• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

City/County governments imposing bans.

bczoom

Super Moderator
Staff member
USMC Veteran
NYC Health Department Proposes Ban on Trans Fats
It sounds like Chicago has the same thing in mind.

Pittsburgh City Counsil just passed a smoking ban for the entire county (in public places).

Should the government have the right to ban legal things? The cooking oil one in particular bothers me... Why do they get to dictate what I eat or cook with?:confused2:
 
bczoom said:
Should the government have the right to ban legal things? The cooking oil one in particular bothers me... Why do they get to dictate what I eat or cook with?:confused2:

Because, we pay taxes that are supposed to be used for our welfare and to protect us from harm, even if it it is self inflicted. The tobacco and trans fats may take over our cities and country and we are just to stupid to recognize the real dangers as individuals and thus we need government intervention. That is why we go to the polls to elect these politicians to office to protect and serve....and collect a lot of tax money from the people to waste on things that individuals should do for themselves if they could only use there head for more than a hat rack. Once a legal item is banned it then becomes an illegal item and if used taxes will increase thru the other tax method called fines. :confused:
 
Chicago is now debating getting rid of the Foi Gras ban but that brought out the Animial Rights folks again.

Chicago is also looking at a mild verison of the trans-fat proposal, it limits the trans-fats in 'fast food' establishments but not in 'sit down/dine-in' establishments.

To me all of it is nuts. I tend to agree with what Bill wrote!
 
I think this is fine as long as it doesn't infringe upon the rights guaranteed in the Federal and State constitutions. If cities want to be kooky and impose petty politically trendy laws then they can and if people don't like it they can vote in politicians that won't make stupid laws or they can move.
 
What a great debate! I love all the posts above. You guys have covered most of the intelligent positions one could take on this. I was ready to jump all over this law and condemn if for being "nanny government" but PBinWA did a great job of explaining the local aspects of this. We need to have lots of local control in the USA because that lets different cities, counties and states impose totally different laws, and then we can look at them and compare them. Just like going into a department store and comparing products --- it's free market idealism applied to politics.

But for the record, I'd want to boot anyone out of office who tried to legislate what I eat. I do strongly support laws that require information to be available to consumers. This is already available. Let stupid people eat how they want, it will "thin the herd" and help keep their genes out of future generations of humans. :D
 
Personally, I hate Doritos now that they don't have trans-fat in them. I used to love them but something changed - it was the trans fat!

I need a "Bring back the Trans Fat!" smiley! ;)
 
The free market is already taking care of the trans-fat issue. There are more and more products on the market advertising that they have no trans-fats. My family stopped consuming trans-fats years ago by choice. It's some bad stuff for your heart and your intestines. Should government make laws banning trans fats? No, but perhaps restaruants should give full disclosure to its patrons if they use hydrogenated oils, etc., in their cooking like food companies do with ingredient labels. Let people choose what they want to eat, but tell them what's in what they are eating.
 
PBinWA said:
I need a "Bring back the Trans Fat!" smiley! ;)
Your avatar will suffice. :bigMoon:

Cityboy said:
The free market is already taking care of the trans-fat issue...
...Should government make laws banning trans fats? No, but perhaps restaruants should give full disclosure to its patrons... tell them what's in what they are eating.
YESSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Look at what we get to vote in!

Flint hill vinyards is just the road from me. You should see the money the guy is investing in his place, but people are afraid that if he could sell alcohol and have events such as weddings and "get togethers" on his property, all hell is going to break loose and nothing but "drunkards" and "degenerates" will come.

YADKINVILLE, N.C. -- Wineries are a big part of Yadkin County's growing tourist industry. But -- except in five vineyard tasting rooms and the town of Yadkinville -- you can't buy a glass of wine within its borders.
County commissioners want voters to say whether they'd like that to change. They voted 5-0 Monday night to hold a referendum some time next year -- probably February or March -- on whether to legalize the sale of wine throughout the county.
"I think the people of this county should have the right to vote on an issue that's important to them," said Commissioner Brady Wooten, the chairman of the board.
The county's Economic Development Council recommended the ballot.
Tourism revenue in Yadkin County rose from $24.17 million to $26.95 million -- an 11.5 percent jump -- between 2003 and 2004, according to the state Department of Commerce.
Every county around Yadkin allows wine sales, and it's also legal in Yadkinville after voters in 2003 voted 317-315 to legalize the sale of wine, though not beer or mixed drinks.
Federal and state laws allow vineyards and wineries to sell their own wine on their properties. The county now has five tasting rooms, the newest of which -- Flint Hill Vineyards outside East Bend -- opened in October.
Legalizing wine sales throughout the county would provide an incentive for tourists who visit those vineyards to eat in the county's restaurants and stay in its hotels, industry participants say.
"Once we get them across the mighty Yadkin, it will be an opportunity to keep them here," said Tim Doub, the owner of Flint Hill Vineyards. "It's nice to have the county leaders' support for the industry in its infancy."
But others in the county say it's a question of quality of life rather than making money.
Phil Beavers, a pastor at South Oak Ridge Baptist Church outside Yadkinville, said he opposes legalizing the sale of wine. He believes that most people in the county agree with him.
"The people of the county, they're family-loving people, and they realize the problems that alcohol of any sort create for the family," Beavers said. "I think there is just the feeling that drinking alcohol of any sort is just not what they want in the community."

Whats somewhat funny is that everyone in the county who wants to drink usually stops at the gas stations just outside the county line, buys a six pack, then drinks it on the drive home, then throws the cans and bottles off the exit ramps. For a dry county, you wouldn't believe all the beer cans and bottles on the side of the road.

Give you an idea of the work the guy put into the "house" at Flint Hill, a before and after pic. Amazes me to some extent that people are against this guy and his business. Ironic as well that tabacco farming is on the decline, but wineries, particularly in this area, are growing (no pun intended)
 

Attachments

  • restore_400.jpg
    restore_400.jpg
    28.8 KB · Views: 20
  • house.jpg
    house.jpg
    59.2 KB · Views: 19
Last edited:
dzalphakilo said:
...a pastor at South Oak Ridge Baptist Church outside Yadkinville, said he opposes legalizing the sale of wine.
:tonguewit :stroke: :angry3:
Freedom of religion is a beautiful thing. Now, if only the religious would respect the freedom of the rest of us and keep their stupid rules to their congregations...
dzalphakilo said:
...everyone in the county who wants to drink usually stops at the gas stations just outside the county line, buys a six pack, then drinks it on the drive home, then throws the cans and bottles off the exit ramps. For a dry county, you wouldn't believe all the beer cans and bottles on the side of the road.
Yup. We have "dry counties" in Texas and I bought a house in one just south of Austin. There were serious drunk-driving problems on the roads between the booze joints and the dry zone, so it was normal to see major accidents blocking 4-lane highways. Fortunately there are lots of back roads to use as alternatives but I recall one night when 2 of my back-up routes were also blocked, and all 3 road closures were because of drunks getting in wicked wrecks.
 
DingoTango said:
Yup. We have "dry counties" in Texas and I bought a house in one just south of Austin.

With some of those musical festivals and great source of musicians around Austin, never thought there would be a dry county for hundreds of miles around that town..
 
Top