a lawyer nor a lawmaker. I'm a guy on the Internet with opinions, and I don't always immediately think of gray areas. permalink fedilink source parent