If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
As a Pittsburgh Steelers fan for many years, I've been following the
Ben Roethlisberger story with some interest, and it concerns me that the vast majority of comments both from the media and from the general public (at least as read in the "letters to the editor" section of USA Today, which I normally wouldn't have been reading but was the only rag available at the hotel I've been at for the last week) is that this whole incident is somehow Roethlisberger's fault for not wearing a helmet. Excuse me? What would have been the difference if Roethlisberger had been wearing his helmet? He still would have hit the car, he just may or may not have been as severely injured. Where's the public outcry against the lady who pulled out in front of him? Had she not done that, there would have been no incident at all. I find it very disheartening that all the blame seems to be placed on someone who was acting in a perfectly legal manner (well, except possibly for the rumor that Roethlisberger didn't have his "M" endorsement, but that's somewhat irrelevant) simply because he made the legal choice to ride without an optional piece of safety gear and nobody's saying a thing about the person who caused the accident. This is akin to someone saying that if I hit a SUV that pulls out in front of me while driving my old Studebaker and get a punctured lung as a result, it's my own damn fault for not buying a new car with a collapsible steering column. As I'm sure you can tell, I have a real problem with that - but it certainly does seem to be where our society's heading. So what of it? Why is the blame not being placed squarely where it belongs, on an inattentive driver? I'm not saying that the lady needs to be publicly beat up over this; I'm sure she feels bad enough already, but I just can't wrap my mind around how everyone's faulting Roethlisberger for something that by all accounts wasn't his fault. nate |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
In article .com>, N8N wrote:
> Where's the public outcry against the lady who pulled out in front of > him? Had she not done that, there would have been no incident at all. This is the same as what happens when advocating properly set speed limits. It's the blame-the-victim-of-bad-driving argument that is consistantly used. If someone turns left in front of you it's your fault for going too fast despite that you were doing 10mph under the already absurdly low limit and the person put his vehicle 3 feet in front of yours. Never mind someone cut you off going 20mph slower and then stomped on the brakes.... it's your fault for 'going too fast'. 'too fast' often defined as 'more than zero' Helmet arguments go the same way. At least motorcycle helmets have some benefit. In bicycling the magic foam hat is supposed to save us when our chest is crushed by fully loaded semi-tractor-trailer. How a piece of styrofoam is supposed to do that I don't know, but news articles enjoy mentioning that the rider didn't wear a helmet even when the injuries are no where near the top of the head. Instead of demanding competency this society has moved towards demanding tolerance and preparation for the incompetent. The problem is that adapting to the incompetent is a never ending battle because as time passes better idiots are built. In the end our lives become more limited and getting things done and getting where we are going requires more labor, time, and causes more frustration. > This is akin to someone saying that if I hit a SUV that pulls out in > front of me while driving my old Studebaker and get a punctured lung as > a result, it's my own damn fault for not buying a new car with a > collapsible steering column. As I'm sure you can tell, I have a real > problem with that - but it certainly does seem to be where our > society's heading. Yep. I see the same thing for driving an old car or riding a bicycle. Their incompetence and bad behavior is my fault because it effects me to a greater amount that the average bear. > So what of it? Why is the blame not being placed > squarely where it belongs, on an inattentive driver? Because it doesn't benefit government and corporations to have a competent, responsible population of people who can think. Yes, I know to many people I sound nuts. But once you've read how schooling has systematically dumbed down people in the USA in the last century plus and couple that with the consistant build a better moron nanny state parental government it starts to become clear. Incidents like this with the proper media spin get people accepting greater controls over them. Willingly passing more laws, making more people lawbreakers. And so goes our free choice, sacrificed to limit the damage of morons which it will never really accomplish. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
N8N wrote:
> [snip] > Where's the public outcry against the lady who pulled out in front of > him? Had she not done that, there would have been no incident at all. There is no outcry because we don't have the political will to remove incompetent drivers from the roads. We will belt, air-bag, pad, and helmet everything in sight in order to minimize the damage done as the incompetents merrily bounce off of them. -- Paul Hovnanian ------------------------------------------------------------------ Think honk if you're a telepath. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
> N8N said in rec.autos.driving:
> As a Pittsburgh Steelers fan for many years, I've been following the > Ben Roethlisberger story with some interest, and it concerns me that > the vast majority of comments both from the media and from the general > public (at least as read in the "letters to the editor" section of USA > Today, which I normally wouldn't have been reading but was the only rag > available at the hotel I've been at for the last week) is that this > whole incident is somehow Roethlisberger's fault for not wearing a > helmet. IME, the big deal probablly is that since Roethlisberger is a big name in the NFL that he is considered a "role model," and that there are people out there who will want to follow his lead good, bad or indifferent and they will come up with all sorts of "what if..." scenarios where someone else who rides sans helmet and gets Darwinized will be blamed on that person imitating or following the "lead," of Roethlisberger. > Excuse me? What would have been the difference if Roethlisberger had > been wearing his helmet? He still would have hit the car, he just may > or may not have been as severely injured. Probablly would not have been injured as badly... > Where's the public outcry against the lady who pulled out in front of > him? Had she not done that, there would have been no incident at all. Because these people who are quick to criticize Roethlisberger for no helmet would see too much of themselves in the lady who caused the accident. Here's to hoping that Roethlisberger makes a complete rocovery and returns to his career... Go JAGUARS!!!!!! -- -- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Benjamin Franklin |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
> Brent P said in rec.autos.driving:
> Helmet arguments go the same way. At least motorcycle helmets have some > benefit. In bicycling the magic foam hat is supposed to save us when our > chest is crushed by fully loaded semi-tractor-trailer. Its a control thing. They can't rule a cyclist's life in other ways, so they come up with the helmet requirement. First for unxer x years of age, and then soon enough to everybody. > How a piece of > styrofoam is supposed to do that I don't know, but news articles enjoy > mentioning that the rider didn't wear a helmet even when the injuries > are no where near the top of the head. Dunno. Maybe it gives the nanny state types a comfortable place to put their figurative thumb down on so that they can twist.... -- "If the Tampa Bay Buccaneers are known as the "Buc's," And the Jacksonville Jaguars are known as the "Jag's," Then what does that make the Tennessee Titans?" --George Carlin |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
necromancer > wrote in
th.net: >> Brent P said in rec.autos.driving: >> Helmet arguments go the same way. At least motorcycle helmets have >> some benefit. In bicycling the magic foam hat is supposed to save us >> when our chest is crushed by fully loaded semi-tractor-trailer. > > Its a control thing. They can't rule a cyclist's life in other ways, > so they come up with the helmet requirement. First for unxer x years > of age, and then soon enough to everybody. In PA, there used to be a helmet law where all riders had to wear them. It's in the past few years that this law has been loosened up. Going the other way there, don't 'ca think? Doug |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
DYM wrote: > necromancer > wrote in > th.net: > > >> Brent P said in rec.autos.driving: > >> Helmet arguments go the same way. At least motorcycle helmets have > >> some benefit. In bicycling the magic foam hat is supposed to save us > >> when our chest is crushed by fully loaded semi-tractor-trailer. > > > > Its a control thing. They can't rule a cyclist's life in other ways, > > so they come up with the helmet requirement. First for unxer x years > > of age, and then soon enough to everybody. > > In PA, there used to be a helmet law where all riders had to wear them. > It's in the past few years that this law has been loosened up. Going the > other way there, don't 'ca think? > > Doug based on the comments outside this forum, my prediction is "not for long." Yes, you are correct, the whole time I lived in PA there was a mandatory helmet law, no exceptions. nate |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
Scott en Aztlán wrote: > On 16 Jun 2006 12:01:49 -0700, "N8N" > wrote: > > >As a Pittsburgh Steelers fan for many years, I've been following the > >Ben Roethlisberger story with some interest, and it concerns me that > >the vast majority of comments both from the media and from the general > >public (at least as read in the "letters to the editor" section of USA > >Today, which I normally wouldn't have been reading but was the only rag > >available at the hotel I've been at for the last week) is that this > >whole incident is somehow Roethlisberger's fault for not wearing a > >helmet. > > > >Excuse me? What would have been the difference if Roethlisberger had > >been wearing his helmet? He still would have hit the car, he just may > >or may not have been as severely injured. > > Let's look at a slightly different scenario: > > Suppose Roethlisberger had been ****ing the woman instead of running > into her car. Suppose that he wasn't wearing a rubber and she got > knocked up. Whose fault is it that he is now on the hook for EIGHTEEN > YEARS' worth of child support payments? > > Bottom line, he bears a certain amount of responsibility for > protecting himself. He knew the risks, but he pulled a Gary Busey > anyway. This tempers any sympathy I might feel for him. > -- > What the heck, I'll play too. > - Dave I admit that I haven't followed the story all that close but... I haven't seen anything at all blaming him 'for the crash'. Only for not wearing a helmut. So far I don't recall hearing anything at all about what the woman was charged with and I'll bet she was ticketed heavily. Harry K |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
In article >, Scott en Aztlán wrote:
> Suppose Roethlisberger had been ****ing the woman instead of running > into her car. Suppose that he wasn't wearing a rubber and she got > knocked up. Whose fault is it that he is now on the hook for EIGHTEEN > YEARS' worth of child support payments? Where did he ask the woman to turn in front of him? See, that's what is missing. > Bottom line, he bears a certain amount of responsibility for > protecting himself. He knew the risks, but he pulled a Gary Busey > anyway. This tempers any sympathy I might feel for him. I'll remember that if some dumb trucker crushes your corvette. It's your fault for not driving something bigger like another semi. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why is the blame not being placed where it belongs?
Brent P wrote: <brevity snip>
> In bicycling the magic foam hat is supposed to save us when our > chest is crushed by fully loaded semi-tractor-trailer. Are you saying wearing leathers, boots and helmets is ridiculous since they won't protect your chest from being crushed by a semi...? ----- - gpsman |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
blame this one on crackwhore KATE | [email protected] | Ford Mustang | 1 | June 14th 05 05:57 AM |
Investigators Blame Stupidity in Area Death | Larry Bud | Driving | 1 | May 24th 05 09:51 PM |
"Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry!" Bumper Stickers | Monxt | General | 2 | November 10th 04 11:56 PM |
The High Price Of Gas--Don't Blame OPEC! | William R. Watt | General | 2 | April 20th 04 04:47 AM |
Blame OPEC! Blame the environuts | Dusty | General | 4 | April 20th 04 03:13 AM |