ANTIMETHEUS
The Slippery Slope (Fiction)
© 2003 by Rocky Frisco
Letters to the Editor, clipped from the paper over a forty year period:
Dear Editor,
Now, they say the little Austin Mini Coopers I love so much can’t be brought into the country any more because they aren’t as “crash-worthy” (what an ironically appropriate term) as most of the chrome-trimmed tanks lumbering around on our streets and highways these days. Who decided those damned idiots in Washington, D.C. were my Mama and Papa? That’s what I’d like to know. I’m 42 years old and I resent being treated like a child by anybody or any organization. A Mini is still a hell of a lot safer than a motorcycle; why should we be denied our chosen mode of transportation when it doesn’t endanger anybody else?
-Hopping Mad
Dear Editor,
Now they have outlawed all “offensive weapons,” so no law-abiding citizen can legally possess guns or knives or clubs. Well, it might have seemed like a good idea at the time, but these new hammers are ridiculous and what passes for scissors these days would have set the invention of sewing back thousands of years. It seems to me all of these laws are just a way of confirming that people are corrupt trash who can’t be trusted, that therefore all power must be concentrated in a strong central government made up, if you think about it, of people we are just supposed to trust to not prove to be the same kind of corrupt trash as everybody else, except they have the absolute power to dictate other people’s behavior, which is pretty scary if you ask me. I think the things we are trying to be protected from are not even close to being as dangerous as people in governments can be with this kind of power. All of our tools have to have blunt edges and padding now, even if it makes them much more dangerous to use. What will they take away next, our lighters and matches?
-Worried
Dear Editor,
I have been carefully following the debate over the bill to outlaw matches and I want to add my voice to those courageous citizens who are willing to suffer a little inconvenience in order to save lives and keep mischief out of the hands of criminals and delinquents. Why is it necessary for any modern person to have a handy means for making fire, literally for setting fire to things? Now that tobacco is finally as illegal as marihuana and crack, and “cigarette lighters” are banned in the United States and most of the Free World, what would a peaceful, law-abiding person want with matches anyway? I realize there sometimes appear to be legitimate reasons for a person to make fire, but most of those are examples of atavistic behavior. Even in these modern times, some misguided souls still use natural gas to heat their homes and cook their food. So far, they still have the right to do so, but those of us who saw, right away, the safety and cleanliness of electric heat and cooking have already converted our homes and businesses and invested in electric company stock, so I also strongly support the bill they are introducing that outlaws an open fire anywhere within 500 feet of the walls of a dwelling or school, which will mean that everybody will have to convert to electric and nobody will be asphyxiated or exploded ever again from a gas leak and there will be a projected 43.5 per cent less house fires related to heating systems. Welders have their flint lighters; these should be allowed, but carefully regulated. Since a person with a welding torch and a lighter-device can set fire to just about anything in the world, including lots of things you could never light with a lighter or matches, I think that people who use them, as all others who have legitimate reasons for possessing fire-making equipment, should be subject to mandatory anti-pyromaniac training and be licensed and bonded, similarly to licensed armed guards and the holders of concealed-carry weapons permits were back when weapons were still allowed outside the military.
If this can save even one life, it will easily be worth the small sacrifice of inconvenience some of us may suffer, but since even burning leaves is already illegal, I don’t think anybody ever really has a legitimate cause for starting a fire except as part of their job or maybe a campfire while on vacation and we can have special permits and training courses for that. If the deviates and criminals who smoke both kinds of cigarettes become even more clearly labeled as criminals and deviates because of their illegal use and possession of the means for making fire, why should a free American citizen care about that? I urge all right-thinking voters to support the referendum that will free us forever from the tragedy of the hundreds of fires annually caused by matches.
-Signed, One who loves Mankind.
Dear Editor,
Well, first of all, congratulations on your successful impersonation of a member of the Press. You have once again sat quietly by the side of the carnage while the liberty of Mankind has been savagely raped and murdered at your feet. Now we witness the terminal irony, as we relinquish the ability to create and control the power of fire, that which has been said to elevate us above (or at least separate from) the other creatures of our planet. The final insult? Today, the Supreme Court of The United States of America decided that it is Constitutional for otherwise law-abiding citizens to be imprisoned for no worse infraction than possession of the means to easily produce fire. The rationale seems to be that this is well in line with the standards we have come to expect from Federal Law Enforcement since the advent of the War on Drugs.
This is cold comfort indeed to Clarissa Seymour, 67, who has had her appeal denied by this decision. Clarissa will now be going into a Federal Penitentiary to serve the lion’s share of her twenty year sentence (if she lives that long) for possessing an old Bic lighter, half-filled with fluid, forgotten at the bottom of her late husband’s tackle box, which lay, misplaced, behind the spare tire of his old pickup, parked, choked with weeds, behind the barn of their rural dwelling. One of the Justices of the Court confided off the record that it was too bad about Clarissa, but it had been felt that it was necessary to “send a message” to show how seriously the people of the nation take the laws against violence.
This is totally unfair. I think we should never punish a person for doing something that isn’t really wrong. Let real justice be done. Clarissa Seymour should be released and apologized to, while the people who smoke marijuana and tobacco and eat illegal fatty foods should all be put to death. How long will we be satisfied with half-measures?
-A Concerned Citizen
Dear Editor,
Your recent article on the history of Man’s relationship with fire contained a description of the ancient primitive methods of making fire, using only the sort of materials found in nature. I don’t think I have ever been so angry in my life. How could a respected journalist such as yourself perpetrate such an evil, twisted act? I was delighted to learn that this afternoon in court you were found guilty of a mortal infraction of the total ban on firemaking materials, since the information you provided puts these deadly tools in the hands of every degenerate in the country and makes a mockery of the national laws against possession of lighters, matches and all other unlicensed fire-making materials. We are overjoyed to know you will be reading this where you belong, on death row, with less than a week left to live. Freedom of speech is a grave responsibility. You misused it to put deadly technology in the hands of those without the wisdom to possess it, therefore society is exacting the maximum penalty. Thus, we retain our freedom from violence and irresponsible communication.
-Sign Me Good Riddance
"LIFE IMITATES ART" Department: (from Rational Review News Daily February 16, 2005)
Next on no-fly list: Lighters, matches
from USA Today
"Airline passengers will no longer be allowed to bring lighters or
matches on planes under a new U.S. security policy expected to go into
effect within two months. The ban will require federal screeners to
confiscate lighters and matches from passengers trying to take them
through security. The policy could force airports to halt smoking in
restaurants and lounges located beyond checkpoints. 'We may be forced
to do that,' said Ian Redhead of the Airports Council International,
an association that represents airport owners and operators around the
world." (02/15/05)
http://tinyurl.com/6tjjk
mail to The Webmaster