"Safetyness" is no life to live

Let’s make a law that requires everyone to wear an anvil on their chest. Because, you know, an anvil would stop a bullet. Maybe later we can address the loophole that doesn’t require a second anvil to protect the back.

Then we’ll hire anvil enforcement officers empowered to stop people at random to make certain they are wearing their anvil. If they are found in violation, the officers can imprison them, confiscate their property, and shoot them if they resist. For their own good, and the common good, of course. If you oppose this proposal on the grounds that it would harm people or be inconvenient and uncomfortable, then you just don’t care about saving people from being shot.

Or, let’s make everything illegal that has ever resulted in an injury or death. Just think how much it would help the economy to hire enough people to enforce that one! You can’t seriously oppose laws against things that could hurt or kill people, could you? Do you want people to hurt and die? Well, you’re no better than a murderer in that case! You probably are one, but haven’t been caught yet!

As ridiculous as this sounds (I hope you think it sounds ridiculous), this is how I see drunk driving “laws”.

The guy who killed my daughter was living under all sorts of “laws” which are imposed and enforced to (supposedly) protect the innocent. That they failed doesn’t mean the “laws” killed her, but they failed to protect her. And they damaged her Rightful Liberty all her 24 years. That’s not an acceptable trade-off.

Just an hour or so before I found out she had been killed, I had posted a Facebook status which said in part:

Do I “like” the act of drunk driving? No, not one bit. But I hate the checkpoints, “laws”, and enforcement imposed to supposedly fight it even worse.

Rightful Liberty will solve any problems the best possible way without violating anyone.
Statism never can.

It is still as true now as when I wrote it, not knowing how ironic my post was.

So, no. I don’t blame the “laws” for her death. I don’t even blame them for failing to prevent her death- “laws” are powerless in that regard. What I blame them for is cheapening life by destroying liberty and property, and by making responsibility a quaint notion in this day of “legal, or not?”

I hate the culture of “safetyness” and cowardice that has taken root and bloomed. I want to see people live their lives boldly, living their liberty in spite of “laws”. It’s your life; make it count. You never know when or how it will end. You can comply and cower and avoid breaking counterfeit rules, and you’ll still die. Reject “safetyness”. Refuse to wear the anvil. Do dangerous things, with open eyes. Take responsibility, accept the consequences, and make your life mean something.

.

Advertisements

5 Responses to “"Safetyness" is no life to live”

  1. CurrentUser Says:

    I wear a size X-L anvil. I think it's unfair I need more safetyness than other people.

  2. Anonymous Says:

    Why not make cars like bumper cars, …with roll cages, sensors and retractable Kevlar airbags everywhere? …like a puffer fish. In the event of a collision, or by hitting an emergency button, the vehicle[s] instantly becomes like a beach ball and bounces around. Casualties are minimized. ..maybe install fences around roadways to inhibit runaway 'car balls'.

    ..Or install (high speed?) tracks on the roadways that cars could connect to with a relatively simple mechanical attachment to the frame, …even have an auto-driver-mode.

    If feasible, such free market safety solutions could be better than guns in your face telling you what to do/not do.

    What if driving drunk meant walking to a nearby track access point and pushing a “home” button? I bet elderly and handicap people would appreciate that as well.

  3. Kent McManigal Says:

    I think this is the promise of self-driving cars. But, I predict cops will fight them as a threat to their stolen money racket. After all, there is no “drunk driving” if the car drives itself and you're perfectly safe to guzzle whiskey while your car drives you home. It eliminates the justification for “checkpoints” where cops can fish for money to steal and charges to file. Safety designed into things is a huge threat to cops.

  4. Anonymous Says:

    I'm sure they'll make it a “crime” to ride drunk.
    And as to “checkpoints” I'm sure the highwaymen will discover some electronic way to rob us. A “sunpass” comes to mind.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    Oh, the insanity!!!

    And one law to end it all …

    It is against the law for anyone to suggest a law.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: