| EricHiggin said: If some people start getting killed in an unexpected manner while driving in the near future, say because a certain model part has a deadly problem, would the Gov forcibly stop everyone from driving their cars? |
I can only speak to what occurs here... But the answer short answer is yes. - Depending on a myriad of factors, you have risk/hazard assessments performed to ascertain it's extent and take the appropriate course of action.
For example there was a big recall on cars here a few year ago due to an airbag fault discovered in a heap of different car brands... Manufacturers were forced to repair/replace the part.
Sales of some new cars had to get temporarily halted here a few years ago because the materials they were derived from were significantly stronger than older cars... And our Road Crash Rescue tools were unable to handle the new materials until we got new equipment in.
There is allot that goes into the safety of cars, allot of planning and legislative frameworks exist and constantly change.
| EricHiggin said: Maybe just the cars and owners that are directly part of the problem without negatively impacting everyone else? Would the Gov even necessarily need to get involved? Certain drivers in specific cases get treated differently, and can have their vehicles recalled or potentially have their licenses pulled for reckless behavior, so only they and not everyone are negatively impacted going forward. |
If there is an intersection which is a known "black spot" (I.E. High road accident counts) then the Government steps in and improves the intersection.
If there is a trend of deaths, then new safety features like seat-belts and airbags get introduced and legislated.
Everyone adheres to the same road rules and legislative safety requirements.
If someone is being stupid, then that individual will get "done by the system" - Everyone has to adhere to the same rule set... And sometimes if people are doing stupid shit consistently in a certain area, there are often infrastructure changes (I.E. Road speed bumps) to reduce those.
I know the angle you are trying to take... I.E. "Freedom" above other peoples health and safety... It just doesn't work, the USA is proving that to the world right now.
| EricHiggin said: Cars may kill about 30,000 every year, but what about the flu in comparison, and then there's covid-19. How many death's is too many and what is and isn't worth comparison if every last life counts? Are all lives equal or are some more important and worth more than others? |
It's not just the death counts you need to consider, it's the overall health impact during the short and long term, if a large % of the populations capacity to breathe is impacted for life... Then that becomes a significant burden on society in the long term and thus a greater reliance and cost on the health system and tax payer... The USA already has an insanely expensive and inefficient health system as it is, could you imagine it being worst?
All lives are obviously valued equally.
And it is stupid to put the economy ahead of health and well-being of a countries populace. - The countries who went into total economic lock-down early and defeated the virus are now enjoying their social freedoms and return to full economic activity.
Countries like the United States and Brazil who have systemically failed in containing and controlling the virus through sheer leadership incompetence and neglect are just prolonging the economic and social hurt.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
