Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (8932)	3/16/2001 7:33:11 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

My brother survived an accident because he wasn't wearing a seatbelt, but that is statistically unlikely. Bike helmet laws for kids and seat belts have reduced traumatic head injury. Fact. You can verify that from many sources. I always rode my motorcycle with a helmet, even when there wasn't a helmet law. I supported the helmet laws and think that riding a motorcycle is risky enough without exposing your head to unnecessary trauma. When people get injured the expense is borne by the rest of us. Sorry, I think if you are statistically more likely to need public assistance for trauma because you don't wear seatbelts, it is fine to have a law to require it. You can choose to ignore the law and the revenue raised by your willful violation (but rare prosecution) will tend to reduce the times you don't wear seatbelts and increase the times your passengers do, even if you don't.