Skip to main content

The Nanny State

"In fact, safety has no place anywhere. Everything that's fun in life is dangerous. Horse races, for instance, are very dangerous. But attempt to design a safe horse and the result is a cow (an appalling animal to watch at the trotters.) And everything that isn't fun is dangerous too. It is impossible to be alive and safe." P J O'Rourke

The amalgamation of the English and Welsh police forces is a classic case of the "Something must be Done" mentality. The idea is that the smaller police forces- never mind that most of them are doing a very good job- could not cope with the theoretical problem of a terrorist attack on their patch. This is nonsense. One of the smallest forces in the UK: Dumfries and Galloway were able to pursue the case against the Lockerbie bombers to a successful prosecution- the largest man hunt in British police history.

In fact this is an example of the nanny state- mostly this is "something must be done about X" and occurs after a highly unlikely accident. The hysteria of the "War on Terror" that is giving an over mighty state the right to abridge our liberties now seems set to undermine the efficiency and local nature of our police forces. This is weak kneed. The price of such an approach is to reduce the moral hazard of our whole society. If things go wrong, sometimes it is just an accident- but increasingly our legal system is determined to make a buck. Suing after accidents has distorted our medical system- now few are willing to take on the role of Obstetrician since the risk of being sued is now so high. The costs of ever more intrusive and absurd safety requirements is driving once profitable British businesses into bankruptcy.

Life should contain some risks- all of us have an unwritten expiration date on our birth certificate. The key is the find a balance- the "something must be done" brigade are driving our society to expect the impossible: complete safety, and to sue when this is not the case. The price is unresponsive police forces, absurd safety instructions and intrusive regulation.

Life is dangerous- that is why it is precious, and fun. A safe life would be as dull as [fill in your choice of dullness here]

Comments

MatGB said…
Well said sir, well said.

I especially like the expiration date bit. Incidentally, I was quoting your namesake today; didn't actually realise Lorem Ipsum was mangled Cicero...

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...