WARNING: Freedom is dangerous!

[KBCraig]

I have to question their methodology if they "took into account laws regulating the use of seatbelts, motorcycle and bicycle helmets, alcohol, tobacco, fireworks, firearms and cell phones while driving", yet ranked NH as the 13th freest state.

http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/654005-196/study-links-freedoms-accidental-deaths.html

Freedoms, unlike men, are not all created equal, and generally speaking, the more less-essential freedoms that people are allowed, the more likely they are to die as a result of an accident.

A University of Massachusetts Lowell study published this month found a link between the number of certain kinds of freedoms that states allow and the rate of deaths by unintentional injury or accidents.

Put more simply, the study suggests that a person is less likely to die in an accident if his or her state has laws governing things like seatbelt and tobacco use.

The study was co-authored by Leland Ackerson, a UMass Lowell Community Health and Sustainability Department professor. It used a ranking created by George Mason University researchers that evaluated a state's level of freedom based on how stringent its laws are about certain behaviors.

The ranking took into account laws regulating the use of seatbelts, motorcycle and bicycle helmets, alcohol, tobacco, fireworks, firearms and cell phones while driving, according to the study.

New Hampshire is ranked the 13th free-est state and had an accidental death rate of 33.7 per 100,000 people in 2006, according to the study.

Alaska had the most lax laws and an accident rate of 51.9 per 100,000. At the other end of the spectrum, Maryland was judged to have the strictest laws and had an accidental death rate of 26.1 per 100,000 people, according to the study.

The gap was wider for the states with the third strictest laws, New York, and third most lenient laws, New Mexico.

New York had an accidental death rate of 25.9 per 100,000 people, and New Mexico's rate was 67.1, according to the study.

In social science circles, the freedom to do things like ride a motorcycle without a helmet or to own a gun are called negative freedoms, Ackerson said.

The designation negative isn't meant to imply that such freedoms are bad, necessarily, just that they're a result of a lack of influence from an outside source, namely, the government.

It also differentiates them from positive freedoms, meaning things like the freedom to pursue "desired opportunities," according to the study.

In concrete terms, a government allows a negative freedom when it allows its people to find, buy and use their own health insurance, or buy no coverage if they so choose or are unable to.

But another way to think about freedom is to consider that 40 million Americans don't have health insurance. A positive freedom might include a public option and giving all citizens the freedom to some amount of health care, Ackerson said.

"It doesn't mean good or bad. It's a different way of thinking about freedom," Ackerson said.

Ackerson and his co-author decided to compare the George Mason freedom scale to accidental death rates because using a state's allowance of negative freedoms struck them as a narrow way to define freedom.

Ackerson, who grew up in New Hampshire, said negative freedoms are important but may pale in comparison to others, like the freedom to live in a country that bans certain behaviors and to raise one's children in a safe environment.

"There are other factors as well, other freedoms that might be more important," he said.

The two types of freedoms, first noted by negative-freedom lover Sir Isaiah Berlin, are not always compatible. For instance, Person A's freedom to not attend school would impinge on Person B's right to live in a functioning democracy, which requires an educated populace.

Not all states with stricter laws had lower accidental death rates. One reason for that is statistical probability, but also social rules can influence behaviors, Ackerson said.

Utah, for example, is 14th most free state and is also quite safe with an accidental death rate of about 30 per 100,000 people, according to the study. One reason may be the influence of the Church of Latter-day Saints, Ackerson said, which prohibits things like drinking.

The accidental death rate also includes deaths that don't necessarily correlate to laws. A drowning death, for instance, would be included in the injury calculation but may not be influenced by the type of laws the George Mason University scale looked at, Ackerson said.

While the study seems to suggest strengthening laws that, at least in New Hampshire, are defended staunchly by personal rights proponents, the authors said they are not "questioning the value of freedom," according to S.V. Subramanian, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of society, human development and health at the Harvard School of Public Health.

"Rather we are pointing out that there are multiple ways to think about freedom. In the end it may make better sense, from a health perspective, to think about freedom as freedom from danger or death," he said, "rather than as freedom to act any way that you like, even if it is unsafe."

The study was published in the American Journal of Public Health, according to UMass Lowell spokesperson Karen Angelo.

[Pat K]

I think the people who did this study should be free
to go Fuck themselves.

Just saying..................

[Ogre]

I'm right there with you, PatK.

Of course, anyone with an ounce of sense would question the value study done by employees of government that has as its only conclusion that more government is good.

[Pat McCotter]

"The average man doesn't want to be free. He wants to be safe." - Henry Louis Mencken

[Free libertarian]

I think the people who did this study should be free
to go Fuck themselves.

Just saying..................

Yes, as long as they are wearing safety glasses and helmets.

[CJS]

I think the people who did this study should be free
to go Fuck themselves.

Just saying..................

Yes, as long as they are wearing safety glasses and helmets.

And condoms !

Article should be up on the Onion's site instead of being taken seriously .

[lildog]

What gets me is they spent money to find out something we already knew.

Darwin pointed this out long before now.

[Russell Kanning]

I think the people who did this study should be free
to go Fuck themselves.

Just saying..................

Yes, as long as they are wearing safety glasses and helmets.

but their freedom to do so might get in the  way of my right not having to see it
would they have the freedom to have free health care provided later?