Freedom includes the freedom to decide poorly
Libertarians push helmet law repeal. The opening paragraph is a riot:
The helmet on Barry Cassetty’s head saved him from death or disability when an SUV pulled out in front of his 2008 Harley-Davidson Screamin’ Eagle Ultra Classic last summer.
You see, that anecdote proves the state should force you to wear a helmet because those unmanned SUVs just pull out in front of people all by their own selves.
February 21st, 2012 at 1:02 pm
How does pushing the medical costs of traumatic head injuries onto taxpayers fit in with libertarian ideology?
February 21st, 2012 at 1:03 pm
As a rider, i like the law as it is in PA. I think that if you are foolish enough to ride on the street with the current level of “skilled” drivers, you deserve to have a higher insurance premium.
I think that if you got caught in a moving violation or accident without that waiver, then you get bigtime fines and loose your license.
And most of those bikers need to learn how to ride, and stop thinking “lay er’ down” is an appropriate evasion tactic.
(This is from the guy wearing the full riding suit and helmet for every commute)
February 21st, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Guav, Your premise that individuals are somehow responsible for the costs of head injuries is not exactly something that libertarians are into anyway.
February 21st, 2012 at 1:49 pm
I’m not following you.
It’s my understanding that libertarians are generally opposed to government (taxpayer) funded health care, and feel that people should be personally responsible for their own health care costs.
Does that mean that the people advocating the repeal of helmet laws will refuse any medical treatment—emergency or otherwise—that they themselves cannot pay for, or are not insured for when they get into an accident and suffer a severe head trauma that a helmet could have prevented?
February 21st, 2012 at 1:56 pm
You’re looking at the wrong end of the equation, I think. After all, it is the .gov that forces hospitals to provide services regardless of ability to pay. And, subsequently, the need to force people to wear helmets.
February 21st, 2012 at 2:26 pm
If I’m looking at the wrong end of the equation, then so are they.
If that’s the correct end to be examining, then why aren’t they fighting to end the requirement of hospitals to provide treatment to those who can’t pay instead of fighting to end helmet laws?
February 21st, 2012 at 2:30 pm
I think 98% of libertarians, if ACTUALLY in an automobile or motorcycle accident, severely injured and in need of extremely expensive emergency medical care that they most likely cannot pay for, would want to the hospital to be required to treat them.
Or am I supposed to honestly believe that they’d just be like, “Fuck it, let me die, I don’t have the cash.”
February 21st, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Maybe I’m not being clear enough. But a libertarian would think you’re crossing the line mandating healthcare to begin with. Then asking them about the helmet law in response to that. It’s akin to ‘you don’t like this crap sandwich but what are you going to do about the crap sandwich’.
February 21st, 2012 at 2:44 pm
I don’t think libertarians are against insurance and personal responsibility. I’ll have to do some more research.
As for the “public burden” theory-if the public(gov) chooses to assume the costs of treating the less responsible, it can hardly complain about the consequences of that choice.
Take away the safety net and I think you’d be quite surprised at how peoples behavior can change.
February 21st, 2012 at 4:41 pm
As a rider, I’m of the opinion that being involved in a motorcycle crash, and not having a helmet on when you did so, should be treated the same way as having a DNR (do not resuscitate) on record. Failure to wear a seatbelt should be in the same category. I also feel that seatbelt laws and helmet laws should be repealed along with that.
If you want to play fast and loose with your life, you should be willing to pay the consequences for it.
February 21st, 2012 at 7:15 pm
I’m with Laughingdog on this except I would also add automatic organ donor along with the DNR.
February 21st, 2012 at 7:18 pm
Jeffersonian, I didn’t say libertarians were against insurance and personal responsibility …. I said they “are generally opposed to government (taxpayer) funded health care, and feel that people should be personally responsible for their own health care costs.”
February 21st, 2012 at 8:53 pm
You think so? So, when did you poll the libertarian community on it? Wait, you DIDN’T? You just made that up? So why the fuck should we take your word for it?
You’re using an unsubstantiated, wishful, made-up on the spot statistic to support the use of state force to make people insulated from their own decisions. And then using the result of THAT policy to bootstrap yet more restrictions on individual liberty. Excuse the fuck out of me if I don’t agree with your argument.
February 21st, 2012 at 9:26 pm
X is an idea. (Like, say, wearing helmets when riding motorbikes.)
“Is X a good idea?” is a COMPLETELY SEPARATE question from “Should government force people to do X?”.
While the answer to the first question varies according to X, the answer to that second question is always NO (assuming conditions of liberty.)
Conflating the two questions is the surefire mark of a mind untarnished by any grasp of basic liberty.
That being said, let me effect the following repair to convert the presumption of the second alternative to that of the first:
I think 98% of libertarians, if ACTUALLY in an automobile or motorcycle accident, severely injured and in need of extremely expensive emergency medical care that they most likely cannot pay for, would want to the hospital to be required to treat them.
February 21st, 2012 at 9:27 pm
aaand that strikethrough experiment failed, so here’s the repair to Guav’s comment using ellipses:
I think 98% of libertarians, if ACTUALLY in an automobile or motorcycle accident, severely injured and in need of extremely expensive emergency medical care that they most likely cannot pay for, would want to the hospital to … treat them.
February 21st, 2012 at 10:24 pm
Rob, that was not intended to be a statistic, I said “I think” as in “I believe” …. total speculation on my part. Wasn’t supposed to be taken as anything other than my personal opinion.
February 21st, 2012 at 11:02 pm
Seerak, yes, of course I’d prefer that hospitals just treat emergency patients regardless of ability to pay without having the government force them to do so … but they weren’t, which is why EMTALA was passed in the first place.
February 22nd, 2012 at 3:23 am
“Does that mean that the people advocating the repeal of helmet laws will refuse any medical treatment—emergency or otherwise—that they themselves cannot pay for, or are not insured for when they get into an accident and suffer a severe head trauma that a helmet could have prevented?”
The same question might be asked of proponents of not requiring occupants of cars be required to wear helmets–the public spends more money on healthcare costs for head injuries experienced by driver/passengers of motor vehicles that it does paying for motorcyclist’s head injuries. That’s because of the larger number of cars.
February 22nd, 2012 at 8:35 am
I’ve been riding since the sixties. I need government decreeing to me that I wear a helmet about as much as I need government decreeing to me I have to use a effin’ gun lock.