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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: D. Long who wrote (170148)	6/17/2006 2:22:13 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793955

"the only person you are hurting is yourself." how different or is it limited the minds eye of those who don't do physical solutions. Seat belts hold one in place, not just at the time of crash but at any time. Times of extreme accelerations. While a seat belt holds one, one has the freedom to use ones hands and feet to possibly prevent a car from crashing at all. Or to control the crash in a less destructive end. Seats belts are justified as providing others with protection, not just the person wearing them. In a limited way a similar argument, but not as one sided can be made for a helmet. But as was mentioned, the all the time improvement in seeing and hearing can be argued to outweight the protection of others argument of a helmet. I can see reason in mandating equipment and procedure for the safety of others. But self safety should be one's personal choice.