Quoting:
Is government getting waaaay to involved in our lives? I was just doing some online followup on the old "lawn dart ban" of the 80s, and it prompted me to get some opinions. Do you think government should "protect us from ourselves"? Please feel free to rant. I'm going to.  :(

(Trying to remain calm, trying to remain calm......)
End Quote

Quoting:
Did anyone see the movie "Enemy Of the State" with Will Smith?

Pretty darn scary what they can do these days and I don't doubt for one minute the government has those capabilities.

As far as their involvement with children's toy safety -

I'm a bit out of the loop on that one.  :-/  What are they doing?
End Quote

 Enemy of the State great example, also the Arnold Swartzenager movie the Sixth Day gives us a realistic Look at what the near future may be like if we elect to keep some of the same people in power.   Cigarettes are Illegal, the government keeps track of everybodys Info.  Paying for Cabs with thumbprints.  
  Personally, I'm sick and tired of the government Bans.  New York already bans cell phones in cars,  Many states have seat belt laws, I dont believe the goverment should be able to say what you can and can't do in your car, or home.  the North East seems to be the worst for stupid laws.  

Quoting:


 Enemy of the State great example, also the Arnold Swartzenager movie the Sixth Day gives us a realistic Look at what the near future may be like if we elect to keep some of the same people in power.   Cigarettes are Illegal, the government keeps track of everybodys Info.  Paying for Cabs with thumbprints.  
  Personally, I'm sick and tired of the government Bans.  New York already bans cell phones in cars,  Many states have seat belt laws, I dont believe the goverment should be able to say what you can and can't do in your car, or home.  the North East seems to be the worst for stupid laws.  
End Quote

Quoting:
The Government sucks. Don't get me started on them. They are like The dirt I walk on everyday.
End Quote

Quoting:

  Personally, I'm sick and tired of the government Bans.  New York already bans cell phones in cars,  Many states have seat belt laws, I dont believe the goverment should be able to say what you can and can't do in your car, or home.  the North East seems to be the worst for stupid laws.  
End Quote

for one thing, cell phones are not banned in cars in new york state.  you have to use a headset so that both hands are free to drive with, but you can use them.  and i don't think that, or the use of seatbelts, are stupid laws because they protect the safety of everyone.  i understand your point about how the government shouldn't be able to mandate what you can and can't do in your car because your car is personal property.  however, when you drive, you're driving your personal property on public property and the government should be allowed to mandate what occurs on public property for the safety and well-being of all of us.  of course, the laws they make should be within reason.  i don't feel that the 'stupid laws' you mentioned are either stupid or outside of reason.

Quoting:




for one thing, cell phones are not banned in cars in new york state.  you have to use a headset so that both hands are free to drive with, but you can use them.  and i don't think that, or the use of seatbelts, are stupid laws because they protect the safety of everyone.  i understand your point about how the government shouldn't be able to mandate what you can and can't do in your car because your car is personal property.  however, when you drive, you're driving your personal property on public property and the government should be allowed to mandate what occurs on public property for the safety and well-being of all of us.  of course, the laws they make should be within reason.  i don't feel that the 'stupid laws' you mentioned are either stupid or outside of reason.
End Quote

 The only person whose safety is affected by you not wearing a seatbelt is your own.  Granted seatbelts save a lot of lives, but you should have the choice of not wearing one if you chose to (I always wear it).  As for the Cell phone I think its just a way for new york to make extra revenue.  I guess will know in a few years if cell phone accidents decrease because of the law ( I doubt they will).  Almost everytime the goverment tries to ban something in the name of public safety they fail. Another stupid law gets added to the books and the public isn't any safer.      

Quoting:
I think that every 30 years, every Federal, State and local law that does not have to do with violent crime should be erased from the books, and then our Congress, State Legislatures, etc. can re-write whatever laws they want to be reinstated, and go thru the entire process to get them back on the books. That way they would not be spending all their time as they do now, constantly enacting new laws that we don't need. Think about it. The whole purpose of Congress is to keep inventing and passing new laws. That means our freedom gets whittled away more and more with every passing day.
End Quote

Great Idea, but they should rewrite whatever laws WE want to be reinstated.  As public servants they should be serving the public.

Quoting:


Great Idea, but they should rewrite whatever laws WE want to be reinstated.  As public servants they should be serving the public.
End Quote

Most Congresspersons are too busy serving Special Interest Groups.

Food for thought: At what point do we finally have enough laws?

Quoting:


Most Congresspersons are too busy serving Special Interest Groups.

Food for thought: At what point do we finally have enough laws?
End Quote

well, there is the occasional congressperson who actually does have the interests of the public at the top of his/her priority list.  so there's a little hope.

i don't think it's so much a question of when do we have enough laws as it is when do we have too many laws.  

and i do see your point about wiping the laws clean every once in awhile to get rid of the obsolete laws.  there's this one  very old, crazy pennsylvanian law that states any house with 2 or 3 or more unrelated women living in it is considered a brothel.  so all the sorority houses on all the campuses in pa are really brothels, legally speaking.  now i think that's a stupid law, don't you?

Quoting:

Theres a man who likes to go out and get his mail naked and all his windows are always up. His neighbor sued him for indicretion.  ;D  Who agrees with the woman who agrees with the man End Quote

My neighbor always walked around his yard naked. I went over without phoning first and surprised him a few times!   :D

Quoting:
I am by no means an expert on any Government, especially not the US government - I, personally, couldn't care less about them. But isn't any elected party going to draw this kind of (perfectly valid, Alicia, don't worry), response from the people that didn't vote for them, and, even in the short run, the people that did?

End Quote

Bobo, the disgruntlement isn't - in this thread anyway - with any particular party, but with Government as an entity. It's too big and too intrusive. We need government lest we have anarchy, but there have to be limits. Unfortunately, the Federal Government in this country went beyond the bounds of its Constitutional limits many years ago, and it hasn't stopped.

Quoting:


Bobo, the disgruntlement isn't - in this thread anyway - with any particular party, but with Government as an entity. It's too big and too intrusive. We need government lest we have anarchy, but there have to be limits. Unfortunately, the Federal Government in this country went beyond the bounds of its Constitutional limits many years ago, and it hasn't stopped.
End Quote

But no comments at all about my naked neighbor? You're off form tonight Lester!  ;D

Quoting:


But no comments at all about my naked neighbor? You're off form tonight Lester!  ;D
End Quote

Well, as long as he was in his own yard...

Quoting:


Bobo, the disgruntlement isn't - in this thread anyway - with any particular party, but with Government as an entity. It's too big and too intrusive. We need government lest we have anarchy, but there have to be limits. Unfortunately, the Federal Government in this country went beyond the bounds of its Constitutional limits many years ago, and it hasn't stopped.
End Quote

Quoting:
Okay, I understand. I guess what I'm trying to say is that whoever is chosen as the Government is bound to do some wrong things - according to... whoever. Sorry about the confusion.

End Quote

No problem Bobo. And you're right - no matter who is in charge, someone is going to be honked off!!

Quoting:


 The only person whose safety is affected by you not wearing a seatbelt is your own.    
End Quote

NOT CORRECT! What about your children should a mere fender-bender become fatal? What about the driver who now is indicted for manslaughter or at least never gets to sleep well again? What about my insurance premiums going up because I have to help pay for hospital bills that could have been prevented. Wrong wrong and wrong.

Look, the "government" is the people. When it "pays" for something, that's US paying. When it stifles something, that's us refusing to engage in an activity... supposedly. And as long as there are members of society who endanger the whole of us, either financially or physically, there will need to be laws.

Unfortunately, the only people bothered by them are the ones who follow them...

Quoting:


NOT CORRECT! What about your children should a mere fender-bender become fatal? What about the driver who now is indicted for manslaughter or at least never gets to sleep well again? What about my insurance premiums going up because I have to help pay for hospital bills that could have been prevented. Wrong wrong and wrong.

Look, the "government" is the people. When it "pays" for something, that's US paying. When it stifles something, that's us refusing to engage in an activity... supposedly. And as long as there are members of society who endanger the whole of us, either financially or physically, there will need to be laws.

Unfortunately, the only people bothered by them are the ones who follow them...
End Quote

 Notice I said  you are the only person affected by not wearing your seat belt, i did not mention children.  This is true.  I did not say anything about Minors not wearing thier seatbelts.  The Goverment can make stringent laws regarding minors. Besides,  thier have been some accidents people have died because they were wearing a seat belt.  These accidents are uncommon, but they still hapen.

 As for your second point, I agree with tax dollars being our money.  But our more accidents caused by adults not wearing a seatbelt?  are your driving skills impaired when your not wearing a seat belt?  

Quoting:

Besides,  their have been some accidents people have died because they were wearing a seat belt.  These accidents are uncommon, but they still hapen.

End Quote

Regarding your point here:

IMO, the percentage of possible fatalities possibly caused by seat belt wearing is negligible when compared to the overwhelming percentage of lives saved because of it.

I'll add:

The laws for adults to wear seat belts are also geared with the children in mind. See, if the parents buckle-up, there's a better chance the children will be buckled-up as well.

There's no harm in this particular type of general safety law, IMO.

Quoting:


 Notice I said  you are the only person affected by not wearing your seat belt, i did not mention children.  This is true.  I did not say anything about Minors not wearing thier seatbelts.
 
End Quote

Look, look, I have my own marching band for this one! Hit it boys, something patriotic and sappy.

No, no, I mean children are affected by your not wearing a seat belt. Say you've got a couple of kids. Tommy's five and Alyssa's two. And you're tootling along one day sans seatbelt and some moron blows a red light and you plow into him. Now what normally would be some bruising augmented by the airbag becomes a header through the windshield. Voila... somebody's explaining to Tommy and Alyssa where daddy went and yes he still loves them but he's not coming home. Nobody love you? Then feel free to put yourself at risk. Anybody love you? Then it's not just you you're risking.

Were the Norman Rockwell backdrops too much, you think?

Quoting:







As far as the cell-phone bans, here in the Greater Boston area, traffic accidents and fatalities have steadily increased with the popularity of cell phones.  The Town of Brookline (which is literally next door to Boston), has banned the holding of cell phones while driving.  You may still use one if you have a "hands-free" kit.  It's too early for any hard statistics, but my mom, who listens to her police and fire scanner has told me there are fewer traffic accidents happening in Brookline as a result.


End Quote

I think even those "hands-free" kits will still cause accidents because you are still concetrating on talking to someone.

Quoting:



Regarding your point here:

IMO, the percentage of possible fatalities possibly caused by seat belt wearing is negligible when compared to the overwhelming percentage of lives saved because of it.

I'll add:

The laws for adults to wear seat belts are also geared with the children in mind. See, if the parents buckle-up, there's a better chance the children will be buckled-up as well.

There's no harm in this particular type of general safety law, IMO.

End Quote

I See your point here.  I didn't want this to get into a debate about seatbelts (I just Like to debate).  My whole point is that we gave the goverment a little power, with seatbelt laws, now were giving them more power with cell phones.  Then we had C.A.F.E. where the government wanted to tell the auto industry what kind of cars they produce.  Whats next? You can't own a car over 300hp because state troopers can't catch it?  You can't listen to your car radio because it impairs your driving ability?  The real question is wich laws are good laws without the government oversteping its power?

Quoting:
This also explains some of the stupid warnings on other products, like Drano saying "do not eat" or oven cleaners saying "do not spray into eyes".  Some of these warnings are required by law.

End Quote

You know, I don't think we should put warning labels like this on things. If someone is stupid enough to eat Drano, then the gene pool is better off without them!

Quoting:
Example.  Someone buys a HOT cup of coffee at a McDonald's.  Customer spills hot coffee and gets a really bad burn.  Customer sues McDonalds for millions of dollars because he/she says they didn't know the coffee was that hot. ::)

(BTW, this really happened here in the USA, but I don't remember who won the case, the customer or McDonald's)

If only people would use common sense sometimes.
End Quote

I remember reading a bit about this one, and although at first glance, it sounds ludicrous, there was some merit to it. The customer won the lawsuit. The reason the jury found in her favor was that the coffee was so hot that she suffered third degree burns which required hospitalization and skin grafts. It was more than just a case of slightly hot coffee and a minor burn.

Ooops! Now I'm actually arguing against my original post. I guess I have a multiple-personality!  ::)

Quoting:


My neighbor always walked around his yard naked. I went over without phoning first and surprised him a few times!   :D
End Quote

If it weren't for my kids And wife I'd be naked all the time :D

Quoting:

If it weren't for my kids And wife I'd be naked all the time :D
End Quote

Somehow, I doubt she'd mind. I wouldn't mind having a naked man running around my house...

Check with TVamp. He'll give ya a crash course I have the feeling. Nekked's good!

Quoting:
Next they'll be putting camera's into our bedrooms to see what we're doing....except for mine of course....that would just net them a blank tape ::)
End Quote

I thought we had all seen the R&RF bedroom tape already.

Doesn't it appear at the bottom of all of your messages ?

;D

Quoting:


I think even those "hands-free" kits will still cause accidents because you are still concetrating on talking to someone.
End Quote

very good point, alicia.  also, you have to dial the number on most of them, unless you have the voice activated phones or you have someone riding shotgun to dial for you.  however, the number of crashes due to cell phone use have decreased in my area, so the hands-free concept seems to be working.  i think the risk of accidents while talking on a headset is about the same as it is fiddling with the radio or changing a cd.  


as for some of the other points others have made...yes, we gave the government little power so we could govern ourselves.  with that said, just about every law on the books was thought up by some regular joe schmoe (or group of them) who thought it was a good enough idea for everyone to follow.  so we can't blame the government for everything when the public thinks up and proposes most of the laws.  the government just reviews and passes them if the support for the proposal is there.

Quoting:



with that said, just about every law on the books was thought up by some regular joe schmoe (or group of them) who thought it was a good enough idea for everyone to follow.  so we can't blame the government for everything when the public thinks up and proposes most of the laws.  the government just reviews and passes them if the support for the proposal is there.
End Quote

The main thing wrong with Government is career politicians. Joe Schmoe is supposed to be the one in the Senate, not Stromm Thurmond at 100 years old. Joe Schmoe should be in Congress rather than John Conyers. The whole idea behind self governance was just that - we, the people, but somewhere along the way that all got lost. And I believe that we CAN blame the Government, because the politicians know that they have currupted the system yet don't have the scruples to change anything. As for the general citizenry, most are sheep and go whichever way the wind blows.

Quoting:


I remember reading a bit about this one, and although at first glance, it sounds ludicrous, there was some merit to it. The customer won the lawsuit. The reason the jury found in her favor was that the coffee was so hot that she suffered third degree burns which required hospitalization and skin grafts. It was more than just a case of slightly hot coffee and a minor burn.

Ooops! Now I'm actually arguing against my original post. I guess I have a multiple-personality!  ::)
End Quote

Well, yes.  With burns that serious, the customer deserved to win that one.

Back in jr. high school, we had to read Upton Sinclair's The Jungle. It was not about the real jungle, but rather about the plight of poor working people and the dangerous conditions they had to endure just to survive.  It was also intended to be pro-communist.

Among other things, the book describes large, wealthy businesses knowingly selling dangerously tainted meat to the average public (a-ha! she's finally getting to the point!).

When a business is so concerned with profit that they put the general public in danger, it is a good thing that the government gets involved to protect us.

Nobody needs (or wants) tainted meat, exploding cars, or cribs and baby carriages that collapse with baby in them.  When the company refuses to fix these problems, most people want the government to shut them down, or impose sanctions. But when a company admits it goofed, and immediately recalls, and replaces dangerous products there is no need for government involvement.

Quoting:


The main thing wrong with Government is career politicians. Joe Schmoe is supposed to be the one in the Senate, not Stromm Thurmond at 100 years old. Joe Schmoe should be in Congress rather than John Conyers. The whole idea behind self governance was just that - we, the people, but somewhere along the way that all got lost. And I believe that we CAN blame the Government, because the politicians know that they have currupted the system yet don't have the scruples to change anything. As for the general citizenry, most are sheep and go whichever way the wind blows.
End Quote

just a note:  all references to 'you' are to be taken as a general type of reference.  i'm not aiming this at wicked lester or any individual.

first, the men wicked lester mentioned were at one time joe schmoes and the people voted them into office.  apparently, they're doing something the people like because the people keep voting them in.  

second, if the general citizenry consists of a flock of mindless sheep, then the general citezenry is just as much to blame for corruption as the government.  yes, maybe the government is working the corruption to their own ends, but the public is allowing it to happen.  i believe that makes the flock of sheep just as much at fault for going along as the government for doing it.  blaming the government for corruption without trying to do anything about it only serves to perpetuate the corruption.  i mean, if you tell a politician he's corrupt, he's just going to laugh at you and keep on doing what he's doing.  if you try like hell to get him out of office or reprimanded for it, he might actually try to change his corruption.  

Quoting:

first, the men wicked lester mentioned were at one time joe schmoes and the people voted them into office.  apparently, they're doing something the people like because the people keep voting them in.  End Quote

This is true to an extent, except I am much more cynical. It has been my experience that when I ask people, those who are willing to discuss it anyway, why they voted for a particular candidate many can't really give an answer beyond the fact that he was already in office and therefore must be more qualified than his opponent. He has experience. People just tend to vote for the incumbent, or along party lines, so to me the fact that these guys continue to be elected really doesn't say that people are particularly satisfied .

Quoting:second, if the general citizenry consists of a flock of mindless sheep, then the general citezenry is just as much to blame for corruption as the government.  yes, maybe the government is working the corruption to their own ends, but the public is allowing it to happen.  i believe that makes the flock of sheep just as much at fault for going along as the government for doing it.  blaming the government for corruption without trying to do anything about it only serves to perpetuate the corruption.  i mean, if you tell a politician he's corrupt, he's just going to laugh at you and keep on doing what he's doing.  if you try like hell to get him out of office or reprimanded for it, he might actually try to change his corruption.  
End Quote

Nowhere did I say that the flock of sheep aren't as much to blame as the politicians. I totally agree with you. As for changing things, there aren't enough people willing to make the effort. For the past several years there has been an effort underway in this state to make it mandatory for people to show their ID before voting, but it never gets anywhere because people just don't care. Term limits also never get anywhere when brought up, and as we saw in the most recent election cycle, even candidates who ran on a platform of term limits, promising to leave office after a set number of terms, became so seduced by the power and perks that they abandoned their promise and ran for re-election anyway. So in the end you are correct. Until the people get tired of bending over, the circle will remain unbroken. The problem is that most people don't even realize that they are bending over.

Quoting:

The problem is that most people don't even realize that they are bending over.
End Quote

Until I really think hard about that odd discomfort and realize nobody even bought me dinner!

Seriously, though, Lester I'd add on but you got it covered, man. People need to take responsibilty. Ultimately, anything else is just giving up our power and become more and more a bunch of victims.