HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: brians@atlastele.com (Brian Sheets)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Keywords: Helmet Laws, Drug Laws, etc.
Organization: Atlas Telecom Inc.
Distribution: sqnt
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 08:19:27 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.180742.5313@sequent.com> stm@sequent.com (Scott "Worf" MacQuarrie) writes:
>nanook@eskimo.com (Robert Dinse) writes:
>
>
>>     Last night I got on a tirade about the new bicycle helment laws we have
>>here in King County.  Today I had some time to think more about what really
>>bothers me about this law.  I hope that by sharing it I might convince some
>>of you out there that what we are doing as a society is not a good thing.
>
>
>Well, I expect all the same arguements used against the mandatory Helmet law
>for motorcycles will be used on the bicycle helmet law.
>
>
>The bottom line is that the government is not forcing you to wear a helmet,
>they have simply established a financial penalty for not doing so. You are
>still free to not wear a helmet, just expect a ticket when you do. You have not
>lost any freedoms, society is simply charging you for the results of not
>wearing a helmet.

Are you kiddding me?? You tell me I have not lost my freedoms to choose for my
self what is harmful or not. When there is a penalty for doing or not doing
something my freedom to choose is severely limited. Freedom to choose is
not something that you have to pay for when exersised


>-- 
>Scott T. MacQuarrie  Marketing Training Developer, Sequent Computer Systems   
>     stm@sequent.com    Beaverton, OR      503-578-5456 
>"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
>     safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."  -  Benjamin Franklin


-- 
Brian Sheets		    _   /|  	"TRUCK?! What truck?"
153 N. Hayden Bay Dr.	    \`o_O'    	 
Portland, Or 97217	      ( ) 	   -Raiders of the Lost Ark
brians@atlastele.com           U
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles,talk.politics.misc
From: peter@helix.ObjecTime.on.ca (Peter Epstein)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Organization: ObjecTime Limited
Distribution: bnr
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 15:40:05 GMT

So, the constitution was not perfect.  I have heard no logical arguments for mandatory
helmet laws.  Sure, the constitution does not specifically declare that helmet wearing
is required by law.  Nor does it declare that not wearing a helmet is a freedom to be
guaranteed.  However, let us argue the logical reasons for and against a helmet law
rather than how such a law relates to the history of the U.S.A.  Anyone out there
have a reason why helmets should be mandatory?  Communists need not answer :)

-- 
   ,__o                                                  ,__o
 _-\_<,     Peter Epstein   peter@objectime.on.ca      _-\_<,
(*)/'(*)                                              (*)/'(*)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles.misc,talk.politics.misc
From: harryb@phred.UUCP (harry barnett)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Displaying a weapon (was Bicycles are Vehicles)
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:51:32 GMT
Reply-To: harryb@phred.UUCP
Distribution: seattle
Organization: Physio-Control

In article 11930@eskimo.com, timf@eskimo.com (Timothy R. Flanagan) writes:
>I never displayed a weapon.  That is against the law.

NOT!

There are many scenarios in which it is NOT against the law to display
a weapon.  Some which come readily to mind are a situation which
involves self defense, to assist a police officer, to prevent the
occurrence of a felony, to apprehend a felon, to defend a
family member (or other third party) immediately threatened with
unlawful force or violence..., and the list goes on.

>It is called
>"brandishing".

NOT!

There are both Washington State statutes and local (King County,
Seattle, other political subdivisions) ordinances governing "Displaying
a Weapon" modelled upon (usually word for word) the State statute.  The
word "brandishing" or any word even remotely close to it is not part of
those statutes. If you believe this to be incorrect, please cite the
Washington State statute, or King County or City (your specific city
where you work as a Communication Specialist will do, or any other in
Washington) ordinance on "Brandishing".

> Also, I am not an officer.  As I indicated, I work
>for King County Police.  I am a Communications Specialist.  I answer
>the phone, screan requests for emergency (police, fire & medical)
>response, and dispense what the training manual calls "police advice".

Could you enlighten us on what constitutes "police advice"?  That
manual should probably contain a caution about presenting misinformed
opinion gleaned from "Top Cop", "Bad Boys", and "Rescue 911" as fact
(which I am sure you would never do in your official capacity,
right? :-)

>I am not a commissioned officer, I do not wear a uniform, and I do not
>"impersonate" police officers.  I am just an ordinary private citizen.

You probably shouldn't give up your day job.

>
>I also agree with your statements.  Carrying a deadly weapon is a
>tremendous responsibility,

In spirit, I agree.  However, "tremendous" is subjective, so we may not
completely agree.

> and far beyond the scope of this discussion.

Don't know enough about the original scope to agree or disagree; note
new thread in subject line.

>
>
>-- 
>Timothy R. Flanagan				
>ACLU  EFF  NRA
>tim@reed.edu  
>timf@eskimo.celestial.com

harryb@phred

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brittanius (shocked):  Caesar, this is not proper.
Theodotus (outraged):  How?
Caesar (recovering his self possession):  Pardon him, Theodotus:  He is
a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and islands are
the laws of nature.

		--Caesar and Cleopatra, Act II, George Bernard Shaw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: das@voodoo.boeing.com (Deb Schwartz)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Happy with Honda of Seattle service?
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:08:36 GMT
Organization: Yet Another Graphics Project, Bellevue, WA

In article <1992Dec16.175443.24112@u.washington.edu> monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
>
>NO!
>
>First, you will need the coupons, because they are *VERY* expensive.
>Second, the last time I took my Honda in, they could not fix the problem,
>and charged my a lot for doing nothing.  
>
>I recommend High Road Automotive (formerly Dr. Honda) in Ballard.
>They fixed the problem and for less, which to me was of less importance
>since the car worked.  I've been going to them for years now.

I totally agree with Tracy about Honda of Seattle.  Another recommendation
is Japanese Auto Parts and Service in Bellevue (not the one in Renton):
cheaper than the dealers, totally honest, do excellent work.
------
Debbie Schwartz // das@voodoo.ca.boeing.com  // ....uw-beaver!bcsaic!voodoo!das
From: kdahlst@uswnvg.com (Kevin Dahlstrom)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Bellevue Honda is good (was: Happy with Honda of Seattle service?)
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:01:22 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

In response to other article re:  Bellevue Honda..
I have been very happy with the service there...Granted they are more       
expensive than "other" places, but I trust their work and feel confident
that I am not being "taken for a ride"

Kevin D...
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.poli
From: nmiller@starbase.trincoll.edu (norman miller)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Organization: Trinity College, Hartford, CT.
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:33:35 GMT

Dick Winningstad has got a point (never mind some of the reasoning).
It would be possible--just as we now try to prevent people from buying
cocaine or jumping off bridges--for the state to ratchet things up
considerably.  Possible, though not as ineluctable as some people
insist.

What bothers me about dangerous activities is that I wind up paying
some of the costs.  (I do now of course to keep the FDA and others
in groceries, but I'm willing to pay those costs because I hope they
protect me and mine.)  These costs stem from higher insurance rates
as well as higher taxes because of negligency lawsuits.  The unhelmeted
motorcyclist thus runs a better chance of dying or being maimed for
life _and_ I wind up paying because he or his estate will sue my com-
pany.

What does the freedom-for-all crowd say about that?

Norman Miller
From: dfpedro@nv2.uswnvg.com (Donn F. Pedro)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Idiot e-mail
Date: 12 Dec 92 09:46:37 GMT
Distribution: seattle
Organization: I don't speak for them anyway.

In article <4096@phred.UUCP> harryb@phred.UUCP writes:
:In article 1339@brat.wa.com, donn@brat.wa.com (Donn Pedro) writes
:>You know I try to be respectful of others opinions but, when I 
:>relate the story I realted about my experiences with motorcycling
:>and the tragedy that befell my family because my brother didn't
:>bother to wear his, and I get this in e-mail, all bets are off.

[ stuff deleted.  And yes I *was* rude ]

:>         Donn Pedro ....................a.k.a. donn@brat.wa.com
:>	
:>	       "You talk the talk.  Do you walk the walk?"
:
:THIS, from someone who says  "You know I try to be respectful of
:others [sic] opinions"?  Why, you've witlessly made another point.
:You're nothing but a hypocrite!

I said I tried to, I do not always succeed.  In this case the person
was apparently having mailer/news problems and sent this to me
instead of someone else.

Combined with the caliber of responses I received on this subject
(references to the bettering of the gene pool and the like) and the 
flu I was fighting at the time, I over-reacted.

I have received an apology from the person for sending me this confusing
message in error.

:>		    There are no ordinary moments.
:
:I'm sure that is certainly true for someone who takes offense where
:none is intended, and gives offense where none is called for.  I am
:sure you will take offense at this, for it is written  " Rebuke a
:fool, and he will hate you."

I take no offense, so you are incorrect.

I was wrong in that instance and I apologize publicly.

:May you live in interesting times.

May I?  I already am.



     Donn Pedro ....................................dfpedro@uswnvg.com

		     There are no ordinary moments.
Xref: sparky seattle.general:4171 pnw.general:2984 alt.society.civil-liberty:6980
From: donb@igor.tamri.com (Don Baldwin)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.poli
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:48:14 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

In article <1992Dec16.012626.8675@hpcvca.cv.hp.com> scott@hpcvccl.cv.hp.com
(Scott Linn) writes:
>This would be great, but there would be a big outcry from various sections
>of society.  My own parents insist that if someone goes out in a wilderness
>area or wherever, and don't come back, society is *morally required* to go
>in and find him/her, regardless of the costs.  Until we can get most of these
>people to change their minds, society will bear the costs, and we will
>continue to get more restrictive laws passed (seat belts, helmets, etc.).

Totally different scenarios.  Hell, I feel that if someone goes out in
the woods, falls and breaks his leg, they should go out looking for him
too.

Riding a motorcycle is different, however.  I don't think there's any way
in hell society should EVER pay the bills for someone who rides a motorcycle
without a helmet and without insurance.  If you don't have the brains to
do at least one of those things, then I would rather you be left to your
own devices where medical treatment is concerned, than pay your bills.

   don
Xref: sparky seattle.general:4085 pnw.general:2917
From: josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:44:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: mowgli.josh.724362299
Organization: University of Washington

I think the book full of warnings is not likely to be the development
in product sales. Rather, you'll have to sign something like:

"I am solely responsible for everything that happens while using
this product. No other person, product, agent, or company will be
liable under any circumstances for any damage that may occur."

But in legalese, of course.

In other words, buy the product, use the product: you're on your
own.

Surely there can be some middle ground? Surely there is some point
where people, companies, and everything else, take responsibility
for what they produce, and how they use what they use? I'd hate
to think that the social contract now must be a REAL contract, on
paper.....

Here's a side issue, that I'm curious about: obviously, there are
a lot of people who don't like the helmet law. But just as obviously,
it would not have been proposed and passed unless someone pushed the
council to do it. So, who applied the pressure? Insurance companies?
Doctors? Nosy mothers? Who? Anyone know?

Josh Hayes
--
  Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
  josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu             206 543-5004
 That's one more kid that'll never go to school, never get
	   to fall in love, never get to be cool
Xref: sparky seattle.general:4090 pnw.general:2921 alt.society.civil-liberty:6906 alt.activism:19585 alt.individualism:6088 rec.bicycles.misc:1547 talk.politics.misc:64266
From: dickwin@sequent.com (Dick Winningstad)
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:25:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Dec15.002504.16454
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.


Earlier stuff deleted

>What you don't seem to know is that "pursuit of happiness"
>is part of the Declaration of Independence, and thereore
>has absolutely no legal basis nor bearing.

I did know that it was in the Declaration of Independence.  The phrase
does have a bearing in that it helps to define the spirit of this
country's founding.  A spirit of noninterference by government in one's
life.

>The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
>of America has a somewhat similar phrase ( that is, the
>life, liberty and pursuit of happiness phrase ) but's it's
>intent is to protect the people from oppressive government,
>not to assure the people the freedom to do whatever they
>wish.
>
>That phrase from the Constitution is
>
>     No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty
>     or property without due process of law ....
>
>In the case of these helmit laws ( both bicycle and
>motorcycle ) there was due process law, and there
>laws were well within the overall purpose of the
>Constitution:
>
>   to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,
>     provide for the common defense, promote the
>     general welfare, and to secure the blessings of
>     liberty to ourselves and our prosperity.


I was not arguing the legality, but the philosophy behind the passage
of these laws. That is the expansion of government regulation of
society from one of regulating actions by individuals that directly
impact others to including regulation of actions that impact only the
individual doing the action.

Government should have power to regulate interactions between
citizens such as murder, robbery, or commerce. But it should not be
in the business of regulating individual actions that are only the
business of the individual.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+Dick Winningstad                                                    +
+                    Italian Wines are Fine                          +
+          I'd rather be on a Moto Guzzi in eastern Oregon.          +
+dickwin@sequent.com                                                 +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: lurch@eskimo.com (Erik Kloeppel)
Subject: Re: liberal attitudes on sex
Organization: -> ESKIMO NORTH (206) For-Ever <-
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 03:24:19 GMT

whre do you live?  When _I_ went through school, there were darn few girls
sleeping with guys who didn't like it.  And I don't know about you, but not
a single one of my past girlfriends has EVER complained.

WHEN do you live?  The point is not whether one half of the population enjoys
it or not, it's protecting those that engage in the act - or doing our best.  And... do you recall how old Juliet was in Shakespear's play?  And she was
(as was Romeo) considerd an adult.

you have to deal with facts, here.  more and more of our high-school aged
kids are fornicating, WITHOUT protection of any kind.  Which would you rather
do: Spend X dollars to distribute condoms, or millions of dollars to support
the children that result from sex without protection? - because MOST of those
young mothers will end up on welfare, mooching off you and me.

I make no statement regarding the "righness" or "wrongness" of what these kids are doing.  I know _I_ did it, many years ago, and far-far away.  It is an
established fact.

now, deal with it.


-- 
****************************************************************************
|                                      |                                   |
|          lurch@eskimo.com            |         Does the Noise in my      |
|          lurch@delphi.com            |             Head Bother You?      |
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: ekirby@buckeye.boeing.com (Elizabeth Kirby)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: FREE CHOICE QUESTION
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:33:10 GMT
Reply-To: ekirby@buckeye.boeing.com (Elizabeth Kirby)

In article <1992Dec16.005748.1288@u.washington.edu>, monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
|> In article <Bz4BI9.x8@plato.ds.boeing.com> daylan@mlssun9.telecom_group writes:
|> >
|> >Does anybody support a woman's right to have an abortion AND support the helmet law?
|> >
|> >If so, please explain.  
|> 
|> There is only a contradiction if you happen to be in that minority which
|> believes 'life' begins at conception.


	What about babies are messy creatures that need to be taken
care of, people with head injuries are messy creatures that need to
be taken care of?   :-)

		Beth
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall)
Subject: Re: FREE CHOICE QUESTION
Organization: Boeing
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 16:32:14 GMT

dcb@kopachuk.uucp (David Breneman) writes:
 > Which is more important, materialism or spiritualism?

I refuse to answer this question for fear of contradicting my materialistic
spiritual values. Have a merry commercial christmas!

-- 
 Bob Hall                   |  if [ -bs message ]; then
 Boeing Computer Services   |      mv message /compost/heap/$$
 root@chicken.ca.boeing.com |  fi
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: alpinist@eskimo.com (David Butler)
Subject: Re: Mandatory Bicycle Helmets. (long - venting of stupidity)
Organization: =>ESKIMO NORTH (206) 367-3837 SEATTLE, WA.<=
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 20:50:57 GMT

In article <Bz40JK.694@spdg.com> spowers@spdg.com (Steve Powers) writes:

>Even I wouldn't bet on Dave 2 falls out of 3 at any speed.

That's ok, I'll pass on the experiment.
 


-- 
Dave                                     The alpinist@eskimo.com
No Disclaimer:  construe my ideas to be those of anyone you wish
 - you will merely be wrong.
From: navids@jaws (Navid Sebti)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Automotive Work
Date: 11 Dec 92 18:58:53 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Robyn Spady (spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com) wrote:
: I need to know if anyone can recommend a place that does a good, reasonable
: brake job on cars?  Preferably, something close to downtown Seattle or 
: toward the Shilshole Bay area . . . My husband's '90 T-bird is due for a
: routine brake inspection . . . However, I'm one of the masses that believes
: all mechanics are out to screw you for as much money as they can get and I
: get nauseous thinking about taking cars in for work.
: 
: Any input, especially one with personal experience, would be appreciated.
: 
: Robyn Spady
: spady@bcstec.ca.boeing.com


	I know a couple of good place on east-side. Try "A & A" automechanic 
	in Redmond or the "Made in Japan" in Kirkland. I have dealt with both of 
	them and have been extremely pleased. They both backup their work for 
	months later, and have great pride in their work. 



	Good Luck!!
Newsgroups: seattle.general
From: randall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Zaphod Beeblebrox)
Subject: Eastside Piano Teacher?
Followup-To: randall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com
Keywords: piano, eastside
Organization: Screwballs Anonymous
Distribution: seattle
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:16:13 GMT

Looking for a piano teacher in the Bellevue/Issaquah area. Please E-mail
recommendation to me at address below. Also include whatever info you can
(e.g. phone, rate, quality). This is for an Adult, with a good amount of
skill. No, it's not me. ;^)  Thanks y'all.
-- 
  Michael W. Randall           | Don't put animals with sharp teeth or
  randall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com | poisonous fangs down the front of your
   ...!uunet!bcstec!randall    | clothes.  -- Mike Harding
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.politics,alt.activism,alt.individualism,rec.bicycles.misc,talk.politics.misc
From: allen@tessi.com (Allen Warren)
Subject: Re: Freedom, Social Responsibility, Individual Responsibility
Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:02:08 GMT

paynter@bnr.ca (Stuart Paynter) writes:

>I would say that you *obviously* do not have a clue what a trip to the
>hospital costs.  My girlfriend is a insurance consultant in group benefits.
>(read employer-employee group medical benefits here).  She has to deal 
>with this every day.  I figure I know exactly how much it costs.  I think
>that I also pay tax and insurance.  I have a pretty good idea of how 
>much you would pay.

>|> 
>|> As for insurance costs: your payment isn't suppose to pay for your
>|> medical costs. The _group's_ insurance premiums are suppose to cover
>|> the medical costs of the group and leave a profit for the issuing company.
>|> Your belief that there is any connection between individual injuries and
>|> premium costs is inacurate. More so since bicycling related injuries is
>|> infinitesimally low when compared to other sources of accidental injury.

>Exactly my point.  Thank you.  Your premiums do not even begin to cover
>the costs.  Therefore you are affecting EVERY OTHER premium payer when
>you draw on that insurance.  When another policy holder makes a claim,
>they affect YOU.  That is the only point I have been trying to make.



I can attest to the fact that premiums and copay doesn't BEGIN to cover the
actual costs billed from hospitals, doctors, labs, etc.  I have two little
boys, a third child on the way, and have been to doctors, hospital emergency
rooms and what-not quite a bit over the last 4 years.  Every time I get a
billing statement, or rather, and informal statement from my insurance
company, it lists the cost of the service and what the insurance company
pays per the agreement they have with the entity submitting the bill and I
have YET to see a payment from the insurance company which pays 100% of
the actual billed cost.  In a couple of cases, the contracted payment from
the insurance company was hundreds of dollars less than the actual billed
figure.  So, I know for a fact that what I'm paying in premiums doesn't even
BEGIN to cover the difference between billed figure and insurance payment.
I don't know if this is a contrived plan from doctors, hospitals, etc. just
so they can show a loss to the IRS, but I'd highly doubt this type of
procedure.

allen