Republican.
Stuff about YOUR country that pisses you off
- Thread starter Riffy
- Start date
Facetious
Moderated
Seatbelt laws make sense though - It doesn't HAVE to be about an insurance companies' bottom line.
Let's say that we have two uninsured motorists, one motorist is wearing seat belts, the other, not. The two vehicles collide head on, the belted motorist get out with minimal injuries, the not belted up motorist has extensive injuries and is sure to be in the hospital for months.
Do you see the burden on the taxpayer ?
Seatbelt laws make sense though - It doesn't HAVE to be about an insurance companies' bottom line.
Let's say that we have two uninsured motorists, one motorist is wearing seat belts, the other, not. The two vehicles collide head on, the belted motorist get out with minimal injuries, the not belted up motorist has extensive injuries and is sure to be in the hospital for months.
Do you see the burden on the taxpayer ?
Using that trap door...you've reasonably extended to the government the right to decide what foods you may consume, what you may *****, smoke etc...because, you could potentially be a burden to the state if you don't have your own insurance. And they already do so because well meaning but naive people join them in imposing their beliefs on what others should do.
Frankly, there a some things I'm happy to pay for as a taxpayer in order that the government encroachment on our personal decisions is limited. But let's take your example and look at it. The problem isn't that the person is unbelted as accidents happen in all walks of life in all manners of circumstances...the problem in that case is the person is uninsured. Now the extent of his/her injuries may have been exacerbated by not being belted but in the majority of cases where you have a serious enough injuries...those accidents are usually fatal....If that be the case, then that is THAT person's decision..unfortunate but acceptable in my book. In some cases the cause is greater than the casualty. For example, accidents and fatalities are an acceptable casualty of the benefits of automobiles.
I know this is probably going to be a difficult proposition to explain to some but I personally believe the greater crime is the imposition of paternalistic laws on free people that will fine you for not protecting yourself...moreso than an individual choosing to not exercise prudence and paying the ultimate price for it.
Somethings are worth dying for and you can't pick and chose what personal freedoms you're willing to give up. Once you allow a government the jurisdiction of deciding what's best for your person, it's very difficult to draw a line on where their right to do so ends.
The government doesn't want a person to use ********* for whatever reason de jour and now an otherwise law abiding citizen is threatened with criminality for engaging in an activity that only directly affects him...that and laws like it are stupid to me. Well, under a potential burden to the state belief, I'm sure the government can draw some 3 or 4 link nexis to that. But making it criminal assures them of being a burden to the state or local government once they're arrested for it.
In my mind, if you need more than two variables to establish proximate causation for one event to another...their relationship is not actionable enough warrant encroachment on the rights of others.
that Im not the president :eek:
A thru Z Premium Link Upgrade :uohs: :shocked:
O'bama's have yet to be addedukey:
You can't smoke a cigarette in your car, much less home, in Belmont or Del Mar California.
Nazis !
The Del Mar-tians are way to uppity folk anyway. They still get all pissy about Marine aircraft and their flight paths. They are ignorant sheep with way to much money and self importance.
GabberMan
Closed Account
Fast food
Spitting
Litter
Islam (please, no more religion)
State funding for having babies
Holocaust denial
Arms sales to Israel and countless other war torn regions
Biographies and autobiographies (specifically of ***********) dominating book shops
******** with mobile phones
Chewing gum on the pavement
Faith schools
Easy exams
Multiculturalism
Racism
Chavs
The Cabinet
Apart from that I love it.
Spitting
Litter
Islam (please, no more religion)
State funding for having babies
Holocaust denial
Arms sales to Israel and countless other war torn regions
Biographies and autobiographies (specifically of ***********) dominating book shops
******** with mobile phones
Chewing gum on the pavement
Faith schools
Easy exams
Multiculturalism
Racism
Chavs
The Cabinet
Apart from that I love it.
State funding for having babies actually makes sense.Some people ***** the system of course but that never was a reason for stopping anything.
Our future prosperity depends on our ********.They are the ones who will be creating the wealth to fund our pensions, to generate the dividends to keep us from starvation.******** are net State recipients for a while but State benefactors for longer and it is wise to help their parents along for a while.When their **** have grown up they will put it back.
Our future prosperity depends on our ********.They are the ones who will be creating the wealth to fund our pensions, to generate the dividends to keep us from starvation.******** are net State recipients for a while but State benefactors for longer and it is wise to help their parents along for a while.When their **** have grown up they will put it back.
The way this whole country is turning into a nanny state. This place is too pussified now. The country has no balls. The government is too scared about what people with darker skin tones might think of them or say to them. So this country gets played like a fucking paino. Yes it sucks sometimes to live in the UK. If I was in power the country would have it's fucking balls back and those that didn't like it could either GET OUT or get a kick in the cunt. As for example if we went to their country we'd be ****** to live by their rules. None of this bitching and playing the government like a piano over there. So they should live by OUR RULES. People would be treated fairly and all that. But if they started cumming the cunt [fucking about] then they'd regret it. This UK government is a bunch of cock bags.
Government sponsorship of certain groups over others is not freedom, hot mega.
And that is essentially what I dislike about my country in recent years and years to come, government interference, it affects freedom drastically in all from major to even the most subtle, often unnoticed ways.
And that is essentially what I dislike about my country in recent years and years to come, government interference, it affects freedom drastically in all from major to even the most subtle, often unnoticed ways.
I am saying, everything from the over-zealous UK "**** crime" legislation, to government interference in free market, is anything but freedom.
When the government starts special treatment for certain groups, that is anything but freedom. Then you have the "We're all equal, but some are more equal than others". It is just nonsensical.
When the government starts special treatment for certain groups, that is anything but freedom. Then you have the "We're all equal, but some are more equal than others". It is just nonsensical.
The UK laws are having to change from the Emmigration of Muslim's because our laws don't serve any purpose for their religion as it is based on christianity so things like that i can understand from Ravenholm. That aswell as our returning troops from Afghanistan being greeted by a group of fundamental muslims having a go at them like it's there choice where they go and fight and the war is all down to the individual soldiers, the government balls'ed up a bit then when they have now made it an offence to incite hatred to a uniformed soldier.
I don't know exactly, yes my point is invalid for not having any proper evidence for any of this in process but discussing it with my Law lecturer the House Of Lords and parliament will have to adopt some Sharia law aspects. It's also been compared anyway that the English and Islamic laws are similar in the first place but as the UK is increasingly becoming more diverse it is being called upon to be looked at again.
Just look at things in perspective. Governments can only think in general or collective terms rather than deal with individual cases.It has to base decisions on the general public interest.
If someone dies in a road accident the ripples spread far and wide.There will be grief to close friends and relatives and a lot of taxpayers money will be involved in the aftermath.If a person is badly injured it's as bad in a different way.No income because no work , a burden on others and a host of other problems, again many of which will involve tax money.
If the death or severe injury occurred to someone who refused to wear a seat belt it becomes worse.Insurance companies are entitled to walk away from any claim or to drastically reduce any payout because it's one of the conditions laid down that the policyholder must take all reasonable steps to mitigate any risk.So either the ****** suffers severe financial hardship or the taxpayer has to step in.
The government is quite justified to act.If a law saves thousands of ******** from being orphaned, lives from being ruined and public money spent needlessly it's a good law.An individual just can't think of himself in isolation.
Facetious
Moderated
Re: Stuff about YOUR country that pisses you off
Conflict of interest !! :rofl: :jester:
Conflict of interest !! :rofl: :jester:
Facetious
Moderated
same with my country.
U.S. is getting that way, not quite yet though. obama will see it through, no doubt, thank you very much
Can you blame 'em with all of these radical Mohammadanists outside their doors with torch in hand, flipping cars over, breaking window glass and threatening to burn the city down to the ground unless their demands are met ?
Looking at the current conditions, it may be past the point of return, that goes for America too.
I knew that you were a radical right winged loon ! It's all here everybody !!
I'm just teasin', Raven
Seriously though, you gotta get the soccer thug culture together over there again & crack a few heads !
Or the government can make people live with the consequences of their choices and not give them anything when they do something incredibly stupid, but allow them to do it as long as they aren't directly hurting others. That way everybody can have personal freedom and other people don't have to cover for their stupidity. That might be a little harsh in some situations but it's fair.
Similar threads
