Ironically, he's also making a strong argument for legislation. Inadvertently, of course. But if the point being demonstrated here is that reasoned arguments based on years of experience and plenty of data in areas where the problem is strongly pronounced have no persuasive effect whatsoever, involving the law may—in fact—be necessary.

Mindless and even well-intentioned behavior can have as much to do with socially adverse consequences as actual malice or recklessness. The more closely you connect law and morality, the harder it becomes to accept this. But that doesn't change the reality that it's possible for lots of individually well-intentioned choices to add up badly.