By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Big Brother ideology returns
Placeholder Image

“Government has an obligation to protect its citizenry,” Sen. Carl Kruger boldly declares with his recent introduction of legislation in New York, “to ban the use of gadgets such as Blackberry devices and video games while crossing the street” (Reuters 02/07/2007).
Be forewarned! This philosophy and ideology of “Big Brother” once begun can NOT be undone?
I remember in my adolescent years the advent of the “walkman” (radio/tape cassette player with audio head phones) that revolutionized the private enjoyment of personal listening preferences while in the pursuit of alternative endeavors.
We could go jogging and jam out to AC/DC too. It was fantastic. Of course, my hearing suffered slightly as that volume button seemed to remain on the highest decibel level possible to afford the greatest pleasure of my reminiscent youth.
I never once heard a peep from legislators that such a device was so distracting we could not cross the street properly. Did accidents happen because we could not hear the cars coming, or anything else for that matter? Most definitely.
The point here is that “Big Brother” concluded matter-of-factly we were responsible for our own “foolishness” if we chose to step out onto oncoming traffic without looking both ways, as my parents diligently drilled into my head at such an early age as to now be beyond my recollection.
We need “Big Brother” to tell us to pay attention? Or worse, what will be the punishment if we engage in unknowing civil disobedience and utilize our technological gadgetry on the way to work or errands and forget to turn these blasted, addictive toys off at the curb?
We better start recruiting and budgeting for an enormous legion of law enforcement officers to “police” this absurd new attempt to legislate, or better yet, “castrate” our free will, if this philosophy takes root in our elected official's minds.
I do think gadgetry can be distracting; and, I am deeply saddened whenever an accident prematurely takes a soul from a beloved one and their family; but, this matter does not, in my opinion, require legislation to correct.
A public awareness campaign would do the job. We utilize these informational dissemination tactics on a regular basis to combat various perceived health and welfare issues facing our citizenry to some degree of effectiveness (for those who choose to listen to the never-ending diatribes subscribing what we should and should not do in order to remain somewhat “healthy,” “safe” and “sound,” as if we could not possible gleam this wisdom on our own.)
Before you know it, it will be illegal to “walk, talk and chew bubble gum” at the same time. I am told this too is somewhat distracting.

Contact Bezanson at

Sign up for our e-newsletters