Do we need laws to end every kind of risk?

[PatSeg]

"Not every human problem deserves a law."

That quote comes from a veto message Gov. Jerry Brown penned when he rejected Senate Bill 105, a measure that would have fined parents who failed to have their children wear helmets while snowboarding or skiing.

I have no view on whether children who ski or snowboard should wear helmets. But I agree with Brown who, in his veto message, went on to say "I am concerned about the continuing and seemingly inexorable transfer of authority from parents to the government."

If you didn't know better, reading that you'd almost think Brown was courting the tea party crowd. That phrase could have been plucked directly from a Michele Bachmann speech.

Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/09/24/3933870/do-we-need-laws-to-end-every-kind.html#ixzz1YsssgElx

The writer goes on to say that in New Mexico, they have a helmet law for tricycle riders. We truly live in a strange world.

[xchrom]

1. im not sure i think young children should be victims of their parents stupidity. nt

[PatSeg]

5. I'm not sure that the government

would be a better parent than I was, but I'll ask my grown children.

[xchrom]

6. you have a right to have children. you do not get to be reckless w/ their lives.

wearing helmets while engaging in certain activities is a reasonable requirement.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

7. So charge the parents with reckless endangerment...

No reason legislatures need to be wasting time with writing more useless nanny-state laws.

[PatSeg]

8. And each person's idea of "reckless"

is bound to be an individual perception.

I've disagreed with parents about their child-raising techniques and they with me, but I don't think these things short of abuse or gross neglect can or should be legislated.

What kind of children are we raising when every seemingly normal aspect of life is perceived to be dangerous?

California has a lot of really important issues to address and the governor has 600 bills on his desk right now.

[bluerum]

2. We need laws to protect people from corporate greed of all sorts.

From environmental contamination, product safety, food and water, building codes, etc etc.

Expecting business to 'do the right thing' without substantial legal requirements is nonsense.

[PatSeg]

3. I feel that laws like this

are a distraction from more important issues such as the ones you raise. I spent nine years in California and I have to say the Nanny laws got to be joke. With all the problems that California has, I can't believe the senate there has time for these kinds of laws.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

4. I agree completely. There are too many stupid laws trying to micromanage our lives.

[bhikkhu]

9. Well, requiring helmets and safety equipment and supervision is one way to keep them inside

...where they can play video games in safety instead.

I agree that some things are inherently dangerous, but things have gone far in the direction of hyper-vigilant parents and a hyper-protective society that kids have far fewer options than when I was young. I'd rather err on the side of letting kids take reasonable risks, as developing muscles and reflexes and balance, and all the things that one is supposed to develop when young, involves physical activity that can be risky. Too many grow up into adult-sized children, lacking the experiences that would develop their minds and their bodies.

[bemildred]

10. Laws should be few, simple, just, and unambiguous. nt

[Fuddnik]

11. Every adult should be required to wear a full suit of armor in a car.

You can't be too careful nowadays.

[Fuddnik]

12. Lewis Black: Threats to America's children.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-september-22-2011/back-in-black---threats-to-america-s-children

[PatSeg]

13. No one says it better!

[Earth_First]

14. I'm demanding a new law to include a warning label on paperclip boxes

which includes the consumer warning that paperclips fashioned into a rubber band bow and arrow may be hazerdous to ones health...

I'm suggesting that OSHA move to push for this increase in office and school safety!!!

[PatSeg]

15. And children under 14 shouldn't be allowed to use

paperclips without protective eye-wear and adult supervision. Same with those darn rubber bands!

[Igel]

16. No.

We need parents that can make reasonable judgements and politicians (and their supporters) who aren't convinced that they're so far superior to commoners that they have the right to control them and their progeny.

It's a common human failing to believe you're superior to others when you know at the very most no more, then to proceed to tell others what to do. Many people have a choice to go into the ministry or politics and have the same goal: Power over others. (IMHO, those who seek power over others are immediately disqualified from any position that allows them to have power over others. Often it's disguised as "helping others" because, well, we can't allow people to think they know what they want or make their own decisions. It's a democracy, after all.)

What's always good for a laugh is when some would-be nanny imposes a law and (a) the scientific basis for it winds up pulled out from under his unmitigated certainty or (b) the populace responds in ways to get around th law so they can continue their behavior. The first shows the absolute belief they have in their own apotheosis and the second causes a level of frustration that brings out the covert authoritarian in the self-acclaimed nurturer.

Unfortunately, a lot of parents (like drug companies) want to be relieved of responsibility for their decisions (or relieve others of their responsibility).

If we had parents such that 95% made reasonable judgments or if we didn't have nanny staters intent on assuming responsibility for all the world's ills (just to have the world say, "Good on ya!") we wouldn't have the educational system we have now, either. Or the crime rate. Or lots of other social pathologies. (You'd be right in assuming I think nannyism is a social pathology.)

[PatSeg]

18. Well said

There is a fine line between protection and control.

[Zoeisright]

17. Whining about this is stupid.

Laws to protect children have decreased the death and injuries of children across the board over the last 50 years.

And saying "I didn't have a bike helmet and I'm fine!" or "I managed to learn to ski without a helmet" is even more stupid. Anecdotal evidence means NOTHING. Emergency visits for playground injuries fell from 187,000 in 1992 to 98,000 in 1997, according to a study in Ambulatory Pediatrics. That is a DIRECT result of playground safety laws.

Why don't you read some of these stories before you whine and lie about laws that protect children.

http://www.the-bennetts.com/ourstory.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/07/010725081300.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1719797/

http://consumerist.com/2007/12/22-children-died-toy-related-deaths-in-2006.html

[PatSeg]

19. There a fewer children on playgrounds each year

And fewer children playing outside, riding bikes, skating, skiing, etc. Kids playing video games, watching TV, and surfing the Internet suffer very few head injuries, though the long term effects could have serious consequences.

There certainly are instances where laws have made us safer, but we can't legislate everything and some areas fall more in the realm of education and information, rather than passing more laws.