As the previous posts stated, if we were to ban activities such as mountain climbing or racing, it would not only encourage more people to seek the illegal and physical thrill of those activities, it is also impractical. Where would they be banned--globally, just in the United States? Banning mountain climbing in the United States doesn't even take away the mountains that die-hard climbers want to conquer (Mt. Everest, etc.).

One aspect that you could address in your essay is the fact that we enjoy the freedom to participate in dangerous activities, but that doesn't mean that others should have to help us out if we act foolhardily. For example, we often hear about cases where a group decided to climb a mountain in bad conditions or to go into areas that were supposed to be off limits, and those climbers end up missing. In cases like this, it should be made clear ahead of time that rescuers are not obligated to risk their lives because of someone's foolish risks.

As long as their is a "frontier" to be explored, humans will find a way to explore.  It is in our nature to do things that no one else has done, or things that scare us, or give us a thrill.

Banning such sports on the argument of "danger" would only heighten the desire of those willing to engage in them anyway, to continue.  Afterall, it would heighten the danger to perform them illegally.  All sports (even untraditional ones like mountain climbing) have experts and some are even bound by rules.  Instead of banning such sports on the argument of danger, it would be far more beneficial to continue training and instructing others in how to perform them as safely and expertly as possible.

Crossing the street is dangerous.  Getting into our cars is dangerous.  We cannot protect everyone from everything, and it's not as if the people who choose to do this are unaware of the dangers involved.  It's not the role of government to protect them as individuals, rather, to protect the society at large and the public in general.

Someone I know was killed recently in a fall from a snowy mountain peak in Pakistan.  He had written books on climbing, and had summited almost every difficult mountain peak in the world.  He died doing exactly what he loved, and honestly, I don't think he would have had it any other way.

No one forces anyone to engage in these sports, so unless people want to live like prisoners in their own country, they should be allowed the freedom to choose their activities.  Already there are too many people who want a nanny government to tell them what to do and what to think.  History terms these governments totalitarian, and the denotations and connotations of such governments are definitely not good! 

Saint-Exupery, author of Le Petit Prince, wrote "etre homme, etre reponsable" [to be human is to be responsible].  It is each person's own responsibility to make choices that are in his/her best interest without harming others.  So, people must be given the freedom to be foolish if they wish so that others also may have the freedom to do what they can and should.

All sports have some danger.  A soccer player can be kicked in the head or can break their leg.  A marathon runner can suffer a heart attack and die.  There is essentially no physical activity that is free from danger.

So long as the participants know the risks and are as protected as possible, there is no reason to prevent them from doing what they want to do.  This is especially true if society is not going to have to care for them if they get hurt.  If they are knowingly risking their own health, and if they will be the ones to pay if they get hurt, let them do what they want.

Besides, if governments wanted to ban everything that was dangerous they would ban driving cars, eating fatty meats, smoking, etc.