Hacker News Reader

Comment by kalleboo | Hacker News Reader

Yeah there are always levels of risk we as a society have chosen to allow. My thinking was along the lines of how to self-regulate these imports of cars that do not follow the common safety standards our society has chosen if they are forced upon us by trade agreements or well-intentioned loopholes.

("murder" is a bit an extreme reaction but the more realistic idea may be to make harsher judgements the more pointlessly large and dangerous the vehicle is)

View on HN

Presumably there's some level at which this can be solved in a purely monetary way.

If the average Dodge Ram causes X millimorts of deaths per year (per km? per km on suburban roads?) and every dollar spent on public healthcare (drug interventions? road safety? Fire departments?) saves Y lives, you can increase the tax by X/Y, trust the government to spend the extra revenue in the most effective way, and everyone comes out better off.

A skilled surgeon can generate millions of negative micromorts per year. Should they get a pass if once a year they push a child off the roof of the hospital? What of the classic example of killing a healthy patient and saving several lives with their organs?

It sounds so enlightened to shuffle micromorts around. What good is it to the parents of a child killed by an unsafe vehicle that increased taxes going to healthcare will ensure that 320 elderly people can live 3 months longer?

Easier might be to just not give exemptions when public safety is the tradeoff?

You can get charged for murder in Germany when killing someone with a car.

How is this relevant? Is there any object which you can use to kill someone that will make sure you can not be charged with murder in Germany?

A suicide vest will do the trick.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com