Re: UK: Drivers may be banned from smoking at the wheel

[Andy Sutton <newslists () pessimists net>]

On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 22:09 +0100, Drsolly wrote:
> I'm really not too bothered if a drunk wrecks his own car. It's his
> recklessness getting me killed that infringes my rights. 

I think you are both arguing the same point from a slightly different
angle: Someone is free to drink themselves to death, but not free to run
over little Debbie.  The place where you differ is that Brian seems to
be coming from the "no victim, no crime", and Solly from the "the crime
is the potential victim".  I apologize if I have misstated your
positions. 

While I would not argue that driving a car while intoxicated is an
incredibly stupid thing to do, I have to side with Brian.  Mostly
because there are way too many threats out there to wrap laws around
them, something like the TSA banning toothpaste and knitting needles.
There are just too many potential crimes available to us.  Without a
victim, the crime loses a lot of its meaning.

"Drunk" could easily be replaced by "Mad" or "on the cell phone" in this
conversation.
-- 
- Andy

Among the many tragic elements in the human condition is this
tendency toward short-term thinking, the inability to imagine
how our arrangements will work in a time that is not right now.
  - James Howard Kunstler

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.