|
This columnist sums up what is happening in Ontario quite nicely
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Sat, December 18, 2004
Are the Grits out of their heads?
By CONNIE WOOD
They just can't seem to help themselves. Dalton McGuinty's Liberals can't quit meddling with Ontarians' lives.
Every time you turn around, they're micromanaging something else -- ethanol in gas, no smoking in cars or Legion halls, no soft drink machines in schools, no pit bulls. The list gets longer every month and nothing is too insignificant, no issue too trivial.
Among the bills in the pipeline pending the legislature's Christmas break: bicycle helmets for adults. In McGuinty's Ontario, it could soon be illegal for grownups to risk a trip around the block to the corner store without protective headgear. This is so tiresome and what it's going to accomplish is not clear.
I have an interest in this law for two reasons: I ride a bike once in a while -- and I helped stave off an adult helmet law in Ontario almost a decade ago.
The Mike Harris Tory government, which had been intent on getting children to wear helmets, apparently hadn't realized its legislation also proposed forcing helmets on adults.
But they backed off and people older than 18 have been free to go out and knock their brains out if they want to ever since.
"Hey Connie, they did it because of what you wrote," a colleague at Queen's Park enthused. "They just hadn't thought about it."
Let's be clear: Helmets are likely a good thing, although I once witnessed a child's death in a bike/car accident that no helmet would have been tough enough to withstand. If I were heavily into biking, I might wear one, but I'm not. I ride my bike a few times a year, mostly to the corner store, and if forced to wear a helmet, I simply won't do it -- another one of life's small pleasures forgone in the interests of lawmaking gone wild.
Many people believe helmets don't make a significant difference anyway. A report of a cross-party committee studying bike helmets in the Scottish parliament found cyclist head injuries "are actually quite rare." It revealed that in Australia, one of the first countries to pass helmet laws, there was no difference in the number of head injuries, In fact, there was some evidence that injuries actually went up, while bicycle ridership plummeted.
Although two studies in the late 1990s showed head injuries had dropped 10%, they failed to factor in the drop in ridership.
The Scots quote a number of studies, including one by the Consumer Product Safety Commission, a U.S regulatory agency, which showed, perversely, that while helmet use rose 25% in the '90s, head injuries rose too -- by 10%.
In Britain, the risk of death in a bicycle accident rose a whopping 25% between 1993 and 1996. All in all, say the Scottish legislators, "the message in these studies is consistent: mass cycle helmet laws do not affect the injuries suffered by cyclist populations to any material degree."
The only reasonable conclusion that can be drawn, they add, is that helmets provide "only slight protection" from head injury.
They also mention a British Medical Association report that points out that in a serious accident, the bike helmet is liable to fail "instantaneously."
British statistics show, they say, that bicycle accidents are not a major cause of children's injuries in Britain -- just 7%. By far the leading cause of injury and death to children is walking, they add.
There is quite a bit more, all leading to the inescapable conclusion that the government will accomplish nothing with any new helmet law except to drive many people to give up cycling.
Which strikes me as counterproductive, since people need more exercise, not less.
|
|
|
|
| swilly |
Ya I am all for bringing back the tories. That last 4 billion dollar defecit did wonders for the economy and the public service. Honestly, the liberals can up all they want as long as they dont manage to sell off a tonne of public assets and still manage to creat a 4 billion dollar defecit then they are still in good in my books.
At least the NDP went into the red by spending alot on social programmes the tories did it by cutting back.............. Which i still dont know how it occured
Sheesh!!!
swilly |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by swilly
Ya I am all for bringing back the tories. That last 4 billion dollar defecit did wonders for the economy and the public service. Honestly, the liberals can up all they want as long as they dont manage to sell off a tonne of public assets and still manage to creat a 4 billion dollar defecit then they are still in good in my books.
At least the NDP went into the red by spending alot on social programmes the tories did it by cutting back.............. Which i still dont know how it occured
Sheesh!!!
swilly |
Uh wha...?
Mike Harris was doing fine. The only reason things didn't turn out well is because the Canadian public, as they always do, FREAKED OUT that social programs were being cut and didn't let him finish the job! His plan was great but it required a lot more than 4 years to implement, and it looks bad in hindsight because the Liberal government which came afterwards decided to backpedal on all his efforts to privatize. |
|
|
| girllovingtvibe |
| revolution dahum it! So glad I live in Canada...at least I don't have to worry about being bombed while taking a bus. :p |
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Uh wha...?
Mike Harris was doing fine. The only reason things didn't turn out well is because the Canadian public, as they always do, FREAKED OUT that social programs were being cut and didn't let him finish the job! His plan was great but it required a lot more than 4 years to implement, and it looks bad in hindsight because the Liberal government which came afterwards decided to backpedal on all his efforts to privatize. |
w3rd |
|
|
| dEsidEL |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Uh wha...?
Mike Harris was doing fine. The only reason things didn't turn out well is because the Canadian public, as they always do, FREAKED OUT that social programs were being cut and didn't let him finish the job! His plan was great but it required a lot more than 4 years to implement, and it looks bad in hindsight because the Liberal government which came afterwards decided to backpedal on all his efforts to privatize. |
i definately think they needed more time to implement it.. but someone should hav done a better job of convincing the Ontario public that
|
|
|
| Spam |
| quote: | Originally posted by dEsidEL
i definately think they needed more time to implement it.. but someone should hav done a better job of convincing the Ontario public that
|
Dude, we'd still be electing him if he didn't retire lol. He HAD more time if he wanted it. |
|
|
| djshan |
| there needs to be a new section for toronto forum that has to do with ontario politics. name it whatever, make jayx 1 the moderator. ;) |
|
|
| b4k-oz |
DigiNut tell me, what liberal ran up your butt? Scratch that..........what does your daddy do?
How long has he been a Tory supporter? You should post the baby pics of you and daddy at the rallies?
Social Programs? Huh, when did your rights under the Employment Standards Act and your rights under the Landlord Tenants Act become a social program?
Why is it that the loudest Tory supporters are always the ones under daddy's roof...and have never really held a long term job (paper routes don't count, nor does a summer job at daddy's firm).
Dude, lighten up on the bashing.
You so totally glorify (on a pedestal) everything the Tories do. If your gonna glorify.........then pick someone thats worthy and was actually educated enuf to be in office. I'll give you a hint.........Harris is outta dat game....pick someone else.
End of discussion. |
|
|
| girllovingtvibe |
| quote: | Originally posted by b4k-oz
DigiNut tell me, what liberal ran up your butt? Scratch that..........what does your daddy do?
How long has he been a Tory supporter? You should post the baby pics of you and daddy at the rallies?
Social Programs? Huh, when did your rights under the Employment Standards Act and your rights under the Landlord Tenants Act become a social program?
Why is it that the loudest Tory supporters are always the ones under daddy's roof...and have never really held a long term job (paper routes don't count, nor does a summer job at daddy's firm).
Dude, lighten up on the bashing.
You so totally glorify (on a pedestal) everything the Tories do. If your gonna glorify.........then pick someone thats worthy and was actually educated enuf to be in office. I'll give you a hint.........Harris is outta dat game....pick someone else.
End of discussion. |
I think I sense some hostility here. ya know I could be wrong???...ouch... |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| WHy is it that Harris haters think that Harris is the root of all evil? I once even had someone try and tell me that the homeless problem was Harris' fault. I guess they are forgetful of the Bob Rae days when everyone hated him so much. He was a so called compassionate NDP. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by djshan
there needs to be a new section for toronto forum that has to do with ontario politics. name it whatever, make jayx 1 the moderator. ;) |
How about you just shut up and stop clicking on my threads? |
|
|
|
|
