To paraphrase a little bit, I think one of the biggest problems is the gap between what was intended and what was designed
Like it’s great that Congress is supposed to make laws, but the math of the design makes it impossible for Congress to keep up with the demands of running a country
Obviously doesn’t work if you have celiacs, but at least gluten gets sold as a food (and is therefore regulated) instead of as an unregulated supplement
I think one other path (although maybe not plausible) would be to use control of Congress to make more blue states. If you split CA and NY in two and add DC + PR if they want to join, the Republican Party would have to shift left to be electorally viable
Even if people discount the opposition of enslaved Black people, (some of) his fellow white politicians knew what he was doing was wrong and tried to free the people he enslaved
Similar deal with Washington, who deliberately forced the people he enslaved across the Pennsylvania border on a six-month schedule so that they wouldn’t become free according to PA state law
I’m confused—it looks like that says that cyclist and pedestrian head injuries are much more common per kilometer than driver head injuries. Did you write it backwards?
Do you actually have evidence for that? Also, I don’t see how “you should wear a helmet while driving” would mean that you shouldn’t wear a helmet while biking.
I already said I don’t. Why are you asking the same question again?
Also, what’s your source for your claim that motoring helmets would save more lives, and why would that be an argument against wearing helmets while biking?
Feel like there’s a difference between “you should wear a helmet” (which was what they said) and “cops should punish you if you don’t have a helmet on” (which is what a helmet mandate is)
