Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The function of government is to exercise police powers that protects the health, welfare, and safety of residents. It looks like you haven't thought about this very deeply.
Heck, I guess we should just repeal all laws. Because we don't need government to enforce any laws, right? Let's repeal those laws against murder, rape, robbery, and kidnapping because "involving government" is worse than those activities are.
Explain to me what purpose is served by an 'eating contest". How does human society benefit from such an activity? The answer is doesn't on any level. Its simply a dangerous activity waiting to claim lives.
Such activities can probably not be prohibited on a personal or family level, but organizations like radio stations, sororities, and restaurants can be prohibited from sponsoring these contests. If it saves a few lives than it is worth it.
No, I don't think the government should be regulating eating contests. We need less government in our lives not more. This would be extremely intrusive in people's lives. If you don't like something, don't do it. Don't participate. Don't buy it. Don't donate to it. It's that simple. You don't get to dictate to others what they can and cannot do.
No one here was talking about murder, rape, robbery, or kidnapping....those are completely different eating pancakes! If you think they're even remotely the same, you should seek some professional help cause wow. Murder, rape, robbery, and kidnapping involves another party who is harmed. An eating contest doesn't - normally - harm anyone. And participants WILLINGLY participate. Murder victims don't go running out into the road and yell for someone to murder them.
Saves lives? When was the last time you heard of a person dying from an eating contest? It's incredibly rare! This was for CHARITY! Good grief.
Back in the 70's you could still buy a used car that usually ran pretty well for about $100. I bought one when i first came home from Vietnam. A lot of GI's at Fort Ord bought them to go to town (Monterey), & the Bay Area, CA.
It's not just buying the car, though; it's the gas and insurance. Students who were dependent on financial aid and part-time campus jobs didn't have much money to spare. It could be the California was more of a car culture than some other locations, too, though UC Santa Cruz had, and still has, a policy discouraging students from having cars. Lots of bikes at UCSC, and UC Davis, as well.
No, I don't think the government should be regulating eating contests. We need less government in our lives not more. This would be extremely intrusive in people's lives. If you don't like something, don't do it. Don't participate. Don't buy it. Don't donate to it. It's that simple. You don't get to dictate to others what they can and cannot do.
No one here was talking about murder, rape, robbery, or kidnapping....those are completely different eating pancakes! If you think they're even remotely the same, you should seek some professional help cause wow. Murder, rape, robbery, and kidnapping involves another party who is harmed. An eating contest doesn't - normally - harm anyone. And participants WILLINGLY participate. Murder victims don't go running out into the road and yell for someone to murder them.
Saves lives? When was the last time you heard of a person dying from an eating contest? It's incredibly rare! This was for CHARITY! Good grief.
I don't blithering care whether it was for charity or to make a profit. Eating and drinking contests are stupid ideas. Maybe before people became aware of the dangers of choking you could sort of rationalize it. You can't rationalize it anymore.
So you want "less government" and you have decided this is an area where we don't need government. I'd be content letting state legislatures decide whether eating contests should be prohibited or not.
Repeat: Government exists to protect the health, welfare, and safety of the community. This is a situation where regulation could further that end.
Oh yeah? Here's another eating contest that claimed someone too. This time it is donuts.
People can scream individual responsibility at me until the cows come home. That's one piece of this. The other other piece is contests that shouldn't be held--at least held publicly-- by an organization.
Even when people don't choke its not a very healthy activity. Throwing up afterwards is really pretty common. Ask a doctor or a dietician if bingeing and throwing up afterwards is healthy. Its not.
Just stop. 450 people die each year by falling out of bed. I can pull up accidental deaths by knitting pins too if I really wanted to continue this argument. Freak accidents happen, that's life.
Your position that eat contests serve no "societal benefit" was all I needed to read. They weren't designed to provide societal benefits, they were designed for young people to have fun and in this case to raise money for charity. Stop being an old fart.
Just stop. 450 people die each year by falling out of bed. I can pull up accidental deaths by knitting pins too if I really wanted to continue this argument. Freak accidents happen, that's life.
Your position that eat contests serve no "societal benefit" was all I needed to read. They weren't designed to provide societal benefits, they were designed for young people to have fun and in this case to raise money for charity. Stop being an old fart.
Stop?
Here are some more incidents. If you don't like my posts, than don't read them.
And people choke all the time while just out to eat at a restaurant or in their own home. People don't only choke on food while participating in an eating contest. Should we just ban all food and require everyone to be on a liquid only diet?
And people choke all the time while just out to eat at a restaurant or in their own home. People don't only choke on food while participating in an eating contest. Should we just ban all food and require everyone to be on a liquid only diet?
Of course not. Eating food though not is not gratuitous and unnecessary. An eating contest is.
Of course not. Eating food though not is not gratuitous and unnecessary. An eating contest is.
Well I hope you only eat your 3 meals each day, since anything more would just be unnecessary eating.
The girl are 3-4 pancakes. I'm sure plenty of working parents have quickly eaten just as many pancakes as they try to get everyone out the door. There is nothing dangerous about eating a few pancakes. And as someone else mentioned, seizures are not the international sign that someone is chocking. Obviously there is more to the story.
This is an interesting article mentioning some other deaths in eating competitions and describing health issues these contests cause that go beyond the dangers of choking.
Last edited by markg91359; 04-08-2017 at 07:52 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
