How dare I presume that considerate and competent folks such as yourselves could ever possibly, for even the most vanishingly rare hypothetical but not entirely unheard-of reason, be in less than utterly conscious and completely safe and entirely harmless control of the massive piece of metal machinery that is rapidly approaching me, or have any doubts about whether your foot will connect with the brake pedal in time to avoid hitting me?
Why, I’ve been treating you all as Potential Vehicular Homiciders all this time, and it’s just not fair! From now on I’m going to do the decent thing and just walk across the road without even looking. I know that I’ll be totally safe, because what could possibly go wrong with you (and you, and you) behind the wheel?
I’m also flabbergasted that at one time I thought enrolling in a defensive driving course might be a sensible risk-management idea. How flagrantly insulting to my fellow road-users would that be, constantly being in a deliberately fostered state of relaxed-but-vigilant awareness about what might go wrong at any moment, prejudging fellow drivers as potential dangers to my safety on the road? I mean, that would be unjustifiably prejudging them as a potential threats! Totally fucked in the head, right? Don’t get me started on random breath testing, the bastards.
I also wish to express my solidarity in outrage with every single shopper who walks into a store with a CC-TV camera recording their every move. How dare they assume that we might just possibly be potential shoplifters?
Also, all you students whose schools automatically run your essay papers through a database to check for possible plagiarism – how appallingly and unbearably insulting is that?
As for those fascists who want me to put my (well, I could have one some day) dog on a leash near the toddler’s playground, apparently “just in case” my dog is not as friendly as I think it is, well…hanging’s too good for them. Obviously.
I know that all these systems claim to only be necessary because some people take advantage of other people’s natural desire to trust in the goodwill of others to gain unfairt advantage or get away with harming/traumatising others in some reckless/negligent/wanton/callous/sadistic pattern, but obviously that can’t be right. There’s got to be some secretly hateful intersecting agenda that is squarely aimed at making all drivers everywhere feel shame for your natural road-user impulses underlying it all, really. You know it makes sense.
And I guess we’ll just have to respectfully disagree on whether or not the burden should be on me to prove my innocence. To me, that’s like saying I must prove to stores that I’m not a thief (I’m not), that I must prove to my teachers that I’m not a plagiarist (I’m not), and that I must prove to casinos that I’m not counting cards (I’m not, I suck at math).
It was pointed out that stores, teachers and casinos do, in fact, all have systems in place that monitor *everybody* for shoplifting, plagiarism and card-counting, respectively. It’s part of their explicit contract with their clientele. Why doesn’t he find this just as offensive a prejudgment of his character? Apparently it’s just “different”.