Context was the idea of a government banning certain popular foods

  • splendoruranium@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    4 days ago
    This would mean they’d be against food safety regulations, would it not?
    

    It would not.

    Having traffic laws isn’t the same as banning cars, either.

    Of course it is. Part of traffic legislation literally involves banning certain types of vehicles, either in certain areas or on any kind of public road in general.

    • remon@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Exaclty … certain types in certain areas with a reason. That’s regulation. You wouldn’t just ban all vehicles. Do I really have to spell this out?

      • splendoruranium@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Exaclty … certain types in certain areas with a reason. That’s regulation.

        Which is just what I wrote, yes. Excising every unmaintained or outdated vehicle from traffic everywhere for example is just as valid a regulation as excising a certain type of food - any food - from general consumption. There’d simply have to be a good reason. And once there is, yep, what can and can be eaten gets dictated.
        Again, that’s already how it works, in traffic and in cuisine.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        3 days ago

        are you being intentionally obtuse? obviously they wouldn’t ban all vehicle, that wasn’t suggested in the OP either.

        • remon@ani.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          3 days ago

          Are you?

          We’re talking about banning one of the major things that is food. If you ban meat, you only have plants and fungi left. So yes, I think banning an entire branch of transportation is a decent analogy.

    • desktop_user [they/them] @lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      yes, however as far as I am aware there are no laws in the us against any private vehicle usage on private land. Unlike the FDA which criminalizes owning or consuming certain chemicals.

      • Randomgal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        The difference is having a car on your land is your problem. Having dangerous chemicals that leech into the ground and water is a problem for everyone around you and the generations down the line.

      • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 days ago

        I don’t know. Pretty sure bleach isn’t allowed in most drinks but you can feel free to drink as much as you like at home.

        jk if that’s not obvious

      • splendoruranium@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        yes, however as far as I am aware there are no laws in the us against any private vehicle usage on private land. Unlike the FDA which criminalizes owning or consuming certain chemicals.

        You may have reached the limit of that car-metaphor there.