ars libertatis

Ja, in New York soll tatsächlich Salz verboten werden. Zumindest der Gebrauch von Salz durch Restaurants. Wenn man nur für sich oder seine Familie kocht, dann darf man glücklicherweise noch so viel Salz benutzen wie man will.

Aber auf die New Yorker Restaurants dürften schwere Zeiten zu kommen, würde dieses Gesetz tatsächlich verabschiedet. Denn wer will schon salzlose Speisen serviert bekommen?

Die Salz-Prohibition würde aber nicht nur den gesetzestreuen Restaurants schaden, sondern auch zur Bildung von Schwarzmarkt-Restaurants führen, die illegal gesalzene Mahlzeiten anbieten. Aufgrund des grossen Risikos aber zu höheren Preisen und womöglich in dunklen Hinterhöfen.

Auszüge aus dem Gesetz:

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The general business law is amended by adding a new section 399-bbb to read as follows:
S 399-BBB. PROHIBITION ON SALT; RESTAURANTS. 1. NO OWNER OR OPERATOR OF A RESTAURANT IN THIS STATE SHALL USE SALT IN ANY FORM IN THE PREPARATION OF ANY FOOD FOR CONSUMPTION BY CUSTOMERS OF SUCH RESTAURANT, INCLUDING FOOD PREPARED TO BE CONSUMED ON THE PREMISES OF SUCH RESTAURANT OR OFF OF SUCH PREMISES.¹

WHENEVER THE COURT SHALL DETERMINE THAT A VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION HAS OCCURRED, THE COURT MAY IMPOSE A CIVIL PENALTY OF NOT MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR EACH VIOLATION. EACH USE OF SALT IN VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION SHALL CONSTITUTE A SEPARATE VIOLATION.¹

1. New York State Assembly – A10129 / via reason.com – $1,000 Salt Coming to New York Restaurants? [↩] [↩]

In den USA wird derzeit behördenseitig erwogen, Beschneidungen männlicher Neugeborener verpflichtend zu machen, da hierdurch das Risiko einer Infektion mit HIV sinken kann.¹

1. erzliberal.de – Beschneidungen für die Volksgesundheit [↩]

Welcome to the wartime contracting bazaar in Afghanistan. It is a virtual carnival of improbable characters and shady connections, with former CIA officials and ex-military officers joining hands with former Taliban and mujahedeen to collect US government funds in the name of the war effort.
[...]
The real secret to trucking in Afghanistan is ensuring security on the perilous roads, controlled by warlords, tribal militias, insurgents and Taliban commanders. The American executive I talked to was fairly specific about it: “The Army is basically paying the Taliban not to shoot at them. It is Department of Defense money.” That is something everyone seems to agree on.

Mike Hanna is the project manager for a trucking company called Afghan American Army Services. The company, which still operates in Afghanistan, had been trucking for the United States for years but lost out in the Host Nation Trucking contract that NCL won. Hanna explained the security realities quite simply: “You are paying the people in the local areas–some are warlords, some are politicians in the police force–to move your trucks through.”
[...]
A veteran American manager in Afghanistan who has worked there as both a soldier and a private security contractor in the field told me, “What we are doing is paying warlords associated with the Taliban, because none of our security elements is able to deal with the threat.”¹

1. Adam Roston – How the US Funds the Taliban [↩]

Do you believe that the government of the United States considers itself obliged by law to respect anyone’s rights? You are wrong. Read Chris Floyd’s article on a recent Supreme Court decision to let a lower court’s ruling stand, and weep your bitterest tears. If you count yourself among those who believe that this country stands for something better than the historical norm of tyranny and savagery, consider yourself as having made a grievous mistake.

In truth, any “constitutionally protected rights” you are now exercising exist solely at the pleasure and convenience of the rulers. The minute the continuation of your life or liberty no longer pleases them, they will, as the Court’s decision makes clear, simply declare you an unperson to be dealt with as they choose, whether they choose to torture you, confine you in a steel cage for the rest of your life, or peremptorily kill you. They recognize NO rights in anyone (except themselves, of course) that they are bound to respect.

This horror is the end to which a brave experiment has come. If the rulers can, at their pleasure, declare ANYONE THEY SELECT a legal unperson, the notion that the United States is a free country is nothing but the sickest of sick jokes.¹

1. Robert Higgs – The Supreme Court Has Spoken: You Have No Rights [↩]

Der Mann, der nackt in seinem Haus rumstand, dann von einer Frau erblickt wurde (die offensichtlich nicht mochte, was sie sah), welche die Polizei alarmierte, die unverzüglich kam und ihn festnahm, wurde nun verurteilt:

Erick Williamson, the Springfield, Virginia man arrested earlier this year for being naked in his own home was convicted of indecent exposure on Friday. The judge sentenced him to 180 days in jail, but suspended the sentence.¹

Was zu erwarten war: Eigentumsrechte werden (nahezu) im ganzen Westen nicht respektiert und Staatsgerichte schaffen keine Gerechtigkeit, sondern üben willkürlichen und launenhaften Zwang aus:

“I believe from the evidence here,” O’Flaherty said, “that the gentleman obviously was intentionally naked in the house. [...] and I find the gentleman guilty.”²

1. Radley Balko – Virginia’s Naked Coffee Guy Convicted [↩]
2. Washington Post – ‘Intentionally naked’ Fairfax County man appealing his conviction [↩]

On orders from President Barack Obama, the U.S. military launched cruise missiles early Thursday against two suspected al-Qaeda sites in Yemen, administration officials told ABC News in a report broadcast on ABC World News with Charles Gibson.

One of the targeted sites was a suspected al Qaeda training camp north of the capitol, Sanaa, and the second target was a location where officials said “an imminent attack against a U.S. asset was being planned.”

The Yemen attacks by the U.S. military represent a major escalation of the Obama administration’s campaign against al Qaeda.¹

1. abc news – Obama Ordered U.S. Military Strike on Yemen Terrorists / via David Kramer – I’m Sorry I Was Correct About O-bomb-a [↩]

In New York City, the Bowery Mission tossed away a batch of fried chicken brought by a local church to help feed the homeless. The chicken contained trans fat, and city law bans all licensed food vendors, including emergency food providers, from serving food with trans fat.¹

1. reason.com – A Bunch of Chickens [↩]

Es erstaunt mich immer wieder, was die Bürokraten und ihre Gehilfen alles so regulieren wollen. Im US-Staat Virginia geht es offenbar den Yoga-Lehrern an den Kragen:

My students and I have a right to be talking about philosophy, to be talking about a way of life,” says Suzanne Leitner-Wise, “without the state interfering with that freedom.”

But the Commonwealth of Virginia contends otherwise. Leitner-Wise is the co-owner of Little River Yoga in Alexandria. Since she not only teaches yoga, but also teaches students how to teach yoga themselves, the state says her small studio is an institution of post-secondary education not wholly unlike, say, the Northern Virginia campus of Georgetown University. Because of that, the state wants her and yoga teachers like her to jump through a costly series of hoops.

Among other things, the state requires a $2,500 application fee for mandated certification — as well as annual renewal fees ranging from $500 to $2,500. That’s a big nut for studios that often have only a handful of students in the course of a year. On top of that you can add detailed financial reporting requirements, a mound of paperwork (e.g., required written policies on grievances and “faculty accessibility”), and penalties for failure to comply that start at $1,000 a pop.¹

1. Richmond-Times Dispatch – REGULATION: Is Crackdown on Yoga Schools Enlightened? / via Damon W. Root – Teaching Yoga Is Not A Crime [↩]

Veronique de Rugy – Is This What Deregulation Looks Like?

Where does this lunacy end?

End the assassinations. End the occupations. End the war on terrorism. End the war on drugs. There is no other solution for restoring freedom, morality, peace, prosperity, and security to our nation.¹

1. Jacob G. Hornberger – Drug-War Assassinations [↩]

In Springfield, Virgina (nicht zu verwechseln mit dem fiktiven Springfield, wo Homer Simpson und Ralph Wiggum leben und wo es ähnlich irrsinnig zu und her geht) wurde ein Anwohner verhaftet, weil er nackt in seiner Küche stand. Eric Williamson war um 5:30 in der Früh aufgestanden und machte sich Kaffee, hatte aber keine Kleider angezogen, als eine Frau mit ihrem Kind durch Erics Vorgarten lief und ihn nackt in seiner Küche stehen sah.

Wird Eric verurteilt, so muss er 2′000 Dollar zahlen und ein Jahr im Gefängnis verbringen. Die Polizei geht davon aus, dass Eric nackt in der Öffentlichkeit gesehen werden wollte.¹ Was wohl bedeutet, dass Erics Vorgarten um halb sechs in der Früh ein sehr beliebter Aufenthaltsort ist. Dazu stellt sich die Frage, wieso diese Frau einfach so durch einen fremden Garten spaziert ist? Stellt das nicht trespass dar?

Was ist das bloss für eine Welt, in der ein Mann verhaftet wird, wenn er nackt in seiner Küche steht?

-

Ein Update

1. wtop.com – Coffee-making naked guy rebuffed by exposure charge / via Radley Balko – Man Arrested for Being Naked in His Own Kitchen [↩]

These two police officers were caring for each other’s children, as they worked different shifts. England’s Children’s Minister (yes, there is one) stated that the arrangement broke the 2006 Childcare Act because it lasted for longer than two hours a day, and constituted receiving “a reward.” Therefore, the arrangement was no longer babysitting – it was “illegal childminding.”¹

-

Apparently, in Michigan, babysitting is considered daycare, and therefore requires state licensing and regulation.

[...] Lisa Snyder, who incurred the wrath of the Department of Human Services for watching over her neighbor’s children for the short time period after they leave for work and before the bus comes. The crime? She didn’t have a license. The reaction from her state representative? He is ”drafting legislation that would exempt people who agree to care for non-dependent children from daycare rules as long as they’re not engaged in a business.” So he’s ‘easing’ the rules for the crime of babysitting.²

1. Karen De Coster – Unapproved Babysitting Is Illegal in England [↩]
2. Karen De Coster – Unapproved Babysitting Is Illegal in the US [↩]