The liberal war on choice

Unless it involves killing unborn children, liberals aren’t much for choice these days.

Consider what’s happening in England, which is even more of a lefty paradise than California.

Alfie Evans is a 23-month-old boy with a serious brain disease. His doctors say there’s no hope for recovery and ordered him off life-support on Monday. The doctors thought he would die quickly, but he’s still breathing as of this writing. His parents want to transfer him to a hospital in Italy and have arranged private transportation.

So off little Alfie went, right? Nope.

Alfie is British, and the United Kingdom has socialized medicine. Remember the Obamacare “death panels” over which the left mercilessly mocked Sarah Palin? They’re real, and you’re seeing them in action. Bureaucrats have determined that Alfie should die, and die he will, no matter what choice his parents want to make — and pay for.

If it won’t cost British taxpayers anything, why won’t doctors let Alfie go? There’s not been a clear answer, aside from the assertion that it’s somehow in the child’s best interest for him to die. It looks as if what worries the bureaucrats most isn’t Alfie dying, but the consequences of his survival. How many other patients and parents would demand extra care that bean counters don’t want to authorize?

This whole situation is a reminder that there are always limits to health care. Free-market supporters want those limits set by individuals making their own choices. Liberals want those limits set by government functionaries.

The situation is so backward that the local police posted a Facebook message telling protesters that they’re monitoring social media postings. “Threatening behavior will be investigated and where necessary will be acted upon,” wrote the Merseyside Police.

Hey, officer. There’s a group of adults preventing parents from helping their toddler. These kidnappers are threatening to kill this boy by withholding life-sustaining care. Can you think of any necessary actions to address that situation?

Not only do leftists want to restrict the ability of parents to save their child’s life, but they want to take away your ability to complain about it.

This isn’t the only peculiar thing British police think needs investigation. In March, London’s Regents Park Police did a “weapons sweep” that yielded two screwdrivers, two pairs of pliers and a pair of scissors. The police bragged those “weapons” were “safely disposed and taken off the streets.”

That sounds like a parody of what U.S. gun grabbers want to do, except it’s not. It’s the logical conclusion of Britain banning semi-automatic rifles and handguns decades ago. Turns out people — not inanimate objects, whether it’s a gun or flathead screwdriver — kill people.

Despite its strict gun laws, London had more murders than New York City in February and March. Knife attacks account for two-thirds of the killings, and the city’s murder rate has increased by 44 percent in one year.

This led London Mayor Sadiq Khan to tweet recently that “there is never a reason to carry a knife. Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law.”

Want to carry a weapon to legally defend yourself? In London, you don’t have that choice.

Freedom isn’t inevitable. The choices Nevada and the country make today will affect how many choices you get to make tomorrow.

Victor Joecks’ column appears in the Opinion section each Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Listen to him discuss his columns each Monday at 9 a.m. with Kevin Wall on 790 Talk Now. Contact him at vjoecks@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-4698. Follow @victorjoecks on Twitter.