The Case for Opening Beaches, Parks, and Outdoor Recreation Areas.
The United States Declaration of Independence lists "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" as three "unalienable rights." Unalienable means not to be given or taken away.
Sometimes people don't do what is good for themselves or others, but the assumption seems to be that those in government can make better decisions for the entire population than individual citizens can make for themselves. Prove it. Where are the double-blind studies that prove those decisions safe and effective? Are the citizens too dumb or irresponsible to exercise safe behavior appropriate to their own situation?
Not only do officials presume to know better and care more than the citizenry, but they often exclude themselves from the restrictions they impose. In their "essential" functions they exercise their own judgement and remain immune to the penalties or forced compliance exercised upon the general population.
In the case of Coronavirus, is it safer, or even possible, for a family to remain cramped together 24 hours a day in a single dwelling? Would not total confinement in close quarters mean that any one of them having other contacts be in danger of infecting the entire household, therefore leading to multiple contacts with healthcare workers and others.
Would not an automobile or outdoor setting actually provide or allow more effective isolation and social distancing while reducing stress and possibly adding the psychological and health benefits of exercise and fresh air?
People are capable of self-distancing. They are wearing masks and staying away from others. It is easier in open spaces.
Can't we see that packing people in close proximity is the worst thing you can do? Compare the disaster in New York with Wyoming, or even Los Angeles, which has a very large population, but one that is much more spread out.
There is always risk. Nearly 70,000 people die from drug overdose every year. Nearly 40,000 people die from car accidents, while over 4.4 million are injured by car accidents. The flu just two years ago was killing 4,000 a week for a period of time. Are people willing to accept risky behavior? Do we for some reason more easily accept some causes of injury or death? The obvious answer is yes. There is a balance to be reached. Some risk is acceptable. Some risk is beneficial.
The elderly might be more at risk, but they've lived through World Wars and epidemics without modern medicine and survived. The elderly living do not need anyone to tell them how to survive. They have done it.
From their towers, the vision of researchers is as skewed as their data and models. Their advise is valuable but it should not be taken as the whole wisdom of mankind. If we are to maintain our form of government, our citizens must be thought intelligent and responsible enough to make decisions for themselves.
I am not minimizing the dangers of coronavirus. It is dangerous. It may be unprecedented in many ways, and adequate precautions need to be taken. However one thing that must be considered is the risk of depriving the citizenry of their self-dignity and their right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
Signed,
The TreasureGuide
Feel free to share.
