OPINION: People responsible for safety

When preventable deaths happen, it's tempting to ask the state to pass a new law that would force folks to take steps to avoid similar situations in the future. That's what Coloradans are seeing in Denver, with Thornton Democrat Rep. John Soper pushing HB1091 which would require certain homes to have carbon monoxide detectors.

Kelly Murphy, a 22-year-old Manitou Springs mother died last month when the odorless gas leaked into the home the family rented. Manitou Rep. Michael Merrifield is co-sponsoring the bill.

HB1091 would require CO detectors in new homes, homes for sale and newly leased apartments. On its face, the bill seems like a good idea. After all, who would be against a bill that will save lives? Sen. Keith King, for one.

King said he opposes the bill because it adds to the burden of builders and homesellers.

At a cost of $15-$50, that doesn't seem like much of a burden. A better argument would be philosophical: It's not government's job to protect us when we should be protecting ourselves.

Just as the relatively low cost of the detectors isn't really much of a financial burden to home sellers, it's not prohibitively expensive for anyone without a CO detector.

The problem with laws that require people to act responsibly is that as more such laws appear, people become complacent and don't look out for their own welfare. Then when tragedy strikes, many complain it occurred because of too little government regulation.

Better for individuals to look out for their own interests, freeing government to concentrate on its legitimate role in society.

If Soper, Merrifield and their supporters really want to prevent needless deaths, they'd be more effective in backing private fundraising efforts to buy the devices for those who can't afford them, and educate people on their use.