Nanny State Wants Safe Bridges

A new report from the nanny staters at the The American Road and Transportation Builders Association reports on the unsafe bridges in the USA. The US Federal Highway Administration acts like it is the nanny states job to determine if bridges are safe for our cars and trucks. We don’t need the nanny state acting like we are kids that need to be coddled.

If we see unsafe bridges we can just stop and turn around and go somewhere else. On highways this might be difficult but we can just stop before the last turn off for each bridge and send our drone ahead to inspect the bridge and then turn off if it is unsafe and take a different route.

Why does the nanny state act like it has to protect us from dangers? They really need to stop being such busy bodies and leave us alone.

The nanny state reported that 29,505 of 143,139 bridges on the national highway system were deficient. And they encourage other parts of the nanny state apparatus to make those bridges safe. They don’t seem to realize if we want to drive on safe bridges we can do that for ourselves, we don’t need a nanny state trying to make all the bridges safe for us.

Related: Nanny State Doesn’t Want People Texting While They DriveNanny Staters Think the Government Should Protect People From FraudNanny State Wants Safe Medicine

Nanny State Wants to Police Charities

We chose to donate to charities that we wish to. Why should the nanny state go bothering those charities to see whether the state approves of what they do? Not all of us want to donate to the needy or to the arts or to improve society. We may want to send those running the charity on vacations instead of focusing those dream vacations on people with terminal cancer.

The nanny state shouldn’t judge those charities we choose to donate to. But of course that doesn’t stop the nanny state.

The Federal Trade Commission and 58 law enforcement partners from every state and the District of Columbia have charged four sham cancer charities and their operators with bilking more than $187 million from consumers. The defendants told donors their money would help cancer patients, including children and women suffering from breast cancer, but the overwhelming majority of donations benefitted only the perpetrators, their families and friends, and fundraisers. This is one of the largest actions brought to date by enforcers against charity fraud.

They don’t know the thoughts of those giving to the charity. We are not fools. We don’t give money away without studying how it is spent. If we needed the nanny state to tell us how to spend our money we would ask.

According to the complaint, the defendants used the organizations for lucrative employment for family members and friends, and spent consumer donations on cars, trips, luxury cruises, college tuition, gym memberships, jet ski outings, sporting event and concert tickets, and dating site memberships. They hired professional fundraisers who often received 85 percent or more of every donation.

When we choose to give it to organizations that treat their staff well that is our choice.

The complaint alleges that, to hide their high administrative and fundraising costs from donors and regulators, the defendants falsely inflated their revenues by reporting in publicly filed financial documents more than $223 million in donated “gifts in kind” which they claimed to distribute to international recipients.

Donors certainly understood this. The nanny state acts as though they know better than us what we want to give money to support.

Read more about the nanny state actions – FTC, All 50 States and D.C. Charge Four Cancer Charities With Bilking Over $187 Million from Consumers

Related: Nanny Staters Think the Government Should Protect People From FraudNanny Staters Expect Sidewalks to be MaintainedNanny State Shouldn’t Bother Food Service Workers To Use Safe Health Practices

Nanny State Shouldn’t Have Food Service Workers Use Safe Health Practices

Sen. Thom Tillis (Republican, North Carolina):

“I don’t have any problem with Starbucks if they choose to opt out of this policy as long as they post a sign that says we don’t require our employees to wash their hands after leaving the restroom. The market will take care of that.”

As we said earlier, if consumers want safe milk they can test it themselves. Why should the government seek to help citizens be safe when we don’t want a nanny protecting us.

If we want to know if where our baby is safe from unvaccinated people, we can just ask every person if they are vaccinated before we bring our baby into the airplane or shopping mall or theme park. This isn’t tricky stuff. We don’t need a nanny state making things safe for society. If we want to protect ourselves, we can do the research and testing ourselves.

It is odd to think some people believe safety rules and regulations are needed when ancestors 20,000 years ago didn’t have any such things and we descended from them. They must have gotten along fine, otherwise we would be here.

I suppose some people might argue a social contract makes sense when we form urban societies where some might want expectations of safety and protection: from thieves, fraudsters, other criminals, unsafe products, unsafe medical practices, abuse by those with authority, unsafe roads, etc.. But that seems crazy. If we need safety we can just do the testing and research ourselves and avoid anything where we haven’t been able to independently access the safety of. Thinking we are society of people interacting with each other and with obligations to society is reckless.

It is much better to live in a nanny free state and view ourselves as individuals with freedom to behave however we want with the understanding we are on our own to protect ourselves from all the others that may not feel like providing safe services or products. It may seem a little daunting at first but I am sure we can figure it out without nannies.

Statue of Chairman Mao, Shanghai

Statue of Chairman Mao, Shanghai, China. Do people that believe in safety regulations want us to model our government on Chairman Mao’s policies?

Of course the Senator’s desire that the freedom of Starbucks be limited and they give notice of what safe practices they avoid is reverting to the nanny state ideas. He is a freshman senator so it isn’t surprising he hasn’t figured out the logical extension of his belief. Over time he should be able to be more logically consistent.

Related: Citizens Don’t Need Nanny State Deciding What Food is Safe to EatNanny Staters Think the Government Should Protect People From FraudNanny State Recalls Beef Shipped from Kansas

Nanny State Wants to Intrude When New Jersey Bars Try to Trick Customers

Once again the nanny staters are having the government act as our nanny. We don’t need the government figuring out if our drinks are dangerous. We can test the drinks ourselves if we want to protect ourselves.

Six Ways to Tell Your Bar Is Passing Off Cheap Liquor as the Good Stuff

On Wednesday, the New Jersey Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control raided 29 New Jersey bars and restaurants as part of Operation Swill, a year-long sting operation that caught these establishments allegedly pouring bottom-shelf liquor into top-shelf bottles and selling it to customers as the real deal

Sometimes, the fraud was a bit more blatant. “In one instance, a bar in New Jersey mixed rubbing alcohol with caramel food coloring and served it as scotch,” writes Brent Johnson in the Star-Ledger. “In another, a bar filled an empty liquor bottle with dirty water and passed it off as liquor.”

It should be obvious that we don’t need the Nanny State intruding if we are drinking alcohol. How many studies are there are about the risks of drinking alcohol? If we are trying to drink alcohol we can’t really be interested in out health can we?

Just leave us alone, and stop acting like we need the nanny state to protect us from tainted drinks (or just watered down drinks or being served something not quite what we ordered). If the bars can fool us why should the nanny state protect us from them – the bars just took advantage of our stupidity or laziness and it serves us right.

Related: Citizens Don’t Need Nanny State Deciding What Food is Safe to EatIf You Want Unpolluted Milk Just Test It Before You Drink ItNanny State Recalls Beef Shipped from Kansas

Nanny State Wants Safe Medicine

The nanny staters are at it again. They want to have the state protect people from dangerous medicine. Eliminating regulation and inspection allows for people to chose what they want instead of having the nanny make sure every thing is safe. If people really wanted safe medicine they could test it before they used it. Why does the state have to respond to people getting sick from contaminated medicine by acting like a nanny and trying to protect people from unsafe medicine?

From the nanny state’s own website: CDC Responds to Multistate Fungal Meningitis Outbreak

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in collaboration with state and local health departments and the
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is investigating a multistate fungal meningitis outbreak among patients who received contaminated steroid injections.

Patients and clinicians need to remain vigilant for onset of symptoms because fungal infections can be slow to develop. In this outbreak symptoms typically have appeared 1 to 4 weeks following injection, but it’s important to know that longer and shorter periods of time between injection and onset of symptoms have been reported. Therefore, patients and physicians need to closely watch for symptoms for at least several months following the injection. See updated Patient Guidance for more information, and contact your physician if you are concerned you may have become ill from your injection.

The FDA has inspected the production facility after the contaminated medicine was used and has issued a preliminary report of violation of nanny state regulations and laws on the manufacturing of drugs for medical use.

Nanny State Recalls Beef Shipped from Kansas

The nanny state that is the USA is at it again. The USDA issued a “Class 1 recall” of ground beef products shipped from Emporia, Kansas, by Tyson Fresh Meats to 14 states. Don’t these nanny’s understand we don’t want them meddling with our food? We can figure out what food is tainted or safe. If they keep protecting those of us who can’t they just weaken us all. If we want to protect ourselves from e-coli we can get testing equipment and test our food ourselves. If we just want to risk it without such tests that should be our business.


Ground Beef Recalled in 14 States

The E. coli contamination was first reported to the FSIS on Sept. 26 by the Ohio Department of Health. Ohio officials had collected contaminated ground beef from the Butler County homes of people who had taken ill after eating it. The investigation is ongoing.

Infection from the E. coli 0157:H7 bacterium can cause bloody diarrhea, abdominal pain, cramping or tenderness, dehydration, and in some people, fever, nausea, and vomiting. These symptoms usually start about three to five days after infection. Extreme cases can lead to fatal kidney failure. Those most susceptible to E. coli infection include the very young, the elderly, and those with weak immune systems.

E. coli food poisoning can be prevented by safely handling raw meat and by cooking ground beef to an internal temperature of at least 160 degrees Fahrenheit, which kills the bacterium.

If we keep trying to keep the food supply safe we just make people lazy just like the nanny state wants.

Related: Protecting the Food SupplyFood Safety and Inspection Service case archive

Nanny State Kills Wild Animals

56 exotic pets were let out by their owner. And what does the nanny state do? They come in and hunt down the animals and kill them. Once again the government shows a disregard for nature evolution and decides us weak little creature need to be protected from some animals. We didn’t used to need government to bud into our business like that. We survived for millions of years dealing with what nature had in store for us. But the nanny state thinks we can’t do it any more.

Police have shot and killed dozens of exotic animals in Ohio

Officials said the “volatile situation” of animals escaping from the 73-acre (29-hectare) Muskingum County Animal Farm and the approach of nightfall on Tuesday had prompted the shoot-to-kill order.

As usually the nanny state tries to justify such intervention by claiming the need to protect us.

Among those killed were 17 lions and 18 Bengal tigers. US nature TV host Jack Hanna said the killing of the tigers was especially tragic as there were only about 1,400 remaining in the world.

Mr Hanna said the scope of the event was immense. “This is like Noah’s Ark wrecking here in Zanesville,” he said.

He shot a gray wolf and a black bear, firing his pistol as the bear charged at him. The policeman said the bear was about 7ft (2m) away when he killed it with a single round. “All these animals have the ability to take a human out in the length of a second,” he told the Associated Press news agency.

The nanny state often tries to get popular experts to parrot their position like Mr. Jack Hanna a long time TV personality and animal expert.