Push Back

How to be a Good Example: Why two wrongs do make a right. Part 3 of 4

 

It’s also incredibly important to recognize that laws are not being created “for our benefit”, regardless of the government arguments or media hype. More and more what makes sense to some people is being established as the law for all people. Following the law is mandatory regardless of whether it’s right or wrong. Not following the law then becomes the wrong thing to do, and is criminalized.

 

But I digress: What I meant earlier about those who don’t follow the rules being better examples is that we (society) need people who refuse to follow "all of the rules all of the time". By obsessively following the rules the way I do I am contributing to the rise of an autocratic state. If there is no one to push back at the rules then new rules will continue to be created and applied to citizens at an ever increasing rate.

 

Take helmet laws for instance. California enacted laws which require bicyclists to wear a helmet, typically when riding on the road or a road-related area (such as a bicycle lane or path). In California it applies to those who are under 18 years of age, and their parent or legal guardian is “jointly and severally liable”. The law was later extended to scooters, skateboards, and inline skates.

 

Although it’s easy to argue that helmets decrease the risk of injury, it’s inherently difficult to measure whether differences in injury rates are due to helmet legislation or other factors. While I would agree that wearing helmets “makes sense” and I'll admit I'd want my child to wear a helmet, I’m not sure that people should be forced to wear helmets because "it’s the law".

 

This is even more obvious regarding motorcycle helmet laws. There are many riders who constantly push back against helmet laws. Sometimes publically by organizing events such as "biker rights rallies". One of the main points of contention is that bikers don't want lawmakers passing laws regarding how they ride. I agree and support their resistance to the law.

 

Regardless of whether a helmet reduces the risk of injury, is it fair to force people to wear helmets against their will? I’m using this group as an example, even though I realize it’s a weak example, because I recognize the value of helmet laws: It’s one of those that “make sense” to most of us. My point is that legislating safety is an example of laws that go too far, because it criminalizes those who push back.