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.
Maine government officials are not down with getting lobsters baked before boiling them alive, and have declared the practice illegal after Charlotte Gill, owner of Charlotte’s Legendary Lobster Pound, made headlines for her unusual pre-cooking methods.
Maine health inspectors said the “food served to consumers at licensed eating places and affected by marijuana, as has been described with this establishment, is adulterated and therefore illegal,” the New York Times reports.
The decision was made by the department because regulators do not currently “have information on the health implications or effects of ‘sedating’ lobsters with marijuana,” the Times reports.
Gill wants to expose the lobsters to marijuana as to ease their pain/relax them before boiling them alive. Not sure if it works and don't even care.
Here's an idea: private establishments can voluntarily disclose how they prepare their food. And customers can inquire as much as they wish on preparation methods. Then the two parties can decide if they'd like to voluntarily associate in a transaction (money for food).
Personally, I don't care about marijuana one way or the other. But there are others who have very strong views about it and would probably object to eating lobsters laced with pot. What if some chefs decided to give the lobsters opioids before boiling them? Should the patrons of the restaurant be told?
For that matter, should food and restaurant inspectors be allowed to inspect the kitchen for cockroaches and check for unsanitary/unsafe food handling and preparation techniques?
Maybe restaurant owners should be able to choose whether they get inspected or not. Those who wish to avoid inspection could post a notice on the door stating "This establishment not subject to health and sanitation inspections. Dine at your own risk."
Personally, I don't care about marijuana one way or the other. But there are others who have very strong views about it and would probably object to eating lobsters laced with pot. What if some chefs decided to give the lobsters opioids before boiling them? Should the patrons of the restaurant be told?
For that matter, should food and restaurant inspectors be allowed to inspect the kitchen for cockroaches and check for unsanitary/unsafe food handling and preparation techniques?
Maybe restaurant owners should be able to choose whether they get inspected or not. Those who wish to avoid inspection could post a notice on the door stating "This establishment not subject to health and sanitation inspections. Dine at your own risk."
Works for me.
Awesome!
A little freedom is rolling around in your head. Go with these feelings.
Maybe restaurant owners should be able to choose whether they get inspected or not. Those who wish to avoid inspection could post a notice on the door stating "This establishment not subject to health and sanitation inspections. Dine at your own risk."
Works for me.
I think that approach would pretty much put a restaurant out of business. I know I wouldn't eat there.
I think that approach would pretty much put a restaurant out of business. I know I wouldn't eat there.
Why? You're happy eating in a place inspected by people you don't know of competence unknown to standards unknown. A sign saying they are self exempt just means you would need to do your own homework and decide for yourself, do your own inspection.
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.