Please follow the link to watch the show on BBC’s IPlayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00s1vxf/The_Big_Questions_Series_3_Episode_14/
(Skip to about 44:00 min)
Unfortunately it looks like Chris was surrounded by a very emotional audience...
PS: try and spot the woman claiming to be libertarian and supporting an almost outright ban on drink driving. :)
8 comments:
Here's a direct link to the the segment:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00s1vxf/The_Big_Questions_Series_3_Episode_14/?t=43m55s
It's amazingly difficult for people to engage in a rational discussion of emotive topics, and this 'debate' was a good reminder of what we're up against.
At one point, Carole Whittingham of the Campaign Against Drinking & Driving seemed close to tears.
Her son was killed by a driver who was "only just over the drink drive limit", driving on the wrong side of the road at 80 miles an hour in a 30 zone. However much we may sympathise with her loss, we have to recognise that she's blinded by it.
Her son was killed by a dangerous idiot; the alcohol was incidental. Sensible people manage to drive perfectly safely at just under the current limit, and just over it.
I too chuckled when the representative from BMA declared herself to be libertarian.
For a truly libertarian perspective on the issue, try Lew Rockwell's article.
Hopefully we'll see a write-up from the Devil in due course.
Well put SP, you've covered much of what I was going to say.
It's absurd that one of the panel talked of instant death if you have just one pint with a meal in a country pub. This is the problem we have, whereby a closed minded public's instant fall back position when faced with reasonable debate is to resort to hyperbole and extremes.
It was also telling that when the true fact of kids being a massive distraction in cars was raised, the reaction was vitriolic. Eliminate all risk ... as long as it's something which won't affect me. ;-)
The point about kids was not given the attention it deserved. The whole approach to this is wrong, we're measuring a narrow cause because we can measure it biologically and statistically, we should be punishing dangerous risk takers whenever there is evidence that dangerous risky things happened.
Frankly a mother who gets in a car with children she knows she can't control is a greater danger than than man who drives after one pint of pale ale, with his meal, he knows he can handle. To believe otherwise is just ridiculous, social utility be damned.
Bella for President.
Simon
I am glad that Chris was able to get on the show and was soo pleased to see "Libertarian Party" under his name when the discussion begun...
But unfortunately the audience was not one ready for rational discussion... and I do not simply say that because I support Chris' arguments.
Clearly a woman who had lost a son to drink driving will be emotional beyond most.
The point made about children being a distraction was PERFECT...
but shot down emotionally by the New Statesman writter with "are you seriously comparing children to intoxication?!?!"
The idea that 5% was "5% too much" according to the vicar. What about the 30ish% which occur from disctractions... surely thats "30ish more than 5% too much?!?!" :)
The guy who brought in Utilitarianism... WTF?!
getting rid of the deaths from distractions would be far more utilitarian than clamping down on drink driving.. but he failed to spot this.
The truth is this:
Drink driving will get the bad press because it can be emotionally jumped upon.
A mother who ran someone over because her child distracted her? well... its not that same as some drunk driver is it?! it doesn't look as bad...
but at the end of it all a death is a death.
(Not getting into the philosophical arguements of what "crime" is actually being commited)
Poor DK looked absolutely terrified. O_O
If I wanted to be finicky, then his opening statement was a little unstructured and his argument -- whilst convincing for a rational person -- wasn't terribly suitable for an audience packed with emotive single mothers.
With that said, he handled it fantastically, and came across as a mature and rational debater. I look forward to seeing him on the Daily Politics this Wednesday. :D
Is he going to be on the daily politics this Wednesday?
My thoughts
http://www.boatangdemetriou.com/2010/04/chris-mounseys-dks-appearance-on-big.html
cheers
JD
It's all very well to quote figures but where is the evidence to back these figures up.
Incidentally more people are killed by sober drivers
Post a Comment