Safety Rules Will Be The Death Of Us All

No question that what you describe is a classic, ongoing conflict that's not easily resolved. When states debate motorcycle helmet laws, which is a similar issue, opponents take exactly your stance.  Proponents have often times successfully argued that society has an interest requiring you take this safety step, and that the requirement saves the states a lot of money.

The old classic empathy vs selfishness argument

It might save insurance companies a lot of money.  Not sure how it saves the state a lot of money.  Seat belt laws are the same thing.  The state should not be forcing me, as an adult, to wear a seat belt.  Is it the smart thing to do?  Probably in most accident situations, but should I be forced to do it?  Personally, I don't think so.

In the above types of situations, it boils down to government regulating our personal decisions.  IMO, the government should be taking care of national defense and public safety (crimes of one individual or group against another), not issues of personal safety.  Adults should be able to decide that for themselves.  In the case of organizations, like the MLB or colleges, it really comes down to what we are talking about in this thread.  Protecting themselves against lawsuits.  So, they enact a rule that protects an individual from themselves, so they don't get sued.  Crazy!!

So now wanting to have personal freedoms and freedom to make your own decisions is selfish??  And because I choose to make my own decisions, that lacks empathy?  Where is that coming from?

JCG - Great point.  What does the peanut gallery think about seat belts?  Should that be a personal choice or is that gov't overstepping it's bounds.   Everybody has a different line in the sand between personal freedoms and authority (in many forms...gov't, Little League, etc...).  We can moan and groan about it, but the rules or laws or guidelines is mostly well intentioned IMHO.  Whether or not it is effective is left up to the people making those decisions who are ultimately responsible for it.  If people don't like it they can to voice their opinions to try to change it. 

Thankfully, we live in a country that allows us to do that. 

at least for now!!

Yep, until they decide to outlaw that for the "public good".  

Are you familiar with the term "nanny state?" The intellectual giants in government feel they are more intelligent and better suited to make decisions regarding our lives. Here's one of the brighter ones in government ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs23CjIWMgA

The general problem is that you have a bunch of "do gooders" out there who make the argument "if we could save just one life" we should pass this law/regulation.  Most of the time the rule passed would not have prevented the original tragedy. 

What a genus.  Don't get me started. 

We're losing our rights one right after another. I never thought I would have thirty federal agents storming into my house, subdue me to the point I needed hospitalization even though I offered no resistance and tear my house apart over a bad assumption. They're not accountable. The 10k+ in damages done to my house from ripping apart walls was covered by my homeowners. My lawyer said I could sue the government as long as I like the idea of an IRS audit every other year.

They thought I was running a major east coast drug distribution center with illegals working as production and packing workers. Had they spent any time watching my house they would have known nothing was going on in my house. The mistake I made was texting a lifelong friend to find out when he would be in town again. It turned out he was being investigated. He's never been charged.

Actually there are plenty here that don't think the government does have the right to require people to wear seat belts. Interesting questions for sure, but not ones that we'll resolve here on a baseball board, or resolve by cherrypicking a clip to something stupid one obscure congressperson said years ago.  I could post a dozen clips to idiotic statements prominent congresspeople have said within the past month, but I don't think it would serve much of a purpose.

Baseball is like talking about the weather. It  gives us the chance to share common ground with people we differ with on most other issues.

It's too late to save government. It's run amuck. Don't listen to the crap that spews from their mouths. They're nothing but lobbyists in training. 79% of congressmen and senators become lobbyists. They don't represent the people in Washington. They represent themselves in a lobbyist-in-training program. Do what the lobbyists say, eventually become one and make 2-5M per year. Politicians don't leave Washington anymore. They move to K Street. The counties around Washington have become the wealthiest in the country. These Washington entrepreneurs don't create goods and services. They only create red tape and kill the economy.

OMG - classic - "do you have any concerns with the island tipping over"

 "no sir we don’t anticipate that happening" WOW!!

Hope and change boys!

If you take this to it's logical conclusion, government will be in charge of our kids soon.  Happy days are almost here!

What some people don't notice but makes me laugh is the officer keeping a straight face while answering the questions. Can you imagine his off the cuff comments to other officers on the exchange?

I hate wearing a seat belt because I'm somewhat fluffy and the belt is very uncomfortable to wear.  So I refuse to wear seat belts and I think it's a travesty that the government makes it a law that I have to wear one in my own vehicle that I paid for.  What I hate even more are the cars built that "ding" until you buckle your seat belt.  If I know I'm getting into one of those cars I just buckle the belt and then get into the car and sit on top of that.  It's stupid to force people to wear seat belts.

You know what?  I have warmed up my pitcher in HS games because my starting catcher made the last out and whatever reason my backup can't do it.  So I grab a mitt and I go do it.  I don't wear a mask, cup or any other protection and I squat down (getting up is a chore now).  Umpires tell me I can't squat and I tell them I'll be fine.  I'll be fine because I was a catcher in college and I can still do it.  Besides if you try to stand and warm up the pitcher it's harder to catch.  They are throwing at knee level and that's hard to catch but if you squat then it's at eye level.  Makes no sense to force them to stand up.

The top ladder warning you guys were talking about?  Well I've stood on that many times because my ladder was too short and I didn't have access to a taller one.  So my fluffy self just hopped right on up there.

The thing is with all of these is I understand if I get hurt it's my fault - not anyone else's (except for a car wreck could be someone else's fault).  I'm not going to sue if I'm standing on top of a ladder and fall because I should have been smarter.  

Did you also pay for all the roads and the other cars? Also, what about all the people you are taking caring time away from with your preventable injury?

Dear Coach,

We're so very sorry that your overweight condition means that seatbelts cause you mild physical discomfort. Not wanting to infringe upon your precious personal liberies we won't ask you to cut back a bit on the chilidogs and twinkies, but we do insist that you wear your seatbelt when you drive. If you don't, you're far more likely to suffer serious injury or death in a traffic accident, which clogs up our roads, jams up our emergency rooms, and too often causes us to pay your medical bills and support your orphans once you're gone.   Plus we like having you around coaching the kids, paying taxes, posting on the internet, etc. So please -- try to respect the interests of the society you live in and not just your own personal rights --- and buckle up.

Thanks,

Society

I also hate all those freedom-stripping big-brother laws.  But here's what I hate worse :

- The fact that I can't just step over your body while you're lying there writhing in pain with blood squirting out of your head, so that we can just get on with the game.  Unfortunately, the human condition being what it is, it's difficult to just say, "He's a grown-ass man who knew the risks and still decided not to wear a helmet, so let's move on..."

- Insurance costs.  

- The fact that most gooey civil-libertarians, who have exercised their right to eat whatever-the-hell-they-want, don't carry around instructions in their wallet addressed to loved ones saying, "In case I have a heart attack or stroke, I insist you do not use any insured funds or health-care resources to keep me alive.  I have waived that privilege because I didn't like people telling me I can't eat Twinkies, smoke cigarettes, or drink 44oz buckets of sugar"

- The fact that Emergency Responders can't just ask you if "you know it's your fault you got hurt" and then turn around and go home if it was.   Mainly because you would lie right through your teeth about what really happened, anyway.

- People who's imaginations limit them to thinking that big-brother laws must be solely motivated by mis-guided philanthropy and self-serving altruism.

Coach,

To add to JCG's Dear Coach post, I'd like to add that seat belts are there to protect you (and everyone else)  from other idiots in our society.   You may be right about your personal freedoms but there is no reason to die because some teenager was texting or a drunk driver or a deer bounds across the road.  I'd much rather you be wrong and alive than right and dead. 

Please wear your freaking seatbelt and we can argue about this other stuff another day.

Is the answer that there is a panel/board/bureau in the government endowed with the power to mandate some or all the following:

What you eat - Must be healthy

How Much Excercise - Must be healthy

No Smoking, Drinking, Skateboarding, Skiing, diving into pools, trampolining, driving autos except for business, or a 1,000+ other activities because they are dangerous and you could get hurt.

No Alchohol - That worked out great the last time we tried it

No Fighting

No rudeness - Stesses others out and is unhealthy

No privacy - Everyone might be a terrorist

You are sick - It is time to die because the cost to society too keep you alive is too high.

Several of these things are starting to or have happened.  It is wise to be concerned about the growing encroachment of governmental authority. 

After the Constitutional Convention Ben Franklin was asked - What have you done?  His answer: Given you a republic...if you can keep it.  Smart Fella that Ben.

Every regulation/law has a trade off.  Protecting children and obvious risks like batting helmets or catchers gear lead inevitably to more and more reach and that is where an honest debate should happen about the lines and be done without acrimony because honest people can disagree and still find some common ground.

Why are people insisting that someone wears a seatbelt, but are seemingly unwilling to continue a conversation about the laurels of pitch counts and helmets? Aren't they conceptually one and the same, as it pertains to the cause-and-effect of such actions/inactions? 

I'll chime in to try to sway the thread back to this utterly ridiculous OP - if you think pitch counts and helmets are bad for the game, stay the hell away from the game.

I really can't believe that's even being discussed in 2014, but this website sure has had some interesting statements pop up lately.

IMO it has everything to do with common sense and the lack of it today. In fact I think instead of people saying someone has common sense they should say he has uncommon sense. Does that make sense? Probably not.

Common sense would emply that a batting helmet is a very good idea. It doesn't hinder the hitters ability to hit and it provides protection. Common sense would emply that a base coach wearing a helmet would not hinder his ability to coach, while giving him some type of protection. There have been many common sense safety precautions that have helped save lives, reduce injury, and make life a little safer. I remember when cars did not come standard with seat belts. The first time I ever wore a seat belt was when I joined the Police Department. I remember almost everyone said seat belts kill more people than they save. I dont want to be trapped in a burning car. Etc etc. Of course it is clear that the seat belt has save many many lives.

I remember chewing on those yellow pencils in class. The ones with the lead in the paint on the pencil. Most of my pencils ended up brown where I had chewed all the paint off of them. Then someone came out and said "Hey stop making those pencils with lead in the paint on them because kids are eating lead."

As a parent I have to decide what is safe and what is not for my kids around the house and when I am with them. Swing on that rope over the creek and back or not? Is the risk worth the reward? Needless to say like me my boys had their share of stitches, bumps and bruises. And I hope I made some good common sense decisions along the way as well. We can't eliminate all the risk in sports. Not and have a game we want to play coach and watch. But when common sense is or in todays world uncommon sense can be applied to limit that risk it only makes common sense to do it.

I hope this post explains my position on this topic. If not I understand. I stuggle with common sense. Or is it uncommon sense? I am confused now. What's new.  

I'm not declaring "my" higher intelligence, I'm declaring what science and research - over the last half-century - has proven. Pitch counts and protective helmets are good. They provide safety, for people of all ages involved in the game. Debating this is to ignore fact. And, yes, I strongly feel that if someone chooses to ignore such facts then they shouldn't be responsible for the well-being of individuals that are directly impacted by the results of these facts.

I don't "know" more than other people. I just listen to facts. Pitch counts and protective helmets being beneficial are facts that have been proven. I simply can't grasp the concept of arguing this.

If you feel that my intentions are to declare higher intelligence, then I'm sorry I misled you. If you feel that my following of research and science lessens my integrity…that, I can't change.

If "pitch counts are proven", then why are injuries and TJ surgeries on the rise?

I think we are miles from saying ahem 'the science is settled'.

It is impossible to prove injuries are on the rise, given the lack of empirical data from the past.

However, it has been proven (and shared here, via many links to interviews and studies with/from folks from ASMI, including Dr. James Andrews) that part of the reason why surgeries are on the rise is because of overuse in youth baseball. A direct preventative measure for this is pitch counts.

I couldn't agree more that we are far from where we need to be pertaining to the scientific study of health and safety in the game. But to ignore the advances already made?

Pitch counts have been implemented in youth ball for years now.  Injuries are still on the rise.  Pitch counts aren't working.

They're also not working in ML ball.

Is it time to question the 'science'? 

Coach May - Your spot on.  "Common Sense" is not as "common" as everyone thinks it is. 

Really? This argument still happens? 

Please provide proof of this. Until then, I will stick with the 'science'.

Pitch counts are not working in youth ball?   That's a heck of a blanket statement.  Prove it, please.  Or at least be more specific.

edit to say looks like JH had posted while I was typing.  So I'll add this to my question:  only LL has meaningful pitch count rules, and  elite LL players typically leave LL after they finish their 12U seasons. After that, there are no pitch count rules, only meaningless innings pitched rules. And there are no rules at all, even at 12u and younger, about pitching for multiple teams at the same time.  So please tell us specifically how those pitch count rules are not working and what questions you have about the 'science'?

It can't be proven, because it's wrong. 

Gosh, that sounds so familiar.  I know I've heard it before, about something else.   Hmmmm........

Really? People have discredited scientific findings, without having any proof at all of their own positions? They just decided 'it's not true' with no facts and stuck to their convictions as is without putting the time in to research the topic? That's happened in the past? Wow. If that's the case, wouldn't people learn from that and adapt from their experiences?

I am old enough to remember when Tommy John had the Tommy John surgery.  It was considered a break through that would save and extend the pitching careers of guys that in the previous 100 years would have been through because of "dead arms" or "sore arms" etc.

So when someone can define how many thousands of pitchers went through the ranks of HS, College and Pro Ball from 1870 to 1978 that had to leave the game because of all of the undiagnosed arm and shoulder maladies as a percentage of pitchers that did not then there would be a "scientific" basis for arguing the old approach.  When baseball was king there were 7 or 8 minor league teams in every system.  That meant plenty of arms and I would find it hard to believe with a vast pool of cheap disposable labor that the MLB clubs cared about a Rookie ball guy that suddenly lost his stuff.  Just move on to the next guy.  Club was out a small signing bonus.  We'll sell that many hot dogs at the next game.  I'll bet every year there were 50-100 washouts from arm problems in pro ball in the 30's, 40s and 50's when there were several hundred  minor league teams across the county

Pitching is an injury risk. Ways to prevent injury are determined by scientific research and shared by those conducting such research. To ignore it is to increase the risk of injury. Just as I can judge someone for not wearing a seatbelt (which is an example that, again, has nothing to do with the ridiculous original post in this thread), I can judge someone for ignoring fact from scientific research.

I'm not arguing a person's right to decide for themselves, I'm arguing the intelligence with which such opinions are formed. Ignoring the safety benefits of pitch counts and protective helmets is something I cannot deem to be intelligent, and will speak my mind as such.

Saying that pitch counts and protective helmets are stupid is, in my opinion and in the opinion of science, stupid in and of itself.

Bballman, you feel that not wearing  seatbelt should be your own personal choice. It's a classic libertarian stance.  The non-libertarian argument is that diving on public roads is a privilege, not a right, and that the governments that provide those roads, bridges, and other infrastructure have the right to regulate such things as speed limits, car safety features,  and the use of such safety equipment. As noted in my reply to Coach earlier, government has an interest in keeping you safe because it doesn't just affect you -  it costs all of us a lot of money when you get hurt and/or die.  It used to be that Republicans and Democrats agreed on that, but now with a Libertarian becoming a leading presidential contender, who knows... maybe you'll get your chance to stop wearing seat belts.  But I sure hope not, because I believe that while your individual rights are very important, society as a whole has rights as well.