Since when were consumer protection laws meant to protect us from ourselves?

June 23rd, 2010

viagra sales recipe 0, check 4821950.story?track=rss”>Weeks after a Silicon Valley county became the first in the nation to ban toys from McDonald's Happy Meals and other food promotions aimed at children, a public health watchdog group called on the fast food giant to remove the playthings from all its meal packages.

Citing toys aimed at promoting the latest “Shrek” movie, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that the plastic promotions lure children into McDonald's restaurants where they are then likely to order food that is too high in calories, fat and salt.

The organization on Tuesday served the fast food giant with a letter expressing its intent to sue if toys are not removed. The letter is legally required in several states, including California, before lawsuits can be brought under consumer protection statutes.

So it’s come to this: using the courts to try to keep a company from selling a legal product that millions of people love because consumers can’t be trusted to make their own choices.

And the worst part for me is I KNOW that some of you don’t see a problem with this.

Entry Filed under: Observations

4 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Jenna  |  June 23rd, 2010 at 9:47 am

    Egregious, right?

    Kinda reminds me of using the courts or state statutes to restrict where folks can enjoy a legal product (tobacco) that millions of people love.

    I can’t stand it when the government tries to tell it’s citizens it knows what’s best.

    Sorry … couldn’t resist :).

  • 2. Elliot  |  June 23rd, 2010 at 10:29 am

    I was really hoping nobody would notice that. Should have known you’d pop up, Jenna!

    Of course, the distinction to me is that fast food hurts only it’s consumer. Second hand smoke hurts the people at the next table.

    But, I know I haven’t managed to convince you of that one. ;)

  • 3. Jenna  |  June 23rd, 2010 at 10:39 am

    I, like most, am aware of second hand smoke dangers. But I am far more concerned with the dangers surrounding the codification of a heckler’s veto, which both these issues essentially involve.

    But that’s just my libertarian side, I guess ;).

  • 4. Dan  |  June 24th, 2010 at 3:38 pm

    Next they’ll go after the dollar menu. It encourages cheap eating. Then they’ll go after the playlands. Then Ronald McDonald. Then the Hamburglar and the big purple thing.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


About

Being in a wheelchair gives you a unique perspective on the world. This blog features many of my views on politics, art, science, and entertainment. My name is Elliot Stearns. More...

The Abortionist

Recent Comments

Categories

Meta