Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould Congress ban auto racing?
Results so far:
| Yes | 37% | 19 votes | Total: 51 votes | |
| No | 63% | 32 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesShould the United States Congress take the leap and ban auto racing? Why not take away all of our personal liberties at a time when our nation is at war? I think we're at war, at least they keep telling us we are at war against some unseeing force called terrorism which rears its ugly head every now and then causing death and destruction. Our soldiers of off on distant shores fighting so, we must be at war, and when we are at war, Congress can make all sorts of changes that affect the general populace. They didn't even need a war when they banned alchohol eighty years ago and doesn't auto racing have it's roots in the boot legging drivers that ran moon shine during Prohibition? With the enactment of the Patriot Act, Congress has been granted the power to usurp personal liberty and that equates to taking away our fun. Isn't auto racing fun? It's supposed to be, because sports are fun and isn't auto racing a sport? Well, I'm not a fan of that sport and let's qualify the term 'sport' right here and label auto racing just what it really is, a competition. A sport embodies a team concept, players on one side competing against players on an opposite side. Volleyball is a sport, while tennis is a competition. Both require skill and stamina but, one requires an individual playing against another individual while the other entails team work. You may thank me later for this, as I have just answered the age old question, "is golf a sport?" It may take a finely tuned athlete at the peak of his skill level to win on the PGA Tour but, he is competing against other individuals, ergo, a competition.
Now that we've cleared that up, let's take issue with Congress and the question at hand. First off, I answered 'Yes' simply because it was the first button to click. In my amazement that this was even a topic, I clicked the wrong button, and once clicked the process was irreversible. This is an energy issue and race cars suck gasoline so Congress will be conserving energy if they do institute a ban but, the last time I looked, gas was under two bucks a gallon again, cheap. So, my answer should have been 'No' because there is no way that Congress is ever going to touch such an issue. From the grass roots level up, stock car racing is as intrinsic an American pastime as there is, and no Congressman is foolhardy enough to even consider such a stance as attempting to ban the competition. You will notice that at the end of the last sentence I did not use the word sport, as we have already determined that auto racing is not a sport but a competition. Either way, there is no Congressman fool hardy enough to reach into the bowels of middle America and take away the simple pleasure of watching dare devils fly by at up to four times the legal speed limit.
So there's my answer, 'No', even though I voted 'yes'. Perhaps I should give reason for my decision to so blatantly flip flop in the middle of writing this. I have seen a Daytona 500 up close and personal, and spectacle is the best adjective to describe what I witnessed. A hundred thousand plus rabid fans watching over horse powered machines make left turns. The crowded masses rise as one voice and scream at the spectacle of 200 mile per hour maniacs maneuvering around a banked track. I know where it comes from, this quest for speed. I grew up near a small quarter mile race track that has closed it's doors years ago. But I can vividly remember standing along the outside wall and watching the modified stock cars race. Particles of hot rubber would fly off the wheels and hit you in the face, and the smell of exhaust and gasoline is still etched in my memory. It was so long ago, and yet I can still recall the sights and sounds at that little track, and that little track was merely the bottom of the pyramid, an entry level into the world of stock car racing with NASCAR at the top of the pyramid. I can understand how racing gets in your blood. I read somewhere that of all the sports and competitions in America, only football has more fans than stock car racing. That tells you something, big money, and when it comes to big money, Congress looks the other way. Therefore, the question is moot. It will never happen.
Learn more about this author, Bob Duden.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
Should Congress Ban Auto Racing?
I believe banning auto racing would be a mistake, for several reasons. The first of which is freedom. Whatever happened to the guarantee of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Each day, congress seems to put more laws on the books restricting our actions. Obviously, we cannot have total freedom and need some rules to guide us, but I wonder if we will one day have so many laws to observe that it could be considered slavery. Even now, many times, I feel like I am a slave to the government (especially around April fifteenth).
Another good reason not to ban racing is the technology advancement that trickles down into the autos we drive daily. Have you ever watched a race car lose control at two hundred plus MPH, fly into hundreds of pieces as it bounces off walls and other vehicles, only to see the driver undo the seat belts and walk away? The cars we drive today contain much of the same technology that was developed for auto racing. Crumple zones, collapsible steering columns, and seat belts just to name a few. You, or your relatives might be alive today, thanks to auto racing, if any of you have survived a serious car accident.
Auto racing has brought to the forefront another aspect of car design, aerodynamics. To get the highest possible speed from an automobile, it must be able to move through the air as easily as possible. Racing teams use wind tunnels to test their designs for efficiency. Obviously, our daily commuter cars do not have to run at racing speeds and therefore, their drag coefficient is not as critical. Still, the easier our vehicles move through the air the less power it takes to propel them at speed. This translates to better fuel efficiency which these days is certainly a worth while pursuit.
How your car handles can also be associated with auto racing. The vehicles we drive today are easier and safer to maneuver than ever before. Race cars must be designed to handle well at the very edge of their performance envelope. Their suspension must keep the tire in contact with the road while under the stress of high g-forces. Our everyday vehicles do not normally operate under these conditions, however, I'm sure all of us drivers out there have had to do some fancy high stress maneuvering around someone who cuts us off or pulls out at the wrong time. What has been learned from racing is built into our vehicles and made it possible for us to avoid those collisions.
There are many other aspects of racing that have made our daily commuters better. Race cars must be built light to go fast. Our cars must be built light for lower fuel consumption. Race car engines must be built strong to stand the stress. Our car engines must be built strong to last. The list goes on and on. So many of the necessities for a race car can be used to the advantage of our everyday vehicles.
Some people say all these achievements would be possible without the racing industry. They say car manufacturers could make all these advancements on their own. I agree that they could. My question is whether or not they would. Necessity is the mother of invention. In racing these advancements are a necessity. For our everyday cars they are not. I do not believe we would have the cars of today without auto racing. I believe it should not only be allowed, but encouraged, and our cars of tomorrow will be better for it.
Learn more about this author, James Dreamer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Energy Issues
- Should government subsidize renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and ethanol?
- Is capturing and extracting carbon dioxide the key to solving our energy crisis, as Shell's Danish CEO touts?
- Should hardrock mining companies pay the US government a royalty on minerals extracted from federally owned lands, the way oil, natural gas and coal companies do?
- Which is more likely to produce clean alternative energy, the private sector or the government?
- Should gasoline used for personal pleasure be taxed at higher rates than gasoline used commercially?
