Peple who know me in the “real world” have long known that it’s easy to get a rant out of me: just present me with another instance of “gummint” knowing what’s good for me… and punishing me if I disagree.
Take the national “Click It or Ticket” campaign that’s been going on for a couple of years now as but one example of many intrusive “gummint” policies. What a piece of bullshit! (Nope. Not getting a bowdlerized euphemism out of me on that one.) Stealing from–and modifying–the Chesterton quote in my right sidebar,
“Though not using a seat belt may be dangerous, it is a danger that cannot be forbidden to a citizen, but can be forbidden to a slave.”
Or, as The American Spectator put it a couple of years ago when the “Click It” bullshit began,
The late conservative intellectual Sam Francis came up with an excellent term for all of this stuff — “anarcho-tyranny.” In brief, he meant a situation in which the truly lawless (violent criminals, big-time crooks) are increasingly treated with kid gloves while at the same time, ordinary schlubs who never commit serious personal or property crimes are increasingly hassled over Pecksniffy technical fouls and “lifestyle violations” such as failing to wear their seat belts.
Invariably, the punishment involves money.
Anarcho-tyranny has another dark side beyond the simple harrassment of citizens with ever more restrictive laws and regulations along with the encouragement of dangerous outlaws: the infantilization of America. Big Brother will force you to either give up what “he” considers bad habits or pay an ever-increasing price. You are no longer responsible to yourself, your family, your neighbors and community for the effects of your behavior, because now you are responsible directly to Big Brother for your behavior (and soon thoughts–that’s what “hate crime” legislation is about, after all) regardless the results.
“When will politicians realise that George Orwell’s 1984 was a warning, not an instruction manual?”–Derek Clark, Member, European Parliament
So, don’t wear your seat belt, drive safely to your destination and start home–still safe–until Big Brother’s thugs decide you’ll be an easy, safe way to fill a ticket quota. Your safety is NOT the issue: compliance with authority is the issue.
As this slide into infantilization of the American public continues, expect ever more interference in your life. After all, you asked for it, didn’t you, when you voted for Any of the Above instead of None of the Above every time you went to vote for the last couple of decades?
That said, do I wear my seat belt? Usually. Have I ever been ticketed for not wearing my seat belt? No. Does it matter that I have not been ticketed? No. The law restricting my freedom to make my own decisions about my own safety is reprehensible. As are all other laws that presume to dictate my actions supposedly for my safety.
Note also:
“A nation of sheep will surely beget a government of wolves.” -Henry de Jouvenel
Trackposted to DragonLady’s World, Adam’s Blog, Pirate’s Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Wolf Pangloss, , Conservative Cat, Right Voices, D equals S, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.
You must be a month early with this rant, normally the Click it or Ticket mantra comes out near Memorial day. I wrote nearly this same rant two years ago; perhaps you read it and have waited all this while to get angry.
http://tfsternsrantings.blogspot.com/2005/05/click-it-or-ticket.html
Nah, TF, I rant on this and other nanny-state anarcho-tyranny all the time in the RW. Heck, if I published all my RW rants, I’d be doing nothing but blogging 24X7X365.25
*heh*
The world’s not ready for that.
David,
You already know I’m going to agree w/you more often than not — unless I decide to yank your chain. However, both you & TF have your collective heads where the sun don’t shine on this one.
The rants should be pointed at the false premise (if this is a proper use of the word, “Oh Great Master of Wordsmithdom.” The whole seatbelt thing was sold falsely!
While personal safety is valid, that in & of itself should be an individual choice — W/O “nanny” involvement. However, there is a far bigger issue. Nanny’s interest should be toward vehicle control. The whole seatbelt thing should have been “sold” from the vehicle control standpoint!
In the old days in cars with bench seats, did you ever have one slide out of control — on ice, dirt, paved or otherwise? Car is in a skid; driver’s butt has slid across the seat. Now driver is still trying to steer from right seat. That’s the real need for seatbelts — keep driver’s butt behind steering wheel & feet close to the dedals.
Now I don’t mind seatbelts; would like to have a shoulder harness, too. That comes from well over 4000 hours strapped in air machines — general aviation Cessnas to B-52s.
Why all the straps? Personal/aircrew safety is one issue, but the main issue is to keep the machine under control whether maneuvering, experiencing turbulance, whatever.
As I said above, ground vehicle seatbelts were sold from a WRONG premise.
This *WRONG* “wussified” seatbelt issue (i.e. “nanny” required personal safety) has been one of my soapboxes for quite a few years now!
Personal safety [motorcycle helmets, child safety seats (parental issue), etc.] should be *MY* choice. But, the state should have an interest in requiring drivers (not passengers) to strap in — for vehicle control purposes. If one doesn’t believe that, then the state must be “in the wrong” to license drivers of the death traps.
Hugh,
I believe your premise is flawed. I’ve hit some really bad road conditions (yeh, driving old bench-seat cars w/o seatbelts available), 360-degree+ black ice situations on old bias-ply tires with old iron pig and other such (including being head-on-ed and rear-ended by idiots while not strapped in–cos there were no straps). Lose my place behind the wheel? Nuh-uh. If the car’s already badly enough out of control to move the driver out from behind the wheel, it’s beyond a driver sitting there, strapped in already.
I believe your years driving airchines are elading you astray on this one. It’s not a control of vehicle situation. Heck, if the car’s pulling an inside loop, even someone strapped in can kiss their a** goodbye, as far as control is concerned, and that’s about the only situation I can envisionfrom about a half century of driving that’d remove my a** from behind the wheel, with or without seatbelts, and still leave me inside the car at all.
(Heck, had one car totaled out from under me by a yahoo crossing a double yellow on a two-lane, going 60mph+… when I was in a car that HAD no seat belts. Good old Detroit iron saved my a** that day. Not a full head on–he spun me 540+ with a good strong clip of my left front fender. No seat belt, no damage to me. None. Bench seat. Never left the driver’s seat. Car was a complete goner, though. Yeh, I tried to get outa his way, but he had moved in my lane to pass… as I was driving past the vehicle he was trying to pass–no time, so even if I had been pushed, shoved or flung outsa the driver’s seat, it would have made not one bit of difference. Rear end? Same deal. Hugh, there’s probably not one instance of an automotive vehicular accident in 100,000 that your “control” scenario would apply in any way, shape fashion or form.)
Something up in the air pulling a heck of a lot more Gs–or negative Gs– (and possibly, even probably, recoverable after doing somethng dumb that’d dump a non-strapped in airchine driver outa the driver’s seat), sure, it’s a control issue. Cars? not so much.
And requiring seat belts for a drive to the grocery store on 15-25mph streets is even less of a safety issue. Heck, requiring them at the more common 35-45 mph of local errands doesn’t bring one anywhere near seat belt usage for “control of vehicle” scenarios you envision.
(BTW, TF’s a retired LEO and has seen more in the way of auto accidents, etc., than both of us put together, squared.)
Yeh, I generally buckle up. But it’s not for safety issues. It’s simply to avoid having the time-wasting hassle of some keystone cop doing a “Big Brother’s Pet Thug” routine when I go down to the store for a gallon of milk. ANything serious enough to remove me from the drivers seat, well, that’s what I now have air bags for (although I will admit that common sense says buckle up–belt and suspenders principle–but that ought to always be MY decision, not some bureaucrap, politician *spit* or Leo).
Oh, and at least 80% of the time, by the evidence of what I see on the roads day in and day out, the state IS wrong to license folks to drive. *heh*
{While I understand your TF LEO statement, with all that experience he/she has that you & I don’t have: how much of that experience came first hand, i.e., was inside one of the vehicles involved?}
Just as I suspected——
Your mind is made up, so don’t attempt to confuse you with that thing called “reason” or fact 🙂
My premise is not flawed. Your opposition to seatbelts is flawed — for reasons I stated in 1st comment.
I do have experience with vehicles skidding in the old days (bench/no belt) & being in front passenger seat still trying to get the beastie under control. Obviously you discount that, but it’s my experience. [I tend to think others, from my generation (if they’re honest), have had similar experience to mine — whether you did or not.]
Sometime soon I’ll have to tell you about my “real” driving school — the one after I got my license.
I even had one experience in mid ’80s driving a 3/4 ton full size GM van — no bench. Was on I-85 between the Big A & Monkey Town. Mid afternoon, sun shining, dry road, minor traffic, cruise control set at speed limit. Stone cold sober, but very tired. Almost went to sleep. Awakened in a swerve, back & forth between both lanes. Swerve was sufficient to have unseated me . . . if I had not have had the strap attached. Finally got the old girl under control. Needless to say, I had to stop at the next exit to “clean-up” & fully wake up.
Of course there was a female driver near me during the “swerve” — only vehicle within 500 yards, front or rear. She yelled something out her window at me that I still haven’t heard. What I did understand was her signalling me 3-4 times that I was #1 in her book for that day.
I appreciated her telling me I was #1. I deserved it!
What prevented the wreck after I went to sleep? Being “strapped in” & waking up in the nick of time. The belt still prevented a wreck that day.
Had a LEO been around, he’d have wanted to know more about me at that time. BUT, the strap worked for recovering control!
BOTTOM LINE: (for me)
Drivers should be required to be “strapped in” — don’t really give a d*mn whether PAX are or not!
And I assert the opposite, Hugh, from my own experience. Of course your “mileage” varies. Never, in my experience with road machines have I needed or benefitted from seat belts enhancing my control of a vehicle, and I am, as a result of my years’ experiences, unable to envision a circumstance where that can be the case for me. I do further assert, as T.F.’s article (linked above) does that compelling seat belt usage is none of the State’s business, and that I should be the one to balance personal protection vs. injury issues. Note:
Many other references available with a simple Google: seat belt caused injuries are extremely common. Folks ought to be free to make their own evaluations of benefits/dangers and decide accordingly. In fact, were that to be the case, a Darwinian “solution” to the masses of stupid drivers out there might be allowed to assert itself.
A solution more in line with liberty might be to allow insurance carriers to deny all or part of insurance claims for injuries in accidents where the injured were not wearing their seat restraints.
BTW, that might also be a liberty-responsibility enhancing solution to helmet laws for motorcyclists. Sure, motorcycle related deaths decline when cyclists wear helmets, but the cost to society goes up. Huh? Sure, more cyclists survive accidents, but more also have long-term disabilities from neck and spine and other injuries that you and I end up picking up the tab for, in more cases than not.
BTW#2: I will admit that some passengers who’re unused to safe, efficient cornering techniques or the proper use and observance of a Yield sign*, etc., tend to look for a grab bar while riding with me. They (usually) get over their irrational fears after a few rides, though. Funny: the ones who seek a grab bar the first few times outa the gate don’t seem to be helped by their seat restraints (and yes, I do require–for my own financial safety–that pasengers be buckled in, and I have a right to insist on such since I’m driving and it’s my car they’re riding in).
*I have a fun story of a judge instructing a young cop on the proper observance of a Yield sign: the illiterate, overzealous young cop thought it was simply another way to say “Stop”. Dumbass. The judge ought also to have revoked his license to drive and sent him to driving school. Instead, the kid just got a lecture in court. I love it when a plan comes together!
Unrelated to your topic, but close enough; when I was a working cop a fellow dumbass actually wrote a ticket to somebody who had been “rubber necking” while passing an accident location. He wrote the ticket, not making this up, “Driving straight while head turned to side”, as if there were such a violation.
Now I know I’d like to speed up traffic around bottle necks caused by rubber neckers who want to see the bloody body with one arm sliced off; but that’s just human nature. News at 11.
TF, Off-topic comments welcome, even encouraged, as long as they are sensible.
Actually, while I agree with you about the rubbernecking (both the “speed up traffic” part and the “giving a ticket for plain old human nature” part), I find folks who engage in that behavior to be Prime Idiots. *sheesh* They probably do deserve repeated dope-slappings.
I have made it my practice when passing a “working” accident (public safety and ambulance, etc. personnel onsite) to
a. Ascertain quickly–as far in advance of nearing the site as possible–whether I know any of the participants and then, regardless of whether I do ot not
b. passing by with my eyes atuned to the rubbernecking idiots intent on causing another
accidentincident. During my “many, many miles per day” driving years, I saw no few ancilliary incidents caused by dumbass rubberneckers… *sigh* OK, I admit it: I was very nearly one of them one time, which was all it took to cure me of the habit.Dopeslapping ought to be written into the law as a valid punishment for dumbasses. In fact, you see those dumbasses who do NOT play catcher for a baseball team who wear their “gimme caps” with the bill backasswards? I think that’s their defense against the many earned dopeslaps they’ve endured. *heh*