Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Friday, December 28, 2007

Nanny State Expansion Set for 1/1/08

Many new laws take effect on January 1st. One of them is a law that outlaws smoking in cars if minors are present.

Now I know I am not going to earn many points arguing for people to have the right to smoke around kids - and indeed I completely agree that people should not smoke around others, especially children.

I lost my stepfather to lung cancer and absolutely hate cigarettes. But I think this is something we have to do because its the right thing to do. Not because the government forces us. Sure, its easy and popular to use the Nanny state to beat up on smokers and I'm not going to put much energy into it myself. But at what point do we say no to the Nanny state before it gets too late? When are they coming after what YOU like to do?

By the way, should county press releases contain only one point of view on a controversial issue?

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

Dumb part is it includes any minors upto age 18. Two other states have similar laws but for kids to age 12 or 60 lbs., or some cut-off below adult size.

So a 19-yr old can't smoke around an 17-yr old friend?

December 28, 2007 3:54 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Press Release"

To release, via the 'press" (newpaper, media, etc) information for general knowlege.

Those opposing the "information" can comment if holding an opposing view to the action.

December 28, 2007 7:02 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, Sinclair Lewis really screwed up the country with his "nanny state" caca.

The free market can keep rat feces out of our food supply!

The free market will save our children from abuse!

The free market will give health care to everyone!

The free market will keep air clean!

The free market will prevent earthquakes... and hurricanes...

The free market will make monkeys fly out of my ass!

Fuck the nanny state! Who needs it?!

December 28, 2007 9:28 AM  

Blogger Mayor Sam said:

The free market can keep rat feces out of our food supply!

It can - just get word on TV that Mickey D's McNuggets are something other than Chicken. There goes Ronald's Christmas bonus.

The free market will save our children from abuse!

That's a criminal matter - an appropriate role for the government (Police - Courts). Dum Dum.

The free market will give health care to everyone!

It used to! If you got sick in the 1880s and you went to the country doctor usually a chicken sufficed for the bill. Anyway, 40 years of government funded LBJ-care has sure given everyone access to care and kept the prices WAY down.

The free market will keep air clean!

Look at how many people bought Priuses when they came out. A superior product that has an environmental benefit. Build it and they will come.

The free market will prevent earthquakes... and hurricanes...

No, but it can respond to them far better than FEMA. Matt Dowd could respond to a disaster far better than FEMA, though I guess you could say he has daily experience with disasters.

The free market will make monkeys fly out of my ass!

Maybe. But knowing you that would happen in a totalitarian state as well.

Fuck the nanny state! Who needs it?!

Exactly, now go play on the freeway.

December 28, 2007 9:40 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Don't know who Sinclair Lewis was, do you, Mayor?


December 28, 2007 10:01 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The free market provided health care, protection for children, clean air, etc.?!! Gimme a break. It didn't do any of those things and people finally got fed up and demanded help from the government to get it done.

And others felt guilty watching everyone lose their homes and starve during the depression (thank you very much, free market!) so they finally created some safety nets the free market couldn't (and still can't) be bothered with.

You can wax nostalgic for those good old days of the free market, but the reality is this country didn't start living up to its original ideals until it started guaranteeing certain rights for its people. Before that, the only ones who prospered were those who could afford to take care of themselves. That's great for them (and, presumably, for the modern-day social darwinists who seem to want to roll back the clock), but it sucked for those who couldn't get an education, didn't have indoor plumbing, couldn't afford to see a doctor, and worked like slaves (or WERE slaves) until they died at what now would seem like a ridiculously young age.

Ah yes, bring back those good old days our ancestors were glad to be rid of.

December 28, 2007 10:28 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'm against smoking, too...HOWEVER, I do not want government to tell me what I can do in the privacy of my car with MY children!!!

And, uh...er....isn't the $2.00 increase per pack of cigarettes supposed to pay for all the GDamned illegals and their Gdamned healthcare???? Well, it would seem to me that this law will decrease smoking!

AND, furthermore, the $2 increase in a pack of marlboros will result in everyone getting their cigarettes on the black market or from Vegas or somewhere!

What stupid assholes run this city!!!

December 28, 2007 6:30 PM  

Blogger Jack Hoff said:

Interestingly made point, 6:30 --

Can we also extend the argument that you should be able to drive your kids in the privacy of your own vehicle while drunk? Stoned? Blindfolded? Driving with only your feet? How about cell phone in one hand, coffee in lap and eyeliner or morning news in the other hand?

How about driving your kids without seat belts? Does your right to lunacy supersede their right to life, liberty and all that other crap?

Let us know!

December 28, 2007 7:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jack Hoff...

You are such an imbecile! Yes...i always drive drunk, blindfolded, no hands on steering wheel, no seat belts...and a myriad of other minor infractions!

So What!!!! My kids never complain!!!

But God forbid I blow a whiff of smoke from a Marlboro in the car! Wow!!! Sue me!!! Taze me!!! Impound my car!! And life imprisonment after the third strike!

What's next on your agenda of nothingness....house searches? Why not send the smoke detectives out 3 times a day to check for cigarette butts inside every residence with children? Obviously, if there's a butt, there's a smoker blowing smoke in the face of a minor. Why not give lie detector tests to all smokers with children?

I repeat...you are all imbecillic assholes!

December 29, 2007 6:27 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

We would gladly have an opportunity to use a taser on 6:27 a.m. It'll put him out our misery.

December 29, 2007 7:37 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jack Hoff,
I agree with anyone who says second hand smoke is a killer and children should not be exposed to it, but your argument is absent of all logic.

Apart from the seatbelts, every activity you described impairs one's ability to drive. Smoking does not.

The seatbelt law addresses car safety in the event of an accident. There is no known connection at this time, nor will there ever be, to banning cigarette smoking and car safety.

December 29, 2007 2:01 PM  

Blogger Jack Hoff said:

2:01, thanks for the response. The argument I was offering was not based on cigarettes, but on the statement "I do not want government to tell me what I can do in the privacy of my car with MY children!!!"

I'll try to be clearer next time.

Side note: When the car industry sued the government against mandatory seat belts, they too, made the same argument.

December 29, 2007 4:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That is one law that really needs changed. 18 year olds and everything about them. Either they are adults or they aren't. They can vote, go to war and be charged as adults in a crime.

They can't drink alcohol though and that is crazy.

The most important thing that any person in the world can do is raise children and 13 year olds can do that.

What a fucked up world.

Way off topic, but very irritating to me.

December 29, 2007 6:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Way off topic. You sound "off", too.

Thanks for the clarity Jack. That said, I agree with you.

December 29, 2007 7:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

He doesn't sound so off to me. I know what your saying. I know because I remember when I was 18 and was considered an adult and could go to war for this country and yet I couldn't order a whiskey and coke in the bar. That just doesn't make sense. Now that Ima grandparent at my young age, I'm wondering why my son didn't have to have a license to have a kid at 19 and a half.

December 30, 2007 1:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Jack Hoff:

Seat belts save lives...at any age! It's only common sense to buckle up!!!

BUT we don't need any effing laws telling us we can't light up (not many smokers left anyway) in our own cars in the presence of our children. I, for one, do not smoke...but both my parents smoked like chimneys in my presence in our vehicles. I suffered no ill effects and we survivied without our marxist govermnemt telling us what was good for us!

Why don't the marxists downtown and Sacramento go after the pot smokers, coccaine sniffers, liquor stores who sell the booze to the drunk driver murderers, the restaurants and saloons that sell the booze to the drunks...etc., etc.!!!

If I were a smoker, I would park my car with my 3 kids in front of each marxist politician and smoke my brains out!

We are fed up with these morons and we will oust them all from office. Wait and see! Hoff, you won't have anyone to defend anymore...

December 30, 2007 10:01 AM  

Blogger Jack Hoff said:

At least I'd still have your 3 children to defend...

December 30, 2007 1:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Especially after he croaks from lung cancer at 32 years old.

December 30, 2007 9:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home