A poem for those that love speed limits
Discussion
Anon said:
To laugh is to risk appearing the fool
To weep is to risk appearing sentimental
To reach out to others is to risk involvement
To expose feelings is to risk exposing your true self
To place your ideas, your dreams before a crowd is to risk their loss
To love is to risk not being loved in return
To live is to risk dying
To hope is to risk despair
To try is to risk failure
But risks must be taken,
because the greatest hazard in life is to do nothing.
The person who risks nothing,
does nothing, has nothing, and is nothing.
They may avoid suffering and sorrow,
but they cannot learn, feel, change, grow, love, live.
Chained by their attitudes, they are a slave,
they forfeited their freedom.
Only the person who risks can be free
I saw this on a wall when I was working in a school today and somehow it just screemed out at me to be posted in SP&L... Discuss
vonhosen said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 12th April 23:38
Ah yes, the control freak at work again
This bears no relationship to the original poem
vonhosen said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
>> Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 12th April 23:38
Shame the government/lawmakers dont have this philosophy, as there are plenty of examples where unwarranted restrictions are placed upon us, typically because some pressure group has got its way.
Although actually I feel its a bit simplistic. Where does tolerance fit into this? Also I am quite prepared for some of my freedoms to be adversely affected for the right reasons, for instance to give greater freedom to children when they need it. Its a complex issue, bad move to try to contain the concept in a single sentence.
vonhosen said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
Agreed, the exception being when those restrictions are over imposed to the effect of restricting my freedom whilst serving no benefit to others.
Your statement would be more accurate if we inserted the words should be in place of are.
deeps said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
Agreed, the exception being when those restrictions are over imposed to the effect of restricting my freedom whilst serving no benefit to others.
Your statement would be more accurate if we inserted the words should be in place of are.
Well put deeps, IMHO we have far too many restrictions which serve no benefit to the wider community but limit the freedom of the individual. Control-freakery seems to have infected a worrying majority of our politicians. (And, of course, the bureaucrats love it)
deeps said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
Agreed, the exception being when those restrictions are over imposed to the effect of restricting my freedom whilst serving no benefit to others.
Your statement would be more accurate if we inserted the words should be in place of are.
Prof Beard said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
Agreed, the exception being when those restrictions are over imposed to the effect of restricting my freedom whilst serving no benefit to others.
Your statement would be more accurate if we inserted the words should be in place of are.
Well put deeps, IMHO we have far too many restrictions which serve no benefit to the wider community but limit the freedom of the individual. Control-freakery seems to have infected a worrying majority of our politicians. (And, of course, the bureaucrats love it)
Whose freedoms were protected by banning certain forms of hunting but not others, for example?
Few of our laws are still about protecting others from the excesses of the odd individual. The good ones still are.
900T-R said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
Agreed, the exception being when those restrictions are over imposed to the effect of restricting my freedom whilst serving no benefit to others.
Your statement would be more accurate if we inserted the words should be in place of are.
Yes, control freakery just doesn't have the "intelligence" to know where to draw the line.
Before someone gets into trouble The poem is called "To Risk" and it's by William Arther Ward.
The full version is reproduced below:
"To laugh is to risk appearing a fool,
To weep is to risk appearing sentimental.
To reach out to another is to risk involvement,
To expose feelings is to risk exposing your true self.
To place your ideas and dreams before a crowd is to risk their loss.
To love is to risk not being loved in return,
To live is to risk dying,
To hope is to risk despair,
To try is to risk failure.
But risks must be taken because the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing.
The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing.
He may avoid suffering and sorrow,
But he cannot learn, feel, change, grow or live.
Chained by his servitude he is a slave who has forfeited all freedom.
Only a person who risks is free.
The pessimist complains about the wind;
The optimist expects it to change;
And the realist adjusts the sails."
The full version is reproduced below:
"To laugh is to risk appearing a fool,
To weep is to risk appearing sentimental.
To reach out to another is to risk involvement,
To expose feelings is to risk exposing your true self.
To place your ideas and dreams before a crowd is to risk their loss.
To love is to risk not being loved in return,
To live is to risk dying,
To hope is to risk despair,
To try is to risk failure.
But risks must be taken because the greatest hazard in life is to risk nothing.
The person who risks nothing, does nothing, has nothing, is nothing.
He may avoid suffering and sorrow,
But he cannot learn, feel, change, grow or live.
Chained by his servitude he is a slave who has forfeited all freedom.
Only a person who risks is free.
The pessimist complains about the wind;
The optimist expects it to change;
And the realist adjusts the sails."
vonhosen said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
The fundamentals of modern law. Although I'm not sure how me putting my foot down a bit on an empty, straight and open piece of road interferes with your or any one else's freedom.
_VTEC_ said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
The fundamentals of modern law. Although I'm not sure how me putting my foot down a bit on an empty, straight and open piece of road interferes with your or any one else's freedom.
Nearly the fundamentals, prior to Bliar and his merry men.
_VTEC_ said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
The fundamentals of modern law. Although I'm not sure how me putting my foot down a bit on an empty, straight and open piece of road interferes with your or any one else's freedom.
...whereas arbitrary speed limits constrain your freedom and mine.
Prosecute reckless endangerment by all means but don't pretend that blanket speed limits protect anyone's freedom.
fluffnik said:
Your freedoms must not adversely affect mine or anyone elses.
As such any restrictions imposed are to balance your freedoms & those of others.
The fundamentals of modern law. Although I'm not sure how me putting my foot down a bit on an empty, straight and open piece of road interferes with your or any one else's freedom.
...whereas arbitrary speed limits constrain your freedom and mine.
Prosecute reckless endangerment by all means but don't pretend that blanket speed limits protect anyone's freedom.
I disagree.
Arbitrary limits are the only "practical" way to strike a balance between those freedoms. What is more up for debate (IMHO), is what each individual limit should be set at for each road.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff