Police in Ga. shut down girls' lemonade stand

neptunechimney wrote:

AspenValley wrote: I'm just going to ask all of you who doubt that stupid local regulations have anything to do with big business to do the research and see on how many fronts (yep right down to the teensy weensy local level) large agri-business conglomerates are operating to make sure that small producers can't legally sell their own produce, milk, cheese, etc.

Get back to me when you have, 'kay?

Sorry, I am not interesting in investing any time in trying to prove that big business cares about children's lemonade stands. Nor am I interested in proving that nanny ism exists in government mindsets.

I do agree that big business does invest in politicians to protect their profits and erect barriers to competition.

So what are we disagreeing about? What is your definition of "teensy weensy local level"?

If you are not interested in investing any time to understand how big business is crushing and burying small business by promoting "silly" regulations that make "examples" of even little kids lemonade stands, let's just hope you are well-employed by big business and not an owner or employee of a small one.

These are your rules. And when you ask for them, you have both given up most of your rights in business, but also your daughter's right to sell lemonade. Remember in CO jobs don't come from people working hard and coming up with ideas, they come from the government and their policies. This is your new world...where little girls cannot sell lemonade, and neither can you. These laws are a big reason why the economy is so poor locally and there are so many public employees not producing anything but fines.

I agree with yoyo here. This has very little to do with big business- Halliburton didnt go to this local city and enact all these regulations. The requirement for a business liscense and the the requirements for the two permits are a perfect example of local government, and yes it works the same way st the state and federal levels too.

This does not just affect lemonade stands- it affects every small business startup. It puts a burden on every business - no matter how small it tries to begin.

It was the local residents themselves who elected a city council - and with nothing better to do with their time sat around and dreamed up these regulations, and the people who elected those types of city council members who think that those kinds of restrictions are necessary.

The girls lemonade stand is important becase it is an example of what we have done to ourselves. It goes down as small as a few girls trying to raise a few bucks to go to a water park. But this kind of stuff starts small and works it's way through all levels of the economy - all the way up to those big businesses. This is why regulations and restrictions need to be eliminated where ever they are found. It's bad for the economy, of course there was a time when those girls could have their lemonade stand without being harassed by the law who represents that cities overblown regulations, but that's what government does best- add more and more restrictions, rules and regulations. We are doing the same thing at the county level here in Jeffco. They add dozens of new rules and regulations every year.

And why would that water park want to have a few more customers? And with a few more customers they might need to buy more water pumps- and build an addition to the park, hire contractors and cement workers, iron workers and architects.

Bad policy is bad policy- many citizens are unaware that the local restrictions they advocate and agree with are anti- business, anti-competition - anti American. I wish we could have a sweeping wave of voting taxpayers to reverse the trend, but we keep moving towards government control of everything.

Here in Durango, Lemonade vendors get free space in the Durango Herald.....

http://www.durangoherald.com/article/20 ... -in-Herald

The Viking wrote: What has happened to this country?

We have too many laws on the books- and you Right Wing fellow man haters demanding that our candidates "be tough on crime" is the main reason for that..You righties haven't figured it out yet..It's us against them, and every new law you let em have is another weapon to be used against us. Having said that- We need the FDA to ensure our food supply is safe. I don't know about this story, I don't care about it, but obviously some moron Barney Fife type cop went overboard. It happens. Everyday there are millions of lemonaid stands that are left alone so don't get your panties all in a bunch over nonsense like this. We got real problems to worry about.

Oh yeah - lemonade crashers are an example of being tough on crime...... NOT

bailey bud wrote: Oh yeah - lemonade crashers are an example of being tough on crime...... NOT

We have too many laws on the books..Like after the Casey Anthony trail some Florida lawmaker made a law that it's a crime to not report a missing child..Sounds good right?..Until some parent gets arrested, has to get a lawyer and go to trail because his rotten teenager runs away again and he doesn't call the cops right away...Cops look to arrest people..It doesn't matter if the law was meant for this, they'll arrest you for that.

It still comes down to a matter of good judgement or in this case the lack there of. How many times have you been pulled over for some traffic infraction by a policeman only to have him let you go? It's certainly happened to me more than once. I got pulled over because I obviously did something wrong relative to the existing laws. Yet, those policemen judged that my infraction violation deserved a warning rather than a ticket. Yes, laws are on the books, but their enforcement can be literal or can be with good judgement. Vl makes a good point. Many laws are well intentioned, but the reality of it is that they can not and should not be enforced without some thought about their applicability. As written, many laws make each and every one of us criminals subject to prosecution. Yet, we consider ourselves mostly as law-abiding citizens.
One other thought on this matter is conflicting purposes. Let's say we are on a dirt road a hundred miles from a population center. you come to a cross road with you having the stop sign. You can see for miles as the land is flat and there are no trees. You slow at the intersection or if you are really good do a California rolling stop. The only reason for this is because there is a stop sign and the law insists that you need to stop. But there is not another car in sight for miles around. Furthermore, if you are a gas miser, you know that starting and stopping requires more fuel and thus is environmentally unfriendly (I know this is stretching it a bit). How many of you will come to a complete stop? I'm not. There is absolutely no reason for it. Were it a busy road, or even another car within a mile I'd stop sort of depending how close the car was and if my crossing would constitute a safety problem. It's a matter of common sense, something that too many have forsaken including the cops that prosecuted the lemonade stand. All the other stuff about big business etc. is utter BS as far as the story referred to on this thread is concerned.