December 2008
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

City of Albany v Freedom: Cell Phone Bans

OK, first off I am going to give a hardy compliment to the local news media here in Albany. This blog centers around an event that happened probably around 7pm last night – barely 11 hours ago- that I read about in an article on the local paper’s website that was on said website at some point before 4:30am, when I first looked at the site this morning. That is very impressive to me, and they are doing a great job insofar as getting the news out fast.

This morning’s article notes that last night at its work session, local resident David Hewett asked the Albany City Commission to ban all cell phone usage while driving.

Evidently, about a month ago Mr. Hewett’s wife was struck by a car. When the driver got out of her vehicle after the collision, she was on her cell phone. There is no mention of whether or not she was actually using her cell at the time of impact, or if she had made the call as she was getting out of the car. Clearly, this distinction is lost on Mr. Hewett.

Mr. Hewett is demanding immediate action on this, and I agree.

The Commission should have laughed Mr. Hewett right out of their meeting.

There are already laws on the books regarding distractions while driving. We do not need more laws regarding particular types of distractions while driving.

I point to myself in this regard: I have been in 2 collisions for which I was at fault. In both cases, I was distracted. In neither was the distraction my phone. In one, the distraction was anger for having to go run an errand. In the other, the distraction was a very long and tedious drive, and I had simply zoned out.

Should we now ban running errands and long, tedious drives?

Further disturbing is Mr. Hewett’s statement to the Commission that it has the “responsibility to ‘assure the safety’ of its citizens”.

You see, I don’t remember the Founding Fathers saying anything about the government having the responsibility of assuring the safety of its citizens from anything other than foreign attack and government intrusion into their lives.

Instead, they put that pesky little thing called the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights, giving the citizenry the right to keep and bear arms. To me, that seems to indicate that they viewed the safety of a man, his family, and his property as the sole responsibility of that man.

I do have a bit of praise for Mr. Hewett, in that light. At least he is doing something that he clearly feels will protect his family. The problem is that he is doing the wrong something, and in the process he is endangering the rest of us and our families.

City of Albany v Freedom: Oudoor Indoor Furniture

So not only has the City of Albany decided to ban convenience stores from selling markers and rose vases, they’ve both passed one ordinance limiting freedom and have been asked to pass another.

In the ordinance that has been passed and is scheduled to take effect beginning Jan 1, the city has made it a crime punishable by fines, community service, and even jail time to ‘have indoor furniture on the outside of their home’, per this article in the Albany Herald.

Keep Albany-Dougherty Beautiful Director Judy Bowles says that leaving indoor furniture outdoors indicates a ‘lack of pride in one’s home and in the city’.

So choosing to have more comfortable furniture outside is a ‘lack of pride’? Even more disturbing, government should be allowed to regulate the amount of ‘pride’ one has in a given area?? Has this lady ever read 1984???

Furthermore, what constitutes ‘indoor’ furniture? Am I allowed to have a wooden table on my patio, or must it be plastic?

Finally, if government is allowed to dictate what can and can’t be on the outside of my house, it will eventually decide it can regulate what is inside my house.

More government control is never the answer. More individual freedom is.