Re: UK: Drivers may be banned from smoking at the wheel

["Brian Loe" <knobdy () gmail com>]

On 5/13/07, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2007 13:39:03 CDT, Brian Loe said:
> > And it seems a bit odd that you're so pro babysitting by the state to
> > save you from dumb people but completely against that same state doing
> > all it can to save you from terrorists...
>
> Note that the cost-benefit analysis for "state taking some obvious low-cost
> actions to minimize the cost transference from dumb people to others" is quite
> different from "state taking *all it can* to save use from terrorists, no
> matter what the costs"..

I'd like to know how you came to the conclusion that the enforcement
of such bans is "low cost". Perhaps the high hot burglary and physical
assault rate on the island could be reduced if the police spent more
time on the streets looking for real criminals and violent gangs as
opposed to looking for people talking on the phone. Further, how do
you deduce that NOT catching terrorist is so cheap? Do you not realize
the value of Manhattan real estate?

Finally, no one has answered the question of HOW you regulate against
and then stop people from being dumb or doing stupid shit. It would
seem that if it were possible it would have been done long ago and we
wouldn't be discussing it now. On the other hand, it is easy to outlaw
terrorism and easy to measure the value of the methods you use to stop
them.

I'm not in favor of giving up my rights for ANY purpose, btw. I don't
have the right to live worry free.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.