How's This for Irony?

wolf · 01-11-2005, 10:58 PM

First Read This

Then read this

zippyt · 01-11-2005, 11:06 PM

HA !!!!!
I beleve the saying is " live by the sword , die by the sword "!!!!!!!

Troubleshooter · 01-12-2005, 10:24 AM

Yeah, ironic, but stupid at the same time. There's such a thing as taking contrariness too far.

Kitsune · 01-12-2005, 10:28 AM

Oh yeah? How about this?

Oh, you meant...

OnyxCougar · 01-12-2005, 10:38 AM

So smart and at the same time, so stupid.

Radar · 01-12-2005, 11:26 AM

I don't see any irony. He was a libertarian who supported removing seat belt laws so people could make that choice for themselves. The result of that choice are irrelevant. He chose not to wear one. When you're in the back of an SUV and it rolls, you probably wouldn't make it even if you were wearing one.

It's a shame to lose a decent and bright guy who was on the right track when so many others aren't.

Elspode · 01-12-2005, 11:38 AM

So are all Libertarians firm believers in Darwinism?

Troubleshooter · 01-12-2005, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Radar

I don't see any irony. He was a libertarian who supported removing seat belt laws so people could make that choice for themselves. The result of that choice are irrelevant. He chose not to wear one. When you're in the back of an SUV and it rolls, you probably wouldn't make it even if you were wearing one.

It's a shame to lose a decent and bright guy who was on the right track when so many others aren't.

The irony is that he let his ideology (read as "replacement for critical review of thought processes) get in the way of doing what is a good idea regardless of your feelings for the idea.

So the question becomes, was he really that bright after all?

Roosta · 01-12-2005, 01:12 PM

Seems to me if the law said to this guy "don't drink battery acid", ten minutes later he'd neck a pint of it.

Radar · 01-12-2005, 01:30 PM

If someone doesn't want to wear a motorcycle helmet and fights against such laws because they make it tougher for him to see and he accepts the risks involved. Then later this same guy dies from head trauma he got in a motorcycle accident, that's not irony, and it's not allowing his feelings to keep him from exercising a good idea.

It's a man accepting the risks involved in a certain activity even when he falls victim to those risks. It's like Evil Kenevil jumping cars on a motorcycle and crashing. He accepted the risks and he didn't make it. That doesn't mean he was wrong for accepting the risks.

If you choose to play baseball and get hit by a ball in the eye, choosing to play baseball wasn't wrong.

dar512 · 01-12-2005, 01:51 PM

Society feels it has the right to specify the use of seat belts because society also pays a price:

Quote:

Everyone pays for those who don't buckle up, because the costs go beyond the loss of lives and result in higher taxes, health care costs, and insurance costs. On average, hospital costs for an unbelted crash victim are 55 percent higher than those for a belted crash victim (National Safety Council 2001).

Society bears 85 percent of the costs of crashes. Every American pays about $580 a year.

The needless deaths and injuries that result from not using seat belts cost society an estimated $26 billion annually in medical care, lost productivity, and other costs (NHTSA, 2002).

American College of Emergency Physicians

So the argument that society should not intrude because it only affects me is a fallacy.

Elspode · 01-12-2005, 01:51 PM

So Darwinism is compatible with Libertarianism...that's what I was thinking.

Fudge Armadillo · 01-12-2005, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dar512

Society feels it has the right to specify the use of seat belts because society also pays a price:

So the argument that society should not intrude because it only affects me is a fallacy.

That can be used as an argument against anything; people should not be allowed to drink, smoke, ride bicycles, ski, etc. since they are increasing their probability of getting injured by participating in such activities. Since theses injuries cost society more money in health care costs, these activities should be outlawed. If everyone wore helmets while driving, injuries and hospital costs would be reduced. Is this an argument for enforcing such a law?

Clodfobble · 01-12-2005, 02:01 PM

So the argument that society should not intrude because it only affects me is a fallacy.

Yes, but a Libertarian would say do away with the (partially) socialized healthcare too, that way society wouldn't be paying for it.

Kitsune · 01-12-2005, 02:04 PM

the costs go beyond the loss of lives and result in higher taxes, health care costs, and insurance costs

Unsure about the taxes, health care, etc, but I know any insurance company in their right mind should deny payment or compensation to any dumbass that doesn't wear a belt and ends up on the pavement.

Driving without insurance is and should be against the law because that action has the ability to impact many other people in very negative ways. Driving without a belt is the driver's problem.

01-11-2005, 10:58 PM	#1
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	How's This for Irony? First Read This Then read this __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

01-11-2005, 11:06 PM	#2
zippyt LONG LIVE KING ZIPPY! per Feetz Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Arkansas Posts: 7,661	HA !!!!! I beleve the saying is " live by the sword , die by the sword "!!!!!!! __________________ "Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get. " Brother Dave Gardner

01-12-2005, 10:24 AM	#3
Troubleshooter The urban Jane Goodall Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Florida Posts: 3,012	Yeah, ironic, but stupid at the same time. There's such a thing as taking contrariness too far. __________________ I have gained this from philosophy: that I do without being commanded what others do only from fear of the law. - Aristotle

01-12-2005, 10:38 AM	#5
OnyxCougar Junior Master Dwellar Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Kingdom of Atlantia Posts: 2,979	So smart and at the same time, so stupid. __________________ Impotentes defendere libertatem non possunt. "Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth." ~Franklin D. Roosevelt

01-12-2005, 11:26 AM	#6
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	I don't see any irony. He was a libertarian who supported removing seat belt laws so people could make that choice for themselves. The result of that choice are irrelevant. He chose not to wear one. When you're in the back of an SUV and it rolls, you probably wouldn't make it even if you were wearing one. It's a shame to lose a decent and bright guy who was on the right track when so many others aren't. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

01-12-2005, 10:28 AM	#4
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	Oh yeah? How about this? Oh, you meant...

01-12-2005, 11:38 AM	#7
Elspode When Do I Get Virtual Unreality? Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Raytown, Missouri Posts: 12,719	So are all Libertarians firm believers in Darwinism? __________________ "To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog

01-12-2005, 01:12 PM	#9
Roosta Nutter. Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: England Posts: 221	Seems to me if the law said to this guy "don't drink battery acid", ten minutes later he'd neck a pint of it. __________________ Back from the brink...

01-12-2005, 01:30 PM	#10
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	If someone doesn't want to wear a motorcycle helmet and fights against such laws because they make it tougher for him to see and he accepts the risks involved. Then later this same guy dies from head trauma he got in a motorcycle accident, that's not irony, and it's not allowing his feelings to keep him from exercising a good idea. It's a man accepting the risks involved in a certain activity even when he falls victim to those risks. It's like Evil Kenevil jumping cars on a motorcycle and crashing. He accepted the risks and he didn't make it. That doesn't mean he was wrong for accepting the risks. If you choose to play baseball and get hit by a ball in the eye, choosing to play baseball wasn't wrong. __________________ "I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death." - George Carlin

01-12-2005, 01:51 PM	#12
Elspode When Do I Get Virtual Unreality? Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Raytown, Missouri Posts: 12,719	So Darwinism is compatible with Libertarianism...that's what I was thinking. __________________ "To those of you who are wearing ties, I think my dad would appreciate it if you took them off." - Robert Moog

01-12-2005, 02:01 PM	#14
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	So the argument that society should not intrude because it only affects me is a fallacy. Yes, but a Libertarian would say do away with the (partially) socialized healthcare too, that way society wouldn't be paying for it.

01-12-2005, 02:04 PM	#15
Kitsune still eats dirt Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Tampa, FL Posts: 3,031	the costs go beyond the loss of lives and result in higher taxes, health care costs, and insurance costs Unsure about the taxes, health care, etc, but I know any insurance company in their right mind should deny payment or compensation to any dumbass that doesn't wear a belt and ends up on the pavement. Driving without insurance is and should be against the law because that action has the ability to impact many other people in very negative ways. Driving without a belt is the driver's problem.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)