Originally Posted by Snowolf
Dude, not once did I call you any names, not once was I disrespectful to you, not once did I suggest that you were a control freak, a Fascist or any other term that you are CHOOSING TO OWN. I specifically said "is typically" to be sure I was NOT stereotyping everyone. The point is that a majority of people in this camp are this way. I never suggested that you were and was explaining MY position. It was YOU who derided my position by the way. Not only that, but I have NOT called any member of this forum Fascists or control freaks and have used those terms in the general sense; again suggesting that those types exist within the broader group. I have been very careful in choosing my words in this regard. You are taking ownership of these terms voluntarily when all I have ever done is ASK you pointed questions and stated my reasons for not supporting the regulations being discussed. The points I raised were designed to get you the think harder about the unforseen side effects of that which you advocate. I even credited you with having "best intentions". So, what this boils down to is you are offended because not only do I not change my position and agree with yours, but I have the unmittigated gall to argue my position. So, you have an emotional outburst and turn it personal and for added effect suggest that because I am an admin, I am not free to engage in debate, then take your ball and go home.
This is all on you pal.
Yeah, whatever you say, dude. Good luck in your "Orwellian nightmare" of having to wear a helmet while you snowboard. Oh, the horror.
And for what it's worth, you don't even know what fascism is. A helmet law in this country would come in one of two ways: capitalism and representative democracy.
Capitalism, in that a private resort chooses to impose a helmet requirement because they believe it's in their best financial interest to do so.
Representative democracy in that the elected representatives decide to legislate the issue, having been duly and properly elected by their constituents. They don't BAN snowboarding. They simply regulate it to make it safer. And if those constituents feel that their elected officials did a poor job, they have the ability to vote for someone else in the next term.
Two ways, neither of which is fascist. You simply use the term as hyperbole. A scare tactic. "Sit idly by while helmet laws get made and one day you won't be able to snowboard at all." That's your argument. And it's the same argument people made when seatbelt laws first happened. "Sit idly by while seatbelt laws get made and one day you won't be able to drive." How'd that work out?
It's bullshit paranoia, nothing more.