[scoofy]

This is fine to say, but how many dead or permanently maimed kids before you think playgrounds should be neutered?

I mean, it's just a number right? So how many kids does a playground need to kill every year before you'd say "oh, maybe we should nerf the monkey bars"?

Time-and-time again is see the masses have zero idea how many people are getting killed regularly until the stats are put in front of them. We assume it's small, but often non-negligible, like the fact that there are 11 drowning deaths every single day: https://www.cdc.gov/drowning/facts/index.html

[saurik]

I am unsure what the "correct" number is but do you believe it to be "0"? The way you get to 0 is by systematically removing everyone's autonomy "for their own good" :/. Like, are you upset about the 11 daily drownings enough to outlaw swimming pools?

[scoofy]

If we care about this, the way to do it is to move potential death from "accidental" to "negligent." If it's more serious, we need to push deaths from being "negligent" to "criminally negligent."

We can have swimming pools were kids drown. If a bunch of kids are drowning, we can require a locked gate around the pool, so that children cannot enter without supervision. If kids keep drowning, we could require pool covers that need to be removed before use.

The point isn't to remove autonomy, the point is to require everyone to admit that preventable mistakes happen, and we need to take reasonable precautions "for our own good."

The best analogy is ticketing cars that block fire hydrants when "popping into to a store real quick." We know that universalizing that habit will cause fires grow where they wouldn't otherwise, and people could die because of it. However, when the fire truck eventually shows up, the person blocking the hydrant will respond with "what are the odds." We know the odds are low, but non-zero, but the negative payoffs are extreme, that's why we need to always take precautions.