Posted on 07/08/2008 1:48:58 PM PDT by bs9021
Nanny-State Anyone?
by: Daniel Smith, July 08, 2008
The August/September edition of Reason, a libertarian publication dedicated to Free Minds and Free Markets, ranks the 35 “worst nanny-state cities in America.” After the analysis was complete, Chicago remained the worst and Las Vegas the best.
Scrutiny was based on a cities’ “exercising [for] personal freedom.” Under this broad umbrella of freedom, Reason researched eight categories: alcohol, tobacco, sex, guns, gambling, drugs, movement, and a “catch-all” of food and “other.” According to the article, “the higher a city’s score, the more restrictive it is.”
Scoring for six of the categories were based on taxation, local restrictions, and state and/or federal laws. The “sex” category, however, concentrated on the per capita numbers of prostitutes who utilized Craigslist, the number of “strip clubs per capita,” rankings from “gay publications” on “gay-friendliness,” and “adult entertainment regulations” from the Association of Club Executives. In addition, the “drug” category drew its’ “rankings and data” from “the Marijuana Policy Project, the Drug Policy Alliance, and the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.”
The Libertarian thinkers behind Reason chose to conduct the study because “a paternalist wave has been sweeping the country.” Nanny-state legislation so pervades American cities, according to the authors, that “it may be easier to smoke a joint today than it was 20 years ago…but it’s getting much more difficult to enjoy a legal cigarette.”
So what makes Chicago number 35 and Las Vegas number 1? The Windy City “gets moral prudery and public health fanaticism—the worst of both worlds.” Restrictions have created “black and gray markets in Chicago” that operate in spite of the laws. The advice to locals—“don’t flout the laws openly.”..
(Excerpt) Read more at campusreportonline.net ...
Would someone please publish the list. Thanks.
Interesting, but does this list take into account laws related to gun ownership, yard upkeep, registration requirements, and the like? There is much, much more to freedom than laws related to alcohol, gambling and the “moral” issues. Las Vegas may allow you to put quarters into a slot machine but do they allow you to own weapons without onerous registration requirements, for example?
Interesting. Ping for later.
That said, the nanny state is nevertheless encroaching here too. About two years or so ago, I remember telling my wife that at least in Nevada, we don't have to worry about nanny-state anti-smoking laws in bars and restaurants. Guess what? Within six months, the "enlightened" voters here voted for a bar/restaurant smoking ban. Go figure.
It is precisely the “exercising of personal freedom” that divides conservatives from libertarians. For most conservatives, America would be a better place if “traditional family values” were both practiced and promoted. Whether libertarians like it or not, most Americans view drug use and sexual activity (gay and straight) as ethical issues. Both our Puritan fathers and Revolutionary fathers did not argue for “libertinism.” Colonists of 17th and 18th centuries championed communal and individual morality. One need only read Winthrop and Edwards alongside of the Federalist Papers to realized that morality is a strong argument in the minds of Americans.
The patriots of the Revolutionary War did not risk death on the battlefield or being hanged for treason, and endure starvation and cold at Valley Forge, in order to guarantee free access to drugs, gay sex, and prostitution. On those issues there is a complete overlap between the libertine New Left and Liberaltarians.
Out of curiousity, please name a drug that was illegal during the American Revolution.
Nice try. I think you’ll find that you could be punished severely for public drunkenness in those days. Now you go find me any statement by any of the Founding Fathers saying they fought for drug rights, gay rights, prostitution, etc. They fought against taxes. They fought against laws imposed without their consent. They fought against having their existing elected governments replaced by a fat imperialist king and his aristocrats.
They fought against government interference in their lives.
And drugs were legal.
If you want to claim that they fought against "interference" in their lives, then I'll agree with you. But the "government interference" they fought against was decidedly "British" government interference, and not just a generic variety of government interference. In fact, they were quite happy when the French government "interfered." (But for our side, of course.)
Did the French outlaw drugs at the time?
You keep bringing up drugs. What has this to do with our Founding Fathers and the American Revolution?
This is what:
“The patriots of the Revolutionary War did not risk death on the battlefield or being hanged for treason, and endure starvation and cold at Valley Forge, in order to guarantee free access to drugs,...”
They had “free access” to drugs, at the time, both before and after the revolution.
What did George Washington grow, anyway?
What kind of vellum is the US Constitution written on?
Why do we tolorate government interference in our lives, to a degree way beyond what incited our forfathers to revolt?
Why do FReepers advocate it?
Why not just tell the government, “No!”
Am I missing some sarcasm here, or does the author really believe this?
"...Reason researched eight categories: alcohol, tobacco, sex, guns, gambling, drugs, movement, and a 'catch-all' of food and 'other.' ...
Scoring for six of the categories were based on taxation, local restrictions, and state and/or federal laws."
It appears that they looked into more than just sex, drugs, and rock and roll.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.