It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Court won't reinstate New York City's big-soda ban

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Looks like the fizz has run out of the soda ban. Good for it too. As much as this might have made health sense? The Government isn't in the business of dictating behavior to save us from ourselves or our own bad judgement in my opinion. It's just not the purpose of having one.


ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — Guzzlers prevailed Thursday as New York's highest court refused to reinstate New York City's ban on the sale of big sodas, ruling that the city's health department overstepped its bounds when approved the 16-ounce cap on sugary beverages.

The court largely ignored the merits of the ban in the 20-page ruling but determined the city's Board of Health engaged in policy-making, and not simply health regulations, when it imposed the restrictions on restaurants, delis, movie theaters, stadiums and street cart vendors.


Indeed.. Regulation = Good. Policy Making = Unconstitutional Overreach of power.

We have methods to change policy. It's among elected representatives...where they answer to the people who put them there. It's why they are the ones in charge of such things, and even that rarely goes as we'd like these days. Executive policy making leaves 0 ability to have input or hold accountability to bad moves.


The city had hoped Thursday's ruling would overturn a lower court's decision that blocked the restrictions after restaurants, theater owners, beverage companies and small stores sued.

In oral arguments earlier this month, attorneys for the city argued that sugary drinks are the largest source of added sugar in the American diet. They argued the restrictions were based on science, and weren't a true ban, only a limit on cup size.
Source

(shakes head) They just don't get it. IT'S NOT THEIR PLACE TO DECIDE OUR SODA POP CUP SIZE!

At least we have the courts to remind them of their place occasionally. Eh?




posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

The trouble with soda is its a slow killer. If you could instantly see the damage it causes then it would be more regulated.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: PhoenixOD

That's the whole thing... It's a legal product and it's not regulated by properly passed laws. Until or unless that changes (and perhaps it should if the damage is that clear for cause) then regulatory moves have no business or place substituting for that proper change of law, is how I read this.

A solid rebuke of the assumption of power for lack of the result some would like to see outside the laws we have.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 09:35 AM
link   
How about better education and parenting and less regulation? There is something abysmally wrong with our education if people think it's a good idea to be drinking a gallon of soda every day. But instead of putting a regulation on it, it should have been taught early on.
edit on 2014 by Skyfloating because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Skyfloating

But you are talking about something that is harmful and sold to children and addictive. Education doesn't seem to work with addictive substances.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
a reply to: Skyfloating

But you are talking about something that is harmful and sold to children and addictive. Education doesn't seem to work with addictive substances.


The internet is harmful and addictive to children as well!

Should we pass laws that limit the amount of time people are on the internet?

Many things are dangerous in this world. Passing laws won't change a thing, except granting more power to those whom already seem drunk with it.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Wrabbit2000




The Government isn't in the business of dictating behavior to save us from ourselves or our own bad judgement in my opinion.


They shouldn't be but sadly, they are. I guess it wouldn't be so bad if their true intent was safety but quite often the motivation appears to be monetary at the base level. Two examples of this would be red light cameras and seat belt laws.

In my state of Illinois, you will get a $75.00 ticket for not wearing your seat belt. They set up roadblocks all of the time to check for seat belts... Yes.... Roadblocks for seatbelts. All of this despite the fact you can drive down the highway doing 65 on a motorcycle with no helmet and that's perfectly legal.

The reason they shouldn't be in the business of making these laws is because they are too inept to even balance a budget properly. Worry about saving us from ourselves when you can fix the potholes and not run out salt in the winter imo.
edit on 26-6-2014 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Let them drink all the soda they want. Until a known killer like cigarettes are banned, I doubt anybody in power really cares about what's good for you.
edit on 26-6-2014 by korath because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   
a reply to: PhoenixOD

And neither does regulation or an outright ban. There are quite a few ..ehem.. substances that come to mind. Education is the only thing that can produce results. If it hasn't yet, than we need to revise the methods. Not take stupid pills and think laws are going make it go away.



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

lol enough with the straw man arguments, they have no bearing on the subject at hand.



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join