Active Now

.
Danilo_G
my2cents
Discussion » Questions » Random Knowledge » Does the genereal public need to be protected from its own stupid ideas?
Just Asking

Does the genereal public need to be protected from its own stupid ideas?

Posted - March 28, 2017
Tags : None

Responses


  • 6988
    Oh, you mean like 'selfies?'
      March 28, 2017 11:44 AM MDT
    5

  • I'm gonna say no.  I think the general public needs to be protected from authoritarians stupid ideas.
    If someone shoots themselves in the foot then so be it.  Oh well. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 28, 2017 8:50 PM MDT
      March 28, 2017 12:03 PM MDT
    4

  • 83
    Yes, such as alternative facts.
      March 28, 2017 12:31 PM MDT
    4

  • Yes.
      March 28, 2017 1:18 PM MDT
    0

  • 2515
    I don't agree the public has stupid ideas. From my prospective, it is the politicians that have the stupid ideas. 
      March 28, 2017 1:30 PM MDT
    4

  • ^^^^ This
      March 28, 2017 3:58 PM MDT
    0

  • 22891
    i think so
      March 28, 2017 2:26 PM MDT
    3

  • It's only stupid if nobody's buying. Even then...


      March 28, 2017 2:43 PM MDT
    4

  • Of course people who hold such an opinion do not think they're own ideas are stupid. 
      March 28, 2017 2:47 PM MDT
    3

  • This idea was mooted by an  Australian minister of religion-turned politician, who was trying to get support for a for a controversial amendment. When asked by journalists if he thought people wanted such a draconian law he replied, "It's not about what people want but about what they need." And he was the self-appointed arbiter.

    Ultimately you can't protect people from their own stupidity but there are situations where you can protect other members of the public from the stupidity of others. (I've often considered that the charge of "criminal stupidity" should be added to the road rules.)
      March 28, 2017 3:00 PM MDT
    5

  • Well I had a good laugh at "criminal stupidity"...and not totally sure you were even joking...
      March 28, 2017 3:06 PM MDT
    1

  • Oh, yeah, I was joking ... but there was a level of despair mixed in with the laughter. :(
      March 28, 2017 3:09 PM MDT
    1

  • It is a fascinating question, and I hope the answer proves to be NO.

    I have read that the US Founding Fathers actually envisioned government more by an enlightened elite, protecting us from our own ineptitude. And that view seems to have held until the 7th presidency (1829-1837), the controversial Andrew Jackson. Along with brutalizing Native Americans, Jackson apparently was also an outspoken advocate for the common folk against the corruption of the aristocracy.

    The US government was important in the Civil Rights movement…which could be construed as protecting us from our stupid ideas…however, SCOTUS also has a terrible history of supporting oppression of African Americans.
    * * *
    Right now I am concerned we may be governed more by a military-industrial complex, and I hope we all red and blue use these next years to pull it together and make self-government work, without such “protection.”

    This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at March 28, 2017 9:39 PM MDT
      March 28, 2017 3:05 PM MDT
    4

  • Yep... Gambling... A great example...
      March 28, 2017 4:09 PM MDT
    3

  • 3191
    Nope, not as long as they aren't hurting others. This post was edited by Bozette at March 29, 2017 5:36 AM MDT
      March 28, 2017 6:40 PM MDT
    3

  • ... And themselves?.. It's a tricky question and no, I don't have an answer
      March 28, 2017 8:59 PM MDT
    2

  • 3191
    No.  I do not believe we have the right to impose safety measures upon others.  Even if some are based upon known statistics, others are purely arbitrary.  Either way, I believe in people having the freedom of self-determination.

    That may mean someone is free to fry their brains on meth, or sustain greater injuries because they choose not to wear a helmet.  And sometimes those things end up costing society.  Conversely, we would never have advanced in knowledge, technology, industry, medicine, science, exploration, arts, and other areas had people been limited because they might hurt themselves.

     
      March 28, 2017 10:03 PM MDT
    1

  • I might disagree with you on some things, but it's a bloody fine line and I'm not sure where it lies
      March 28, 2017 11:28 PM MDT
    0

  • 13071
    Hasn't worked so far.
      March 28, 2017 10:06 PM MDT
    2

  • 5835
    When the Israelites came into the promised land, God commanded them to have no king, not to be like the nations. That was ok for about 150 years, and then the people demanded a king, to be like the nations. Even God can't protect humans from their own stupidity.
      March 29, 2017 1:50 AM MDT
    1

  • 32645
    No we all have to right to be stupid, we also have to accept consequences for our stupidity. As long as we are not harming anyone or violating anyone's rights.

    Famous last words: Hold my beer, and watch this.
      March 29, 2017 5:40 AM MDT
    0