Roadkill Coyote
Member
Since DUI has been well covered, particularly by Messer Paw, the question remains how we determine what risks require these restrictions. Human judgement, reflected in a social concensus, is how we draw that line. Yes, we have certain inalienable rights, but inalienable or not, the framers spent a long time arguing about how to word their enunciation of those rights. Why did it take so long, and initiate arguments that resound to this day? Because where those rights end was not as obvious as some have maintained. It was a difficult, complex, and important subject then, and it is a difficult, complex, and important subject now.
The main differance between then and now is the changes in how our social concensus views risk, and harm. We, as a soceity, have a greater understanding of some risks and harms, and a greater fear of others. Obviously, through medical progress, we know more about the effects of alcohol, and therefor the attendant risks of operating dangerous machinery. Through research we know about harms done by chemical that would have gone unrecognized. In addition to the changes based upon understanding, our soceity has changed in how we veiw risk itself. There was a time when a road that only washed out occasionally would have been considered safe enough. Today, it would be considered malfeasance on the part of the local government. Much of the change in attitude has come because we are a wealthy society, we can afford to demand better roads and more protection.
So, the problem is sorting out those concensuses that have changed based upon fear, not understanding, and focusing our attention on remaking them. That's what the High Road is about, remaking social concensuses, the faulty ones that were based upon fear, about firearms.
Edited for clarity
The main differance between then and now is the changes in how our social concensus views risk, and harm. We, as a soceity, have a greater understanding of some risks and harms, and a greater fear of others. Obviously, through medical progress, we know more about the effects of alcohol, and therefor the attendant risks of operating dangerous machinery. Through research we know about harms done by chemical that would have gone unrecognized. In addition to the changes based upon understanding, our soceity has changed in how we veiw risk itself. There was a time when a road that only washed out occasionally would have been considered safe enough. Today, it would be considered malfeasance on the part of the local government. Much of the change in attitude has come because we are a wealthy society, we can afford to demand better roads and more protection.
So, the problem is sorting out those concensuses that have changed based upon fear, not understanding, and focusing our attention on remaking them. That's what the High Road is about, remaking social concensuses, the faulty ones that were based upon fear, about firearms.
Edited for clarity