We’re being warned to death.
Product warnings. Tool Warnings. Ride Warnings. Viewer Warnings. Warnings on everything from coffee to cough drops, and from matches to mattresses. Warnings in every single set of instructions for anything we’ve ever bought, and ever WILL buy. Warnings at work, Warnings at home, and Warnings the entirety of our commute between.
“Warning: there’s another Warning ahead!
You have been Warned…”
Yet now, even as we are several orders of magnitude past merely being replete with warnings, the state of California wants to drop still another warning into our lives. Any guesses what new “danger” has been uncovered by our duly-elected Wizards of Smart, and which now (naturally) requires a warning label to protect us from its fearsome wrath?
Give up?
It’s SODA.
Yes, the drink.
As in “Soda Pop”.
—
To be more specific, officially it’s all “sweetened beverages”, but it’s hardly a secret who they have in mind: Big Soda.
Last year, Mayor Bloomberg’s ill-fated War On Soda was small potatoes in comparison: he was only looking at drinks served by restaurants and other eateries. This time, they’re bringing out the Big Guns and going after the stuff on the shelves:
(via Weasel Zippers) – “…The Senate Committee on Appropriations last week passed a bill that would require consumer warning labels on all sweetened beverages sold in California. […]
SB 1000 by Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel) would establish the Sugary Drink Safety Warning Act to place the following message on sweetened drinks containing 75 calories (or more) per 12-ounce serving:
“CALIFORNIA SAFETY WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay.”
Folks, this is insane.
Assuming this isn’t gonna work (and it won’t), what’s next? Banning soda altogther? Requiring a “soda license”, perhaps? Or maybe, California will create a ‘sugary drinks’ Age Restriction (“…Sorry, son, but yer’ I.D. says you’re only 25 years old, and ya’ gots to be at least 40 to buy that there Sodey-pop. Hey, …how ’bout a beer?“)
Am I asking too much? Is it honestly too grandiose a dream to wish to eat and/or drink what I want, or even use a legal tobacco product, or whatever, as long as I’m not hurting someone else or breaking a law?
Is that really too much to hope for?
Why does the Government feel the need to “assist” me with my food and beverage choices? Why does the State seem to be obsessed with the most minute particulars of my health, even more than I am??
Why?
Oh. Yeah.
Well, I guess we can’t say we weren’t “warned” about this…, can we?
Two Heads are Better Than One 
Reblogged this on That Mr. G Guy's Blog.
Thanks, MrG!!
Reblogged this on Dead Citizen's Rights Society.
Thanks, Paul!!
And lets not forget about “trigger” warnings. You should have had one at the beginning of this article for those people who might be offended by VRWC ranting about more government intervention in our life choices. 😉
Brudda, I actually had those in there and took ’em out.
Figured I’d have someone who’d go “what’s that?”, etc,…
But you’re right: I probably should’ve had one at the start. Of course, that could likely be said about everything I’ve ever written.
😉
Well, when you have an electorate that puts Obama in office TWICE…..
The Left has spent 50 years dumbing down our society. I argue that these folks actually NEED all of these government warnings, especially if the Left wants them around for upcoming elections. It’s basically an acknowledgement that they’re “teh tupid” to make it on their own…
Hard to argue that point, Pgh, and I’m not even gonna try.
I hope the big guns of Coca Cola blast this Senate Bill out of the water!