How ‘Concept Creep’ Made Americans So Sensitive to Harm – The Atlantic

During the 1950s, third graders could walk to school, play alone at the park, or bike 10 minutes to a friend’s house without anyone worrying or objecting, so long as they came home for supper or before the street lights came on. Today, though kidnapping is just as rare, a parent who allows that same behavior is at risk of arrest or even losing custody of their children to their state’s child protective services bureaucracy. Society’s concept of what constituted an unacceptable risk, harm, or trauma expanded for ill. In Hanna Rosin’s words, it “stripped childhood of independence, risk taking, and discovery—without making it safer.”

A 17-page pdf available at here

 

Source: How ‘Concept Creep’ Made Americans So Sensitive to Harm – The Atlantic

How the FAA Shot Down “Uber for Planes” | Foundation for Economic Education

“Instead of embracing this service, the FAA used tortuous logic to ban Flytenow and other online flight-sharing websites because it considered these to be “common carriers” (such as Delta Airlines). Private pilots cannot possibly comply with the myriad regulations that apply to the large airlines.”

Source: How the FAA Shot Down “Uber for Planes” | Foundation for Economic Education

Diversity Sucks

“It’s the fundamental defect of all egalitarian ideologies. The diversity advocates assume that all people are the same, when they are clearly not the same. Thousands of generations of evolution have hard wired humans to seek out those who are most like them. Trust is highest with our kin. Social structure like churches, and civic communities are built on trust. Throw a bunch of strangers from different tribes together and they are not going to build a community.”

http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=7429

What I’d like to write to my child’s teacher about his gun control advocacy in class

“The first reason is that, unlike freedom of speech, which is a generalized right, the right to bear arms is specifically and absolutely articulated: it “shall not be infringed.” Although we’ve long recognized that government can, in fact, infringe on this right, the standard to do so is incredibly high.

“The second reason the gun control argument cannot reach the high constitutional standard for imposing strict limitations on gun rights is because it forgets that guns don’t just take lives, they also save lives. Until one produces an accurate risk-benefit analysis, showing that more people die because of guns than are saved by them, one cannot meet the constitutional standard for infringing on the right to bear arms.”

Source: What I’d like to write to my child’s teacher about his gun control advocacy in class