this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
581 points (99.5% liked)

The Onion

5960 readers
142 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] hakase@lemm.ee -5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I'm not the person you responded to here, but the difference is that all of those things are very likely to cause negative externalities to other people, while, as I've pretty definitively shown in this thread, that's not at all the case with the negative outcomes of not wearing seatbelts, which are almost entirely limited to the person making the decision.

The United States has some very rural areas where you can be the only vehicle on the road for miles. "Stupid" driving is safer for other people there than "smart" driving is in more populated areas.

But if you're not in favor of totally deregulating public roads in areas like that, then let's look at just the light situation.

Having a light out is much easier to notice than whether or not someone is wearing a seatbelt, and is also used by law enforcement to pull people over, meet quotas, etc.

If I don't have headlights, but your taillights work, I can still see your vehicle in front of me and avoid a collision. Likewise, if I don't have taillights, but your headlights work, either you should see my vehicle in front of you and avoid a collision, or you shouldn't be driving at all if you can't tell you're getting closer to my vehicle.

In both situations, the lights on your car are sufficient to keep you safe if I choose to be "stupid" and drive without lights.