What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Ban-Crazy

Just heard on the News (WQXR New York Times Classical Station) that a politician in California wants to ban the common light bulb because it's too inefficient and force everyone to use CF's.
Also read in the paper that in NYC (where I work) politicians want to set a standard for the weight of models for fear it is causing eating disorders in people trying to emulate the "look"
Which would virtually guarantee the collapse of one of NYC's biggest industries.

OK, I believe that we live in a free country and that goverment meddling is eroding our freedoms. But when it comes to assinine things like these I think "they're going way too far now"

No links yet, I'll try an find some and edit this post and include them.
 
Quogue, If they can force you to wear a seatbelt, disguising in the form of "It'll save lives!", and take away your choice to live through an accident , or die in one (no seatbelt), then freedom of choice no longer exists. Out de window. I hear all kinds of excuses from people that its a good idea, but I considered that the first infraction of my personal choises. ME, I wear the seatbelt because I understand its value. NO ONE had to tell me that. BUT, to be forced by a law to comply----well, I drew the line THAT day! Our first freedom of choice taken over by a Government that has a lot more than that in mind for its people. Remember the people?? The folks who are supposed to run this outfit?? Well, there too busy playing with their toys, or chasing around, rather than keeping a watchful eye on the crooks over us. I am in NO way suprised by the further assininity put on our shoulders by a Goverment that does not listen to those who own them. Now, the corporations run this country, and it gets more evident everyday. America no longer exists. At least, not the one I grew up in. This is more like Pre-Nazi Germany. I am an avid student of History, and the paralells are just too scary as to how they manipulate us. WISE UP YOU GUYS!!!!
 
I can understand banning certain light bulbs.
Incandescent bulbs are very inefficient. Fluorescents use less than half the energy that incadescents use.
Imagine how much fuel we could save if everybody used more efficient light bulbs.

We have an energy problem not only in this country but the world. We have to take steps to conserve what we can. Changing to a more efficient light bulb is such a small thing that can make a big difference.
 
Well, with the lightbulbs, I'm not saying it's a bad idea to change to more efficient ones... by people choosing to do so, not being forced by self-righteous politicians.
As for the seatbelts, the same schmuck who pushed that law in NY is trying to ban alcohol on the commuter trains I take everyday. I've never seen anyone get drunk on rush-hour, only people who had a hard days work and enjoy a tall cold one on the hour it takes to get home such as myself...

All's I should say is with freedoms comes responsibilities. But when everything's banned and censored, what freedoms will we have then?
 
I think You all have a good point but im with Bugweed... this is stupid.. and the seatbelt issue can be compared with smoking, drinking and driving, noodling (in some states), and drug issues.

All are dangerous, but if done correctly or responsibly then their should be no need for a law.

Same thing goes for this light bulb thing. I mean seriously do they need to take away what kind of light bulbs we use?

Thats just stupid. *grrr* government.
 
Quogue, If they can force you to wear a seatbelt, disguising in the form of "It'll save lives!", and take away your choice to live through an accident , or die in one (no seatbelt), then freedom of choice no longer exists. Out de window. I hear all kinds of excuses from people that its a good idea, but I considered that the first infraction of my personal choises. ME, I wear the seatbelt because I understand its value. NO ONE had to tell me that. BUT, to be forced by a law to comply----well, I drew the line THAT day! Our first freedom of choice taken over by a Government that has a lot more than that in mind for its people. Remember the people?? The folks who are supposed to run this outfit?? Well, there too busy playing with their toys, or chasing around, rather than keeping a watchful eye on the crooks over us. I am in NO way suprised by the further assininity put on our shoulders by a Goverment that does not listen to those who own them. Now, the corporations run this country, and it gets more evident everyday. America no longer exists. At least, not the one I grew up in. This is more like Pre-Nazi Germany. I am an avid student of History, and the paralells are just too scary as to how they manipulate us. WISE UP YOU GUYS!!!!

Well, Weed, I mostly agree with you .... accept, believe it or not, on the seatbelt issue. Yes, it SEEMS like you may have the right to live or die in an accident, but you really don't. When some dumb idiot gets killed in an accident, it forces up my insurance costs. So, your choice can affect other people negatively.

The lightbulb thing is not really all that bad. I think a ban is crazy, and it should be approached in a different manner, but the spirit is good.

The no alcohol on trains? Ok, yes drunk people on a train can be annoying. No one has the right to not be annoyed. Also, I think the person with this idea is trying to deal with the world as he or she thinks it should be, rather than how it is. If you can't ride with alcohol, people are going to DRIVE with it, because there is less liklihood of being caught. Not a good scenario.
 
I totally agree with Bugweed on All aspects. I have been saying the same thing for years about the seat belts. I have heard all the excuses from the insurance premiums to it save lives and all that BS. It is still government manipulation. Plain and simple. What the government needs to do is enforce the laws it already has and stop giving back the licenses to people who exhibit the inability to drive. It is too easy to get a drivers license today. I was driving solo at 16, and looking back I probably should not have been driving. I wrecked my first care a month after getting my license. If you look at things from a certain angle EVERYTHING you do affects someone else some how some way. I can get offended by the outfits some people where. Just because they look so bad in them. Yet you do not hear me complaining and asking them to ban the cloths they wear. I get offended when I go to talk to someone and they have the most foul breath known to man, but I am not going to ask for a law that says they have to brush 3 times a day and go to the dentist. The point is there are many many different things people do that affect other peoples pockets.

The CF vs Light bulb. I agree it is a good idea, but not one worthy of legislation. I have changed almost every light bulb out in my house with the exception of the fancy bulbs and I haven;t noticed a different in my electric bill. It is more than likely the advent of winter and the use of my heater more. Who knows. This is just another example of our BIG BROTHER trying to tell us what is best for us. Granted I know we need to wear seat belts, and use CF, but the government does not have the right IMO to legislate that. I guess it is the same thing as trans fats and I supported its ban, but using a CF over a incandescent is not going to kill you like eating trans fat that is stuck into foods.

This is why America is going to **** and fast. Granted it is still better than most other places ti live, but for how long? I swear it is going to get to the point where we are not going to be able to spit on the sidewalk on Tuesday pretty soon. It is coming and I will be one of those sitting back telling people "I told you so" when everyone is complaining about all the gooberment control, and how every thought they have has to be approved by someone and they cannot take a doodie without the gooberment knowing or telling you how you can wipe your behind.
 
First the Seatbelt thing is based on the fact that first emergency personel will respond to the accident costing tax payer money. Second they take the people in an accident to a hospital if they are injured, which is more common if your not wearing your seatbelt. If you dont have insurance who pays the medical bills for you? We all do. So if your not wearing your seatbelt and you dont have insurance you cost us all alot of money. Plus your driving on a public road which gives the gov't the right to regulate you. No one is complaining about needing a licence to drive yet its still the same principal you have to follow all the rules of the road.

Lightbulbs on the other hand are rediculous. If they really want to get rid of them they should just tax them to make them more expensive and bring in more revinue. Use the extra tax to do enviromental clean up as pollution is the result of more engery production.

My state (Michigan) is currently proposing a ban on smoking in all public places including restaurants and bars (Look what you started California). I know many states and cities have passed similar laws but I feel this infringes on the rights of the establishments owner to choose if they will have a smoke free building or not. I dont believe its the governments job to regulate that. If people dont want smoking in a restaurant then patronize ones that are smoke free. Let economic push the issue not the law. Dont take away someones freedom let the people decide, and as we all know money talks.

Bugweed, I agree that the United States is looking alot like Germany before the war. I would say at this point it would be more like early Nazi control of the government. We are slowing loosing out rights, including fundimentals like the right to privace or the writ of habeus corpus. All we lack at this piont is the SS goose stepping through Baghdad and Tehran. We all need to wake up before we loose all our rights and end up in a police state, the exact oposite of what we seem to think our common cultural ideals are.
 
  • #10
Ktulu you just had a very hypocritical post. Here is why. You are for the seatbelt mandation, but not smoking bans. Hrrmm How many deaths are "linked" to second hand smoke? Granted I choose to go into that bar or restaurant. What if I smoke and my wife didn't smoke and I wanted to go eat someplace that was not smoke free and because my wife loves me agrees to go. Now she is being exposed to second hand smoke because it is a smoking place. Plus it is her right to eat there too ya know. Without having to breath in second hand smoke. You don't agree with the smoking ban for yet you agree with the seatbelt law. Granted I am not for the smoking ban either, but now atleast my wife doesn;t have to breath in the second hand smoke.

The fact still remains that the cause of a lot of the accidents are folks who do not need a license anyway! So lets fix a symptom and not the problem.

I also realize that the higher rate of injury due to not wearing a seatbelt could reflect negatively on everyone else's insurance premiums. YET you still are not giving me a reason that is justifiable for the seatbelt law. You are far more likely to kill yourself or get injured riding a motorcycle. Are you going to propose we ban them? My point is there are a lot of things that people do that increase the cost for everyone in one way shape or form. Are you going to ban all those or legislate something for all of those? Those welfare families that keep popping out babies are costing more and more of my tax dollars on a regular basis yet your not complaining we ban them from having more babies!!!! That is not a jab at those who use it as a crutch to get on your feet. That is a jab at those who use it as a means for living without having to better their self. So your going to take away my right to choose not to wear a seatbelt, but your not going to take away the right of a welfare mother from having her umpteenth baby. As I said there are many other things that cost everyone money. If the gooberment starts banning them all then what kind of America would be be?
 
  • #11
The seat belt point is flat irrelevant. Driving is a privilege NOT a right. You don't want to wear a seat belt? Take the bus. End of story.

As for the light bulb thing.. Is the law going to be that you may not buy incandescant bulbs? Stores can not market them? Or manufacturers may not produce them? Each option provides a different argument.
 
  • #12
I completely agree. We should legislate against catholicism. Their rampant breeding is putting a strain on society.

Seriously though, welfare people who won't stop having kids just piss the hell out of me! OK, it's fine with me if they are on welfare, but come on, why bring another kid into the hell that is your every day life when you can barely (with tax payers help) support the other starving kids while you go to the horse races and buy crack?

Woah, went out on a tangent there lol. Anyway the point remains that... condoms are good and crack is whack.. yo peace out.


About light bulbs, I don't see the big deal. Just put it into legislation tax breaks for CF users. Say... 50 cents per bulb you can write off. Incandescents are inefficient and ugly... at the same side we've gone through at least 10 CF's trying to get the damn things to work in our cieling fans in the Lroom. For some reason unknown to me they last a week or two then burn out. I guess because a 29 watt bulb shouldn't go into a 60 watt socket lol. Do you KNOW how big those 60 watt pc's are? It's absurd!


What's next? Making dandelions illegal so your neighbors don't have to look at them? Oh wait, that's what the HOA is for. They're all appearance nazi's I tell ya.
 
Last edited:
  • #13
I'm with vft guy in SJ -driving is a privilege NOT a right- thats why it can be given and taken away. You are driving on public roads and putting my wallet at risk every time you get hurt. I mean most young adults that die in accidents in my age group don’t wear seatbelts and it drives the insurance sky-high for me and its not fair. Giving them a choice will only make it worse for me, them, their families, etc. Who exactly wins when you don’t wear a seatbelt? Nobody, that’s who. It does no good.

As for lightbulbs, fluorescent really provides so much benefit, and people just don’t use it out of habit. This would be a kick in the pants to jumpstart widespread conversion- I don’t know if banning is the right course of action, but something should be done.
 
  • #14
I think You all have a good point but im with Bugweed... this is stupid.. and the seatbelt issue can be compared with smoking, drinking and driving, noodling (in some states), and drug issues.

All are dangerous, but if done correctly or responsibly then their should be no need for a law.

Same thing goes for this light bulb thing. I mean seriously do they need to take away what kind of light bulbs we use?

Thats just stupid. *grrr* government.
Nep_AK, there is no such thing as "correct or responsibe" driving while under the influence.

About the light bulbs- I believe as that the government shouldn’t have the power to “force everyone to use CF’s.” I do feel that they have a responsibility to increase awareness of the fact that fluorescents are more efficient, therefore increasing the number of people of with a bit more knowledge of "environment-friendly" energy consumption…
 
  • #15
Nep_AK, there is no such thing as "correct or responsibe" driving while under the influence.

Very good point there.
 
  • #16
Yeah I agree. If you aren't wearing a seatbelt or are intoxicated (seatbelt or no) you are irresponsible. This isn't some philosophical paradox, it's a simple fact. There's no right, careful way to drive intoxicated because when you are drunk/high what you think you're doing and what you think is happening and what really is going on are completely different. A car can appear to go 100 MPH or 10 and BAM you're dead.

Forcing people not to sell trans fat or forcing people to use CF's is a lot like dictatorship IMO. Last time I remember, countries that make all of the decisions and micromanage people's lives don't tend to last very long.

As far as noodling... lol that's just... lol ok, whatever lol. Have fun with that is all I can say lmao
 
  • #17
Ktulu you just had a very hypocritical post. Here is why. You are for the seatbelt mandation, but not smoking bans. Hrrmm How many deaths are "linked" to second hand smoke? Granted I choose to go into that bar or restaurant. What if I smoke and my wife didn't smoke and I wanted to go eat someplace that was not smoke free and because my wife loves me agrees to go. Now she is being exposed to second hand smoke because it is a smoking place. Plus it is her right to eat there too ya know. Without having to breath in second hand smoke. You don't agree with the smoking ban for yet you agree with the seatbelt law. Granted I am not for the smoking ban either, but now atleast my wife doesn;t have to breath in the second hand smoke.

The fact still remains that the cause of a lot of the accidents are folks who do not need a license anyway! So lets fix a symptom and not the problem.

I also realize that the higher rate of injury due to not wearing a seatbelt could reflect negatively on everyone else's insurance premiums. YET you still are not giving me a reason that is justifiable for the seatbelt law. You are far more likely to kill yourself or get injured riding a motorcycle. Are you going to propose we ban them? My point is there are a lot of things that people do that increase the cost for everyone in one way shape or form. Are you going to ban all those or legislate something for all of those? Those welfare families that keep popping out babies are costing more and more of my tax dollars on a regular basis yet your not complaining we ban them from having more babies!!!! That is not a jab at those who use it as a crutch to get on your feet. That is a jab at those who use it as a means for living without having to better their self. So your going to take away my right to choose not to wear a seatbelt, but your not going to take away the right of a welfare mother from having her umpteenth baby. As I said there are many other things that cost everyone money. If the gooberment starts banning them all then what kind of America would be be?



I guess you sort of missed my point there. I did put in there but slipped it in at the end of the first paragraph. Its a publicly owned vs. privately owned type of situtation. The seatbelts is a proper step by the government IMO because you drive on publicly owned and maintained roads, so our represenatives (our collective voices in government) have the right to regulate if we need to wear a seatbelt or not on a publicly owned road. Now the smoking ban is regulating a privately owned facility. This is a violation of rights by the government IMO because the establishment is owned by an individual or individuals and they should have sole discretion as to how it is run as long as they dont violate any other laws such as feeding people unsafe foods. Whats next you cant smoke in your house? Although I dont smoke I do not think it should be ban by the gov't. I choose not to go to restaurants that are not smoke free and if everyone did this then the majority of places would be smoke free but a few places would still be there for smokers. As for your wife following you into a smoky bar or restaurant, it was her choice. She chose to follow you in there, she could have said no and not followed you in there, no could have made her, just as no one could have stopped you from smoking if your in a smoking establishment. Again its publicly owned vs. privately owned. I would support a law that would require establishments to post by the door if they were a smoking or non-smoking building so that you could make an informed choice as a consumer, but banning it out right violates the owners right to chose.
 
  • #18
I saw two potential SD laws, one of wich was to ban smoking in bars and casinos. I think people have a right to smoke in these areas, and it is a traditional area to do so. The other... well i really dont want to go into that topic.
 
  • #19
I do. What's the other place?

Smoking in bars and casinos go together like redbull and vodka.
 
  • #20
FFOOOOOOOOODDDDDDDDDD FFFFFIIIIGGGGGGHHHHHHHHTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Back
Top