(10-07-2019 01:48 PM)e-parade Wrote: (10-07-2019 01:20 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote: They could have just advised everyone to wear bug spray.
This is ridiculously stupid.
There is a local to New England heightened level of threat. Rather than do nothing and potentially risk exposure to thousands of people (bug spray doesn't mean they all go away, and if everyone wears it they'll still get through), they did literally the bare minimum by moving a game that wasn't going to be watched by many people anyway.
This would be like saying "there's a cobra in the office. No one has been bitten yet and we doubt it'll go out of its way to bite people. We're just going to have everyone go in today and tell them to just stay away from it."
Stupid is a bit harsh for the right of free people to make a choice. The problem with Nanny State hysteria is that 7 cases in a population base of a couple of million is still statistically small. It's not great enough to prevent the FDA from approving pharmaceuticals, but it would require a warning.
In this case a warning would have been sufficient for a free people to make an informed decision and to accept the consequences of them.
When fear of a remote possibility becomes a justification for the stoppage or altering of major societal events the attendance of which should be left up to the individual then the state, or city, or county, has overstepped its authority.
Now if a terrorist threat is made against the stadium that's a different matter, but one that requires immediate evaluation in advance of the event and heightened security.
If ebola breaks out, or a strain of influenza that is lethal and highly contagious, that's a different matter.
But this is a classic overreaction to a relatively minor health threat that requires no more than a warning.
The only justification for the movement of the game is another fear, fear of liability by the University. And I've seen the overreaction on that account at many schools. And I don't blame that on anything but lawyers. Fear of lawsuit has led to a long list of inconveniences that arise when those who are fearful of litigation erect barriers to enjoyment of life. It's my life, I prefer to assess my own risks. I also prefer to enjoy life, rather than to live in constant fear of remote threats.
Last year 1% of the population of the U.S.A. died in highway accidents. That's far less random than mosquitoes but much more deadly to the general population. Yet we still sell cars, and getting a driver's license is much easier than it was 50 to 60 years ago when you were forced to take a ride with a State Patrolman in an automobile with a standard transmission, which you had to start on hill, operate in normal traffic conditions, and parallel park. My daughters had to drive around the license facility and park between two orange cones. I was appalled.
But this is yet another giant step into the lunacy that now reigns supreme.
The stupidity is in the overreaction to such a nebulous threat when you do things everyday which are far more likely to take your life. I think it's past time you considered "The pursuit of happiness" as juxtaposed against the backdrop of the Nanny State and an overly litigious society. I still like New Hampshire's motto. "Live free or die!"