It must be a sign of the impending apocalypse. C.H.A.D. is in agreement with me on the stupid tan ban.
Coat Hangers at Dawn, a blog which sometimes takes a view opposite to mine is in complete agreement with the absolute stupidity of Senate Bill 208 - the Tan Ban which is going to find it's way to the Senate floor after a vote of the committee for which they should be embarrassed:
While I'm on the topic, as I mentioned, action on the stupidest bill to hit session this year was taken after they voted to bring it back for further discussion. Basically, there was testimony from a dermatologist who said exposure to tanning beds was bad for you.. If you can assume that people with melanoma have lived their lives in caves and under shrouds and are never exposed to sunlight.
I think it was Sandy "one term" Jerstad who noted that "this bill is a step towards awareness." To which I would respond that now we have the stupidest statement regarding the stupidest bill of the session. A double bonus.
A bill which declares non-permitted tanning as a class 2 misdemeanor is 'awareness?' Nonsense. 'Ridiculous' is more like it.
I'd give props to Senator Gant for standing in opposition to this silliness, and a nod to Senator Olson who at least had the foresight to stand for the measure being referred to appropriations. You know, you criminalize something, and someone is going to have to pay for enforcement. Despite that interjection of reasonableness, the flaming big government liberals on the committee rejected that notion 4-3.
So, it looks like the enforcement of the measure is going to be pawned off on the counties as an unfunded mandate that they're going to get stuck with. I'll bet the State's Attorney's are just going to jump at this one.
I do think Senator Gant said it best that with the bill declaring unapproved (via parent's note, I think) tan bed tanning as a class 2 misdemeanor, there's "no oversight, no funding, nothing to put in force, and no complaints"(of tanning bed based melanoma in SD).
Gant continued "We don't require Mayors to collect parent's notes for city pools. We don't require the GF&P to collect them for those exposed to the sun on the Missouri river, but now we're going to do it for tanning salons? This is wrong legislation."
When this hits the Senate floor, I'd encourage the Senators to send the bill back to appropriations, so they might at least try to fund their new mandate.
If not? Let's just hope they kill this turkey over in the House.
Yes there are some risks to tanning bed use. There are also health risks to drinking too much soda. The nanny state madness really really has to stop already.Read it here at C.H.A.D.
If people are really up in arms about these things there are better ways to handle them rather than making more and more confusing and unenforceable laws.
If you want teens to know the dangers of tanning beds, make people sign a waiver informing them of the risks. Make stores post a sign in the lobby. Done, solved. Even adults may not be aware of the potential risks of tanning bed use. You don't need to make laws restricting teens use and potentially making store owners criminals.
While I'm on the topic, as I mentioned, action on the stupidest bill to hit session this year was taken after they voted to bring it back for further discussion. Basically, there was testimony from a dermatologist who said exposure to tanning beds was bad for you.. If you can assume that people with melanoma have lived their lives in caves and under shrouds and are never exposed to sunlight.
I think it was Sandy "one term" Jerstad who noted that "this bill is a step towards awareness." To which I would respond that now we have the stupidest statement regarding the stupidest bill of the session. A double bonus.
A bill which declares non-permitted tanning as a class 2 misdemeanor is 'awareness?' Nonsense. 'Ridiculous' is more like it.
I'd give props to Senator Gant for standing in opposition to this silliness, and a nod to Senator Olson who at least had the foresight to stand for the measure being referred to appropriations. You know, you criminalize something, and someone is going to have to pay for enforcement. Despite that interjection of reasonableness, the flaming big government liberals on the committee rejected that notion 4-3.
So, it looks like the enforcement of the measure is going to be pawned off on the counties as an unfunded mandate that they're going to get stuck with. I'll bet the State's Attorney's are just going to jump at this one.
I do think Senator Gant said it best that with the bill declaring unapproved (via parent's note, I think) tan bed tanning as a class 2 misdemeanor, there's "no oversight, no funding, nothing to put in force, and no complaints"(of tanning bed based melanoma in SD).
Gant continued "We don't require Mayors to collect parent's notes for city pools. We don't require the GF&P to collect them for those exposed to the sun on the Missouri river, but now we're going to do it for tanning salons? This is wrong legislation."
When this hits the Senate floor, I'd encourage the Senators to send the bill back to appropriations, so they might at least try to fund their new mandate.
If not? Let's just hope they kill this turkey over in the House.
Comments
8 year old kids buying unlimited monthly tanning passes creeps me out. The beds cause cancer (that is why the dermatologists support this legislation). And our government puts restrictions on young kids all the time to keep them safe, because we don't trust their judgement at age 11.
I think it is pretty silly for people to be taking a stand about "government intervention" on this issue. Based on their logic, we shouldn't put age limits on cars, alcohol, tobacco, porn, medical authorizations, military enlistment, movies, voting and marriage.
But we do put age restrictions on this things, because we don't trust kids with many really important decisions. As an adult, no one should be told whether they can tan or how many minutes they can tan. We all agree. But again, this is about kids making bad decisions, and government is well within its powers to put an age limit on tanning booths so we have a few less teenagers dying of skin cancer (and yes, there are teenagers in SD dying of skin cancer).
And, um, who do you think is going to enforce the law that makes abortion illegal? I don't hear you complaining about that one.
People in American need to stop forcing the government to do the jobs they need to be doing as citizens and parents.
You do know that these business' could set the own regulations and requirements o that is right they don't know how only the government can do that????????????
Think about it.
We are a bandaid society of temporary fixes until a few years later we are slapped in the face with the reality of what has been done. Sometimes it is hard to turn back the clock sometimes you can't no matter what the
issue(s).