Monday , May 25 2020
Home / Eric Peters /The Bill of Safety?

The Bill of Safety?

Summary:
Will Americans resist being forcibly vaccinated? The worry is that most Americans have already accepted being force-vaccinated . . . in principle. They did so more than 30 years ago, long before WuFlu Fever – when they accepted being ordered to wear a seatbelt/helmet and to show “papers” on demand – but without probable cause – at “checkpoints.” They endorsed it when they amen’d forcing people to buy car (and then health) insurance. When they accepted the government telling them they would no longer be permitted to buy new cars that didn’t meet government’s “bumper impact” standards. Told they would have to buy air bags – and didn’t rise in outrage. They gave their implied consent when they didn’t object to their “consent” being

Topics:
Eric Peters considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Tyler Durden writes Get Ready For Disinfected Dice As Vegas Plans Reopening 

Wolf Richter writes Hertz Bankruptcy Threatens to Make Mess of Used-Vehicle Prices with Burst of Pent-Up Supply

Tyler Durden writes China Sets Yuan Fix At Weakest Since 2008

Tyler Durden writes Dreaming Of Visiting Japan? The Government Might Pay Half Your Expenses To Jumpstart Tourism

Will Americans resist being forcibly vaccinated?

The worry is that most Americans have already accepted being force-vaccinated . . . in principle. They did so more than 30 years ago, long before WuFlu Fever – when they accepted being ordered to wear a seatbelt/helmet and to show “papers” on demand – but without probable cause – at “checkpoints.”

They endorsed it when they amen’d forcing people to buy car (and then health) insurance. When they accepted the government telling them they would no longer be permitted to buy new cars that didn’t meet government’s “bumper impact” standards.

Told they would have to buy air bags – and didn’t rise in outrage.

They gave their implied consent when they didn’t object to their “consent” being implied … when they accepted being forced to assume the degrading I surrender pose at airports and – even more degrading – spread their legs and let a government worker run his hands around their privates. Around the privates of their wives and children.

All these things are based on the same thing – the principle that it’s the legitimate business of government to impose “safety” (however defined by the government) as opposed to respecting and protecting people’s rights.

Which includes the fundamental right – now largely former – of the individual human being to weigh and assume a risk that strikes him (irrespective of what other people think) as remote in relation to the benefit he believes he’ll enjoy by assuming that risk.

This was the essence of the whole pioneer thing that built the country – without which it never would have been built. People in Europe weighed the risk of a months’ long ocean passage in a tiny, often leaky wooden ship, which might not make it – for the sake of hopefully getting to a new country where they would be free, at last, of being told what they could and could not do.

There was no “safety” in this – irritated Indians in the woods, the very real possibility you might freeze or starve to death – and maybe even get sick – but the rewards were potentially tremendous. So tremendous, that people took all those risks – which they could, because there wasn’t yet a government that told them it wasn’t . . . “safe.”

Now, there is. And it’s becoming impossible – illegal – to do anything.

And we are subjected to everything – in the name of “safety.” This will almost axiomatically include forced vaccinations, step right up (and bayonet in your backside). Because vaccinations will – they will say – keep us safe. And safety is everything. Justifies anything. There is no limit to what is necessary to keep us safe.

I’ve been trying to get this point across for decades. People accused me of exaggerating; that “buckling up” is really no big deal. Well, it is a big deal – if you don’t like the idea of being parented – and vaccinated – by the government.

The only way out of this is to reject the principle that it is the rightful business of government to impose “safety” on anyone – rather than respect and protect everyone’s rights. These two things are mutually exclusive things – which is why “safety” has been pushed for these past several decades as the means of getting rid of our rights. Though of course it is not put quite that way.

But the facts – the results – speak for themselves.

Eric Peters
Eric Peters is a freelance car/bike/political columnist. He escaped the corporate-owned media Big Boys years ago. Without the censorship of the corporate tools

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *