Facebook doodles – Why must we bow to the Precautionary Principle like Euro-weenies?

by
Skip

Back in April when speed limits on Lake Winnipesaukee (approx. 21 miles long, from 1 to 9 miles  wide , covering 69 square mile and a  maximum depth of 212 feet) were being debated, one intrepid lawmaker asked for comments on Facebook as she was being inundated by emails and decided to see what her friends said.  Of course, there was one complaint that was truly obnoxious in the vein of “if not human powered, make it illegal” (right, look at the size of it!).

The lake needs a break! The smell of gas is obnoxious when you go swimming. Wasn’t that way 10 years ago! You can’t cross the Lake in a canoe and feel safe. Too many idiots! safety is a huge issue! It’s time to do something to protect those who come to enjoy the lake!

Another concerned themselves with “what if a slow boat comes in contact with a fast boat” and that implied that the fast boats necessarily meant that all other tourists would bail.  While I did talk about the actual accident records (which show that speed is a minor contributor to accidents on the Big Lake when compared to bad or drunken driving, failure to obey the present laws, and the like), that simply was not enough.  Making it on the facts turned out to be a loser – this argument was based on “Feelings, nothing more than Feelings….”.

So I addressed the underlying use of THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE – which effectively says “unless YOU can prove it is safe, we’re gonna ban it if we think there is a slightest risk of harm at all”.

So, because of all the mamby-pambies from Europe who believe they are wards of their States and are down with this, the Europhiles (or is that Euro-maniacs?) here think we should go along with it.  Yeah, the land of the great Western migration, the willingness to explore the unknown, the courage to try discover new worlds, to push the boundaries of space, have gone all turtle-safe (head in, feet in, no risk).  My response to someone saying that the fast boats limit the freedom of the smaller craft:

By your very argument of “if that means we limit other people’s ability to enjoy”, aren’t you limiting the that that wish to go fast? I return to my earlier observation – you talk about that PERHAPS people will be injured – the stats don’t back that up. Look, the “Precautionary Principle” is much used in Europe to restrict liberties of all kinds, simply because something MIGHT turn out badly – but maybe it won’t, either. That PP is now popping up here in the US, and in almost all cases seems to be used as a club by the “We are going to stop you from hurting yourself” crowd to restrict all kinds of things on the idea of “well, it MIGHT turn out to be dangerous”. Nanny State?  How about going back to OUR roots, our American roots, that until it actually proves to BE dangerous, let adults decide it for themselves and TRUST that people will behave correctly – including fast boats. Drive unsafely – throw the book at them THEN (and not declare them guilty even before the engines are turned on).

 

Author

  • Skip

    Co-founder of GraniteGrok, my concern is around Individual Liberty and Freedom and how the Government is taking that away. As an evangelical Christian and Conservative with small "L" libertarian leanings, my fight is with Progressives forcing a collectivized, secular humanistic future upon us. As a TEA Party activist, citizen journalist, and pundit!, my goal is to use the New Media to advance the radical notions of America's Founders back into our culture.

Share to...