|
The nanny state is at it again:Transport minister eyes rule 4 mandatory life jackets (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Endlesswave
Fair enough, that is why I'm in the frame of mind that I understand rules are there for our protection however there IS such a thing as too much control for that sake. People will do what they do regardless so having a billion rules just defeats the purpose. |
just because there is a law to do something does not mean that you have to follow it (ie. seatbelts) but it is a good way to remind people to put it on. i am all for this proposed life jacket law. |
|
|
| Jem_hadar |
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
you cannot lose something that was not there to begin with. |
well then, you dont "gain" common sense, let's say.
these laws stop us from largely having to think for ourselves, imo. |
|
|
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jem_hadar
well then, you dont "gain" common sense, let's say.
these laws stop us from largely having to think for ourselves, imo. |
i disagree. many of these laws were never in place and we stopped thinking for ourselves automatically (taking things for granted i guess). the laws appeared when the government noticed that we were no longer thinking.
edit: i dont see what is so wrong with having a mandatory life jacket law anyway. the life jacket can save lives but some of us were too stupid to put one on while boating and died. the law jumped in when they noticed a common trend. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
if people had common sense then there would be no stupid proposed laws. |
There's a lot of evidence to support the general hypothesis that making some behaviour mandatory actually erodes the intrinsic motivation behind said behaviour that most people normally have. In other words, people are more likely to do the thing you don't want them to do if the enforcement isn't tight enough (and it almost never is).
Drunk driving is one example. Most people are smart enough not to do this, and the ones who aren't, do it anyway in spite of it being illegal. The problem lies in the gray area. Everybody who has ever driven to any party involving alcohol before will know what I mean when I say that we tend to worry more about getting caught than getting killed. It's completely irrational - the legal fear displaces the safety fear. And so, when we think we're less likely to get caught (say, because it's 4 in the morning), we're more likely to make a stupid decision. Instead of thinking about whether or not we can see straight, we try to count the number of drinks we had and figure out if it's going to be over the legal limit or not. The result is you get more people taking these risks, but you don't find out about it as much, because everybody tries to hide it.
You could say the exact same thing about bike helmets, seat belts, speed limits, drugs, even performance reviews at work. In every one of these cases, people do the right thing when they are genuinely worried about getting caught, but as soon as they stop worrying about that, they'll start doing the wrong things when they'd ordinarily be smart enough not to.
In many ways, society's lack of common sense is because of our common-sense laws. If you treat people like children, they act like children. If you make a law against everything under the sun, then people start to assume that anything there isn't a law against must be perfectly fine, and where there is a law, they start to forget why the law is there.
In essence, when you tell people that they can't think for themselves, they will stop thinking for themselves. |
|
|
| infinity HiGH |
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
dont blame the government for proposing laws for common sense. if people had common sense then there would be no stupid proposed laws. blame the stupid people. |
I hate how this society is always trying to save the incompetent. I mean really...what good are they? If anything THEY'RE the biggest safety hazard to the rest of us and should be promptly disposed of. This would totally improve all facets of our life if we didn't have the idiots holding us down.
Remove the warning labels and let it all work itself out (Pretty sure Carlin was the one that suggested this). |
|
|
| Cosmic Fur |
And we'd solve the overpopulation problem!
win-win! |
|
|
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
There's a lot of evidence to support the general hypothesis that making some behaviour mandatory actually erodes the intrinsic motivation behind said behaviour that most people normally have. In other words, people are more likely to do the thing you don't want them to do if the enforcement isn't tight enough (and it almost never is).
Drunk driving is one example. Most people are smart enough not to do this, and the ones who aren't, do it anyway in spite of it being illegal. The problem lies in the gray area. Everybody who has ever driven to any party involving alcohol before will know what I mean when I say that we tend to worry more about getting caught than getting killed. It's completely irrational - the legal fear displaces the safety fear. And so, when we think we're less likely to get caught (say, because it's 4 in the morning), we're more likely to make a stupid decision. Instead of thinking about whether or not we can see straight, we try to count the number of drinks we had and figure out if it's going to be over the legal limit or not. The result is you get more people taking these risks, but you don't find out about it as much, because everybody tries to hide it.
You could say the exact same thing about bike helmets, seat belts, speed limits, drugs, even performance reviews at work. In every one of these cases, people do the right thing when they are genuinely worried about getting caught, but as soon as they stop worrying about that, they'll start doing the wrong things when they'd ordinarily be smart enough not to.
In many ways, society's lack of common sense is because of our common-sense laws. If you treat people like children, they act like children. If you make a law against everything under the sun, then people start to assume that anything there isn't a law against must be perfectly fine, and where there is a law, they start to forget why the law is there.
In essence, when you tell people that they can't think for themselves, they will stop thinking for themselves. |
too much for me to read so could you summarize this? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by infinity HiGH
Remove the warning labels and let it all work itself out |
And supplement this with a policy to catapult everyone who sues into the middle of Lake Ontario - without a life jacket.
(They'll continue telling the public that they actually awarded $10 million cash settlements, in case people start to wise up)
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
too much for me to read so could you summarize this? |
I'm pretty sure you're just being an ass, but fine:
When you make a law against something stupid, normal ("smart") people forget that it's stupid, and just remember that it's against the law. When they realize that the law is loosely enforced, they become more likely to do the stupid thing than they were before you made the law. |
|
|
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I'm pretty sure you're just being an ass, but fine:
When you make a law against something stupid, normal ("smart") people forget that it's stupid, and just remember that it's against the law. When they realize that the law is loosely enforced, they become more likely to do the stupid thing than they were before you made the law. |
oh okay.
no i wasnt being an ass. i hate reading stuff thats long.
ive probably only read two novels in my life. all textbooks from school never got past the first chapter. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
oh okay.
no i wasnt being an ass. i hate reading stuff thats long.
ive probably only read two novels in my life. all textbooks from school never got past the first chapter. |
You and I evidently have different definitions of the word "long". :cool:
Anyway, whether you believe it or not, it's true. When you try to stop stupidity with rules, you'll find that smart(er) people start acting dumb. The more rules you make, the dumber people get.
Just imagine the classic 3-foot high "DO NOT PRESS THIS BUTTON" sign. You just know some idiot is going to press it. And if the sign wasn't there, most people would ignore the stupid button. |
|
|
| chinamon |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Just imagine the classic 3-foot high "DO NOT PRESS THIS BUTTON" sign. You just know some idiot is going to press it. And if the sign wasn't there, most people would ignore the stupid button. |
so you're saying that someone will push it whether the sign is there or not. |
|
|
| Endlesswave |
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
just because there is a law to do something does not mean that you have to follow it (ie. seatbelts) but it is a good way to remind people to put it on. i am all for this proposed life jacket law. |
That would all be well and good if it was easy to not follow laws and get away with the consequences. Sorry dude, I'm with Digi and Infinityhigh on this. :) |
|
|
|
|
