When pedestrians started dying in traffic accidents, big government took the opportunity to start telling us how to walk. They want to restrict your movements. Cross here, but don't cross there. I look around and it's 100 yards in either direction to the nearest one but I want to go straight across.
I'm a healthy, fit, eat my peas kind of guy. I can dodge traffic like a champ. But now I'm a gull darned criminal for walking on a diagonal across the street?
This study demonstrates that jaywalking is not an inherently risky behavior: https://popcenter.asu.edu/content/pedestrian-injuries-fatalities-0
Lots and lots of pedestrians die while in the crosswalk. So why are we wasting tax dollars painting those dumb lines on the road?
I understand old ladies. They can't move as fast, plus the time they are inconvenienced is a much smaller fraction of their total (old) lives compared to mine. Also they can just stay in their homes.
But me? Come on. The government wants right angles only for pedestrians. They'd probably mandate squaring your meals if they could, it's a lot less messy that way.
Sheep.
@wildgrass saidWhat of the folks that are unable to dodge traffic?
When pedestrians started dying in traffic accidents, big government took the opportunity to start telling us how to walk. They want to restrict your movements. Cross here, but don't cross there. I look around and it's 100 yards in either direction to the nearest one but I want to go straight across.
I'm a healthy, fit, eat my peas kind of guy. I can dodge traffic like a ...[text shortened]... They'd probably mandate squaring your meals if they could, it's a lot less messy that way.
Sheep.
What of the guy that says, ''My car is fast, I can accelerate
across this intersection despite the red light?''
I jaywalk, as much as anyone and I understand your point
but, it's for the ''good of all,'' I suppose
@wildgrass saidCool. This brings to mind the difference, the basis, of our many laws. Like jaywalking, which is regulated for obvious social/community reasons. But something like....let's see,,,uh, requiring citizens to allow a shot into their arms, has a totally different basis affecting that particular citizen. I might be a Christian Scientist (no medicines of any kind), or, I am not convinced for ANY reason that I should take the shot....allow invasion by the government into my body. It is quite new,,,,,could it render me impotent? I like to fool around. That would be horrible.
When pedestrians started dying in traffic accidents, big government took the opportunity to start telling us how to walk. They want to restrict your movements. Cross here, but don't cross there. I look around and it's 100 yards in either direction to the nearest one but I want to go straight across.
I'm a healthy, fit, eat my peas kind of guy. I can dodge traffic like a ...[text shortened]... They'd probably mandate squaring your meals if they could, it's a lot less messy that way.
Sheep.
Anyway, good post. It is good that we can differentiate between laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
I appreciate the opportunity of enlightenment!!!!
@jimm619 said"good of all", yea, I hear that a lot lately, rather tired of it, sigh.
What of the folks that are unable to dodge traffic?
What of the guy that says, ''My car is fast, I can accelerate
across this intersection despite the red light?''
I jaywalk, as much as anyone and I understand your point
but, it's for the ''good of all,'' I suppose
@averagejoe1 saidYeah, good point.
Cool. This brings to mind the difference, the basis, of our many laws. Like jaywalking, which is regulated for obvious social/community reasons. But something like....let's see,,,uh, requiring citizens to allow a shot into their arms, has a totally different basis affecting that particular citizen. I might be a Christian Scientist (no medicines of any kind), or, I a ...[text shortened]... etween laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
I appreciate the opportunity of enlightenment!!!!
I wonder why you advocate
censoring history teachers, huh Joe?
@jimmac saidJim619, you rascal, you tried to slip that by....'good of all'. You knew we would all hate the way Marx put it (same thing), which is The COMMON GOOD. Brrrrrrrrrrrr
"good of all", yea, I hear that a lot lately, rather tired of it, sigh.
Who here is all about the Common Good? That would be interesting, assuming you are brave enough to own up to it.
@averagejoe1 saidYes, like those darn MARXIST stop signs...
Jim619, you rascal, you tried to slip that by....'good of all'. You knew we would all hate the way Marx put it (same thing), which is The COMMON GOOD. Brrrrrrrrrrrr
Who here is all about the Common Good? That would be interesting, assuming you are brave enough to own up to it.
By the way, you ready to tell us why you
advocate the censorship of history teachers?
https://www.powerthesaurus.org/less_than_average/synonyms
@averagejoe1 saidA christian scientist?
Cool. This brings to mind the difference, the basis, of our many laws. Like jaywalking, which is regulated for obvious social/community reasons. But something like....let's see,,,uh, requiring citizens to allow a shot into their arms, has a totally different basis affecting that particular citizen. I might be a Christian Scientist (no medicines of any kind), or, I a ...[text shortened]... etween laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
I appreciate the opportunity of enlightenment!!!!
That just sounds like a dog needing putting down.
@wildgrass saidNice!
When pedestrians started dying in traffic accidents, big government took the opportunity to start telling us how to walk. They want to restrict your movements. Cross here, but don't cross there. I look around and it's 100 yards in either direction to the nearest one but I want to go straight across.
I'm a healthy, fit, eat my peas kind of guy. I can dodge traffic like a ...[text shortened]... They'd probably mandate squaring your meals if they could, it's a lot less messy that way.
Sheep.
@wildgrass saidThis was pretty damn well written.
When pedestrians started dying in traffic accidents, big government took the opportunity to start telling us how to walk. They want to restrict your movements. Cross here, but don't cross there. I look around and it's 100 yards in either direction to the nearest one but I want to go straight across.
I'm a healthy, fit, eat my peas kind of guy. I can dodge traffic like a ...[text shortened]... They'd probably mandate squaring your meals if they could, it's a lot less messy that way.
Sheep.
@averagejoe1 said
Cool. This brings to mind the difference, the basis, of our many laws. Like jaywalking, which is regulated for obvious social/community reasons. But something like....let's see,,,uh, requiring citizens to allow a shot into their arms, has a totally different basis affecting that particular citizen. I might be a Christian Scientist (no medicines of any kind), or, I a ...[text shortened]... etween laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
I appreciate the opportunity of enlightenment!!!!
It is good that we can differentiate between laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
Thanks Joe, but you dance around the dilemma. Why aren't you anti-traffic law?
@averagejoe1 saidThat's real funny.
Jim619, you rascal, you tried to slip that by....'good of all'. You knew we would all hate the way Marx put it (same thing), which is The COMMON GOOD. Brrrrrrrrrrrr
Who here is all about the Common Good? That would be interesting, assuming you are brave enough to own up to it.
Good thing the writers of the US Constitution didn't agree with you.
Read the Preamble lately?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_Constitution
@wildgrass saidBut I AM for traffic laws. Let's just all hope that the powerful in the Reset Society do not ask us to submit to a traffic law requiring transgression of our person.It is good that we can differentiate between laws, and then Overreach of such laws.
Thanks Joe, but you dance around the dilemma. Why aren't you anti-traffic law?
You see, that seems to be in the works. Brrrrrrrrr
What is dance around the dilemma ? Dont get you there.
@suzianne saidWell, yes. My post subject is Common Good, a Marxist term. Can you tell me how that term relates to the Constitution, or vice versa? You may be one who mis-defines, for instance, the word welfare as it appears in the Constitution. So, please be specific and not go astray with your response to my question. Thanks
That's real funny.
Good thing the writers of the US Constitution didn't agree with you.
Read the Preamble lately?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preamble_to_the_United_States_Constitution