Re:The Economist: Attempts to ban online gaming are doomed t...
by Alex63 on Thursday July 08, 2010 @05:51PM
(#1498911)
I think it's fair to question burdening taxpayers with the consequences of one's risk-taking behaviour, but I think there are ways to deal with that. For example, search-and-rescue efforts are often expensive, and taxpayers bear much of the cost. Some jurisdictions require backpackers and others who might end up needing those services to pay for permits, some of the cost of which goes to support search-and-rescue services. One can argue that that means careful backpackers end up picking up the tab for imprudent backpackers, but I think that's preferable to asking all taxpayers to pay the cost.
That's the same. If they ask you, you can say no, in which case they'll demand you ride with a helmet, lest be uncovered.
> with some reasonable theory that explains where the line is
I'm arguing that the particular argument of "you can't do that, it might cost the taxpayers money" is over the line. I'm for stuff like consumer protection, standards in advertising, anti-trust and a slew of other statist, communist oppressing regiments. I'm not in favour of spending the polices resources on giving you a ticket if you decide to ride your bike along the beach on a beautiful summers evening and want to feel the wind in your hair.