Category: Nanny State

Unintended Consequences of Government Policies

As part of the government If You See Something Do Something campaign many states have enacted restrictions against young drivers. The government saw that young drivers were involved in more accidents than older drivers and decided that something must be done (to protect the children) so they decided to jump into enacted legislation that restricted various actions that younger drivers were allowed to take. What these bureaucrats never stopped to consider was the possibility that inexperience, and not merely age, was the root cause of the higher accident rates among younger drivers. As Bruce Schneier points out it appears as though inexperience may be the actual problem:

For more than a decade, California and other states have kept their newest teen drivers on a tight leash, restricting the hours when they can get behind the wheel and whom they can bring along as passengers. Public officials were confident that their get-tough policies were saving lives.

Now, though, a nationwide analysis of crash data suggests that the restrictions may have backfired: While the number of fatal crashes among 16- and 17-year-old drivers has fallen, deadly accidents among 18-to-19-year-olds have risen by an almost equal amount. In effect, experts say, the programs that dole out driving privileges in stages, however well-intentioned, have merely shifted the ranks of inexperienced drivers from younger to older teens.

All these restrictions have managed to accomplish is kicking the can down the road for a couple of years. Since 16 and 17 year-old kids aren’t allowed to drive at night they are unable to gain experience at driving in the dark so when they finally are legally able to do so they make mistakes.

So what’s the solution? I would say we should remove these laws as it’s been demonstrated that they aren’t increasing safety but simply pushing the problem down the road. But then we have those people out there that subscribe to the belief that if something doesn’t work we need to try it again, only harder:

McCartt said the solution may be to expand graduated driver licensing programs to include 18- and 19-year-olds who are getting behind the wheel for the first time. The idea isn’t without precedent: In New Jersey, such rules apply to all initial driver’s license applicants under the age of 21.

“The concept of easing drivers into riskier driving situations could apply to older teens as well,” she said.

But Males, who has studied California’s program, said it was inappropriate to impose such restrictions on legal adults and noted that the rules could disqualify them from holding certain jobs.

“That’s a terrible idea,” he said. “That’s saying the programs didn’t work, so we’ll have to make them even stronger.”

Yes that must be the solution! By Thor in Valhalla we may need to go so far as to put these restrictions in place on people as old as 50 years of age!

In New York It’s Cheaper to Litter Than Properly Dispose of Some Trash

Since trashing lying around everywhere is displeasing to most human societies our race as spend a lot of time developing means of ensuring that trash is disposed of in an orderly manner. Apparently New York has a slightly different view and prefers to punish the people living their for being sanitary:

Darbe Pitofsky, 83, said she was on her way for a cup of coffee around 6:30 a.m. on June 25 when she threw a brown bag filled with old papers in a city litter basket near her apartment on East 71st Street.

[…]

She said the worker demanded a form of identification and threatened to “put her away” if she didn’t comply.

Pitofsky said it took the worker 25 minutes to write the summons and when she complained that it would cost her $100, she said he threatened to make it $300.

See in New York a trash can isn’t actually a trash can. The nanny state there has seen fit to make certain trash cans fit for only household trash while others are fit for household or business trash. What’s the difference? I haven’t a clue because I’m a logical human being and therefore have a hard time understanding the justifications given by politicians for the stupid shit they enact.

I’m sure somebody reading this is thinking that the lady could have just avoided the fine if she had followed the rules. True. But I do find it interesting that she faces a lower maximum fine for outright littering than throwing “household or business trash” into a pedestrian-only trash can:

8. Except for any violation of subparagraph one of paragraph b or paragraph c of subdivision seven of this section by a person using or operating a motor vehicle, or any violation of subparagraph two of paragraph b of subdivision seven of this section, or any violation of paragraph d of subdivision seven of this section, the violation of any provision of this section shall constitute an offense punishable by a fine of not less than fifty dollars nor more than two hundred fifty dollars, or by imprisonment not to exceed ten days or both.

So if you have refuse that you wish to dispose of and it qualifies as “household or business trash” it’s actually in your best interest to throw it on the ground and walk away. If caught littering the maximum fine is $250.00 while disposing of trash in the wrong type of bin apparently holds a maximum find of $300.00. Brilliant move New York, encourage littering by fining people for putting trash in the wrong types of trash bins.

Nanny State Still Thinks She Knows What’s Best

The nanny state never ceases to amaze me. When it comes to shitting all over your rights in the crusade to save yourself from yourself some states simply go above and beyond anything sane or rational. Iceland is now considering make cigarettes available by prescription only:

Iceland is considering banning the sale of cigarettes and making them a prescription-only product.

The parliament in Reykjavik is to debate a proposal that would outlaw the sale of cigarettes in normal shops. Only pharmacies would be allowed to dispense them – initially to those aged 20 and up, and eventually only to those with a valid medical certificate.

The radical initiative is part of a 10-year plan that also aims to ban smoking in all public places, including pavements and parks, and in cars where children are present. Iceland also wants to follow Australia’s lead by forcing tobacco manufacturers to sell cigarettes in plain, brown packaging plastered with health warnings rather than branding.

This will obviously obliterate the habit of smoking because nobody has been able to obtain prescription only drugs without a prescription… wait that’s the exact opposite of reality. Making something prescription only hasn’t prevented people from obtaining those things. All making something prescription only does is build the framework for a black market.

The other thing to note is the simple fact this law violates peoples’ rights as self-owners. As the owner of yourself you should have a monopoly on deciding what does and does not go into your body. If you want to smoke cigarettes then you should be allowed to, if you want to smoke marijuana no barrier should be placed in your way, if you want to shoot up heroine then you should have that right. I say this as a man who’s never smoked or shot up anything in his life, in fact I don’t like being around people who are smoking as I find the smell unpleasant. But what you put into your body is your damned business, not the government’s.

The prohibition against specific drugs in this country has done nothing to curb the usage of those drugs but has done a lot to create an environment of violence, both from the state trying to prohibition drug usage and the drug cartels who are fighting the state drug enforcement agents. Prohibitions only end up costing tons of money to accomplish nothing besides generating a body count. Making the use of specific substances illegal also prevent people wanting to kick their addition from doing so because they know that they’ll likely end up in a cage when they go to the doctor for help. Nothing good comes from prohibition but much evil does. Why any country continues to think outlawing substances will be a fix to whatever problems they have is beyond my understanding.

A Perfect Example of the Nanny State

A large number in the libertarian movement often talk about the nanny state. Nanny state, for those of you unaware, is a term used to describe the government’s constant regulations claimed to be put into place to “protect consumers.” In actuality these regulations are nothing more than means of extracting more money from people in the form of permits and license. The state of New York is one of the biggest nanny states out there and that point can’t be made clearer than by looking at their ban on cutting cheese in the open air:

The state Agriculture Department is enforcing a ban on slicing cheese in the open air – and shoppers complain that the regulation means pre-packaged cheese, which defeats the purpose of buying fresh.

That has to be one of the dumbest regulations put into place anywhere (please don’t point out dumber regulation to me, I’ve already developed a strong enough distaste for government). Obviously this regulation was put into place under the guise of protecting consumers, after all there is no other way such a stupid regulation could get pushed through:

“We do not want dirty utensils used at farmers’ markets,” Ziehm said.

“There are many risks involved in slicing cheese in an open-air market. The product could be exposed to the elements, to bacteria and germs, while it’s not wrapped,” she added.

That sounds to me like she’s saying you shouldn’t have picnics because there are lots of dangers involved. Shit I think I gave the New York government another idea of something to require licensing for. If you look at this requirements for getting a license to cut cheese you’ll notice is has protectionism written all over it:

A state regulation on the books since the 1970s requires what’s called an Article 20-C license to slice cheese for commercial sale – and it applies to Greenmarket vendors, Ag Department spokeswoman Jessica Ziehm said.

Vendors can obtain the license only if they slice cheese in a “permanent” building that excludes pests such as flies and has hot and cold running water and a three-compartment sink.

Although I’m unaware of the cost of this Article 20-C license I’m betting it doesn’t come cheap. Likewise this regulation ensures only businesses with established locations are able to get the required license. That means small independent farmers who sell their goods as temporary locations like farmers’ markets are unable to sell cheese outside of the pre-packaged variety. This means that consumers are often unable to get a small amount of cheese from the independent farmers and thus will go to established locations to obtain the small amount that they truly desire. It’s an effective means for government to ensure business flows to those it favors.

Government always find ways to justify their “consumer protection” schemes which almost always turn out to be schemes to protect established businesses from competition.

Nanny State Moving Against Hookahs

We sure are lucky that the nanny state exists to tell us what is and isn’t good for us. By Thor in Valhalla if we didn’t have the nanny state people may do things that could be harmful! Well don’t worry because nanny is working to remove yet another unhealthy things from the list of unhealthy things, hookahs:

But in fact, hookahs are far from safe. And now, legislators, college administrators and health advocates are taking action against what many of them call the newest front in the ever-shifting war on tobacco. In California, Connecticut and Oregon, state lawmakers have introduced bills that would ban or limit hookah bars, and similar steps have been taken in cities in California and New York. Boston and Maine have already ended exemptions in their indoor-smoking laws that had allowed hookah bars to thrive.

Is smoking safe? No it’s not but neither is a lot of the shit we do. Eating fast food isn’t safe, driving sure as the Hell isn’t safe, drinking alcohol isn’t safe, opening a box with a utility knife isn’t safe, basically nothing is safe. Everything you do in life carries risks and it’s up to you to determine if those risks outweigh the benefits. Well it was up to you until everybody was willing to delegate that power to the state, now the state gets to use their monopoly on the initiation of force to force you to avoid things it deems unhealthy.

So what should you do if you don’t like hookah bars? Don’t frequent them. Legislation doesn’t need to be passed to “protect people from themselves.” If you don’t approve of an activity then you don’t have to participate. If something may be harmful to the participants that is their problem and they can decide whether or not the potential risks outweigh the potential benefits. What we don’t need is the fucking state coming in and telling us what is and isn’t good for us.

Political Correctness and Geometry

Political correctness has to be one of the dumbest concepts the human race has ever decided to waste time on. It seems people are paid to find phrases that may be offensive to somebody and then come up with a new phrase that’s fifty fucking words in length and somehow less offensive. I believe a theory was written somewhere that states the more words a phrase has the less offensive it is.

Well let’s take a look at the latest cluster fuck brought to us by a Seattle school who just renamed Easter eggs “spring spheres.” No I’m not making this up:

“At the end of the week I had an idea to fill little plastic eggs with treats and jelly beans and other candy, but I was kind of unsure how the teacher would feel about that,” Jessica said.

She was concerned how the teacher might react to the eggs after of a meeting earlier in the week where she learned about “their abstract behavior rules.”

“I went to the teacher to get her approval and she wanted to ask the administration to see if it was okay,” Jessica explained. “She said that I could do it as long as I called this treat ‘spring spheres.’ I couldn’t call them Easter eggs.”

In the frantic move to make something politically correct some administrative bozo also managed to screw these kids with geometry. An egg is not a sphere, it’s not even close. Obviously these teachers failed geometry because if they had passed they would know that a sphere is a perfectly round geometric object in three dimensional space.

Now that I think about it I believe the word school has bad connotations attached to it. Because of this I propose we renamed schools “equal opportunity non-discriminatory community oriented education environment.” Look how many words are in there, it can’t possibly be offensive!

What we really need right now is a lesson in political correctness by everybody’s favorite Gunnery Sergeant:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o7oKQECBjs]

Car You Can’t Own

Many people claim that we have a free market in the United States. These same people also blame the lack of regulations on our recent financial problems. Neither fact is true as we haven’t had a free market since… well ever honestly as there have always been regulations on the free exchange of goods between two people. Well I have yet another example of market regulations in the United States that I feel few are aware of, a list of cars the government says you can’t have:

Sure, some lustworthy Euro-spec cars can make it in. Witness the list of Show and Display cars the overlords at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration OK’d despite the fact that not one of them meets government safety standards.

Such cars must be exceedingly rare, historically significant and driven a mere 2,500 miles annually. But if you think a boatload of money and reams of paperwork can get any car into the country, think again.

Today, we present some of the cars people tried to import under Show and Display that were rejected by Uncle Sam. We aren’t talking about fanboy fantasies here, but actual cars that someone went to the trouble of tracking down and applying to the feds for.

The list contains 17 vehicles that us measly peasants can’t be trusted with.

You Will Do As We Say

This story can best be summed up with the phrase, “Shut up slave!” It seems one school in Chicago (where else) is prohibition children from brining their own lunches and thus forcing kids to eat what the school command:

At his public school, Little Village Academy on Chicago’s West Side, students are not allowed to pack lunches from home. Unless they have a medical excuse, they must eat the food served in the cafeteria.

Principal Elsa Carmona said her intention is to protect students from their own unhealthful food choices.

“Nutrition wise, it is better for the children to eat at the school,” Carmona said. “It’s about the nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve (in the lunchroom). It’s milk versus a Coke. But with allergies and any medical issue, of course, we would make an exception.”

They will allow you to bring a lunch if you have medical reasons? How magnanimous of them! Why thank you Comrade Carmona for granting such a privilege to the lowly surfs! I’m sure you can guess how I feel about this police, it’s terrible. The school administration is basically saying they know better than the parents what their children should eat. Because a parent may decides to allow their child to bring chips with their sandwich it means brining lunches must be banned and any student who does so must be labeled an enemy of the people.

If I were a parent I’d probably be inclined to tell Comrade Carmona, “Fuck you! Go sodomize yourself with a retractable baton.” Then again if I were a parent I’d not subject my child to a public school in Chicago… or Chicago. Practices like this shouldn’t go unchallenged by parents. If you’re a parent with a child in this school you should pack your child’s lunch every day. When they take your child’s lunch bring the administration up on charges of theft.

Although public schools felt like a prison when I was attending one I must say it’s far worse now.

Child Abduction Services Knows Best

You know what’s great? Using Child Abduction” Services to bar parents from taking their newborn baby home. It’s nice to know that the state has this kind of power to protect our children from those evil little serfs we call parents. Take this instance:

“They said, ‘Well, if you leave the hospital I’ll have to arrest you and your husband.'”

Cecilia is referring to the police officer who was sent to her room just hours after giving birth, all because she and her husband told the nurse they didn’t want to keep Lilia overnight in the NICU to be treated for jaundice.

I guess I don’t really have grounds to make a complain if the parents if the parents were going to put the child’s life in danger. It would be crazy to let the parents go against the wishes of the doctor… oh wait:

The couple says it got a second opinion and spoke with a pediatrician at Summerlin Hospital, who agreed that it would be okay if the couple took the baby home with minor jaundice as long as they signed a medical release form.

What the Hell? The doctor signed off on the parents taking the baby home and yet Child Abduction Services were still called? Who the Hell called them?

But the nurse they originally worked with called Child Protective Services to report these new parents for not agreeing with the recommended hospital care.

Oh, it seems the nurse knew more than the doctor. Likewise the goons send by abduct the child also knew better than the doctor. I must have missed when they changed the curriculum for nurses and government stooges. At what point did the required education for becoming either involve heavy training in pediatrics?

Yes this is yet another case of the state coming in and imposing its will against the slaves… er, citizens, of the United States. It’s also frightening to see that the recommendations of a doctor will be completely ignored by the very goons who are supposed to protect children from abusive situations.

Zero Tolerance Means Zero Intelligence

Public schools not only have a history of being rather poor in the field of educating children but they also have a history of zero tolerance. Between kids being expelled for having shotguns off school property, kids being kicked out for making a gun shape with their fingers, and kids being given the boot for having Aspirin it’s amazing there are any children left in school. Well here’s another one for the record book, a 13 year-old kid was shown the door for brining acne medicine:

A typical middle school girl, 13-year-old Hayley Russell was worried about another acne flare-up when she brought her orange prescription bottle to Rachel Carson Middle School in Fairfax County, Virginia.

She placed the erythromycin on the top shelf of her locker so she could retrieve an antibiotic pill to take at lunch. And then she forgot about it.

The pills sat in her locker for months. When an administrator confronted her about them last May, acting on a tip from other girls, Hayley quickly acknowledged her mistake. But it triggered a disciplinary process that kept her out of class for more than seven weeks, banned her from even visiting Carson without official permission, and eventually forced her to transfer to another school.

Yes not only did she bring medication but she had the audacity to have a prescription for it! It’s sad to see things haven’t changed since I was in high school and administrators were sacrificing children in order to look like they were protective of the kids’ well being.