15
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] neomis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Says “I’m a libertarian but I’m not one of those crazy ones”.

My followup question is usually what’s your opinion on seatbelt laws and drivers licenses.

[-] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

My followup question is usually what’s your opinion on seatbelt laws and drivers licenses.

Seatbelt laws would really only make sense if their purpose was to protect others from harm, but, as far as I've been able to think, this would only make sense in 2 scenarios:

  1. You are in a car with other passengers. In a crash, one passenger not wearing a seatbelt could end up harming the other passengers in the vehicle simply by their limp body flying around, and impacting the other passengers. This does raise the point, however, that the other passengers could simply refuse to occupy the vehicle with that individual, or the driver could bar them from that vehicle. If all occupants are able to give consent to the situation, then there should be no issue under the law.
  2. You have a child and you are neglecting that child's safety by not restraining them with a proper seatbelt.

As for driver's licenses, that's actually a rather complicated issue.

EDIT 1: As pointed out in this post, there is a third case that I hadn't originally considered in that, in a crash, one's limp, and unrestrained corpse could fly through the windshield and end up causing damage to someone else's property, or bodily harm to another.

[-] neomis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

There are cases where in a head on collision the person not wearing a seatbelt is launched out of the car like a missile killing people in the opposite car.

[-] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I came across that point in this post, a little while after I had written the above comment. I will update my comment accordingly.

[-] baascus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Libertarianism isn’t a monolithic ideology, and opinions vary widely among libertarians. Furthermore, one who identifies as libertarian doesn’t inherently reject all utilitarian or communitarian values. Some may argue against seatbelt laws and drivers’ licenses on the basis of personal freedom and responsibility, while others might see the value in certain regulations that protect public safety. What unites libertarians is a belief in limiting government intervention to essential functions, but defining those ‘essential functions’ can differ greatly among individuals within the libertarian community. Libertarians often share common ground with leftists on social values, differing significantly from mainstream Republican politicians.

[-] johker216@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Both are necessary, there's an argument to strengthen the latter, and neither violate the NAP. I'm not one of those crazy ones 😁

[-] Rottcodd@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

violate the NAP

not one of those crazy ones

These two statements contradict each other.

The NAP is a substitute for laws for "libertarians" who can't tolerate the thought of other people actually being free.

The entire point is to have something that proactively justifies the forcible imposition of your will upon others. So the instant that somebody does something of which you disapprove, you can decree, by whatever rationale might serve, that it's a violation of the NAP, so you're now entirely justified in shooting them.

[-] Eldritch@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Not really. It only seems that way because most of us have only had experiences with the psychotic capitalist neo-libertarians of the Murray Rothbard school.

Actual libertarians, left libertarians. Can definitely get pretty squirrely when you get out on the fringes of ideologic anarchists etc. But many are fairly rational and even generally pro social democracy.

Right-wing libertarians are just an oxymoron. Under capitalism none of us can truly be free and we are all subject to the whims of wealth hoarding psychotic oligarch monkeys. They'll tell you that you're free not to work for them. The only problem is choosing not to work for them means choosing starvation, homelessness, and death. Which isn't the sort of thing that should be considered a choice in any civil society. But absolute necessities for unsustainable systems such as capitalism.

this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
15 points (100.0% liked)

Political Memes

5413 readers
2784 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS