I thought this might be interesting. It would seem you need a permit to have a lemonade stand at your front yard. John Stossel talks about it on Fox News. Look here. My parents showed me a recording on illegal everything, John interviewed people who were treated like a drug cartel for importing lobsters in plastic bags even though this person had done this for years. He interviewed people who lost their home because the government thought there land was a flood plain even though it was proven not to be. He interviewed a man who was told to get rid of a tree because it was quote "not the right tree for the home" which I cannot make sense of. Nowadays you can't sell chicken or pigs without a warrant; and these people are farmers who have done these before , they know how to slaughter a pig. People can't sell raw milk because it is unhealthy (which in many cases it is), but the people say they have a right to have raw milk and that the government shouldn't tell them what to eat. Today taxi drivers need to have a medallion on there car in order to give people a ride which costs 3 millions dollors. John even mentioned about a family getting fined for having a prayer meeting at their own home. Do any of these sound right to you? Should we make having a lemonade stand illegal without a permit? Do any of these have common sense?
I'm pretty sure they don't go to that extreme in reality. They ask to see your permit. If you have said permit, then you can continue selling. If you do not, then they'll tell you to take down your stand. They might fine you at that point. If you don't cease your selling of lemonade, then they might take it down for you and/or fine you. If they're going to the extreme referenced above, then they're most likely going to get sued.
If you are going to sell stuff to the public in a store, then you have to pass certain health regulations. You're argument is now, "but people should be able to buy whatever they want whenever they want wherever they want. I somewhat agree...but there is a catch to it. With the exception of maybe you and a few others, most people buy things for personal consumption under the assumption that they're not going to contract some illness from the food stuffs. If you know that gallon of raw milk is virus enriched and just don't care about the future hell your bowels are going to go through, then by all means buy it and chug it. These regulations haven't just been haphazardly placed on food distribution locales. They are in response to the horrendously disgusting ways in which food was prepared and stored years ago. Odds are that if someone doesn't have to spend the extra money that comes with sanitary preparation and storage, then they won't. If you don't care that your drive through window employee has a staph infection on his/her uncovered hand, then by all means have the person handle your food. Just imagine the potential outbreak. I wonder just how many bags and food items are handled by individuals working at fast food drive throughs in a single shift. If people aren't treated uniformly w/ respect to the law, then other people get a toe hold into either suing for being prosecuted or getting their way with the process.
"Oh, that little girl doesn't have to wear a hair net, go through sanitation inspections, wear gloves... She's even sneezing all over the merchandise! Why do I get fined for doing all those things and she doesn't?!?!?"
I would like for that whole little lemonade stand scenario to just be overlooked, but the person IS technically infringing on the law.
As for importing animals like lobsters and such... The problem with bringing in non-indigenous species or animals of the same species but from a different area is that said animals may out compete the natives or get them sick. There exists in this world things we've termed "viruses." Locals to an area that has an ever present level of a virus will develop immunities and resistances to said virus. If you introduce a virus to a population that has never seen that particular strain, then the ramifications may be extremely unpleasant. It doesn't even have to be a virus. It's the same way with introducing non-native bacteria. If the pathogen or whatever makes it into the native population, then it could wipe out an entire industry... clams with clam eating worms, animals and viruses, animals with bacteria, etc. If someone's smuggling in a lobster into an area ended up destroying the native lobster population of that area, then I'd think their actions would be worse in comparison to the drug cartels. You don't necessarily need to treat the people like they're that caliber of criminal, but it may at times be necessary to enforce such regulations.
There are times when the system is abused, but there are also times when it isn't being abused and people just like to complain b/c they got caught doing something that could've otherwise had terrible repercussions for everyone else.
As for the food safety procedure- its kind of necessary. These procedures are what let us go into a restaurant anywhere in the country (well... anywhere populated enough to get inspected) and be confident when we eat our food. I took a food safety class in order to get my license so I could work in the food industry. It wasn't time consuming, hard, or expensive. It merely required that we know basic things that people working in the industry should know (how hot should chicken be cooked, how long can rice be left out at room temperature, etc).
This is when food safety goes too far. Food safety is great and it's wonderful that restaurants are being observed, but what's important is that customers know what they're getting. This market that sold raw foods was raided by a SWAT team. There are so many situations where women are being *****, children murdered, and they send a SWAT team in to point guns at INNOCENT people. Hold a gun in your hand, and you'll understand the absolute horror behind having a gun pointed at you.
If people want raw foods, they should be allowed to take the risks associated with raw food. People generally know what they buy, and if a person goes out of their way to buy raw food, then I highly doubt they're ignorant of the slightly possible health hazards.
You have to sign a waiver at Buffalo Wild Wings to attempt their hot wings challenge, so I wouldn't think it to be all that big of a deal to sign a waiver for stuff such as under cooked food and the like. The swat thing was a tad much.
If people want raw foods, they should be allowed to take the risks associated with raw food. People generally know what they buy, and if a person goes out of their way to buy raw food, then I highly doubt they're ignorant of the slightly possible health hazards.
Sontavarius said, there are already procedures that Raw Foods could be modeled on. In my state, you have to have a very specific warning on your menu if you sell sushi, and you have to denote which items actually contain raw fish. A similar thing could very well be implemented for raw foods, and I would not be surprised if it is, especially if the Raw Food trend continues.
People generally know what they order... mostly b/c they ordered it. What they don't know is what goes on behind closed doors (unless it's all see through glass!). Regulating things on the level of what you can and cannot do w/o the consent of the buyer is one thing... and saying a chef can't prepare the food to the buyer's specifications are another.
I know this is a double, and I apologize. I have a question relating to the topic that I just thought up. I have a hypothetical situation I'd like to delve into first. Lets pretend that there exists a virus that infects both cattle and humans. Now, the virus infects cattle by some obscure means, but it can only infect humans upon ingestion of the raw milk and human to human interaction. Said virus develops all manner of welts and sores on the victim's skin(the pustular material has infection potential!). It can often times be life threatening! Long story short... it's contagious by means of human to human interaction. This virus is denatured and destroyed upon pasteurization of milk. The methods used to test the milk for the virus aren't very reliable.
Now here comes my question... If such a thing's existence were to be acknowledged by the government, should it be within the government's power to prohibit the selling of the host medium, in this instance it is the milk, so as to work towards eradicating said malady? An individual who is fine with taking his chances runs the risk of not only infecting himself but becoming a vector of distribution to any and all unwilling third parties. ...or does the government just need to butt out on this one?
did you know that they can arrest you in the usa if they think you are a terrorist, even if they have no evidence that you are one?
or SOPA/PIPA as an example. they want to censor the internet, why not using hidden webcams to observe every single step you do so they can arrest you if you do something wrong, pretending they used something as like in the movie minority report.
Uhhh...Only thing I gotta say to this is that the police aren't gonna (if I'm wrong, then they shouldn't) kill innocents, or even send SWAT teams for unhealthy foods. The police should just tell the kid's parents that they can't have a lemonade stand without a permit and get a small fine. If they're selling raw milk, then they should be fined (pretty heavily [but not too heavily] 'cause of the public health risks), but if someone can get their hands on some, then they should be allowed to do so, no public harm done. And you know, I never understood why people should be fined for committing suicide, its not their fault whoever killed themselves.
They sent a swat team to arrest a business man for importing lobsters in plastic bags. He was sentenced for about 8 years in prison. They treated him as if he was selling drugs. Now he is broke, his business gone under, and he got a divorce from his wife.
Today taxi drivers need to have a medallion on there car in order to give people a ride which costs 3 millions dollors
Yes this is completly legit, millionaires are the people who are driving people from place to place, it makes perfect sence.
A store got treated as a drug cartel because it was selling Raw milk. They acted as if it was drugs.
Seriously I need a link or soething because I could say they burnt down someone's house because their child had a pony without providing a link.
This is when food safety goes too far. Food safety is great and it's wonderful that restaurants are being observed, but what's important is that customers know what they're getting.
Yea that place really seemed like everyone that was buying the milk knew what it was and really they should be warned or something, it really didn't seem clear as to why they were inside their storage rooms though, there was no cop interveiwed or anything so you couldn't be absolutley sure that what they were going after was the milk.
They sent a swat team to arrest a business man for importing lobsters in plastic bags. He was sentenced for about 8 years in prison. They treated him as if he was selling drugs. Now he is broke, his business gone under, and he got a divorce from his wife.
Agian, link please, and also I've watched that show and it is expreamly one sided, even when they have two people on opposite sides debating, I have seen them stop the other side from debating or hindering him and building up the other, it's quite concerning that they do that.
