Comments on: Jackson in the Age of Paternalism http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/ (the blawg formerly known as Law School Chronicles) Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:55:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Virginia http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/comment-page-1/#comment-71 Virginia Thu, 31 Jul 2008 00:43:14 +0000 http://www.lawschoolchronicles.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/#comment-71 Yes, sometimes. Yes, sometimes.

]]> By: Christopher Meredith http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/comment-page-1/#comment-70 Christopher Meredith Wed, 30 Jul 2008 16:01:39 +0000 http://www.lawschoolchronicles.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/#comment-70 You find my agitation amusing? You find my agitation amusing?

]]> By: Virginia http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/comment-page-1/#comment-69 Virginia Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:59:56 +0000 http://www.lawschoolchronicles.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/#comment-69 "Meredith, J. dissenting." I thoroughly enjoyed this post. Because I could see your agitation while typing it, it made me laugh. Thank you, Chief Justice Meredith. “Meredith, J. dissenting.”

I thoroughly enjoyed this post. Because I could see your agitation while typing it, it made me laugh. Thank you, Chief Justice Meredith.

]]> By: Christopher Meredith http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/comment-page-1/#comment-63 Christopher Meredith Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:44:06 +0000 http://www.lawschoolchronicles.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/#comment-63 Agreed. Although I can see an argument to be made for the speed limit. It's more than just taking the choice from people. Around here, the speed limit is 70 (which means it's actually 75). If I choose to drive 55, I cause a hazard to other motorists who are driving the speed limit. That being said, I don't think that's a good enough reason for Uncle Sam to stick his nose in, but it seems he doesn't need much provocation these days. Your comment also reminds me of the irony in the fact that we have such long lines at airport security checkpoints and the PATRIOT Act because the government wants to protect our freedom. Ben Franklin once said, "he who would sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither." The same might be said for the activists who seek to criminalize any behavior they personally dislike. Agreed. Although I can see an argument to be made for the speed limit. It’s more than just taking the choice from people. Around here, the speed limit is 70 (which means it’s actually 75). If I choose to drive 55, I cause a hazard to other motorists who are driving the speed limit.

That being said, I don’t think that’s a good enough reason for Uncle Sam to stick his nose in, but it seems he doesn’t need much provocation these days.

Your comment also reminds me of the irony in the fact that we have such long lines at airport security checkpoints and the PATRIOT Act because the government wants to protect our freedom. Ben Franklin once said, “he who would sacrifice freedom for security deserves neither.” The same might be said for the activists who seek to criminalize any behavior they personally dislike.

]]> By: casebook sherpa http://www.questionpresented.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/comment-page-1/#comment-62 casebook sherpa Tue, 08 Jul 2008 16:36:24 +0000 http://www.lawschoolchronicles.com/2008/07/02/jackson-in-the-age-of-paternalism/#comment-62 I heard something similar today. Senator Warner was on Fox News talking about how the Senate needed to adopt the national speed limit of 55 m.p.h. again so that families could deal with rising fuel costs. It came out sounding like: families aren't capable of just driving slower to reduce fuel consumption so we need to mandate it for them. There's this notion that if change is happening too gradually or a certain class believes something to self-evidently correct that it's okay to cut back on freedom to achieve the end that class desires. That's a poor model of culture change and a good way to insert the state into decisions it has no business making. I heard something similar today. Senator Warner was on Fox News talking about how the Senate needed to adopt the national speed limit of 55 m.p.h. again so that families could deal with rising fuel costs. It came out sounding like: families aren’t capable of just driving slower to reduce fuel consumption so we need to mandate it for them.

There’s this notion that if change is happening too gradually or a certain class believes something to self-evidently correct that it’s okay to cut back on freedom to achieve the end that class desires. That’s a poor model of culture change and a good way to insert the state into decisions it has no business making.

]]>