alsos
Active member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2013
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 90
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Yes. Safety, as defined as the absence of risk, is unattainable; therefore we can only seek to minimize risk - not eliminate it. Even if you consider yourself as being exactly of median intelligence then half of the drivers that you share the roadway with are dumber than you are - that is a necessary risk.
I would argue that accidents – which is what we are really talking about – are completely unnecessary; they don’t have to happen. It’s only through negligence that they happen. I’m sure you’d argue that many are just innocent mistakes; but an innocent mistake can result in someone’s death and be severely punished for it. Why do we punish people for making innocent mistakes? Because we really don’t completely believe that these ‘innocent mistakes’ are devoid of negligence. Thus, they are preventable. Thus, they are unnecessary.
My point is… we do not need a law for every living thing in this country in order to create the delusion that we are going to even minimize harm to others. I grew up with both of my parents smoking everywhere: in the house (windows shut), in the car (windows shut), everywhere… I don’t know what effects this will have when I turn 80. If I get lung cancer will I blame my folks? NOPE! I have no certainty that if I got lung cancer from my parents’ smoking or from all the cars I’ve been around all my life. I consider myself to be extremely healthy at the ripe age of 51 despite my parents’ ignorance of smoking. We didn’t need laws back then, and I don’t think we need laws today. What we need is to get educated and make smart decision and stop expecting the government to do that for us.