A Challenge
I had an interesting conversation today. It centered around what is wrong with this contry (deliberate typo there) today. A multitude of points were made but I’ll focus on one & issue you with a challenge:
Question everything.
That’s the challenge. Why? Well, today we are run by a governement that appears determined to stop us thinking for ourselves. The powers that be issue an unending ream of rules & regulations that we must follow without questions. We are no longer supposed to apply common sense.
Example: The speed limit is 50 mph. You must not exceed this. I drove down a section of road today that had 2 lanes going up hill, there are junctions & entrances on both sides of the road. There is a bus stop situated in the left hand lane. Then there is a roundabout, the section of road on the other side is also subject to a 50mph speed limit. It is proper dual carriageway, no entrances, no bus stops. Why is it 50mph? Perhaps it should be faster. Perhaps the 1st section should be reduced to 40mph? If we understand why the limits were set, then we can understand if they are right or wrong. So why is the speed limit set as it is? Because the road planners following rules & regulations in order to decide. Or perhaps the road planner thought “This should be 50mph and I will find rules & regulations that support my opinion”. Who knows?
Example: Smoking is not allowed in the front entrance to an office block. Security will tell people off if they dare to smoke in this area. Why is smoking not allowed? Perhaps to stop non-smokers having to fight their way through a crowd of dirty tabbers on their way into the office? So is it an issue to smoke there on a Sunday morning at 2am? Perhaps common sense should be applied?
Example: The MOT test was created to ensure vehicles were roadworthy. The rule: Every vehicle must have a valid MOT certificate. But the certificate itself only proves that the vehicle was roadworthy on a specific date. If you are caught by the police without a valid MOT but with a roadworthy car - should you be penalised? Why is the law blindly applying rules to a symptom rather than the problem itself? If only someone has questioned the “wisdom” used when creating this rule.
Example: A new law was passed recently forbidding images of “extreme sex”. If only someone had asked the question “What is extreme sex?”. Now we have a mass of confusion - the only advice so far seems to be “If it was illegal under the Obscene Pulication Act then it will be considered extreme sex.” So why did we need to createyet another law then?
Rules always have an exception. By questioning the reason for a rule we can apply common sense as to whether to abide by it or not…or we can make more and more rules to allow for every possible exception, but how will we remember so many?
Perhaps the answer is to Question Everything - and to encourage those that blindly quote rules to do the same.
Or of course, to move to another country that has a government that rules for its citizens rather than its own agenda. One that considers its citizens to be the masters, not the politicians. Wouldn’t that be a novelty eh?
