Originally Posted by bmrisko
Has anyone noticed the direct correlation between the apparent intelligence of society vs. the number of safety features and warnings the government tries to enact? I kind of liked when Darwin was allowed to prevail...
As a free market anarcho-capitalist, I'm strongly against the government mandating that companies enact safety features. But I think to not implement common-sense safety features and leave everything to "Darwin" is just plain silly. And I guarantee you you would not be saying what you said if a loved one died in an unfortunate accident that could likely have been avoided if certain safety features existed.
Again -- we're all human, we all make mistakes, no matter how "intelligent" we are. Even the smartest, most careful person will have his lapses in judgement, times of forgetfulness, and what have you. So these people should have to pay with their lives? Come on now.
Remember too that the same safety features that might prevent a truly dumb, reckless person from dying (i.e., a drunk driver crashing into a tree), might also prevent a not so dumb, not so reckless person from dying in a legitimate accident, and so as long as the effect is a net decrease in these sort of accidents, and the features are voluntarily put in place, I think the existence of the safety features should be celebrated.
Finally -- the safety features might prevent not only the person who had a lapse in judgement/whatever from dying unnecessarily, but also any other "innocent" parties involved, such as friends, family, children, etc.