3 ms·
Exactly -- who are you to judge? When you say that you're white and middle class, are you implying that perhaps non-white and lower class parents aren't as res
by stvswn 11y ago
Exactly -- who are you to judge?
When you say that you're white and middle class, are you implying that perhaps non-white and lower class parents aren't as responsible, and therefore need the police to step in?
I have an issue with "if it turned out that it did on average prevent injuries or deaths" line of reasoning. With 380 M people, it's an easy standard to reach.
"8 year old Becky, with her irresponsible parents, would be alive today if there had been a law." That's going to be easy to say. But what you can't easily measure is something along the lines of "these hundred thousand children are not learning life skills because we codified fear of low risk situations into law."
The costs are disperse and hard to measure, the benefits easily identified. So we have a bias to "do something."
- dahart 11y ago> When you say that you're white and middle class, are you implying that perhaps non-white and lower class parents aren't as responsible, and therefore need the police to step in? No. I meant exactly what I said, that I feel lucky that my upbringing has involved environments that are safe for kids. The only parents I implied were irresponsible in my entire comment were my parents. > these hundred thousand children are not learning life skills because we codified fear of low risk situations into law. That's also easy to say. (And if true, should have some easily measurable effects.) But there are millions of parents already driving their kids to school, with or without any laws. If that is causing the kind of problems you suggest, that children are not learning life skills en masse, we're already there. Would you advocate requiring kids to walk to school, and enacting laws to make driving them illegal?