Vaping, helmets, seatbelts and other concerns

Vaping: On December 20 of last year, the minimum legal age to buy and use tobacco products, by smoking, chewing or using one the newer e-cigarette vapor products, was raised from 18 to 21 by the US Congress and signed into law. The popular reaction on social media was generally negative. With the simple eloquence usually reserved for bumper stickers, the memes argued that if an individual is old enough to serve in the military, they should be able to smoke or “vape.” We have known that smoking tobacco isn’t good for us since the surgeon general warned us all in 1964, and e-cigarettes used in combination with illicit after-market concoctions have been associated with several deaths. Current research indicates that vaping is safer than smoking cigarettes, so it’s recommended as a means of quitting tobacco, but it does introduce toxins into the body and stresses the lungs, and we don’t yet know what the effects of long-term use will be. I’m not a smoker, and I don’t want to see anyone get sick, so I stay out of it. It’s not my issue.

Helmets: When I went to school in Denver, I drove a scooter around town. It was one of those cool-looking, but under-powered 50cc deals and I never went more than twenty blocks or twenty miles per hour. I also didn’t wear a helmet, which would be breaking the law in the State of Nebraska. Here, we require the operators of all motorcycles, of any size, whether around town or on the interstate, to wear helmets. We are one of only 19 states that do.

Do you remember the photo of Mike Dukakis in an Army tank wearing a helmet? Call it foolish vanity if you must, but I would feel awkward wearing a helmet on a low-powered bike. Our dining and tourism businesses have reported a more serious issue. They feel the economic pinch of cross-country riders who schedule their trips around our state rather than through it, because of our helmet law. The law surprises me a bit because it’s not consistent with our otherwise free and independent Nebraska attitudes, but I don’t want to see anyone get hurt. I don’t make a fuss. If I get another scooter, I’ll obey the law, even if I look like Mike Dukakis.

Seat Belts: On January 10 of this year, State Senator Bob Hilkemann of Omaha introduced LB 39 which would change the enforcement of seatbelt use from a secondary to a primary offense. In other words, a driver can be cited for not wearing a seatbelt only if pulled over for some other reason under the current law. If successful, the proposed legislation would make it a primary offense, meaning that drivers who are seen not wearing a seat belt can be stopped for that reason alone.

There is no shortage of good people who support that legislation, which is admirable enough. There is a mountain of data demonstrating that using seat belts saves lives. For those reasons, I always use my seatbelt and insist that my passengers do so as well. I don’t want to see anyone get hurt and I want to obey the law, so this isn’t my issue.

Concerns: Individually, I don’t think any of these regulations will trigger the downfall of civilization as we know it. They are well-intended, supported by solid data, and in the best interest of our health and safety. I’m not motivated to fight city hall on any of these laws.

Collectively, however, I think we should be concerned about the trend.

In my mind, the question becomes, “What is the purpose of government?” Is it to protect me from you? Absolutely! I don’t always trust the government’s ability to keep me safe from you, which leads us around to a discussion of second amendment issues (yet another article), but I certainly don’t mind having a legal structure in place for such purposes. Is the purpose of government to protect you from me? Personally, I don’t see that as being quite so high a priority, because unlike the rest of you, I have only good intentions. Having said that, I suppose it’s only fair that the government should afford you protections similar to mine.

Is the purpose of the government to protect me from me? You from you? I don’t believe that it should be. Adults with adequate decision-making capacity should be free to pursue Darwin awards on their own time.

Folks, I’m not going to carry the flag on any of these issues individually. These are not fights that I choose to fight, but I do want to go on record with an overall concern. At some point, we have to ask ourselves, “What is the purpose of government?” The codification of common sense, however well-intentioned, is emblematic of a slowly creeping, erosion of our personal freedoms. As an overall trend, I don’t like it. At some point, we have to look at the larger picture and say “enough.” No more. Stop.