Have Governments Changed Behavior For The Good?

[yankees60]

As I read news of France going into a full month lockdown and people fleeing the country, and plans of protests occurring this weekend, and recent posts here about soda bans, I wonder, has any government ever effected a positive change in behavior for something people wanted to do but government set them straight for their own good?

Tons of people are addicted to drugs in America. And decades later, many states are legalizing weed. So that behavior doesn’t seem changed. And seems like the peoples “bad” behavior has changed government.

People have parties and get together in spite of covid party bans.

Is it that maybe governments change behavior on the margins and maybe that’s good enough to justify their actions?

Specifically, I’m referring to protecting people from themselves.

Religion seems to have done quite well over the last few thousand years. Tons of people saved from pork-related disease back when meat was dirty, because God said not to eat pork.

I’m agnostic but it seems like threatening someone with eternal damnation has worked better than threats of fines and imprisonment.

Are we protecting people from themselves because... why exactly? They’re too stupid to know better but bureaucrats in DC know better? Or we want them to live longer to keep working to pay into social security to keep that system flowing? Or because the more control government has over people, the more control it has. And control is what it wants.

If I didn’t have the government to “help”, would I be far worse off? If they didn’t “help” me figure out a diet as a child based on the food pyramid where I ate 6 servings of heavy carbs and 5 servings of dairy each day?

I might be part of the 0.001% of people under 40 who died of covid, if they didn’t close my local businesses for months. Well, I have no pre-existing conditions so I guess 0.00001% of people under 40 who aren’t morbidly obese or were in a car accident or shark attack while positive for covid.

I aver that it is indisputable that mandatory seatbelt laws have saved / changed many lives for the better. I'd always wanted to wear mine but could never sufficiently motivate myself to do so. Once it became the law I became 100% compliant. It's become such a good habit that I feel intensely vulnerable NOT having it on just to cross the street and pull into my driveway after having stopped at my mailbox opposite my house.

Would I have worn a motorcycle helmet if it was not the law in Massachusetts? I'd like to think yes but who knows. 1/2 hour from me is "live free or die" New Hampshire where there is no such law. Who pays for motorcycle injuries that could have prevented if having worn a helmet and the person is unable to pay for him- or herself? Wait! From reading you, I think you might have an answer to that one!

Vinny

[yankees60]

I aver that it is indisputable that mandatory seatbelt laws have saved / changed many lives for the better. I'd always wanted to wear mine but could never sufficiently motivate myself to do so. Once it became the law I became 100% compliant.

Vinny,

Do you think if the government never created this law, you wouldn't have started wearing a seatbelt anyway? It was the risk of a $50 fine, not the risk of being launched out of the front of your car, that made you decide to do this?

Perhaps if no law were made and the news showed a gruesome car crash where the driver was launched 50 feet, and you saw that a few times over a year, would you have changed your behavior then? Or it was the $50 that did it?

I would not. I'd been a long-term driver, wanted to do it, but never did. Until you mentioned a $$ fine I had no idea what any financial fine was. I just knew it was now against the law and it would be some kind of automobile violation if caught, something I generally want to avoid.

So, without a doubt, yes, it was this particular law that pushed me over to finally do what I'd always wanted to do.

In general, I think I am fairly law abiding but I don't think that because something is legal makes it right and okay to do or that everything illegal is the wrong thing to do.

But, in this case, yes, the law affected my behavior in a highly beneficial manner.

Vinny

[yankees60]

Perhaps if no law were made and the news showed a gruesome car crash where the driver was launched 50 feet, and you saw that a few times over a year, would you have changed your behavior then? Or it was the $50 that did it?

Ha. When I took driver's ed in HS, they made us watch what were colloquially known as the 'Hamburger Films' because the people in the crashes looked like ground beef. It prob threw a scare into us at the time to drive safer.

Again, in the "dark ages" of when I took those classes we were now shown them. I remember exactly one thing from that class, which as never left me. And, I'll test everyone here to see if you remember or if you were taught the same.

What does a yellow light mean?

Vinny

[yankees60]

Until you mentioned a $$ fine I had no idea what any financial fine was. I just knew it was now against the law and it would be some kind of automobile violation if caught, something I generally want to avoid.

So, without a doubt, yes, it was this particular law that pushed me over to finally do what I'd always wanted to do.

I'm a bit perplexed here. So you never wore a seatbelt because you thought it was unnecessary or stupid. And it became the law to wear one. You were unaware of any financial penalty for violating the law, but you are a law abiding citizens and thus changed behavior because you didn't want to break the law. Not for any kind of repercussions of breaking the law, except the consequence of breaking the law itself?

Interesting. It sounds as though you view the law and lawmakers as kind of a deity status, similar to a religion. God says not to eat pork, so you stop eating pork. And you stop not because of what might happen if you eat pork, but because God said so, and the person wants to follow God's order.

I wonder how Vinny would feel to know of all of the laws he's inadvertently breaking each day due to ignorance. And possibly even laws that are completely counter to each other and it being impossible not to break A or B because one must do either A or B, thus breaking the opposite law.

There's so many laws on the books it's impossible to know them all. So I wonder if it's just important to follow the laws you know about, like the government making a huge marketing campaign for wearing a seatbelt being a new law. Or if you would spend perhaps one day each week, maybe Sunday, studying the new laws passed that week, at a city, county, state and federal level. To make sure you comply.

Perhaps getting together with other law abiders each Sunday in the same building to study these new laws, with a lawyer as the leader who's job it is to try to interpret what the laws mean and give example of how to follow those laws in your daily life. And if anyone questions the lawyer as to what the laws mean or why they were written, the lawyer in charge of the meeting shrugs and says, it's not our place to challenge the word of lawmakers, they have a master plan for us all.

I'm teasing a bit, in good fun, of course, but that's what it sounds like to me when you say that you followed the law that you thought was unnecessary, not out of desire to avoid a traffic ticket, but out of desire to avoid breaking a law.

Sometimes your attempts to summarize or paraphrase me are not at all accurate.

I never said I never wore a seatbelt because I "thought it was unnecessary or stupid". I realized it was beneficial to do so but could never motivate myself to do so. I'm a person of great inertia and, also, quite binary in my behavior. Either totally and always on. Or totally and always off. Never in between.

Case in point. I'm trying to install the good habit of daily drinking two quarts of water. I've set up two times each day when I'm supposed to do it. I'm getting better at it. But some days I forget either one or both of those times. But I'm fully confident that at some point it will just become ingrained in me and will be a good habit. Just the same as brushing and taking care of my teeth twice a day. No matter how tired I am or when I get to bed...be it 4 AM, 5 AM, 6 AM I am never Not going to take care of my teeth prior to getting in bed.

And, to again make your paraphrasing more accurate. I was unaware of the SPECIFIC financial penalty for violating the law. But when it comes to any kind of traffic violations I knew from unfortunate personal experiences that there is some form of unwanted financial consequences.

That it became law just made it my personal "tipping point" so that I went to never ever wearing them to always wearing them.

I definitely do not view the law and lawmakers as having deity status.

I don't obey the speed limits. Does anyone? Used to always have a radar detector going, especially when going 85 in a 70 MPH zone. But now I try to keep it to just 5 mph over the limit.

Getting to your final paragraph, you again surmise incorrectly. I made my decision not out of a desire NOT to break to the law but to avoid the consequences of breaking the law. And, as I've stated several times it was the impetus for causing me to do something I really did want to do. Therefore, overall a win / win for me.

I certainly do not like obeying speed limit laws but I observe to the extent described above. Strictly out of wanting to avoid the consequences if caught breaking those laws. I've had enough of those in my past.

Vinny

[Libertarian666]

Until you mentioned a $$ fine I had no idea what any financial fine was. I just knew it was now against the law and it would be some kind of automobile violation if caught, something I generally want to avoid.

So, without a doubt, yes, it was this particular law that pushed me over to finally do what I'd always wanted to do.

I'm a bit perplexed here. So you never wore a seatbelt because you thought it was unnecessary or stupid. And it became the law to wear one. You were unaware of any financial penalty for violating the law, but you are a law abiding citizens and thus changed behavior because you didn't want to break the law. Not for any kind of repercussions of breaking the law, except the consequence of breaking the law itself?

Interesting. It sounds as though you view the law and lawmakers as kind of a deity status, similar to a religion. God says not to eat pork, so you stop eating pork. And you stop not because of what might happen if you eat pork, but because God said so, and the person wants to follow God's order.

I wonder how Vinny would feel to know of all of the laws he's inadvertently breaking each day due to ignorance. And possibly even laws that are completely counter to each other and it being impossible not to break A or B because one must do either A or B, thus breaking the opposite law.

There's so many laws on the books it's impossible to know them all. So I wonder if it's just important to follow the laws you know about, like the government making a huge marketing campaign for wearing a seatbelt being a new law. Or if you would spend perhaps one day each week, maybe Sunday, studying the new laws passed that week, at a city, county, state and federal level. To make sure you comply.

Perhaps getting together with other law abiders each Sunday in the same building to study these new laws, with a lawyer as the leader who's job it is to try to interpret what the laws mean and give example of how to follow those laws in your daily life. And if anyone questions the lawyer as to what the laws mean or why they were written, the lawyer in charge of the meeting shrugs and says, it's not our place to challenge the word of lawmakers, they have a master plan for us all.

I'm teasing a bit, in good fun, of course, but that's what it sounds like to me when you say that you followed the law that you thought was unnecessary, not out of desire to avoid a traffic ticket, but out of desire to avoid breaking a law.

You're shouting into a well. People with his personality type consider government their religion.