JoeCapitalist2 Thanks for responding and giving me the opportunity to spout my
noise. As an Liberal American I have owned and used guns for
hunting and recreation. I still own guns but no longer hunt. Neither of
these issues can be designated as liberal or conservative.The
argument of whether or not the government can force people to go against their
personal preferences is also useless and without meaning. There is probably no
law anywhere, from any government, any religion, or any collective where all the
members, citizens will be in agreement.Mostly we depend on voluntary
compliance with the law, whether or not we agree with it has no bearing on the
consequences if be break the law. Force is necessary only when someone breaks
the law and refuses to take responsibility of the consequences. As
I understood the argument, the government was not forcing individuals to do any
thing in conflict with their conscience but would require a business to operate
within all laws and regulations that apply to businesses regardless of who or
what the owner is. Businesses are not people. The government has
the authority, the right and the duty to see that business operates in the
desires of all the people not just the owners.
These billboards are not only tasteless but they are a safety concern for
distracted drivers. The pictures on these billboards change every 8 seconds.
If I wanted to live in a place that looked like Las Vegas I would move to Las
I donât like advertising. I donât like outdoor
advertising because:It is very difficult, if not possible, to avoid.
Especially when there is movement. It is distracting to my
attention to other things. Driving, walking, talking etc. It
covers up the things I want to see. The world of natural beauty. It
mostly tells only partial truths and sometimes outright lies.The
same objections apply to most other types of advertising, TV, radio, etc. Advertising is an anti-free market tool used by businesses to prevent
price and quality competition. It allows the higher price to be charged.It is a violation of my Constitutional right to the privacy and security
of my own life. I like advertising when it does itâs proper
job.Advertising is needed to provide the public with information
about the availability and location of a product.
Name just ONE citizen who asked for this, just ONE!Special interests
+ $$$ = Secret CombinationsFollow the money.Sen. Wayne
Niederhauser's and his SB136 should be ashamed of himself, period.And this from the State who wants the over-reaching arm of the Feds to keep
out and mind their own business, hypocrites!
This is a no-brainer. Government by and for special interests.
Without a doubt, electronic billboards harm the quality of life of all who see
them. Their endless promotion of breast augmentation and liposuction is
offensive to all citizens with any sense of decency. However, it should be up to
the local communities to ban these evil influences, not the state
legisllature.For far too long, the legislature has railed against
the federal government for dictating what should be done by the states. And yet,
the legislature is quick to impose its will on local communities. Only an
organization overcome by ego could fail to see the irony here.
Follow the money.
Personally, I think electronic message centers are much more appealing than the
static type. I also think it is reasonable to standardize advertizing
regulations along Interstate and state highways.
For all their yammering about the sanctity of "local control," and the
evils of "big government," these legislators sure are in a hurry to
seize power for themselves.How can we find out how much Reagan
Outdoor Advertising and other billboard companies have contributed to Sen.