Stalin would be proud
Tim Kreitz
The older I get, the more I realize that a significant number of my
fellow journalists are totalitarian elitists (A
HREF=http://heraldnet.com/stories/05/08/08/100edi_editorial001.cfm),
which never ceases to horrify me. Behold:
"Motorcycles weave aggressively through traffic. SUVs push the limits
of the roadway, breaching medians into oncoming traffic. High-throttle
cars race down the freeway. While some drivers continue to make the
nation's highways into hazard zones, the numbers show that our roads
are actually safer than they've ever been. Safety precautions -
considered by some to be nuisances or even an infringement of rights -
are actually working. Giving up a little bit of freedom to enhance
safety really can be a good tradeoff."
Benjamin Franklin said it best folks: Anyone who is willing to give up
essential liberties for a little security, deserves neither. Stalin
would've been proud of the author. After all, the position that
individual rights and liberties are optional is fundamentally evil at
its core.
The more fatal flaw in the above quote, however, lies in the
amalgamation of speed limit violations and poor lane discipline as
equal contributors to the so-called "hazard zones" the author attempts
so dramatically to describe. The fact of the matter is that speed
enforcement, especially on rural roads and highways, has been
unarguably shown to increase the accident rate (A
HREF=http://www.motorists.org/issues/speed/speed_limit_articles.html).
Speed doesn't kill. Poor lane discipline, lack of skill, and driver
inattention do.
"Even as roads have become more congested nationwide, the fatality rate
for motor vehicle crashes dropped 0.6 percent last year, according to
the federal Department of Transportation. At just 1.46 deaths for every
100 million miles of travel, 2004's was the lowest death rate recorded
in the 30 years such data have been kept. The improvement was
attributed to safer vehicles, stricter laws and a drop in
alcohol-related accidents."
In what order, at what percentage, and in which areas of enforcement?
Furthermore, who is this position on safety improvement attributed to?
One of the biggest red flags signalling possible yellow journalism is
failure of the author to attribute facts and quotes to specific
sources. The reader should be especially wary of such tactics when
reading editorial articles written by apparent Marxists.
"Some may argue that the state has no place forcing drivers to take
safety precautions. The motorcycle helmet law continues to draw ire
among bikers who want to take responsibility for their own lives. But
the problem is that the burden of preventable injuries falls on
everyone. Accidents and injuries put upward pressure on insurance and
health-care rates, which hit us all."
100-percent totally false. According to McGregor Interests, a leading
investment and econimics firm, insurance companies are big supporters
of helmet laws, often citing the "public burden" argument. The
assertion is that reckless bikers without helmets are raising
everyone's car insurance rates by running headlong into plate-glass
windows and the like, sustaining expensive head injuries. While it is
true that bikers indirectly jack up the rates of car drivers, it's not
for the reason you might think. You see, car drivers plow over bikers
at an alarming rate. According to the Second International Congress on
Automobile Safety, the car driver is at fault in more than 70 percent
of all car/motorcycle collisions. In such cases, juries tend to award
substantial damages to the injured biker. The result: Car insurance
premiums go up.
The only thing worse than an uninformed journalist is a stupid,
uninformed journalist. Were I to wager on this subject, I'd say that
improved highway safety is directly related to improvements in auto
design and better driver education. Restrictive laws regulating helmet
use, seat belts, and speed limits are good for little more than
genereating revenue, and are certainly no justification for the
infringement of personal liberties. But so long as nucklehead
journalists like the one quoted in this post are given a voice, it is
likely that such misinformation and bad laws will continue to be
authored.
For more nonsense, read the whole thing here
(http://heraldnet.com/stories/05/08/08/100edi_editorial001.cfm).
__
Tim Kreitz
2003 ZX7R
2000 ZX6R
DoD #2184
http://www.timkreitz.com
Uncle Pirate
news:1123549514.4...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
> <IMG SRC="http://www.timkreitz.com/photosection/blogspacer.jpg">
> The older I get, the more I realize that a significant number of my
> fellow journalists are totalitarian elitists (A
> HREF=http://heraldnet.com/stories/05/08/08/100edi_editorial001.cfm),
> which never ceases to horrify me. Behold:
Oh yeah, we'll give up some of our rights for this, just a bit. Oh,
what's that? Another thing we need to give a little bit for? Yeah, I
know, you're taking more rights away. Yes sir! No argument sir!.
No thank you. <shaking head>That guy is something.</shaking head>
--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
Tularosa Basin Coordinator, ABATE of NM; AMA#758681; COBB; RCOS#7
Somewhat bent '94 1500 Vulcan.
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein