Should wearing motorcycle helmets and car seatbelts for adults be optional?

Question

I suppose this is a philosophical question. Without doubt, IMO, it's daft not to wear these safety devices.
However, should it be illegal for adults to choose to behave in a way that only risks themselves? Dangerous sports and riskier lifestyle choices such as heavy drinking and smoking are legal after all.
Your views?

Answer 1

Very good question, because it raises fundamental issues about basic freedoms and liberties.

Not many people realise, that the seat belt legislation was the first piece of nannying legislation to be imposed upon us for our own good. It was unpopular at the time, because it was unprecedented as many of us realised.

On balance, it is probably wise to wear them, but not in every situation. If you have to escape from a car quickly, eg, you are about to drive into a river. I saw a person trapped, with the car upside down and petrol leaking out of the car. He couldn't get the belt off.

However, the above is beside the point. By and large, seat belts only protect the wearer. It is the fact that you are being told to wear them for your own good that breaches a fundamental freedom. I don't think anyone would mind them being a manufacturers option.

One argument that has been put forward against them, is that, what you should be doing is making the driver feel as insecure as possible, so that he will drive more carefully, and thereby, protect other road users and pedestrians in particular.

You could of coarse make that argument about all car safety features, particularly air bags, which incidentally, have killed people.

It was inevitable, that having introduced this oppressive piece of legislation, others would follow, as we have now seen. I think that people should be given as much freedom as possible. It is their life, and it is the risk takers that have pushed the boundaries in life ever wider, and we have all benefited. There would be no aeroplanes for example. So called passive smoking is grossly exaggerated as a risk to others.

Nannying tends to be a female trait. Also, I wonder how many of your respondants will completely miss your point of principle, and be swayed by the common sense nannying aspects.

Answer 2

No, I do not believe adults should be made to do anything they don't want to do, assuming that their actions do not produce a victim. People will argue that these laws are for the greater good and, that the ends justify the means, but where is government intrusion in the lives of individuals to be halted? What if wearing a seat belt is actually more dangerous to a persons safety then not wearing one? A good example would be a person who uses the drug plavix to thin their blood. It has been known to happen, though rare, that plavix users have died from seat belts bruising their bodies and suffering from internal bleeding after minor accidents! Now is it possible that they would have suffered from internal bleeding with out a seat belt? It's possible.... however, I am sure that an adult can better assess their situation with greater calculation then some bureaucrat!

Answer 3

Motorcycle helmets and seat belts should be optional.

I realize some states in the US have these types of laws, and in my opinion, they should not be allowed. Why should we allow some "holier than thou" so-called "Politicians" to make these decisions not only for themselves but also for us, not in the interest of public good or order, but only because THEY feel is in our own best interest as individuals?

The argument that "It is a tax issue" is no different than someone telling us "it is for your own good", and should be discounted. After all, if you buy into "for your own good" as a reason why the Government should be allowed to force you to do things, then what happens if we elect a Vegitarian President? Would it be illegal to eat meat? After all, it is "for our own good"! How about eating at McDonalds? It is better for our health if we don't. If we allow the Government to regulate helmets or seat belts, we allow them to set dietary requirements, or make exercise mandatory "for our own good" also. We allow the Govenrment to treat us no better than small children, incapable of making Adult decisions for ourselves.

We have to draw the line at "for our own good" laws. If, as the questioner stated, these activities "only risk themselves", then any law regulating such activity would be an unfair intrusion on the rights of Free citizens, and as such is and should remain well beyond the power granted to our legislators by the Constitution of the USA.

Answer 4

First, I consider your theory that "they only hurt themselves" is invalid. The future organ donor always leaves behind family and friends. This leaves HUGE medical bills, orphan kids, widows, traffic jams etc. to burden society with.

I suppose that the only way I could be in favor of this violation of common sense would be if the future victim were a friendless, orphan...childless...with D.N.R. (Do Not Resuscitate) tattooed across his chest.

He, or she should also carry insurance enough to cover the cost of clean-up, and any therapy that may be needed by those that have to clean up after they are gone.

Answer 5

it is optional, people can (and often do) choose to break the law, that is their option.

seatbelts drastically reduce the chances of injury, people should be encouraged to wear them as much as possible. Keeping the non life threatening risk (a fine if caught) to the choice of not wearing a belt is a good encouragement.

Answer 6

No.Why should the rest of us end up paying the hospitals through our insurance payments.What if it was optional for adults and the rear seat passenger didnt belt up and killed the front seat one who had has often happens in a crash.I would say that the risk is'nt just to themselves in a high speed crash.

Answer 7

YES PRO-CHOICE I SAY!!!!!!!!.
I look at it this way. I am an adult. Who are you (the government) to tell me I MUST wear a helmet? I MUST wear a seat belt. As far as I am concerned, it isn't any of your business. I know the risk involved, for BOTH HELMETS as well as SEAT BELTS. If a biker wipes out and hit head on into a tree or telephone pole that freaking helmet isn't going to do him one damn bit of good. FORCING me or others to wear a helmet (or seat belt) is another step towards Communism. Like as in DICTATORSHIP.

Answer 8

As one of those who used to be involved in dealing with incidents where people HAD NOT been wearing helmets or seat belts, I suggest they bring in a law that says "If you don't wear belts or helmets and you have an accident, no medical help will be made available to you".
They'd soon be wearing them!

Answer 9

of course it should be optional for adults. Part of being an adult is making your own decisions even the stupid ones but our government constantly finds new ways to treat us like children

Answer 10

Actually, it isn't a safety issue...its a tax issue. So long as the public is responsible for taking care of those who are uninsured, or take care of their families should they die or become unable to work, everyone else is going to have to put up with wearing helmets and seat belts.

If the public at large wasn't footing the bill, I doubt the government would require it unless someone was running one of those "stupidity law" campaigns (You know...saving stupid people from themselves.)