OK, Steve beat me to it here, but I had my own thoughts of the accident in Pelham that I started on last night but as you will read, similar.
There will be those out there that will react in horror to what I am about to write ( “BUT CHILDREN GOT HURT – BADLY!”). The news is coming out from Pelham that 11 people were hurt when a years long homeowner’s fireworks tradition went awry. The latest from both NECN (New Englan Cable News) and WMUR says that two children were severely burnt and medflighted to Boston. Of COURSE this is a tragedy, but I grimaced when I heard the Fire Chief’s pronouncement:
I’m not a fan of fireworks. This is a perfect example [of] what can go wrong. Well meaning people trying to have fun and an accident happened and caused a great deal of injuries to children and adults.”
The NECN newscaster said what I expected about Chief Midgley of the Pelham Fire Department:
He wants to work with lawmakers to make sure this never happens again.
Of course he does. Again, this has been a long standing tradition of this homeowner, and thus far, no news accounts have brought up any earlier accidents. No one else in Pelham had any reported serious injuries anywhere else in town (not that I’ve looked, but on the idea of “IF 1, then the news will report it as “AND! over here”). But here it seems, the Chief has decided that it is his business to force all others to comply with his viewpoint and morality, and no longer let people decide for themselves. Is that the role of an Government employee (no matter how good he is in performing that role)? Is the purpose of an appointed employee to lobby the Legislature against what many voters want to be able to do? And do it on TAXPAYER funding (isn’t there a law against that)?
Freedom. Versus the Safety & Security (the first Commandment of the Nanny-Progressive State)
The latter says that we have to restrain EVERYONE when a single person gets hurt doing something stupid. Or, just happens to have an accident. Yes, some accidents happen because of stupidity – but this one, by the reports, seems to have been one of those “fluke” accidents (not related to Sandra Fluke, who seems to believe that someone not giving her contraceptives is a fluke accident of her version of the Bill of Rights). You can be sure that the Chief will work hard with “lawmakers” to take away such nasty outcomes, however. The problem for all of us is that in the usual Government way, it will not be a recognition of an accident, what is a reasonable decision. If things go true to form, one of three results will happen if the Chief gets traction on this:
- In typical Government fashion, the Chief will make us be like Massachuesetts – a complete ban
- Or, so many restrictions will be placed on fireworks manufacturers here in State that they won’t bother (just like what Jeanne Shaheen did with her healthcare bill – she drove most of the insurance providers out of State.
- Or, so many restrictions will be placed on otherwise legal and sane adults that they won’t bother either. And the Chief would have an out in “Hey, we didn’t ban them!”. Technically correct, but again, infantilizing the population no worse that saying “None of you morons should have the freedom to main yourselves”.
They will live in the urgent and reactionary moment of the “hurt”. They will see this not as an accident but as a generalized problem that HAS to have a solution. So walking backwards, they will “fix” the problem (as listed above) by removing “the cause” from peoples possession. However, that will create a NEW problem – one that I can see that the Chief totally ignores (or discards or is ignorant of) and as the actual decision point that many of the lawmakers, unfortunately, will as well.
The Chief, rightly as a First Responder, wishes to mitigate pain and suffering. The lawmakers will be caught in that “have to be seen DOING something” mode and will do a knee-jerk response. What they will most likely fail to do is look deeper in how they should be deciding what to do – basic Rights of sovereign individuals and the boundary lines of those citizens and the Government decreeing how they should behave and carry out their lives (funny, neither NECN or WMUR felt a need to bring this up as a serious issue).
The above deals with “Safety / Security” choices I listed above the jump. The first part, however, is “Freedom” which does say yes, you have the Freedom to blow off your hand, your butt, in your face, as well as other body parts. And it also means that other people who put themselves in harm’s way ALSO have the Freedom for bodily injury. After all, they are adults and are making an informed decision to be in a place where stuff goes “BOOM!”. And “BOOM!” means explosives, fire, hot air, pressure waves, and the possibility of getting your ears blown out, burns, and the like. As they say on the package: DANGEROUS! But they are willing, of their own free will, to make that tradeoff for themselves, as when things go right (the VAST majority of the time), fireworks can be an “ooh-ahh!” series of moments that can create wonderful memories.
The people injured COULD have chosen to be further back. They COULD have chosen to be across the street. They didn’t and are now facing and living with the consequences of their decisions – what a Free Society entails. But the Chief seemingly wishes to short circuit that as he believes (re: “never happens again“) that because these folks chose unwisely that all must be punished – for their own good.
You see, that is the essence of the Progressive State – we will make life safer for you, whether you like it or not, for you do not have the facilities to decide to not do stupid stuff. Even if it is done in a caring, well meaning fashion.
Sidebar: see Chief, “well meaning” can be used in a double sided sword manner for either good OR bad.
We will gently remove that choice from you – after all, it is for not only your good but for all others whose lack of sense (in our opinion) rivals your own, so it is for the common good. Thus, we will make it so.
But Skip, what about the children?!?!?! Yes, what about them? No one wants to see any child hurt – ever, ever, ever. Here is the dilemma – kids will get hurt. Always. Whether they are around adults to protect them or when they aren’t (like the teens in Rye who decided to do adult level materials testing with molten metal and high pressures when they jammed bottle rockets / sprinklers into a bottle). My question to you is: who is really responsible for those children? As a Conservative, I say that the Parents, first most, are. Sure, there are cases where Society or Government should step in and rescue abandoned or abused kids – but this is not that case. This was an accident – yes, one with serious consequences, but an accident none the less. And what I said about the adult choices go double for the adults who were responsible for their kids.
Yes, the kids will pay a high cost, maybe, for their parents momentary misjudgement. But the parents will pay a higher price for the rest of their lives for their decisions that affected their kids that got hurt. Hopefully, other parents will also learn from this mistake (“yes, we will see fireworks, but from a safer distance”). But the Chief would punish other parents, through no fault of their own, by not allowing them this simple pleasures in this manner. And the Communitarian Progressives, who believe that kids belong as much to Society as to the Parents (or even more), will nod their heads in agreement. It will be just one more slice where parental rights AND responsibility will be lessened by “our betters” under the guise of “protecting us”, never taking into account or believing that some of us are willing to take that risk, make that decision, and suffer the consequences thereof.
Sorry, but the phrase “for the children” is not an argument for as much as these unwanted Nannies think it is. And yes, I am of the opinion that this slide into “we are all responsible for all the children” has gone too far for too long.
Look, bad things happen. But that is part of Freedom. The mistake that was made (if one was) and the results will serve as a message to others – think twice. Which is far better a message than a decree that say “we will do the thinking and deciding for you – NO!”. A free society does not do that to otherwise functional adults – but a totalitarian State will EVEN under the guise of helping (which is standard operating procedure). The death of Freedom by what seems to be a thousand “good” decisions, each chopping wee bit of that Freedom, even Freedom to fail, continues to box us into a smaller and smaller reality of lessened Freedom. And doing so removes a very valuable lesson of Freedom – you learn from your mistakes and that makes you a better person. Removing that feedback cycle removes responsibility for oneself – and then hurts Society in general (which the Nanniers never seem to want to come to grips with – they only want to hand out trophies to everyone).
I am sure that there will be those that will think this post repugnant – well, life can be that way. So let me put it this way – the environmentalists are always complaining about how bad pollution is to the environment, that even one more teeny little problem is a big deal to the environment? That every little act of polluting makes the environment just that much smaller? And, thus, an overriding danger to us all?
Doesn’t the same hold true with Freedom? Doesn’t the analogy hold true here as well, that every little “polluting” of Freedom that takes a bit of it ways, that every choice removed (as the essence of Freedom IS the ability to make choices) means less Freedom for all of us?
And where would that leave us, Chief?
