What does being a "Liberal" mean? (US)

[Bullitt]

Strong supporter of mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws. My perspective being from the fire/EMS public safety side of things. There is a whole snowball chain of consequences most people don't grasp when you choose not to wear your belt/helmet and are in a serious accident.

It puts my life and limb at much greater risk because you will have greater injuries. My response method will be code 3 lights and sirens instead of just code 2 urgent, my time on scene will be much longer since I will have to use additional equipment and procedures to stabilize, and we will not be able to stick around to help others injured since you are now a life/limb priority and have to be moved immediately. This then requires additional resources to be brought on scene from our own department or neighboring departments, placing further strain on their ability to respond to incidents in their own areas since they're having to come out here as a mutual aid. Most line of duty deaths and injuries for my profession occur while responding to or from a call code 3.


You wearing your seatbelt/helmet greatly reduces the chances of your injuries being as serious, therefore scaling back the amount of response required for your care. Reduces my chances of getting hurt/killed on the job, and costs your local departments, and thus the taxpayers, less money. Your own medical bills are just the tip of the iceberg.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

Strong supporter of mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws. My perspective being from the fire/EMS public safety side of things. There is a whole snowball chain of consequences most people don't grasp when you choose not to wear your belt/helmet and are in a serious accident.

It puts my life and limb at much greater risk because you will have greater injuries. My response method will be code 3 lights and sirens instead of just code 2 urgent, my time on scene will be much longer since I will have to use additional equipment and procedures to stabilize, and we will not be able to stick around to help others injured since you are now a life/limb priority and have to be moved immediately. This then requires additional resources to be brought on scene from our own department or neighboring departments, placing further strain on their ability to respond to incidents in their own areas since they're having to come out here as a mutual aid. Most line of duty deaths and injuries for my profession occur while responding to or from a call code 3.


You wearing your seatbelt/helmet greatly reduces the chances of your injuries being as serious, therefore scaling back the amount of response required for your care. Reduces my chances of getting hurt/killed on the job, and costs your local departments, and thus the taxpayers, less money. Your own medical bills are just the tip of the iceberg.

I first cottoned on to that while working on a video at a hospital ER. Every time there was a car crash and they heard "unrestrained" the intensity amped up tremendously. It was a much bigger deal at the hospital too.

[TheMercenary]

To bad we just can't tell them, hey you didn't wear your belt, so I'm not rushing off to get your dying ass to the hospital.

[lookout123]

Interesting perspective. How far should we take that though?

A law banning fast food and junkfood would certainly have a knock on affect as well.

How about a ban on alcohol?

How about unprotocted sex?

Use of firearms by anyone not currently serving in a warzone?

Rear wheel drive vs front wheel drive in snow?

Driving a car rather than a covered wagon?

Getting out of bed for longer than your government mandated exercise period?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Getting out of bed for longer than your government mandated exercise period?

Is that in the Mrs. Obama plan for America? wouldn't surprise me.

[lookout123]

Bullitt, my post was *edit, cuz i'm stupid*[NOT not, i really meant NOT meant as screw you, but more of a where does it stop? Personally I feel those are all controls the federal government shouldn't be involved with. If the states want to do so and they can convince their voters to go for it, then more power to them. I seriously have a problem with the federal government expanding to control more and more of our lives.

Well, I think the right system will develop organically as people change themselves inside. All of the rules and government are creaeted one step at a time.

F3, I had no idea you were such an optimist. I see a nation on the decline, not one still developing. I personally think we've gone past the tipping point of "the greater good" and we'll just keep sliding through "i gotta get mine".

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Bullitt, my post was *edit, cuz i'm stupid*[NOT not, i really meant NOT meant as screw you, but more of a where does it stop? Personally I feel those are all controls the federal government shouldn't be involved with. If the states want to do so and they can convince their voters to go for it, then more power to them. I seriously have a problem with the federal government expanding to control more and more of our lives.

No worries I didn't take it as such. I agree it does have to stop somewhere because I too feel that government control over our lives should be as limited as possible, while still looking out for the greater good. Seatbelt/helmet is just an area I think government mandated usage is ok. In many other areas I would rather people left to make their own decisions.

[HungLikeJesus]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

No worries I didn't take it as such. I agree it does have to stop somewhere because I too feel that government control over our lives should be as limited as possible, while still looking out for the greater good. Seatbelt/helmet is just an area I think government mandated usage is ok. In many other areas I would rather people left to make their own decisions.

But this is part of the problem. Everyone wants some special exemption or exception and we end up back where we started.

[footfootfoot]

Lookout, I'm no optimist. I was speaking merely theoretically.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by lookout123

snip--

F3, I had no idea you were such an optimist. I see a nation on the decline, not one still developing. I personally think we've gone past the tipping point of "the greater good" and we'll just keep sliding through "i gotta get mine".

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

Lookout, I'm no optimist. I was speaking merely theoretically.

Perhaps you two are not optimists. Perhaps you once were, I don't know. Clearly you both recognize that state of mind. I consider you a couple of the most rational, articulate, intelligent people I know (who are only coincidentally fellow dwellars). You are not optimists--ok. But I have a question for you.

What are you teaching your children? What do you tell them with your words and what do you show them with your actions? Defensive cynicism? Acquisitive greed? To move up by pushing others down?

Something else? I have paid attention to you over the years and I don't find these sentiments consistent with what I have seen you share about your parenting journey. Maybe you're not optimists, but I see hope in the next generation. This is what makes *me* an optimist--Dads like you.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by BigV

Perhaps you two are not optimists. Perhaps you once were, I don't know. Clearly you both recognize that state of mind. I consider you a couple of the most rational, articulate, intelligent people I know (who are only coincidentally fellow dwellars). You are not optimists--ok. But I have a question for you.

What are you teaching your children? What do you tell them with your words and what do you show them with your actions? Defensive cynicism? Acquisitive greed? To move up by pushing others down?

Something else? I have paid attention to you over the years and I don't find these sentiments consistent with what I have seen you share about your parenting journey. Maybe you're not optimists, but I see hope in the next generation. This is what makes *me* an optimist--Dads like you.

I don't consider myself an optimist in any way shape or form. I think I'm a realist with a healthy dose of jaded cynicism.

What I try to teach my kids is as follows:
-Your life is your own, so make one you can be proud of
-Don't expect an organization to help you, that's what family and friends are for
-Help those around you as much as you can when they need it, part of real help is showing them how to do it themselves next time
-Shiny badges, nice suits, and perfect smiles aren't equivalent to good. Dirty clothes, surly attitudes, and obvious flaws aren't equivalent to bad.
-Don't ever live in fear, you can only die once and that is inevitable anyway so take appropriate risks while you can and live life to the full

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by BigV

Perhaps you two are not optimists. Perhaps you once were, I don't know. Clearly you both recognize that state of mind. I consider you a couple of the most rational, articulate, intelligent people I know (who are only coincidentally fellow dwellars). You are not optimists--ok. But I have a question for you.

What are you teaching your children? What do you tell them with your words and what do you show them with your actions? Defensive cynicism? Acquisitive greed? To move up by pushing others down?

Something else? I have paid attention to you over the years and I don't find these sentiments consistent with what I have seen you share about your parenting journey. Maybe you're not optimists, but I see hope in the next generation. This is what makes *me* an optimist--Dads like you.

Originally Posted by BigV

I love to hear you think, so take your time. I've already made note of what I seen that you've done. I am interested to hear what your "sincere" response will be and how much distance there will be between those words and your actions to this point.

For the record, when I have to choose between believing one's actions *or* believing one's words, I almost always choose actions.

Originally Posted by lookout123

I don't consider myself an optimist in any way shape or form. I think I'm a realist with a healthy dose of jaded cynicism.

What I try to teach my kids is as follows:
-Your life is your own, so make one you can be proud of
-Don't expect an organization to help you, that's what family and friends are for
-Help those around you as much as you can when they need it, part of real help is showing them how to do it themselves next time
-Shiny badges, nice suits, and perfect smiles aren't equivalent to good. Dirty clothes, surly attitudes, and obvious flaws aren't equivalent to bad.
-Don't ever live in fear, you can only die once and that is inevitable anyway so take appropriate risks while you can and live life to the full

I often quote the following ( I don't know who said it but no one would dispute you if you blamed Mark Twain or Oscar Wilde, though it sounds more like Ambrose Bierce)

"An Optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds, and the Pessimist thinks the Optimist is right."

That sums it up nicely for me, and I don't feel I fit in either camp but sympathize more closely with the pessimist.

I try to show my kids there is no Hope. Hope is profoundly passive and encourages thinking of oneself as a victim or powerless at best. There is only what you do and what you put effort into.



You can hope into one hand and shit into the other and see which one fills up first.

I try to show them that good manners never go out of style

I try to show them how to establish personal boundaries and to stick together with family and friends.

I try to show them how to think and use reason to solve problems, to be forthcoming and honest when they make mistakes or break things, etc. And to own up to their actions even when they might rather blame someone else.

In short, they'll make sucky politicians, lawyers, or wall street tycoons. But they will be people who you would want to have over for dinner or have in your corner in a fight.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

In short, they'll make sucky politicians, lawyers, or wall street tycoons. But they will be people who you would want to have over for dinner or have in your corner in a fight.

It sounds like you are raising them just fine. They'll be quite alright when we are all hiding in the mountains from the politicians, lawyers, and wall street tycoons. (listing all 3 seems redundant)

[monster]

...btw this has been an interesting discussion for one who is still unsure about all these labels, thanks

[ZenGum]

With that platform Lookout could be a good president. He'd have to ice about a million parasites that lurk around Washington to make it work, but that would be regarded as one of his greatest achievements.

I think a progressive tax is better. I think the socially provided safety net should include education, medical care and financial support for those unable to work through age or illness, plus some kind of paid keep-you-busy work for the capable unemployed. Putting medical care in the safety net makes it appropriate to require people to take certain precautions, like seat belts.

The only thing I can see no reason for is your bigotry against bestiality. Suppose I have some chickens in the back yard. I am allowed to kill them and eat them, but I'm not allowed to stick my wang in them, not even in private. Can you tell me why not?