What law would you eliminate?

I’d like to amend a law…I am the only person immune to speed limits….muahaha…I imagine if I had the money to eliminate a law, I’d have enough money to drive any car I’d want to.

I would only abuse my immunity when the roads are light with traffic though, to avoid involving anyone in my recklessness.

I would ensure that same-sex couples can benefit from marrital contract. If that’s not possible, I would reinforce the separation of church and state. If that’s not possible, I would abolish the useless Blue Laws.

by the way Blondesjon, I like the topics of discussions….farts, love

Does the USA PATRIOT act count as one law or many?

@laureth, if you donate enough, I’m sure you could just eliminate the entire act =)

Shit! Maybe I should make drugs legal first… hmm.. the gays can wait I suppose.

I would legalize weed. And I don’t even smoke weed. that often

I’d abolish the second law of thermodynamics

Basically, its just a real downer of a law. It makes it impossible to create a perpetual motion machine, and it seems to predict the eventual “heat death” of the universe. Who needs it?!

I would make the death penalty completely illegal throughout the entire country. No exceptions. Period.

I would mak ethe likely upcoming “Fairness Doctrine” supported by Senators Schumer (D, NY), Feinstein (D, CA) and Bingaman (D, NM) illegal because it violates the First Amendment of Free Speech.

Eliminate the inheritance tax.

A lot of families lose everything just because someone died. I think you paid tax when you earned it, you should be able to leave it to someone tax free.

I’d eliminate the law that allows private health insurance companies to do business in this country.

Just got this email today:
I’m writing to let you know about an important new law that goes into effect on February 10, 2009 requiring all products meant for children to be certified safe and lead free. After last year’s scare over lead contaminated toys from China, this sounds like a good thing, right?

Unfortunately, the new law goes a bit overboard. It requires that, on February 10, every single new product on every retail shelf (or every web warehouse) in the entire United States that is meant for any child under the age of 12—not just toys, but clothing—every dress, bib, diaper cover, bonnet, bootie, christening gown, pair of pjs, pair of socks, sweater, slip, every piece of furniture, crib sheet, cloth diaper, as well as every doll, stuffed animal, wooden toy, book, art supply, bike, and tricycle—the list is endless!—must be independently tested by a government laboratory and certified (even though nothing in it contains lead or is hazardous in any way) or it cannot be sold. Nor can it be given away or donated to Goodwill or your church annual fundraiser or your local consignment shop (or sold on ebay or Craigs list either). Now, that doesn’t seem right, does it?

So far, only a small percentage of Grammie’s Attic’s 4000+ products have been certified. None of the new products can be sold after February 10 without certifications on hand from the manufacturers. Many of Grammie’s Attic’s small craft makers and manufacturers cannot afford the cost of certifying their products and they may go out of business. This is going to happen to manufacturers and retailers all across the country. Many other small businesses, local crafts people, and libraries will be affected and so will consumers when there are fewer children’s products to choose from and the cost of certified products skyrockets.

Not many people are aware of the impact of this law yet. You can help by learning more about it at http://www.grammies-attic.com/cpsia.html, by contacting your congressional representatives, and by signing petitions to help prevent February 10 from becoming National Bankruptcy Day.

I would want to lift the ban on offshore oil drilling off the coast of Florida.

@Judi: Last week I made a sizeable donation of clothing to a nearby organization that serves the homeless population. The volunteer who took my boxes told me about this law. She said, “If Mattel tests one sample of a product, the whole line of that product is good. What it means here for us is that we would have to test each and every donated item intended for children. In effect it is going to make it illegal for us to stock and distribute and for you to donate any clothing or toys or other products for any children under 12.”

The plight of retailers and the threat of bankruptcy notwithstanding, the real victims of this craziness are the children themselves. Not to be able to give to needy children anything previously owned but uncertified is madness. How can shoes my healthy children wore possibly poison a homeless child?

I’d remove any law that restricts marriage rights for loving couples permanently.

I’m so conflicted… I’d love to secure marriage rights for gays, legalize abortion forever, and protect the environment….. but the temptation to remove laws on any controlled substances (alcohol and drugs) might be way too tempting.

Murphy’s Law .
It has nailed me way too many times.

Next-day follow-up: last night I sent a message to my congressional representative calling for reconsideration of the CPSIA before it takes effect on February 10th.

@Jeruba, why do you want it to be reconsidered.

For the reasons given above. My message to my representative ended thus:

Please support reconsideration of this act before it goes into disastrous effect. Let people decide for themselves whether they’d like to risk the dangers of wearing a used sweater or coat and warm boots that haven’t been tested or suffer in the cold with the assurance that they are not wearing any lead-tainted wool.

According to the link you posted resellers of children’s clothing, etc are not required to test everything they sell for lead. They are only required to “avoid products that are likely to have lead content.” I have never seen any reports of lead being in warm weather clothing for kids, so that shouldn’t be a concern for these folks. As a mom of three young children I think this law is a very good thing and that stores – even resale stores – should be held accountable to keep from selling dangerous products. They aren’t allowed to sell other items that have been recalled, they shouldn’t be allowed to sell items that have been shown to contain lead.

I think that they should change the seatbelt law. If I’m only jeopardizing my own life why wear one? Hate when it wrinkles a shirt on my way to work.

@bennihan: Yeah, I hate when my shirt is wrinkled when I’m lying dead and bloodied on the side of the road after that five-vehicle accident.

And, as a side note, you could be jeopardizing other people’s lives when not wearing a seatbelt because, in the event of a crash, your unsecured body becomes a projectile object, which could fly into other cars, particularly if you’re in the backseat or passengers side. EVERYONE in my car wears a seatbelt – ALWAYS.

Also, if you are completely incapacitated, society will foot the bill for your nursing home care when you go on disability.

I say eliminate ALL laws and go back to survival of the fittest NOT the smartest…...Okay that’s stupid…...never mind!