Living in an age of avoidance
Mark Pavilons

We are a very ingenious bunch, we human beings.

We've come a long way since our humble, cavedwelling roots and climbing inside wooly mammoths to keep warm (although that still sounds like a good idea to me).

You can take the caveman (or woman) out of the person, but you can't really change who they are.

We're at our height of technological and scientific prowess. Compared with our ancestors just 100 or 150 years ago, we must seem like magicians, capable of sending ships to distant planets; breaking the sound barrier in lighter-than-air vehicles, and altering human genes to produce superior offspring.

But, as Victor Hugo once wrote, "common sense is in spite of, not the result of, education."

And so, here we are, sitting comfortably in the new millenium, feeling quite smug about our self-importance. I would like to remind my fellow humans that there are much smarter creatures - dolphins for one species - constantly laughing at us. Only they keep their secrets to themselves and wouldn't dare let us in on the joke.

Humankind, at least in this neck of the civilized woods, is also at its voracious best - we're the biggest consumers on the planet. We gobble up everything from fast food to fast cars, preferring bling to substance. We are amazed at stainless steel household appliances and preoccupied with sending our kids to school in the latest designer fashion. We are preparing to decorate our homes for the holidays, not giving much thought to those less fortunate among us, who won't have a tree or presents at all this Christmas. We max out our credit cards in the great, mad dash to the counter, using our purchasing power to buy love and affection.

We try to protect ourselves and our families in various manners - through insurance, education investments, health plans, RRSPs, etc. We hope for the best, but believe should the worst hit, we're more than adequately covered.

Yet, time and again, it seems the big financial institutions or insurance companies don't want to rush to the aid of the average "Joe."

We seem to be living in an era of avoidance and neglect, all in the name of profit and self-preservation.

Canada Post is the latest conglomerate to legitimize avoidance - potential service cuts to rural residents.

They claim that existing labour laws make them legally obligated to protect the safety of their employees. That's a given. But then they say delivering mail to rural mailboxes can be dangerous. "Population growth and increased traffic are making delivery of mail to many rural mailboxes potentially hazardous for Canada Post mail carriers and other drivers."

They say they must equip vehicles with more signs and flashing lights, but this enhanced visibility doesn't address all traffic safety issues. They hired "experts" who will now use scientifically based data to assess whether a certain mailbox poses a safety risk, and can tell owners to move them or accept alternative delivery.

There's no doubt increased traffic in the GTA effects all of us. Our insurance premiums reflect this reality. Anyone who attempts to cross Queen Street in Bolton at certain times of day takes their life in their hands. But driving to work and crossing the street are calculated risks, a sign of the times. They always have been.

While I appreciate Canada Post looking after its employees, this latest move is simply ridiculous. Delivering mail to rural Caledon is no more dangerous than shovelling your driveway in the winter; walking to school or eating expired lunch meat.

But labour laws (read potential law suits which comes down to dollars and cents) force the corporation to explore curbing rural delivery.

To those rural Caledon residents, I understand your pain. Feel free to pack your bags and move to a truly democratic country, where taxpayers have a say how their crown corporations operate.

In the end, all this will accomplish is feeding the pockets of insurance companies and private couriers. Imagine a profitable business encouraging consumers to spend their money with their competitors! If this were a private company, the entire board of directors would be removed, post haste.

Another example is the corporation's move to ban the mailing of inert and replica munitions.

This of course won't involve many average citizens. But for the thousands of military collectors, museums and movie companies, they will no longer be able to send these items through the mail.

The reason? Well, it seems that Canada Post employees have had to evacuate their premises because they thought citizens were mailing real bombs. I find it hard to believe citizens are flocking to their post office sending bazooka rockets to their friends south of the border. I can only imagine what has crossed the counter at Canada Post in the past 100 years. Rumour has it it was perfectly fine to mail body parts and even small children in the mail just decades ago.

"In recent years several inert or replica grenades and artillery shells were found in the mail stream which resulted in numerous evacuations of postal facilities. These evacuations cause stress for employees and have a significant impact on mail processing and delivery standards."

Again, I can appreciate the dedication to employee safety, but one would think in this post-911 age, it would be easy to tell the difference (physically or via x-ray) between a toy prop and a real live explosive.

It likely is, but again it's the avoidance issue. To avoid costly premiums and potential law suits, let's eliminate the threat. It's okay that you can still mail guns, knives, swords, drugs, poisons and pornography through the mail. These don't cause stress among postal workers.

Hats off to Canada Post for protecting its