An open challenge to anyone who supports government regulations.

[Quantum Windbag]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

 

[earlycuyler]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually saved even one life. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

I say we regulate the regulations.

 

[The T]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually saved even one life. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

...to protect us from ourselves.

Liberty is an all or nothing proposition QW

 

[SniperFire]

Well... I'll play.

Sticking to cars... how about crumple zones, or perhaps crash test standards in general?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well... I'll play.

Sticking to cars... how about crumple zones, or perhaps crash test standards in general?

You really want to shift to something besides cars if you want to prove your point because I can easily prove regulations actually kill people when we are talking about cars.

Auto Deaths a Side Effect of Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards

Crumple zones are smaller than they used to be because government regulations require cars to be of lower weight to meet gas mileage standards.

 

[SniperFire]

Well... I'll play.

Sticking to cars... how about crumple zones, or perhaps crash test standards in general?

You really want to shift to something besides cars if you want to prove your point because I can easily prove regulations actually kill people when we are talking about cars.

Auto Deaths a Side Effect of Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards

Crumple zones are smaller than they used to be because government regulations require cars to be of lower weight to meet gas mileage standards.

So crash test standards have never saved one life, then?

Let me hear you say it.

 

[rdean]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

Drive your family on vacation in a car made without safety regulations on a road without speed limits. If you come back, tell us how it was.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well... I'll play.

Sticking to cars... how about crumple zones, or perhaps crash test standards in general?

You really want to shift to something besides cars if you want to prove your point because I can easily prove regulations actually kill people when we are talking about cars.

Auto Deaths a Side Effect of Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards

Crumple zones are smaller than they used to be because government regulations require cars to be of lower weight to meet gas mileage standards.

So crash test standards have never saved one life, then?

Let me hear you say it.

Can you prove that without federal standards cars would be more dangerous? Keep in mind that everything that the government has mandated for crash test survivability was developed by auto makers long before the government regulated it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

Drive your family on vacation in a car made without safety regulations on a road without speed limits. If you come back, tell us how it was.

Sounds like my last road trip in New Zealand.

 

[The T]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

Drive your family on vacation in a car made without safety regulations on a road without speed limits. If you come back, tell us how it was.

You know of public roads without speed limits?

 

[Charles_Main]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

So you don't support any Regulation? I mean don't get me wrong, I am a very Vocal Voice against the over use, and Abuse of Regulations and the Negative impact they can have, But Some Regulations are always going to be needed.

It's about being Reasonable, and smart that's all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

Drive your family on vacation in a car made without safety regulations on a road without speed limits. If you come back, tell us how it was.

You know of public roads without speed limits?

The Autobahn comes to mind, and that is not the only one.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

So you don't support any Regulation? I mean don't get me wrong, I am a very Vocal Voice against the over use, and Abuse of Regulations and the Negative impact they can have, But Some Regulations are always going to be needed.

It's about being Reasonable, and smart that's all.

Where did I say that? What I am doing is issuing a challenge to people that support regulations to show me one that actually prevents deaths/accidents/deliberate misconduct.

 

[SniperFire]

You really want to shift to something besides cars if you want to prove your point because I can easily prove regulations actually kill people when we are talking about cars.

Auto Deaths a Side Effect of Higher Fuel Efficiency Standards

Crumple zones are smaller than they used to be because government regulations require cars to be of lower weight to meet gas mileage standards.

So crash test standards have never saved one life, then?

Let me hear you say it.

Can you prove that without federal standards cars would be more dangerous? Keep in mind that everything that the government has mandated for crash test survivability was developed by auto makers long before the government regulated it.

You aren't going to answer my question.

LOL

 

[uscitizen]

Do a study on US railroad safety and see why/when it improved.

 

[uscitizen]

Children should be able to work in coal mines.

 

[The T]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

So you don't support any Regulation? I mean don't get me wrong, I am a very Vocal Voice against the over use, and Abuse of Regulations and the Negative impact they can have, But Some Regulations are always going to be needed.

It's about being Reasonable, and smart that's all.

Where did I say that? What I am doing is issuing a challenge to people that support regulations to show me one that actually prevents deaths/accidents/deliberate misconduct.

That's just it...there aren't any. People are going to be people regardless of any government mandate or regulation to save them from themselves.

Regulations to impede liberty are what they are...an impediment issued by bureaucrats with nothing better to do in thier persuit to rob liberty.

 

[Charles_Main]

I am really fracking tired of explaining the facts of life to everyone who thinks regulations are good and lack of regulation kills people. I hereby issue a challenge.

Give me a single real world example of a regulation that has actually prevents deaths. I know there are a lot of idiots that are going to point at all sorts of things, like requiring seat belts in cars, and say that proves their point, but that is not going to cut it here. You need to prove that, without said regulation, people would die because no one would have...

1. Made seat belts in the first place,
2. Actually sell them if someone had made them,
3. Use them if both 1 and 2 were true.
4. That the end result is that no one dies.

Regulations are not designed to protect people from dangerous products, they are designed to limit liability in case someone actually gets hurt. Companies go to court all the time and argue that they are not liable because they met all applicable government regulations, and the government supports them in this. We live in crony capitalist world where the government makes choices about who lives and who dies based on what some number cruncher somewhere claims is for the common good.

So you don't support any Regulation? I mean don't get me wrong, I am a very Vocal Voice against the over use, and Abuse of Regulations and the Negative impact they can have, But Some Regulations are always going to be needed.

It's about being Reasonable, and smart that's all.

Where did I say that? What I am doing is issuing a challenge to people that support regulations to show me one that actually prevents deaths/accidents/deliberate misconduct.

There are Countless Regulations pertaining to Food Safety, Work Place Safety, Etc Etc, that have doubtlessly Saved many lives.

There are also countless silly, Redundant, or just plain stupid Regulations that Cost our Economy, and us Millions every year.

Sucks Doughnut.

 

[SniperFire]

Do a study on US railroad safety and see why/when it improved.

I keep looking for the punchline in this thread.

 

[SniperFire]

So you don't support any Regulation? I mean don't get me wrong, I am a very Vocal Voice against the over use, and Abuse of Regulations and the Negative impact they can have, But Some Regulations are always going to be needed.

It's about being Reasonable, and smart that's all.

Where did I say that? What I am doing is issuing a challenge to people that support regulations to show me one that actually prevents deaths/accidents/deliberate misconduct.

There are Countless Regulations pertaining to Food Safety, Work Place Safety, Etc Etc, that have doubtlessly Saved many lives.

There are also countless silly, Redundant, or just plain stupid Regulations that Cost our Economy, and us Millions every year.

Sucks Doughnut.

This.