Tag Archives: nanny state

Ban on Puppies: SC City Council to Limit Man’s Best Friend


For dog owners, their pets are part of their families. They treat them like family and love them like children. But now, families in Easley, S.C. with a large number of fur-covered kids are at risk as the City Council voted to put a limit on the number of dogs residents can own.

“To limit the amount of dogs that people have, I spent a lot of money on my animals, and if you try to make me get rid of them, who’s going to compensate me for all of that? Who’s going to compensate me for all the money I’ve spent on my animals? They’re like my children,” said Linda Hughes to the council.

Hughes, according to her neighbor, James Carpenter, has about 40 dogs on her property in kennels that were approved by the council. Carpenter said that he’s negatively affected by Hughes’ dogs.

“You are dealing with people’s animals, and they do love their animals, but at the same time, when their love for animals and their behavior affects my quality of life, my tranquility, we become upset, when we feel like they’re stepping on our rights,” said Carpenter.

A couple of the council members seemed uncomfortable with an ordinance limiting the number of dogs people could have, because they don’t want to limit personal freedom, reported Fox Carolina.

At the Oct. 13 meeting, the City Council approved the first reading of the ordinance in a five to two vote. The new ordinance would limit the number of dogs allowed at a home to five.

The council did agree that there should be an amendment to allow time for owners to find homes when their dogs have new litters.

The second and final reading is scheduled for Nov. 10.

Council member Brian Garrison said that typically, an ordinance would go into effect immediately, but they’ll likely discuss giving a grace period for this one to give people time to find homes for dogs if they exceed the new limit.


Please comment below. Does the government have a right to tell you how many pets you can own?

Feds Declare War on Raw Milk Cheese: Regulation Spoils Acclaimed Wisconsin Cheese


No matter which way you slice it, the federal government is turning Wisconsin cheesemakers’ moods extra stinky.

A soft raw milk cheese, Rush Creek Reserve, made by Uplands Cheese Company near Dodgeville, Wis. is the latest cheese to be ruined by regulation.

Newly imposed regulations may require aging periods for raw milk cheese to exceed the standard 60 days, which is already twice as long as European cheesemakers do. By the time Rush Creek Reserve completed the potential two month-plus aging period, the cheese would become overripe.

So, Uplands Cheese Co. has decided to no longer produce the much sought-after cheese.

According to the Chicago Reader, “It’s not because of anything that has happened at Uplands—[cheesemaker Andy] Hatch describes his most recent FDA inspection earlier in the summer as “really positive”—or, indeed, because of any particular incident anywhere that he knows of. But a cheese specifically designed for aging for 60 days—the rule since 1949—risks suddenly being afoul of newly imposed regulations which may mandate longer aging periods or other impossibly strict conditions for cheese making.”

Just like the FDA’s rule change on curing cheese on wood planks earlier this year, the potential for regulation change doesn’t make producing a cheese that could be illegal once it’s ready to be sold economically feasible. .

Wisconsin cheese blogger Jeanne Carpenter explains it this way: “The death of Rush Creek Reserve should act as the canary in the coal mine for all American raw milk artisan cheeses, because just as our great American artisan cheese movement is in serious full swing, the FDA has basically declared a war on raw milk cheese.”

Thankfully these changes don’t affect Pleasant Ridge Reserve, Upland Cheese’s most decorated and celebrated artisan cheese. But who knows what new rules the feds will come up with next.

More and more companies like Burger King are fleeing the U.S. and finding new homes in Canada where corporate tax rates are more favorable.

As the U.S. becomes increasingly business unfriendly with high taxes and regulations will cheese makers find a new home in another country? I certainly hope not.

Government Regulation Gone Wild: San Francisco Bans Fireplace Use On Christmas


Looks like New York City has some competition for Nanny State capital of America.

San Francisco’s Bay Area Air Quality Management District issued a “Winter Spare the Air Alert,” which banned the use of indoor and outdoor fires. It went into effect on Christmas Eve and extended through Christmas day.

During this time period, residents and businesses in the Bay Area were not allowed to burn natural wood or manufactured logs in any fireplace, wood stove, or fire pit. These rules applied regardless of whether or not the burning devices were approved by the Environmental Protection Agency.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District claimed the ban was put into effect to reduce pollution in the area. In an official statement, the agency said, “We want everyone to enjoy their holiday this week, but unfortunately, weather conditions are causing unhealthy, muddy air again. Air is forecast to be extremely unhealthy this week so it is imperative that residents protect air quality and not burn in their indoor or outdoor fireplaces.”

Jack Broadbent, executive officer of the Bay Area Air District, said, “Please respect everyone’s health this holiday by observing the Winter Spare the Air Alert and not burning wood in your fireplace. We don’t want anyone to spend their holiday in the emergency room because they are unable to breathe. In the spirit of giving, please give the gift of clean air.”

So, what happens to those who violate the rule? First-time offenders will be forced to either take a wood smoke awareness class or pay a $100 ticket. Second-time offenders will be fined $500.

This is San Francisco’s 18th Winter Spare the Air Alert of 2013.

Follow Kristin on Facebook and Twitter.

Latest Attack On Freedom: NY Raising The Age To Buy Cigarettes To 21

On Wednesday, New York City lawmakers adopted the strictest limits on tobacco purchases in any US city.

The change would make 21 the minimum age to buy cigarettes and other tobacco items (the current minimum age is 18). The New York City Council also voted to set a $10.50 minimum price for a pack of cigarettes.

The Council passed these new rules in the name of “keeping us healthy.”

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said, “This legislation will reduce smoking rates among New Yorkers — especially young New Yorkers — sparing them years of nicotine addiction and health problems.”

City Councilman James Gennaro, the bill’s sponsor, said, “This will literally save many, many lives.”

The new rules compliment recent efforts by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has been trying to raise tobacco taxes and make all restaurants and bars smoke-free.

Following the Council’s vote, Bloomberg said, “By increasing the smoking age to 21 we will help prevent another generation from the ill health and shorter life expectancy that comes with smoking. It’s critical that we stop young people from smoking before they ever start.”

As noble as the Council’s rules sound, there could be some down sides.

ABC News points out that “cigarette manufacturers have suggested young adult smokers may just turn to black-market merchants. And some smokers say it’s unfair and patronizing to tell people considered mature enough to vote and serve in the military that they’re not old enough to decide whether to smoke.”

Even if the new rule did make some people “healthier,” when did it become the government’s job to control what adults do to their own bodies? Has America become a complete nanny state? Of course, increased smoking regulation is tied to the advent of public health care. When Washington provides and pays for your health care, it will then try to control what you eat and smoke. Government continues growing.

America is supposed to be the Land of the Free. If people want to make poor choices, they should be allowed to. Of course, it is unfair to make the rest of us pay for their lung cancer. This is why ObamaCare (the biggest government power-grab in a generation) must be overturned immediately. In a free country, government cannot dictate lifestyle choices, nor can it become the overprotective Mommy and Daddy of its citizens. Freedom means having the right to make bad choices and then deal with the consequences ourselves.

Still, politicians will likely keep regulating. Quinn said, “We have to do more and that’s what we’re doing today.”