Election Thread

[kandrathe]

...You have to do a degree of protection of the masses, because quite a lot of behaviours that I've spoken of are careless, reckless, or simply driven by greed at the expense of others.
...The difference between not adhering to regulation in the former, against the latter, is that in the former, the regulation is there for a good reason - it's something that the employer/producer/driver should be doing in the first place if they have any concern for the safety of others. In the latter, it's a non-functioning band-aid.

The problem I see is that a few examples of bad behavior (by individuals or companies) are not only addressed with punishments, but then also followed up with more regulations to prevent anyone from ever being able to offend again which are punitive against everyone, offender and non-offender alike.

So in my life, I've been harassed by the government for growing raspberry bushes or not shoveling my driveway quickly enough after a snow storm. If the government thinks raspberry bushes are a nuisance, well who am I to argue. If I happen to be out of town when it snows, well gosh I should have made arrangements with a neighborhood kid to keep me covered.

In this state for many years, everyone had to go out of their way to get their car checked for smog emissions until they figured out that 99.9% of all vehicles passed the test and the detection stations were a huge waste of money.

Another example, telling bar owners they cannot allow smoking on their property.

Another example, requiring everyone to wear a seat belt. Because, it's the State responsibility to protect everyone from being stupid. Let's ignore the escalating violent crime rate, but by all means let's get those miscreant unsafe seat belt violators. I bet this is top on the list of why people enter the field of law enforcement.

Another example, this state is looking into providing free health care for every child in the state. This is beyond Minnesota Care, which states that if you are turned down by three insurance companies the State will insure you. See this way the state can be sure that you have all the programs covered that they want your child to participate. Who pays for this?

Another example, this state is looking into paying high school students to take difficult classes like math and sciences. So like education is no longer its own incentive, now we need to pay kids to go to school. Who pays for this?

Another example, child psychologists hired in every school district to review the mental state of every child (with the parents consent -- nice that they ask). Again, not only is this opening the door for huge issues between parents and schools disagreeing on how to raise Johnny, but who pays for this?

Another example, no one under the age of 18 can own, purchase or rent a video game that is rated M - Mature and risk a $25 dollar fine per offense, regardless of parental permission (because the state knows best). Because children aren't covered by the Bill of Rights, and don't get 1st amendment freedom.