So every time I turn on th TV or tune in the old radio, I am lambasted by law enforcement telling me that they have talked enough. “If you don’t click-it, ticket.”
Now before I hop up on the proverbial soap box, let me state the following. You should wear your seat belt. I do. It could save your life. Okay.
(Phil climbs up the soapbox hoping it holds…)
The government is not there to protect my from myself. If it is, they had better get hire a lot more cops and look other places than my car. I am a threat to myself in so many ways, the least of which in my choice to click-it or not. But you know, guarding myself from myself is my responsibility and perhaps that of my family and friends. But not the government. Why does the government require me to wear a seat belt? Who are they protecting? Are they afraid I might become a projectile and hit an innocent bystander walking on the sidewalk? Oh please! It is another case of government dabbling where they need not and should not.
And this recent string of TV commercials and radio ads has really driven me over the edge. They make it out as if this is what is most important to law enforcement. Not stopping criminals, not protecting children, not hitting the drug houses, but maybe sure average citizens click-it. Oh my. If we have enough law enforcement that we can dedicate their time to such trivial pursuits, let’s lay off some cops and reduce taxes. Or at least redirect the funds to things that the government should actually concern themselves with.
I know some of you think that my climb was not onto a soapbox but from a molehill to mountain, but the principle here is key. Government does not need to protect me from me. They are to protect me from others and other from me. DUI laws, yes. Seat beat laws, no. If the government talks up protecting us from ourselves, watch out. Your bag of chips might be confiscated or your nap on the couch disturbed. Neither are real good for you. I am much more likely to die from bad food and inactivity than not wearing my seatbelt, I can guarantee that.
So please, let the cops go back to crime, and I will make sure me and my family click-it.
Phil,
I remember back many years ago when I, the “conservative” and you, the “liberal” would have many long and impassioned arguments over politics. I’m glad to see that I have finally prevailed and that you have jettisoned the evils and non-sequiturs of the left. There’s hope for you yet. Now let’s see what we can do to get you into Orthodoxy! 🙂
I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. I’ve often heard the saying that “our nation has become a nation of siblings.” The point is that the hierarchy established naturally with regards to parents and children has eroded because parenting was likened by the liberals of the 1960s (and their fossil remains today) to be a power structure that had to be demolished for a more egalitarian society. NOtice how they said everything was a power structure, family, church, marriage, etc. which meant that it needed to be revolutionized and made democratic so that one person has no more power over another. Because of that foolhearty thinking, parents cannot be trusted or even expected to teach their kids anything. Values and morals and common sense are now left to “others” whether teachers, foster-care providers or the government. The left always assumes that every person needs saving from himself and thus, government intrustion becomes necessary and obligatory.
I don’t know if you have seen “V for Vendetta”, but V, the anti-hero hero of the movie goes on the state-run media and says that the cause of the current fascist state running Great Britain is obvious to everyone. They just need to look in the mirror. How have we abnegated our responsibilities so someone else can do it for us.
We have to stop thinking in terms of people “taking power.” IT’s ridiculous. People are GIVEN power by others who are too vain, too afraid, too lazy, too apathetic to wield it themselves. Is it any wonder that even the Athenians who invented democracy, after they had lost the Pelopponessian War to Sparta, had even questioned the wisdom of democracy. Even intellectuals as St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Luther, Immanuel Kant even lambasted democracy for the same reasons–it inflames the passions easily and thus becomes a breeding ground for demagogues. And that is exactly what is going on here in this country.
Sure “Click it or ticket” may seem innocuous but it is just the tip of the iceberg to reflect on how apathetic we have become. We may want to be a virtuous people, but we can’t do it for ourselves so we simply give more to people who can ensure that it is done for us. Freedom exists so that we may choose virtue. Freedom cannot live in a police state for that which is compulsory is not virtuous.
Unfortunately, it is going to take another terrorist strike, another World War or another American Revolution to reverse this dangerous path we have set ourselves upon.
Phil,
While I agree government does seem to like to get into everything, and that government and police do spend a lot of time making sure people “click it” as compared to a lot of other things they could be concerned about. i do agree that wearing your seatbelt should seem like a personal choice but i’m not sure if wearing your seatbelt is only protecting you.
If you go out and decide not to wear your seatbelt…that seems like a personal choice you should be able to make….however, someone else decides to go out and not wear theirs either….personal choice again. Yet the two cars collide (no drugs, drinking, etc. involved)…you survive but the other driver is killed. Wearing his seatbelt would have protected him from you (at least provided a better chance for survival). And so while the argument can be made that the government should protect us from others and not ourselves…in many cases seatbelt laws do exactly that…they protect us from others and their actions. Same reason why in many states motorcyclists are required to wear helmets….not just to protect themselves but also to protect them from others.
Should someone get fined for not buckling up? I don’t know. I guess it depends which way you are looking at it. If the intent is to protect you not only from yourself but others I can see why they would fine people. Just my two pathetic, unarticulate, extremely boorish cents.
Tom-
Thanks for your comments. However the government should only protect me from others in so far as they restrict their actions and not my own. If I want to be recklessly endangered by others, I should be able to choose that.h
Oh, also for all, I heard about this write-up today on radio, thought I would add it:
http://thenewspaper.com/news/17/1767.asp