Response to column appearing in Worcester Telegram
http://www.telegram.com/sports/gearan3.html
Once again, someone who hasn't the slightest clue about auto racing
decides to pass moral judgement and ask for government protection for
motorsports participants.
This column was peppered with innuendos and thinly disguised bigotry
against motorsports participants and fans while showing his total lack of
respect for people who reside somewhat south of Worcester, Massachusetts.
His constant use of the terms "redneck" and "good 'ol boys" clarifies
exactly where his elitist bias lies.
To the author, I say, what part of life's risks are allowable in your
view? Is it OK for football players to risk life and limb on the playing
field? Would you like to ban mountain climbers from taking on Mt. Everest
because they might freeze to death in a snowstorm? Would the writer like
to shut down ski resorts because speeding skiers could come in contact
with rocks and trees? Perhaps bicyclists should be banned from the road
since they could get hit by a car? Maybe we should all take mass transit
because commuting in your car is sure dangerous. Oh, and let's pull the
bathtubs out of our homes since someone might slip on the soap....
My point is, why blast a sport you don't like just because you think it
is too dangerous? And yes, please notice I used the word "Sport" because
auto racing is one of the purest sports. Football, basketball, baseball,
tennis, golf, soccer and hockey are only games. But I imagine those are
all OK in your vision, especially if you are a "Sports" writer. However,
I could make a case for every one of those games being "dangerous."
We live in a society that increasingly calls for the end of any and all
risk to life and limb. If something happens and a person gets injured or
killed the hand wringing reaction is "what could have been done to
prevent this death?" The logical end to this drive to end risk, is a
world and life that resembles nothing more than a padded cell.
Why should the government interfere with a sport that is admittedly
dangerous but in which the participants willingly get involved? If auto
racers were putting unwilling people in danger, I could see your point.
But everyone in motorsports are involved because they want to be,
including the fans. Everyone knows the dangers. The risk, lurking just
below the surface, enhances the value of the motorsports experience.
Adam Petty knew the risk. No one used a gun to force him into that car.
He didn't feel obligated to take up racing because his family is so deep
into it. No, he raced because he loved racing. The fact such a talented
young driver was killed is tragic. But at least he died doing what he
loved, fulfilling a lifelong dream in just 19 young years.
How many of your readers have never dared to do the things they really
wanted to because of their fear of risk (or an overbearing spouse or
parent who forbade it)? How many desperate people go to their old-aged
graves wishing they had tried something daring in their lives, broken out
of the mold, got a little wild. Millions.
There are many of us who feel much more alive because we have looked
death in the eye and survived to tell about it. Call us thrill seekers
and cuss our stubborn, obstinate, "stupidity." I don't care. But keep
your meddling paws and government off our beloved motorsports. We can
handle the risk, thank you very much.
You may go back to your Scrabble game, now.
Ben Thatcher
Corvette Racer
Stockbridge, Georgia
(educated and lived for over 11 years near Worcester)
|