NationStates Jolt Archive

Today i see more and more evidence of the Government holding our hands, making sure we dont breath in any second hand smoke, making sure we wear our seatbelts, making sure a 18,19, and 20 year old can no longer wind down and have a few drinks. and i think it is insane, i didnt think we needed the government to think for us. and there are quite a few people that agree with me on this.

but those are just the things the Government is doing to help prevent things from happening, what happens after the fact, people seem to wait around with their fingers up their nose saying "whats the government going to do about it?", "when does the government refund me for this?". people seem to lose all abilities to think for themselves if they think the government is going to step in and hold their hand, some of those same people that complain that the government should butt out of peoples lives are the ones complaining that the government didnt do anything to protect them.

i for one am for the government to stop putting forth so many saftey laws and for people once in their life use common sense and to think for themselfs

Yes, I vaguely agree.

Trouble with posts like yours is that they're vague. You gave three specific examples, but beyond those issues, the term "government holding our hands" is too vague to produce discussion.

I more or less agree with you.

Yes, I vaguely agree.

Trouble with posts like yours is that they're vague. You gave three specific examples, but beyond those issues, the term "government holding our hands" is too vague to produce discussion.

yeah, it was very vague to have a discussion, but it was more or less a rant for me, i got it out, im somewhat happier now

I wish someone would hold my hands, it's cold tonight and i'm feeling lonely :(

The US Government could do it if they want...

Okay, I'll bite.

- My right not to breathe in second-hand smoke should be enforced by someone. You have a right to smoke, I should have a right not to be exposed to it.

- Making sure we wear our seatbelts is cost effective in the long run, when emergency crews don't have to hose out the remains of your corpse after an accident. Also, if you can't keep your kids belted up, someone has to do it for you I suppose.

- In my experience, 18, 19 and 20 year old's are drinking to 'wind up', as opposed to 'wind down'. But, I'm Canadian, and we can drink in bars earlier than you can, so we get it out of our system earlier.

- If the government isn't there to hold your hand, then what is it for?

All that being said, I generally agree with less omnipresent government, but the specific cases you mention only seem to be sensible ones (the drinking age being debatable.)

Okay, I'll bite.

- My right not to breathe in second-hand smoke should be enforced by someone. You have a right to smoke, I should have a right not to be exposed to it.

- Making sure we wear our seatbelts is cost effective in the long run, when emergency crews don't have to hose out the remains of your corpse after an accident. Also, if you can't keep your kids belted up, someone has to do it for you I suppose.

- In my experience, 18, 19 and 20 year old's are drinking to 'wind up', as opposed to 'wind down'. But, I'm Canadian, and we can drink in bars earlier than you can, so we get it out of our system earlier.

- If the government isn't there to hold your hand, then what is it for?

All that being said, I generally agree with less omnipresent government, but the specific cases you mention only seem to be sensible ones (the drinking age being debatable.)

the point of the thread was more or less a rant about how some people cant think for themselves and need the government to do all their thinking for them? im not saying everyone shouldt wear their seat belts. im just saying if your too stupid to not wear your seat belt dont bitch and complain after you get in an accident, especially dont blame the government for not telling you to wear your seatbelt.

it wont be long if it keeps up at this rate there will be laws about touching a hot stove.

Okay, I'll bite.

- My right not to breathe in second-hand smoke should be enforced by someone. You have a right to smoke, I should have a right not to be exposed to it.

Does this right exist, independent of a government agency saying it exists?


- If the government isn't there to hold your hand, then what is it for?

Good question...

the point of the thread was more or less a rant about how some people cant think for themselves and need the government to do all their thinking for them. *snip*

Point taken. The government hasn't pointed that out to me yet.


Does this right exist, independent of a government agency saying it exists?

I would argue that no rights exist, unless a government agency or statute claims it is so, and we decide to adhere to that agency or statute. If government has determined that I have a right to tobacco-free air, I would argue it is the duty of the government to enforce that right it decided was due to me.

I would argue that no rights exist, unless a government agency or statute claims it is so,

Well we agree then.

If government has determined that I have a right to tobacco-free air, I would argue it is the duty of the government to enforce that right it decided was due to me.

If not sure what country you live in, but does your government acknowledge the right to clean air?

"do we need the government to hold our hands"

Some people do, unfortunately. :(

Its time we eliminate the government.

And make a new one.

Im serious.

If not sure what country you live in, but does your government acknowledge the right to clean air?

Canada, Greater Toronto Area. No 'right to clean air' exists per se, but almost every municipality has a ban on smoking in public places, i.e. restaurants, workplaces, etc. (not outdoors.) I would say they are de facto recognizing the right of people to work in smoke-free environments regardless of the type of work they do. They can't go into your home and force you to stop smoking... yet....

(nor would I think that it's necessarily a good thing... I think they've taken it all a little far... really, if you're getting a job at a bingo hall, expect a lot of old chain-smokers...)

I need government to hold my hand. I have a right to have my hand held! And tuck me in bed at night! And leave the closet light on, cuz there's monsters!

I'm generally all for let the idiots kill themselves off and leave more room for the rest of us, but I do agree that there needs to be a ban on smoking as it can harm those who aren't even doing it. It's not just the ones who are stupid enough to do it in the first place that get killed from it.

Im serious
...ly mental?

...ly mental?

Bazing! :D

But yeah, for all that I try to feel compassion for all, I must say anyone who needs all the safety labels and whatever must be contemptably dim-witted. Sometimes I really do think we should remove all warnings signs and let the problem of stupid people solve itself lol.

However, realistically, I think that to a certain extent people really do need to be herded - they generally can't be trusted to look after themselves, and bless their cotton socks someone ought to do it. Sometimes it goes too far though.

Yes and No. The government has an obligation and right to reasonably protect its citizenry from harm. Where it gets wrong is if they are acting on something that isn't a proved harm(ie vice laws and whatnot), or overreacting(ie hillary clinton and the Senatorial committee she wants to investigate GTA San Andreas).

But I support the government 'holding our hands' as you put it, where it is both neccesary and reasonable.

Today i see more and more evidence of the Government holding our hands, making sure we dont breath in any second hand smoke, making sure we wear our seatbelts, making sure a 18,19, and 20 year old can no longer wind down and have a few drinks. and i think it is insane, i didnt think we needed the government to think for us. and there are quite a few people that agree with me on this.

Government has a responsibility to ensure that you don't mess up other people's lives. Murder, for example is an obvious no brainer. Manslaughter is a step from that. Accidental death is another step as well. Blowing second hand smoke into another person and giving him or her cancer is still one more step. So what about doing something that only effects you? There ain't no such thing. If you are lucky you die; ok the funeral costs would be born by your family. But if not and you wind up in the hospital on life support for several months then everyone has to pay for it. And in either way you have effectively removed yourself from the tax paying rolls thus impacting a poor old person on Social Security.

You do not have the right to be a moron at our expense. It's as simple as that.

- If the government isn't there to hold your hand, then what is it for?

to take your money :p

i may just sig that. . . .

to take your money :p

i may just sig that. . . .

Hmmm.... there was money in my hand at the time...

Blowing second hand smoke into another person and giving him or her cancer

I wonder how many people got cancer from second hand smoke blown in their face.

Yeah sure, there's the passive smoking research. The ones that study couples who live for decades with a smoker inside. That's not quite the same thing.

Where's the research that shows how the guy smoking a cigarette on a park bench gives random passersby cancer?

So what about doing something that only effects you? There ain't no such thing.

Good point. Everything anyone does has an effect on other people. We should ban... everything!