Our Blog

Ok.  This one’s a little political.  We’ll go back to marketing next week.

You may have heard recently that the National Transportation Safety Board is recommending states ban texting and even using phones while driving.

What’s not to like?  How many times have you been behind (or worse…next to) someone driving erratically only to see that the dolt is too busy sending The All-Important Text to pay attention to the route of his or her one ton wrecking machine of steel and rubber?  It’s common sense, right?  If one is driving, one should pay attention.

Except…

A quote issued in support of the recommendation by the Chairman of the NTSB, Deborah Hersman, got me to thinking.  That statement:

“The data is clear; the time to act is now. How many more lives will be lost before we, as a society, change our attitudes about the deadliness of distractions?” Hersman said.

Fair enough, Ms. Hersman.  But, why is it, once again, the government’s job to change society’s attitude?  Can’t we just, for once, let society do it on its own?

That’s the scary part.

Look, I fully accept that our federal, state and local governments have the fully legitimate right to enact laws and rules to protect society.  There’s rarely a bright line between encroachment on civil liberties and the legitimate use of legislation or regulation to protect public health and safety.  Then again, as my high school civics teacher often said, it is a government’s job to do for the people what they cannot do for themselves.   A fairly simple definition, but one, I think, that holds up well here.

So why is the government’s job to force us to put down that phone?    We can’t do it for ourselves?

I agree 100% that texting and driving is stupid, dangerous, selfish and annoying.  But I don’t agree that the solution is yet more government interference.

If this is true, when will it be time for our Congress to save us from our obesity?  After all, several municipalities are already banning non-lethal, albeit less-than-wholesome, substances such as trans-fats.  How long until We the People, in the name of our own health and safety, are required to attend gyms (perhaps they could be Federally-funded and operated gyms!).  The incentive could be a tax break.  Or perhaps, a civil penalty.

How long until we revisit Prohibition?  We’d never call it that again—bad PR, you know.  But we can all agree that alcohol is not a wholesome substance.   We can all agree that, excluding the ubiquitous case of the 95-year old great uncle who has a single glass of red wine once a day, every day, alcohol does little good for the body.  So why not ban it?  After all, I’m sure someone can generate a statistic to support it. (“The Center for Wholesome Science on Behalf of People Unable to Think for Themselves reports that over $3.5 billion is spent annually on alcohol-related health care.”)  There’s always a well-intentioned explanation for such erosion of liberties.  We can always save a few children, or puppies, or trees.  Each new regulatory intrusion is usually accompanied by much fanfare to that extent.  And it is inherently a good thing to save children, puppies and trees.  Unless, of course, we must do so at the unreasonable limitation of our personal freedoms. (Please note, I believe that freedom absolutely MUST come neatly packaged with responsibility.  We seem to be losing this, too, but I’ll save that for another diatribe.)

In fact, shouldn’t extreme sports be outlawed?  How many broken legs or hospital expenses could we save if we just took those snowboards or bikes away?  While we’re at it, mixed martial arts (MMA) can’t be all that good for a body, can it?  And those hoarders—maybe if we just limited the amount of stuff a person can own…

I’m, of course, using extreme examples. We can debate the location of the line between the Nanny State and responsible government all day.  I believe, however, that we’re careening toward the former rather than the latter.  I’d suggest that, perhaps we are, as a society, slowly forfeiting our independence and collective common sense because, well, that’s what the law is for.

Perhaps I’ll text someone about it.  Soon.  Before doing so makes me a criminal.