Ben Roethlisberger and freedom

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by Big Papa Goat

Of course there's something wrong about what happened, a guy broke his face. I mean, it's bad when someones face is broken. It basically shouldn't happen, and just because it was his own fault doesn't make a difference in that regard.

It isn't always bad when someone's face is broken. Sometimes it happens to bad people, and other times we cheer for it in sport.

Like I said, what happened to him is unfortunate and bad....for him. But he also knew full well the consequences of riding without a helmet, he had been warned numerous times by numerous people about it, and he also has a lot of money to rebuild his face and get the best medical and cosmetic care available. In fact, acording to the local Pittsburgh press (who have ben harping over this for weeks now):

"When Cowher learned at minicamp that his starting quarterback was riding around town on a motorcycle, he had a talk with him. It was as much a father-son talk as it was a coach-quarterback talk.

It was a talk about choices and responsibilities and consequences. It made perfect sense.

Roethlisberger walked away from the meeting and so much as thumbed his nose at the coach. He listened to what appeared to be sound advice and said he would not only continue riding but he would continue riding without a helmet."

LINK

He and fellow Steeler Tommy Maddox were actually both infamous for riding around without helmets. According to Maddox:

"You have to look at life, obviously you have to be smart, and I try to be smart because I have a wife and two kids, not because I'm playing a game. I want to be there for my kids growing up and my wife. You do understand there's consequences to your actions, not only on motorcycles, but that's how you live your life."

LINK

So, where's the harm? He knew the risks, he had been warned, andhe did it anyway. Why isn't he entitled to do that?

And doesn't "public safety" refer to the overall public, meaning how the actions and behavior of some can and/or will effect other people?

Practically speaking it's not a significant reduction of freedom, and if your talking about public safety as being important, then there's no compelling reason to protect people from their own decisions any less than from anyone elses decisions.

Is just a little bit less free speech ok? Just because a law is merely annoying doesn't make it necessary or just. I don't mind paying my taxes, that doesn't mean i should pay as much as I do.

Ben could've hurt someone else regardless of whether or not he was wearing a helmet. That's why I think speeding laws, seatbelt laws, drinking and driving laws, and cell phone laws make sense. They can directly harm other people due to the negligence of one other person.

But why does the government have a say in what Ben does just to himself? Is it the government's constitutional obligation to protect us from outside threats, and from ourselves?

Like with the helmet law, it's reasonable because going out and buying a helmet is a pretty small thing to have to do, helmets aren't that expensive, and you can basically do all the things you would otherwise do when you're wearing a helmet. And helmets are really good for safety, they help a lot. So given a situation where the benefit to safety so much outweighs the costs to freedom, then you can basically say that unless safety has extremly limited importance compared to freedom, then it's a reasonable law.

It's also within one's power to eat healthy, not smoke, not drink, and basically do a lot of things that are better for you. That doesn't mean the government should be in the business of telling us to do it.

Ben could buy 1,000 really nice helmets. He knew riding with one would be safer than without. He decided not to anyway. What's so wrong with that? Like his teammate said, life is about choices and consequencs.

Helmets ARE really good for safety, just like wearing a condom is really a good way to prevent spreading STDs. Condoms are pretty cheap, right? Should it be a law to wear a condom when you have sex? Following your argument, I think it must be.

I don't necessarily want this to be exclusively about cars and helmets. I guess my overall question is where does th reach of governmen end regarding my own behavior?