Posts
So, in one of the most punk rock posts to ever grace this blog, let's tackle skateboarding and smoking.
You probably didn't know this, but June 21st is Go Skateboarding Day, a Congress-recognized national holiday to celebrate skateboarding and American skate tradition. Never mind my obvious frustration that Congress was wasting valuable taxpayer time and dollars talking about a national day to recognize something like skateboarding, and never mind the fact that I'm actually just getting back into the sport myself, the idea is pretty cool, I guess. I can appreciate skateboarding as a sport that gets a lot of kids off their butts, motivates them to put their hair into mohawks, and promotes above nearly all else, a spirit of passionate individualism and a sense of distrust of unnecessary authority.
So that's part of why the history behind GSD is something that I think deserves attention. In a classic example of abuse of power by the hands of law enforcement, a few skaters who were merely skating down a sidewalk in Arkansas were tackled, threatened to be maced, pinned to the ground, and arrested. Skating on these sidewalks was a violation of city codes, but in no way was such aggressive force at all justified. Luckily the entire situation was caught on tape by a bystander who was concerned. The officer responsible was placed on administrative leave after the video went viral, but after the skaters were all found guilty, the officer got off scot-free.
Disgusting. No one will argue that these skaters were violating a law. Granted, the law is ridiculous and absurd, and truly has no business being in existence. But the fact is that this is a classic case of excessive use of force against groups deemed "less desirable" by many of these incredibly prejudiced cops. I don't mean to equate the plight experienced constantly by countless innocent African-Americans at the hands of racist police officers, but the fact is that teenage skateboarders represent a certain resentment of authority that those in possession of that pointless authority truly can't stand. This kind of unjustified violence is exactly the reason this tension between cops and counter culture will always exist. And probably the reason there was a random plastic bottle riot at the Warped Tour stop in Cincinnati back in 2005 (the only year I went.)
But anyway, if you still have time, get out and skate today. Go ahead and carve out some gnarly turns before jumping into that boardslide. Or something. I'm behind on the lingo.
But while you're out and about, you should probably buy a pack or two of cigarettes before they get covered in some of the most paternalistic government-required labels ever. Earlier today, the FDA released nine newly designed warning labels that will appear on at least 50% of cigarettes sold in the U.S. by mid-2013. You know, because apparently simplifying the effects of tobacco smoke to say "SMOKING KILLS" wasn't drastic enough. Now we have full-color images of damaged lungs, random infants in incubators, crying women, a smoker with a hole in his neck, and a bouncer-looking guy with an "I quit" T-shirt.
To be fully honest, I kind of want to collect them all. For people like me who have an absolutely disgusting sense of humor, they've made it almost like Happy Meal toys. But I understand that very very few people have as macabre a humour as I do. So let me try to address this with at least a modicum of maturity.
But while you're out and about, you should probably buy a pack or two of cigarettes before they get covered in some of the most paternalistic government-required labels ever. Earlier today, the FDA released nine newly designed warning labels that will appear on at least 50% of cigarettes sold in the U.S. by mid-2013. You know, because apparently simplifying the effects of tobacco smoke to say "SMOKING KILLS" wasn't drastic enough. Now we have full-color images of damaged lungs, random infants in incubators, crying women, a smoker with a hole in his neck, and a bouncer-looking guy with an "I quit" T-shirt.
To be fully honest, I kind of want to collect them all. For people like me who have an absolutely disgusting sense of humor, they've made it almost like Happy Meal toys. But I understand that very very few people have as macabre a humour as I do. So let me try to address this with at least a modicum of maturity.
What is the purpose of these new labels? To justify these absurd requirements, one must believe that the government has some level of justification for discouraging smokers. Although many statists and anti-smoking lobbyists will talk about the public cost of smokers, this is simply not the case. The most succinct explanation for why this is the case can be found here (I'd rehash the points discussed, but I'd rather not waste my time unnecessarily in case you don't feel the need to delve into that point more deeply.)
Most logical individuals would agree that smoking probably isn't great for your health. I don't even know very many smokers who would argue that it's actually good for you. That being said, is it government's role to regulate one's behavior that affects only oneself? Sure, eating nothing but Laffy Taffy for the rest of my life would be awful for me, but is it the government's job to take the candy from my hands? Should the government be in the business of "saving people from themselves" when there is little to no cost to anyone else?
Apparently, this administration believes so. Today in a press conference, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius was asked if she believed cigarettes will be illegal one day. Her response? "We are making great strides."
A brief history of growing gov't paternalism of the past, oh I dunno, nine months or so.
--The absurd regulation and eventual criminalization of Four Loko and other caffeinated alcoholic drinks.
--The equally appalling laws passed against flavored cigarettes.
--Nothing much here, just a few FDA raids on Amish farmers who produced raw milk which was sold to customers who were expressly looking to purchase raw milk.
Most logical individuals would agree that smoking probably isn't great for your health. I don't even know very many smokers who would argue that it's actually good for you. That being said, is it government's role to regulate one's behavior that affects only oneself? Sure, eating nothing but Laffy Taffy for the rest of my life would be awful for me, but is it the government's job to take the candy from my hands? Should the government be in the business of "saving people from themselves" when there is little to no cost to anyone else?
Apparently, this administration believes so. Today in a press conference, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius was asked if she believed cigarettes will be illegal one day. Her response? "We are making great strides."
A brief history of growing gov't paternalism of the past, oh I dunno, nine months or so.
--The absurd regulation and eventual criminalization of Four Loko and other caffeinated alcoholic drinks.
--The equally appalling laws passed against flavored cigarettes.
--Nothing much here, just a few FDA raids on Amish farmers who produced raw milk which was sold to customers who were expressly looking to purchase raw milk.
And now we see an even more violent step in the war against the cigarette smoker, a largely harmless group of individuals who, if nothing else, supply an industry that is a huge part of the U.S.
If nothing else, the rise of this "government knows best" ideology is disturbing. I am deeply concerned about the implications that this thought process has on our society as a whole. As more and more people become aware of these problems, however, we can get our voices heard and show these bureaucrats what the American people really think.
Thanks for reading, everyone. I'm really looking forward to getting back into blogging here at Anthems. As always, leave comments, lemme know what you think. Looking forward to a summer full of more coverage of these and so many other issues.
Thanks for reading, everyone. I'm really looking forward to getting back into blogging here at Anthems. As always, leave comments, lemme know what you think. Looking forward to a summer full of more coverage of these and so many other issues.
Oh, and I nearly forgot! Some music news or something. Looks like Radiohead dropped a new song that they recorded as part of a session for British program From The Basement. Two drummers in the video? That's right. Portishead's Clive Deamer teamed up with Phil Selway on this eerie, beat-driven track. Check out the video of the studio version below:
No comments:
Post a Comment