You raise some good points, Mark. We have a media that increasingly offers commentary from a 'holier than thou' perspective. The traditional Australian propensity towards admiring the larrikins in our midst, is therefore being eroded; 'larrikinism' is often erroneously portrayed as irresponsibility. We need to tell the killjoys to get a life and recover our irreverent Australian senses of adventure and humour.

Under how current legal regime, the ‘rules’ would probably be used against the innocent party if they were to: “… momentarily drive on the wrong side of the road” to protect themselves from the person really in the wrong.

Rules are for those who will obey them; their enactment is a shallow attempt by politicians to fool us into thinking that they have done something, when they haven’t, and have not intention of, doing anything. The books are full of rules handing out huge fines and sentences, but they are of no use because they are either not enforced, or our pathetic judges think that they know what’s best, and hand out the least, if any, penalty they can. The driver on the wrong side, for instance, is likely to get a licence suspension, which he/she will ignore and continue driving with impunity, irrespective of whether or not he/she was drunk, on drugs, insane or did it deliberately.

I don’t know when the author grew up, but when I grew up, we were taught by YOUR PARENTS, not the socialist nanny state, taught right from wrong; duty to yourself and others, common sense and most things you needed to know to get by in the world.

“Young blokes” and “young girls” – don’t let’s be sexist bout this; there is not much difference between the sexes when it comes to behaviour these days – are now at least the second generation of irresponsible people spawned (brought up is not the right word) by another irresponsible generation, their parents....

......The most in your face, teeming millions are now those who are irresponsible drivers, irresponsible dog-owners, irresponsible neighbours, irresponsible drinkers and drug users, irresponsible spenders, (you name it, they are irresponsible about it) who don’t give a stuff about other people. There are exceptions of course, but there are too many who are downright pests making the lives of other people harder than they need be.

The reams of laws, ‘strictures’ on society and the nanny state have had no effect on protecting society from self-absorbed, anti-social yobs, so it’s hard to see what the author is on about. The mythical ‘larrikin’ hasn’t been around for generations; we are tolerating (we are not dealing with them) nasty, vicious little creeps whose parents spoiled them rotten or were too frightened of social services to raise them properly.

It is the failed parents who want the nanny state to protect them against the dangers they have themselves created in their little monsters, now old enough to do a lot of damage. More useless laws from failed politicians is all they get. Serve them bloody right. We get only the politicians and society we deserve.

Leigh, ! agree with you completely. It is the Nanny State that has got us into this predicament with it's softly softly approach when youth is placed in cotton wool and personal responsibility and consideration for others is not taught or contemplated. It started at school when corporal punishment was abolished. Discipline which was quick and deserved and effective. People now cock two fingers at authority because they know there are no consequences to themselves, only to others who they couldn't care less about.

snake, Leigh.

You give fine examples of those mentioned in the text, who simultaneously whinge about nanny states and demand more strict government.

I humbly submit that these "irresponsible" legions you mention, aren't the scourge you make them out to be.

Unemployment isn't skyrocketing, the average working hours in Australia are among the highest in the developed world and believe it or not, if you can drown out the sensationalist ravings of tabloid media then you'll discover the truth.

Things. Aren't. That. Bad.

Go for a walk in the park, or have a lie down.

Though were I faced with a judgmental ogre who viewed the rest of the world as irresponible louts who needed to be controlled, I rather suspect I may come across as irresponsible.

I do however, respond to friendly attitudes with a similar attitude. Treat others how you wish to be treated. Pretty simple really.

I'll save my opinion for what areas government have right to weigh into, for later;

For now I'll say this- everyone must resubmit for a driver's license and show some actual reaction speeds and use of logic on the roads- if the driver has slow reflexes, motion sickness or bad vision (both width and ability to see close and far), tailgates someone, or once does something idiotic like turn left at the traffic lights into the left lane of a multi-lane highway when they intend to turn right at the next stop, they are automatically failed, the examiner will not even bother explaining why (because anyone who didn't know or care is too stupid to be a safe driver, period) and they will be denied a license.

Without those clowns getting access to cars, our road rules may well be fit to be massively eased up for the rest of us- making the rest of the nanny state measures like speed cameras unnecessary.
Let the good times roll!