I'm not one to get involved in political debates, for several reasons. But alienpi made the comment the Canadian guy pays higher motorcycle insurance premiums, because riding a motorcycle is high risk, and correlates to higher health care cost, etc. Uncle Punk, you replied with, "legislate that activity (I assume you are referring to the high risk activity) out of existence to save us from you". On the off chance I read that correctly, you think it is more ethical for the government to outlaw activities because someone, somewhere, deems it high risk, and therefore nobody should partake? I mean, did I hear that right? So you are talking about the government taking away constitutional freedom (Obviously as long as the high risk activity isn't, oh i don't know, barricading yourself on the roof of a building and playing real life Grand Theft auto) because it will cost them money, and you think this is ok? Now, I should have prefaced this reply with, if I misread what you meant, than I apologize. Like I said, I don't typically get involved with political debates, because not everyone will be happy all the time. No matter who is in office. But, I hope I did misconstrue what you meant, and I am not trying to start an argument here.