I will choose free will

Dr. Lisa posted a new blog entry yesterday about the Press Herald's reporting of a motorcycle accident in which one of the riders was killed and not wearing a helmet. I agree with most of Lisa's points, but I think we strongly disagree on one.

We both agree

1) that the article sidebar was insensitive

2) that riding without a helmet is dangerous

3) that this incident will likely be used to push through "Rochelle's Law" to mandate motorcycle helmets

However, if I'm inferring her opinion correctly, we disagree that there should be such a law.

I have a problem with a government that would tell one group of citizens that it can not put itself in harm's way by biking without helmets, while encouraging another group of citizens to volunteer to engage in armed combat in foreign lands.

I also have a problem with people who would on one hand argue that a woman has the right to choose what happens to her body when it comes to the topic of abortion, but would have made it illegal for Rochelle Plummer to ride without a helmet. Let me be clear here - I have no idea about Lisa's opinions on abortion, so I am not addressing this point to her. I do, however, recognize the rampant hypocrisy on both the far right (pro-life AND pro-war) and the far left (pro-choice when it suits them and plenty of PETA-types who are defenders-of- the-innocent-as-long-as-they're-animals-and-not-unborn-humans). 

If a person chooses not to wear a helmet, they are endangering nobody but themselves. Far more people are injured and killed by others who choose to use their cell phones, fiddle with their radios, put on makeup or eat while driving. A tiny minority of citizens engage in the former activity, while a vast majority participate in those far more dangerous activities. Obviously, it would be very difficult to garner wide support for making it illegal to change the radio station while driving, but it would be much easier for legislators to further erode our liberties by making it illegal to ride without a helmet. Which law would really make the roads safer?

Alexis de Tocqueville warned us nearly 200 years ago in Democracy in America that we must guard against the "Tyranny of the Majority". This is the main flaw in a true democracy, as illustrated by the classic example: democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.

Comments

[Amy Brown]

Great post; this is such an issue for me here in Ithaca, since it is a community that considers itself "enlightened" as long as you completely agree with the majority opinion...an "It's my opinion and you are all entitled to it" viewpoint.

I find that the 'hot topic' focus changes year to year, this year being sustainability. Sustainability; a good thing. But what happened to non-discrimination to the gay/lesbian population in terms of their rental/housing rights (a good thing, but last year's issue), or, equal rights to minority populations (another good thing, but 2 years ago). Why is there no acknowledgment of the rural poor in a community that has 2 major universities/colleges? (it is "ugly" that these circumstances exist)

So unfortunately, "free will" is based on the need of the moment, and while this community considers itself "enlightened" because they have staff monitoring the trash bins to assure that you are properly throwing away your recycle/compost/trash, it refuses to acknowledge that individuals have the right to free will and instead are quick to judge those whose "free will" doesn't coincide with their own beliefs.

Well, this is a rant if I've ever written one. Sorry, didn't mean to make this all "Craigslist Rants and Raves" on you.....