Aha! Now I think I see where Jerry is coming from.
Ralph, I completely agree about that–if I’m injured while not wearing a helmet it contributes to a general increase in health care costs–that’s true. It’s also true if I drink too much, or do a while bunch of other things. Absolutely true.
My point was never that all behavior that harms anyone anywhere should be stopped. That would be neither possible nor desirable. The original post, though, claimed that the california laws were unconstitutional. I started pointing out the rationale for the laws, which is rooted in a lot of laws we take as reasonable an even “common sense.” That’s how I got into this–pointing out that it was both perfectly constitutional and within precedent for California to do this.
I guess your point or issue would be “where do you draw the line?” And my answer would be there is no fixed permanent line. The law, and “common sense” is a floating and malleable thing–it evolves and changes. It was common sense, when I was a kid, that children could ride without seat belts in cars. Now you need to buy different car seat for different stages in your child’s growth. And I assume Jerry will tell me it’s “common sense” to buckle them in. Or, it’s the result of intense lobbying by the insurance industry and the makers of child safety seats, and the fact that no politician wants to be described as having “voted against child safety.” Which wuld do more social good–mandating car seats, or banning fast food?
There is no fixed line, because the notion of public safety and what kind of behaviors are prohibited is constantly evolving. It used to be common sense that no irish need apply, or no blacks could swim in the white pool. Now those tings are illegal. We used to tolerate sexual harrasment–now it’s proscribed. We used to ban alcohol–now it’s legal and controled. The bar of what is or is not considered unacceptable risk is constantly shifting and has always shifted in the past.
I’m not arguing for a nanny state–I find a lot of laws every bit as irksome as people here do. Like a lot of left wing types, I’m a llibertarian when it comes to private behavior. I’m just pointing out that the laws in question are neither an abrupt departure nor the end of civilization. They’re part of an ongoing and evolving notion of “public good.”
No I have to get back to telling everyone else what do do while ignoring those same laws myself.
