I live in a world without legal fireworks.

i'd say get used to it, but i can see your point.

besides, i just go to my nation's capitol for my fireworks, porn and opium.

-:-
Drink Ninja.

its a disease of modern society ...............slight risk ............ban it
didnt you know all people are totally irresponsible to the point that all polititians cannot allow us anything lest we do something stupid
maybe they should start with the most dangerous sharp object of all ........................the pen/pencil at a voteing station
after all we voted for these imbeciles that remove all liberties they can in the name of our safety
above applies in many countries from what ive observed when travelling not just uk/usa

I would like to pop in a small opposing view here, though I can understand if you wish to disagree with it.

Though I agree, that by the sounds of it, this new law is being introduced into your city in order to help popularise the cities own firework display, there is something that needs to be pointed out.

You say that to bring this law in is to break your freedom, in this case, your freedom to do reckless things. And yes, you do point out that sometimes fires occur, normally by accident (though at an alarming rate, more and more are being caused delibrately by youths thinking it is funny to fire fireworks at people's property - trust me, Britian suffers these same problems as the US when we get around to November the 5th (Guy Fawkes night otherwise known as Fireworks night - though these days it is Fireworks Fortnight)). And as you correctly point out, the way perhaps we should deal with this is rather than banning, continue with a out moded, outdated system of sueing people, claiming on insurance etc...

But then one has to ask, what about those cases where accidently or delibrately a Firework causes injury or death? And don't pretend it doesn't happen, it most certainly does and with staggering figures. No amount of insurance or taking people for damages will bring a person back to life, or ease the suffering of a firework related injury, either to the person it has afflicted, or their friends and family. Fair enough if it was your own mishandling that caused the injury or death, but what if you had nothing to do with the incident. Were asleep at the time perhaps and didn't hear the fire alarm? Had the firework explode directly through your window? Or directly in your face as you walk down the street? How is it fair that you have your freedom to rob another of their freedom through your recklessness? And how does this make anyone better than those countries where dictators kill people as they see fit, or torture them for amusement if that is how you will treat your freedom by casual disregard for others around?

Yes, fair enough, most people do take precautions and take every measure to ensure their launching of fireworks is done safely. But accidents do happen, so why allow something that increases the likely many fold of such an accident occuring. It's like taking a gun, setting a target up in a street, and shooting at it and then wondering why a stray bullet hit a passer by and feigning that you are free to do it. What happens to the freedom of being able to live in your own home without fear of death or injury?

Don't get me wrong, I like fireworks as much as the next person, even been the one the launch them myself (as responsibly as one can), but as I am getting older, I am realising more and more how our actions can have the potential to afflict others, whether intentional or not (you may also note that I am against this increased 'I will take you to court' attitude that is taking over the world. Small claims businesses, insurance companies and debt management loans are three of the fastest growing businesses in the world - which is kind of a sad statement in itself).

Edited by - Aldebaran28 on 5/24/2006 11:45:38 AM

Well said Aldebaran

I agree with Aldebaran.

In the US, overall sales of fireworks have been climbing up through the roof while accidents have gone down per hundred thousands of pounds sold. This is a misleading statistic because the general rate of injuries has remained steady while the total volume of fireworks sold have climbed up astronomically.

In the time that sales have gone up, there also has been a correspondingly huge increase in professionally conducted fireworks displays in this country. Practically every municipality has at least one annual fireworks event and privately sponsored (with license) public fireworks events are happening more frequently than ever (not to mention rock music performances with pyrotechnics that have ended up causing disastrous deaths and injuries of late).

There are still roughly 5 to 6 thousand injuries to people every year of which just under half are boys between the ages of 9 to 14 years old (big surprise ). Clearly, these are not professionals. And, usually, the injury is to the firework handler himself.

Most injuries are burns. Next most numerous are various blast injuries to hands and fingers. After that are injuries to the eye or other parts of the body which which came in closest contact with the firework.

There also are fires caused by the handling of fireworks by non-professionals (and not just "professionals" ).

Whether an injury to the fireworks handler or a fire caused, these incidents involve the activation of either ambulance services or fire department response teams ... or both.

If a private individual, in pursuit of his god given rights intends to engage in fireworks play and "damn the consequences" so to speak, that private individual also should agree to not engage in calling for an ambulance or the fire department should things go wrong to themselves or to their own property. If, on the other hand, they happen to injure someone else or cause a fire to someone else's property, they should agree to reimburse the city for all of the expenses incurred in sending out ambulances or the fire department and also be prepared to pay up in court when they get sued.

I live in the same world as Ninja.

Here in the desert, the fireworks start brush fires and so, of course, the entire state has banned them. I guess it's reasonable, as anything from a spark up can start a massive fire out here, but it's a shame because I've only gotten to play with them occasionally.

I agree with banning fireworks. Where I live, the week before the 5th of November and for about two weeks afterwards, I'm kept awake late at night by idiots setting off fireworks. People have been known to set schools on fire deliberately with them. Often people will shoot at neighbourhood cats and stray dogs, badly injuring them. The simple fact is, people are generally very stupid and will always do stupid things, keeping dangerous and fire-causing "toys" out of the general public's hands could only improve the craphole that is my country and keep the idiots safe from themselves.

They're fun, sure, but people just either don't know how to handle them properly or simply don't care, and that's not a minority either. I just wish they would hurry up and ban them here.

I lived in Leeds, and it was essentially like Beruit for 2 months around bonfire night. Fireworks going off every night, but not ONE in the sky. They were all fired down the road, at people etc. Leeds came second in a recent survey for the most crime ridden city, but sadly they included all the peaceful little satellite villages surrounding it - otherwise it would have piddled all over Nottingham from a VAST height.

When it comes to September, if you live near student areas (ie, in the city), you don't go out alone at night. The police (every year) carry out a "walk safe" initiative for new students to the city, to ensure that they stay safe until they know what it's like/get experienced in the zone. You aren't going to get assaulted every time you step out - it's not that bad. But it IS bad enough that it's recommended you only go out in pairs or greater groups. I've had mates who have had fireworks put through their letterbox, rockets fired at them, etc. I've seen rockets flying down the road outside our house at all hours of the day, including being fired at small children going home. Every post box (public mail box) in the city has a small slit fitted over it so that fireworks cannot be put into it, and basically for 2 months it sounds and looks like a war zone. Worst still, the fireworks start as a fuse for worse crime. The kids fire fireworks at people, run away etc - but it builds their confidence, and they egg each other on to do one better/more extreme. By the end of the week, those kids aren't letting off fireworks - they are trying to shoot them through open windows, and when they run out - they go around like a lynch mob looking for a victim to mug/attack. It gives them an addrenaline rush that they will have to turn to more confrontational/violent methods to repeat once out of the ammo, there is no small conicidence that crimes peak around this time of year...

Now i am back in the country, fireworks happen ONCE per year, and nothing untoward happens either. The children love watching them, and the atmosphere is nice.

It's sad that such a ruling would stop all the good for the rest of the country, but to be honest - I've seen exactly what fireworks do when sold on the street (even with age limit of 18, the 12-15 year olds get them with ease), and would support such a bill in the UK. It may stifle the odd enjoyable evening for me, but by god, there are thousands of innocent law abiding citizens who would sleep a lot easier and more peacefully in every city in the UK - and for that, I can make a small sacrifice.

*swift kicks all around*

justice is outmoded aldebaran? well, i guess i'm a fossil then.i believe in the legal system,criminal and civil. it works, like firearm possession in the US, because the vast majority of people are good and don't go looking for people to maim and kill - and if you believe otherwise you likely support a full ban on pointy objects, dangerous chemicals, and breathing.

your argument boils down to liberty for safety. whose liberty for whose safety is the real question - who cares if you can't go hunting anymore, except hunters? who cares if you can't light fireworks, except kids? who cares if you can't smoke in a public building(all of which have ventilated smoking sections i would remind you), except smokers? eventually the Nannies will find something that YOU enjoy, and ban it. and there will be no one left to speak up for you.

@Chips
i know in the UK its pretty much impossible to beat a kid black and blue & get away with it, but i think around here the police would look the other way considering the circumstances;namely that they are little bastards that need their ears boxed because their parents won't do it.

i think every time someone kills or injures themselves doing something stupid its a boon to the human race - our genepool cannot afford a surplus of stupid people when the progress of technological advance makes self extermination easier.and people who are affected by someone elses stupid actions? such is the risk we must accept for living in freedom.life is dangerous, end of lesson. and where the #$&$@! are your bobbies? they should be in the street with rubber bullets based on your description.

i am(i believe) a good person,and i believe in giving everyone(excluding past offenders) the benefit of the doubt.that extends to firearms, knives, fireworks, automobiles, motorcycles, in-ground swimming pools, and any other number of items with limited potential for fatality and injury. i would rather live in fear for my life than to live in a child-proofed world where no harm could possibly come to me.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." --Thomas Jefferson

The Philosophy of Liberty

Edited by - Cold_Void on 5/25/2006 3:39:48 AM

Don't get me wrong Cold_Void, I am not against the freedom of people to do reckless things where it puts themselves in danger. If someone wants to go base jumping, parachuting, bungee jumping, smoke (the arguement of passive smoking aside a moment), sticking their head in a blender etc.... then that is their is their choice and they should have the freedom to make that choice. What I am against is those who take on activites that run a high risk of removing anothers freedom. Fireworks is one of the biggest cases of this, because, quite frankly, it is not a self-contained activity. Forget the criminal implications of it going into the wrong hands (though there is a big arguement against fireworks simply on this matter), what you are doing is launching a volatile (and sometimes unpredictable) explosive into a public area. Even if you launch it in your back garden, typically the firework will arc over neighbouring buildings and thus you basically launching a bomb into the general public.

How can you sit there and justify to a person who loses a limb, an eye, or even their life by a misfired firework, thats it okay, because it was your freedom to take that risk with their lifes? It's not quite the same arguement as firearms (which is whole different kettle of fish and not worth opening up in this thread - but I do prefer the UK's licensing laws on weaponary compared to the more open policy of the US, it is that law in the US which makes me fearful of ever visiting the states), as what you have is a large group of people intentiionally firing explosives into the neighbourhood while others have to tolerate that their house might be blown up, catch fire, they might get injury or even die because it the other peoples freedom to kill them.

Yeah, great freedom.

And yes, the current justice systems throughout the world, are in my mind, very much outmoded, outdated and inefficient (I have witnessed and still am witnessing this first hand) along with a lot of government run institutions. But that is a matter not really on topic here for this discussion.

Edited by - Aldebaran28 on 5/25/2006 3:49:13 AM

i think i would tell that person that 1.i'm terribly sorry about shooting you in the eye with a roman candle 2.please please please drop the charges 3.please please please dismiss your civil suit 4.pleeeeassse?

that said, i would never misuse a firework, especially by launching them at people,animals, or in areas where the accumulation of brush makes ignition likely.people who do, or give fireworks to the children that do, should be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible under the law.

now for the reality, emotional arguments aside;
1. 99.4% of fires in the US are not caused by fireworks.
2. children in the US are SIXTY times more likely to be injured by bicycles(i can testify to that, as i've never been injured by a firework but have fallen off more bicycles than i can recount)
3. buckets(yes,buckets)account for TEN times the number of child fatalities

add to these facts that "although consumption of fireworks in the U.S. has increased in recent years from 29 million pounds per year to 80 million pounds per year, the rates of fireworks-related injuries have actually decreased. The injury rate, per 100,000 pounds of fireworks used, dropped from 38.3 in 1976 down to 10.1 in 1995 - a 74% drop in the injury rate."

and in case you find those statistics(which are from the consumer product safety commision cpsc.gov) hard to swallow, i would ask how many of you know someone who has been maimed or burned out of their home by fireworks abusers? then i would ask how many know someone who has been maimed or killed in a car crash.

@ Aldebaran your argument for banning fireworks would make a great argument for banning all forms of motor vehicle for social and pleasure usage as they kill far more
its the people not the item thats the issue in the uk there more people killed by car thieves/joyriders than fireworks
alcohol banned as people get killed in alcohol fuelled fights
barbecues banned also (burn injuries and food poisoning both have caused death)
skiing golf fishing the list is endless of the things that should be banned ,that could prevent a death or two ,but while you are sitting in a padded room in your ivory tower think on one thing what is life without some risk
as for idiots firing them at people and property well thats a police matter
close the shops that sell to underage people like you would if a gun shop sold guns to a kid


if misuse by a minority means that something is banned well say goodbye to air travel,computers,books (youd better burn them),rope,petrol,alcohol,fatfryers,cookers,ladders,and so on all the above kill more either directly or indirectly than fireworks
and thats without even mentioning guns ! oops i just did !


Edited by - [steel on 5/25/2006 6:39:59 AM

Comparing cars to fireworks is hardly a fair cross analysis considering how often cars are used in comparrison to fireworks, besides which, I think there needs to be a general attitude change towards cars as a whole, but that again is another subject for another time (those things are weapons on wheels - the governments need to really invest in better public transport throughout the various countries).

Talking on statistics you say that injuries and deaths have gone down yet firework sales have gone up. Yet you also forget to include mention of increased tightening of firework laws taking the worst fireworks off sale and increases in public safety awareness schemes to do with fireworks (which I fully support), that are the real main contributors to decreasing deaths and injuries.

And yes, it would be ideal that more age monitoring and restriction of premises of selling these items be monitored, but it's a sad fact that this isn't really a reality. The police forces are over stretched as it is, and without significant increases in funding (meaning increased taxation rates) the police will never be effective enough to be tracking down the large proportion of illegal sales. Further more, those who do aquire them under age often get it (or any other substance) normally get an idiot who is old enough to buy them for them and give them to them, which is incredibly hard for shops or police to monitor or prevent. Sadly, there are too many idiots in the worlds today.

And want to talk about some facts: In 2003, there was only 4 deaths (yes, not that many at all) in the states from Fireworks, but there was 9600 injuries and over 24'000 residential fires started by them, costing some 17.9 million dollars in property damage. All this from something that is only used on a couple of days throughout the year.

And yes, if you want a comparrison, the current statistics say over 100 deaths a day occur due to traffic accidents in the states, but also note, this statistic increases around the fourth of july due to either alcohol consumption being involved or people getting distracted by... fireworks. And once again I ask, how many people drive a car in comparrison to launching fireworks (I don't think there is any official figure on this, but common sense tells you that the car drivers far out weigh the fireworks launchers).

Oh how many people do I know have been injured in car accidents and fireworks accidents? One of each is my answer (and the fireworks one was a misfired firework).

And no, I don't agree in this cell padding attitude people can have either, where by we restrict every single thing that might possibly dangerous, but I do believe it is NO humans right to put another human at risk where possible. I see no one has yet answered my question about what right anyone has to rob another of their freedom.

The ideal solution I think would be licenced zones being introduced for fireworks launching, that is away from residential areas, allowing the public to launch their own fireworks in these areas at designated times of the year. This would then be coupled with more effective policing to ensure fireworks aren't finding their ways into the wrong peoples hands (underagers, illegal fireworks or those with a record of abusing fireworks). However, that just isn't going to happen, the governments will not invest in increased policing if it means raising taxes significantly which will lose them voters at the next poll, nor invest in licence areas because of A) the cost of monitoring licenced areas and ensuring they are fit for use and back to Cold Voids original point, it draws away from city's own firework display.

cars have killed 7 people i knew (all seperate incidents) and fireworks havent killed anyone i know
as for injuries cars many fireworks nil
the injury stats and domestic fires are too general figures to be usefull as rubbish bins and singed fingers from sparklers are going to be in there
the value for insurance claims hmm a pittance in per capita terms and ill bet many things "destroyed" were not a firework accident as much as a fraudulent insurance claim
wow 36000 road deaths a year that is higher than i was lead to believe
how many gun deaths ?
as for participants being killed/injured check the skiing (for a relatively harmless sport) stats ,most are caused by another person doing something stupid
as for cars /fireworks i think its a fair comparrison as neither are necessary !

from a law and order point of view ban guns and doughnut shops and the cops will have a lot more time


Edited by - [steel on 5/25/2006 7:33:36 AM