Hacker News Reader

Comment by sidhuko | Hacker News Reader

Coming from someone who's brother had the same injuries with a seatbelt, in near exact conditions, I'd tell you remain cautious in opening your mouth again. Should I also blame my brother for driving in icy conditions, or, the government for the roads not being made for these conditions? I bet you made the same sort of mistakes at his age, one too many drinks for getting in car, a lack of a seatbelt or even unsafe sex can cause the same anguish and cost to the 'tax payer'. Just because you didn't have any repercussions for your childish mistakes doesn't mean that everyone who has was pushing their luck every day of their life. Also, the passenger in my brothers accident wasn't wearing a seatbelt and was ejected from the car on impact and suffered minor injuries. Go figure.

View on HN

You're telling me to put one individual's emotions over the good of the many. I don't buy into the culture of "trigger warnings".

> Should I also blame

Please don't engage in slippery slope arguments.

> I bet you made the same sort of mistakes

No, i didn't, not at that scale. I made mistakes, yes, but none of them come close in scale of long-term impact to drunk driving, seat-belt-less driving or unsafe sex. Simple matter of culture difference. My up-bringing was full of unvarnished explanations about the causation between mistakes and consequences, to the point that this is widely known humor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9z77oztO6UQ

Plus, you keep talking about things unrelated to what i said.

I'm concerned only with seat belts. "One too many drinks" is a thing that's entirely idiotic too, but it doesn't need to be mentioned because the legal repercussions for it in the usa are already huge, as well as the social repercussions. The fact that eschewing seat belts is not treated with similar scorn is the baffling bit here. Nothing else.

Good to see you realise your slippery slope argument to begin with. My arguments were as ridiculous as yours sounded as well as invalid. The contribution here was the growing separation of diagnoses in MCS and VPS which to some of us has been a life long battle as pro-euthanasia often use the argument people who are VPS aren't aware so their is no moral obligation to consider the impact on their life. I went through a high court case where they used MCS to avoid legal settlements to my family when the indicators used by the consultant in this case clearly work towards a new way of diagnosis so we can seek independent advice

After all, risk of head injury in the type of cars young people drive isn't always related to using their safety features. The seatbelt was assumed to cause the most damage in the collision as it caught him and threw his head back into the B pillar.

Your post looks like this part is a wayward mispaste of something unrelated: "The contribution [...] independent advice"

For what remains: First off, i have not realized any sort of slippery slope i am on. I may not have done the best job in explaining my arguments, but i believe them to be sound. I remarked only on your construction of one.

As for your brother, sorry to hear that. It sounds like the car he was driving should not have been on the streets. In germany we have an institution vested with the power to inspect and verify the safety of a vehicle, and any individual vehicle which does not have an unexpired verification mark from them is illegal to drive in public traffic.

I don't know if you have such a thing in the USA or not, or whether whatever is doing that job is just much too lenient.

Yeh we have yearly MOT in the UK as well. It's called corporate lobbying and hindsight. Funnily enough it was a German car.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com