The Nanny-State Mentality, In Sound-Bite Form

Print This Post

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. SPQR says:

    Can I advocate tar and feathers or is that a Federal crime already?

  2. Scott Jacobs says:

    Clearly a man who suffers from an advanced case of Cranial/Anal Inversion.

  3. I dunno, it seems like he's only getting in on half the fun. What I think he actually meant was:

    "When people are doing things that are detrimental to their own well being, then government should step in."

    There, fixed it for you.

  4. Whoops, ruined the gag with the html typo. Take 2?

    “When people are doing things that are detrimental to their own well being, then government should step in.”

  5. Damian P. says:

    I don't really like it when people call this kind of thing "nannyism," because neither of my grandmothers would have proposed something this stupid.

  6. crunchback says:

    I think people should be encouraged to use Ipods and stuff while crossing the street. Let's get those morons out of the gene pool.

  7. TomH says:

    Is there some proof, some iota of objective evidence, that this accident would have been prevented had Mr. King not been wearing headphones?

    Frankly, every time I hear of one of these asinine nanny state legislative suggestions (somehow they never make it to the floor of the respective legislative body) I wonder if it is serious or some kind of negative, no-publicity-is-bad-publicity things

  8. Fffffffffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!

  9. G Thompson says:

    Damn…
    but…but… now where are we gunna find good Darwin award contenders if no one can be a complete idiot and not take responsibilities for there own stupidity.

    Please think of the Darwin Awards ;(

  10. C. S. P. Schofield says:

    When people are doing things that are detrimental to their own well being, then government will step in it.

    9.95 times out of 10

  11. SG says:

    I, being a good citizen, hereby purport a better version of this bill :

    "It shall be unlawful for anyone to be distracted by anything while walking or crossing the street. The government suggests, for the well-being of the citizens, that their eyes remain strictly fixed ahead and in front of them. Thus it is forbidden for any citizen's eyes to wander more than 5 degrees to the right or left in the horizontal plane, or to wander more than 5 degrees high or low in the vertical plane, while walking or crossing the street ; an exception being provided for when a citizen must look right and left for incoming traffic. This mandated exceptional deviation of sight will only be made at the request of an automatic video-scanning and audio system installed throughout all cities, towns, and agglomerations, and operated by the Transportation Security Agency (TSA)."

  12. SPQR says:

    SG, or we could just put iPod's under the jurisdiction of the ATF and have them classified as AOW – Any Other Weapon – with the requisite transfer tax. ATF's regulations are vague and broad enough already to encompass them.

  13. mojo says:

    When politicians do things that are detrimental to my freedom, they should be slapped.