The Connecticut legislature is
back in session, saving us from ourselves (and each other). And the collection of proposed bills this
session, numbering in the hundreds, includes many that would affect our state’s
transportation laws.
Once again lawmakers are debating our state’s “open container” law as Connecticut is one of only 10 states where it is legal for a passenger in a car to have an open can of beer, hard cider or even a bottle of Jack Daniels as the vehicle drives along. Of course, the driver would never be drinking, just the passengers… so that would keep us all safe, right?
At the same time, some lawmakers
want to extend the pandemic-Happy
Hour law to keep allowing “To Go” drinks from bars
and restaurants. That makes sense too, eh? Let’s all keep partying after staggering out
of the bar onto the streets or into our cars?
And of course there’s the
annual battle to make booze even cheaper and more available by allowing wine
sales in grocery stores, not just our state’s 1200
package stores… an idea popular with consumers but not liquor store owners.
Is it just me, or all these bills
sending mixed messages?
While the CDOT’s “Vision
Zero” program tries to stop the carnage on our
highways, lawmakers seem to be heeding constituents’ cries to allow them to stay
high on the highways.
You’ve seen the stats on
highway and pedestrian deaths, soaring to 40-year highs. And lawmakers too have felt the pain of this
roadway slaughter with the recent death of State Rep Quentin “Q” Williams in a
wrong-way driver crash on Rt 9 after he left Governor Lamont’s inaugural ball. (By the way… where are the toxicology reports
on that crash’s two victims? Why is it
taking so long to find out who had what in their bloodstream?)
But the most interesting bill of all is one submitted by Senate President Martin Looney regarding unhelmeted motorcyclists who die in traffic accidents: Looney wants their organs harvested without their permission.
Looney received a kidney
transplant in 2016 from a donor, which is admirable. But to start dissecting corpses of motorcycle
riders because they were not wearing helmets seems a bit extreme.
The motorcycle lobby points
out that this would violate
the rights of those whose religious beliefs prevent organ
donation. Even New England Donor Services,
which runs the New England Organ Bank, seems skeptical.
While the Looney bill
certainly raises awareness of the need for more organ donations, does he really
think this plan would incentivize bikers to play safe and wear head protection? Or is this just a way of finding more, badly
needed organs for transplants?
I have a corollary bill to
suggest:
Each time a truck collides
with a bridge on our parkways, the truck’s contents should be up for grabs for
the first scavengers and looters who can reach the rig… unless they have open
containers of alcohol in their cars.
No comments:
Post a Comment