Large Drivers, Car Crashes, and the Failure of the Liberal Machine

Timothy Birdnow Here is one that the good people at CBS clearly didn't understand. http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2012/08/07/study-obesity-increases-drivers-risk-of-being-in-car-accident/ Turns out a study by Canadian researchers claims being overweight makes you more likely to crash your car - and more likely to be hurt by such a crash. According to the article: "“Poor car-to-person fit is thought to be the leading cause of the increased risk of injury and fatality in [car accidents] for [people] who are obese or overweight versus [people] who are normal weight,” a portion of the study published by the Ottawa Citizen read. The study continued, “For all those individuals that have a body structure different than [the standard used in designing cars], their interactions with the safety features, such as the seat belts and airbags, may not occur as intended.” Many cars are reportedly designed with a 163-pound person in mind. Researchers additionally claim that carmakers should try to design vehicles whose safety features are more adjustable, in order to provide protection for a broader range of drivers." End excerpt. This is your classic Liberal approach; create a problem then blame something else for that probolem, the solution then proferred being what created the problem in the first place. IF cars are too small for big drivers, do we want to use the force of law to shrink the driver or do we allow the market to make bigger cars? It was the Liberal who established CAFE standards that shrunk the cars in the first place. It was the introduction of ethanol into our fuel, and designer blends aimed aostensibly at cleaning up the environment but really aimed at raising the price of fuel that led to smaller vehicles. It was the Liberal war on the SUV that forced those big people into cars too small for them. There were voices - myself included - claiming that the CAFE standards were tantamount to manslaughter because they imposed limitations on the weight of the vehicles that the consumercould purchase, thus making those vehicles less safe. Now we know that these little rice-burners kill. But what will be the solution? Will the Democrats call for loosening standards to allow the automakers to build safer, larger vehicles?m Will they seek to increase drilling for oil to drive the price of gasoline down so people won't be forced into driving those 75 lb. Priuses or those ridiculous Chevy Volts? No, the answer will be to push to shrink the drivers. Man, you see, is the disposable aspect of the equation to the Left. Thatfits with the tradition of the Left for a long time; Man is but a cog in the machine, perhaps the most malleable one, and he must be fit to the wervice of society rather than society fit to the service of the individual. It's why the Communists have always established manufacturing quotas, and why they are so gung-ho on central planning; the People are given what they need as determined by the authorities rather than their needs and wishes heeded. It's why the old Soviets would build one style of lamp, say, and everyone had to buy that or learn to see in the dark. It's why everyone in China wore the Mao Jacket. Man is not an individual to the Left, but a simple machine in an enormous Rube Goldberg contraption. Men should be standardized (as, indeed, Aldous Huxley illustrated they would be under the triumphant socialists in Brave New World). If there are people who are larger, the people are the ones who need to shrink, not the car be enlarged. Standardization gives you a type of control undreamed of in a world that is custom built. This study makes a critical argument AGAINST the modern Liberal approach. It suggests we must recognize individuality, and celebrate it. It suggests that the economy should be free to cater to the wants and needs of the consumers and not the other way around. I doubt the good folks at CBS saw the implications when they wrote this story.