Judge Overturns Large Soda Ban in NY

[ohheckyeah]

Last edited Mon Mar 11, 2013, 08:01 PM - Edit history (1)

Good. It was ridiculous.

A New York state judge has knocked down New York City's landmark new ban on big, sugary drinks, just one day before it was set to take effect.

Calling them "arbitrary and capricious," state Supreme Court Justice Milton Tingling on Monday invalidated regulations that would have banned New York City restaurants, movie theaters and other food service establishments from serving sugary drinks in sizes bigger than 16 ounces. The ban would have covered not just sodas but a wide array of other sugar-sweetened drinks, from smoothies to coffee. PDF of ruling

Mayor Michael Bloomberg unveiled the regulations last May, part of an effort to curb runaway obesity rates by encouraging people to drink less sugar-laden beverages. The New York City Board of Health approved the measure last September.

But Tingling found that the board of health had overstepped the authority it was granted to fulfill its mission: protecting against and preventing diseases. That authority, the judge said, does not include the power to "limit or ban".

SOURCE

[RB TexLa]

1. Next they will just put a $20 tax on all beverages over 16 ounces.

That'll teach people to try to do things the mayor wouldn't do.

[The Straight Story]

2. I don't know why some people like control freaks to have power over them and their choices

but a frightening amount of people seem to like it when someone else tells them what to do and how to live.

Being pro-choice means that sometimes other people will make choices you don't like.

But hey, we have been doing it forever. We saved the Indians from themselves and their backward, unchristian, ways because it was better for them and society. We have told women what they can do with their bodies, people who can they be around by choice, etc and so on.

The mayor is right though - you have to draw a line somewhere, I drew mine a long time ago way back when.

This law was stupid. You could buy two drinks that were greater in quantity than one - it is like saying you want to ban people from buying packs of smokes that have 20 in them and only let them buy ones with 15 smokes in them.

Waste of time, energy, and a law to make the do gooders feel good about themselves as though they were saving the world.

[ElboRuum]

3. Well, actually.

I find that for those who are proponents of such things, they've already "seen the light" as it were. So not only do they think they're doing the world a favor by forcing conformity with their own behavior, it also requires no effort on their part to comply.

[ohheckyeah]

5. I never drink sodas...

don't like it, but I really don't need the government telling me not to and I don't have any desire to try and control other people's choices. What next? Limit the sale of butter or bacon?

[ElboRuum]

9. Why not?

I mean, why single out soda? Given enough time, I'm sure someone would lobby for it. Which is probably why this law being struck down was of note and import. If a law like this is struck down, it reduces the likelihood for similar laws should there be in the future to stand as well.

[ohheckyeah]

14. What is scary to me

is how many people accept bans like this as "saving money" on healthcare. Forget any semblance of individuality or liberty as long as you save a buck.....I find that repugnant.

[The Straight Story]

6. Indeed

They are saving others from their sins, preaching the gospel to them that they themselves have already become a part of.

But try getting them to give up something they don't like for your religion/gospel and they get bent out of shape and tell you it is their body, their choice.

[ohheckyeah]

4. I agree.

It's amazing the laws that are passed for "our own good".

[Whisp]

7. like drunk driving laws, smoking on airplanes.

ahuh.
none of those are any good either.

[The Straight Story]

10. Ah, one of those people

Let's see, does drinking a big soda and getting behind the wheel endanger others or yourself?

Does making the choice to go to a bar that allows smoking, versus one that does not, involve you making the choice or someone making it for you?

Ban smoking in hospitals and grocery stores and trains where people need to go for things, fine. You don't need to go to a bar, you want to.

Common sense.

Maybe we should ban abortions. We know what causes people to get pregnant, sex. But suddenly people get all freaked out in cases like that. To the religious right it is harming a human infant when such does not need to happen. Shall we embrace their religion and restriction on choices? Why or why not?

[ElboRuum]

11. Big Difference.

It's a precept of impugning the rights of others. Simply put, one does not have the right to do X if it infringes on the rights or protections of another. In the cases you mentioned, this follows the precept in both cases, there is a great potential for material harm to others.

However, if the individual choice harms only the one making the choice in reasonable circumstance, then it is generally accepted that the choice is not subject to the infringement by government. Soda definitely fits this to a much greater degree than the former, ergo, it is not generally subject to restriction or punitive legislation.

[ohheckyeah]

13. Those laws are for other people's good.

Not to save me from myself.

[Whisp]

16. obesity, diabetes.

If those can be lessened, it also is for everyone's good.

Let's try to remember who and why these offerings are made to us, the ones that rate profit over everything and will sell you a sweet assed cola cheaper than bottled water. And wrap it up in a flag and freedom.

[pintobean]

18. People like

this guy?

[ohheckyeah]

20. Has nothing to do with the flag

but a lot with respecting free will. If you don't think sodas over 16 ounces are acceptable don't buy it.

There's something to be said for people minding their own damn business.

[Skip Intro]

19. +100 for the first two lines alone. nt

[Whisp]

8. If the judge was Tingling on Monday, I wonder what he will do on Tuesdays? n/t

[d_b]

12. i wish that judge would bring back crystal pepsi

[quinnox]

15. good ruling

This is the silliest thing I have heard of in a long time.

[surrealAmerican]

17. Wait a minute ...

... smoothies with sugar? Who does that? That would just be a way to ruin a good batch of blender fruit.