Contact Lenses
Barbara T. Dreyfuss' article Eagle-Eyed Regulators brings something to mind. Not the Bush cronyism and habit of appointing to head agencies people who have spent their life opposing what the agency stands for, that's pretty old news and lots of people have done articles on that.
No, it's more something about the "originalists" and how they're fairly indistinguishable from libertarians on this point. No regulation, fantastic - but what about the effect on the customers. The article mentions breast implants. That's even scarier than the contact lenses referred to.
If you buy something from a beachware store on a sand-blown beach front and then stick it in your eye, that's really your choice. I haven't heard of too many women who self-install breast implants. And I'm not sure if it's a local or a general anaesthetic, but either way, you're putting all your trust in someone else's hands. And they might be totally trust-worthy, it's just that isn't going to be any good if they turn around later after the catastrophe and say "Sorry, but these didn't turn out to be what the manufacturer said they were. And sorry, because they're self-regulating, there isn't really anything you can do." If you argue that the manufacturer has a right to do whatever they want free of regulation, doesn't that potentially infringe on my right not be killed by your product?
It's like the whole gun thing. The argument, if I get it right, is that people should be free to do whatever they want so long as it doesn't affect other people. Well, that would be okay so long as your gun isn't loaded. But once the gun is loaded, it is ready to fulfill its purpose, which is to propel a solid projectile over a long distance. Now, my neighbours' houses are 10 -15 metres away. If they have a gun and it goes off, that bullet isn't going to stop at my fence-line. There is really no way a person can exercise that "right" without potentially infringing my right not to be hit by a speeding deadly projectile.
Here's the thing. Guns are dangerous. Maybe that's why the framers of the U.S. Constitution thought it best that they be limited to members of "well regulated militia[s]."
No, it's more something about the "originalists" and how they're fairly indistinguishable from libertarians on this point. No regulation, fantastic - but what about the effect on the customers. The article mentions breast implants. That's even scarier than the contact lenses referred to.
If you buy something from a beachware store on a sand-blown beach front and then stick it in your eye, that's really your choice. I haven't heard of too many women who self-install breast implants. And I'm not sure if it's a local or a general anaesthetic, but either way, you're putting all your trust in someone else's hands. And they might be totally trust-worthy, it's just that isn't going to be any good if they turn around later after the catastrophe and say "Sorry, but these didn't turn out to be what the manufacturer said they were. And sorry, because they're self-regulating, there isn't really anything you can do." If you argue that the manufacturer has a right to do whatever they want free of regulation, doesn't that potentially infringe on my right not be killed by your product?
It's like the whole gun thing. The argument, if I get it right, is that people should be free to do whatever they want so long as it doesn't affect other people. Well, that would be okay so long as your gun isn't loaded. But once the gun is loaded, it is ready to fulfill its purpose, which is to propel a solid projectile over a long distance. Now, my neighbours' houses are 10 -15 metres away. If they have a gun and it goes off, that bullet isn't going to stop at my fence-line. There is really no way a person can exercise that "right" without potentially infringing my right not to be hit by a speeding deadly projectile.
Here's the thing. Guns are dangerous. Maybe that's why the framers of the U.S. Constitution thought it best that they be limited to members of "well regulated militia[s]."
posted by Jimbo | 9:45 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home