Tag Archives: ban

US Border Agents Silently Confiscating Kids’ Candy

Wouldn't it be nice if U.S. border agents did an equally amazing job catching terrorists, drug smugglers, and those criminal elements hell-bent on illegally infiltrating our nation's porous borders?

Wouldn't it be nice if U.S. border agents did an equally amazing job catching terrorists, drug smugglers, and those criminal elements hell-bent on illegally infiltrating our nation's porous borders?

Just when you thought catching terrorists, drug smugglers and illegal alien invaders were among the top priorities of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency, there comes news from the Canadian border that agents have also been tasked with confiscating kids’ contraband candy.

Linda Bird, a Canadian woman who recently attempted enter the U.S., was stunned when CBP agents seized a $2 chocolate egg that has been deemed a “choking hazard” by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The confection marketed towards children is commonly know across the globe as a “Kinder Surprise,” and contains a small toy safely embedded inside a chocolate covered plastic shell.

Canadian health officials have repeatedly said they are not concerned about the potential for youngsters to choke on the tiny toys hidden inside the eggs because the plastic shells are difficult for children of any age to open, especially toddlers that simply do not have the manual dexterity required.

Across the border in the Nanny States of America, the FDA and CBP remain committed to ensuring that contraband candy eggs never infiltrate our nation’s northern border and needlessly put a single American child’s life at risk.

“The U.S. takes catching illegal Kinder candy seriously, judging by the number of them they’ve confiscated in the last year,” reports the Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC). “Officials said they’ve seized more than 25,000 of the treats in 2,000 separate seizures.”

Undated warning label from a Kinder Surprise warns parents of tiny tots about potential choking hazards.

Undated warning label from a Kinder Surprise warns parents of tiny tots about potential choking hazards.

International confectioner, Ferrero, introduced the Kinder Surprise in 1974, and since then, more than 30 billion eggs have safely been devoured by children across the globe. In fact, Ferrero notes on its website that it has taken extra precautions to ensure that “Kinder Surprise toys are designed and developed with safety in mind, rigorously observing international regulations as well as extra safety criteria voluntarily adopted by the Ferrero Group.”

Despite a thriving global market for a seemingly innocent and safe confection that has yet to be threatened with extinction by a frivolous class action lawsuit in any nation, the Kinder Surprise remains on the CBP’s list of items that, if found being smuggled in to the U.S., could result in a $300 fine and legal headaches.

Accused Kinder Surprise ‘smuggler,’ Bird, said she recently received a “seven-page letter” from the U.S. government asking her to “formally authorize the destruction of her seized Kinder egg” or pay $250 for it to be put in storage while legal matters are pursued.

“I thought it was a joke,” Bird said. “I had to read it twice. But they are serious.”

Do you support CBP’s silent crackdown on contraband candy or prefer they stick to performing the agency’s “priority mission of keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S.?”

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Santa Ban Prompts County to Consider De-Funding Head Start

"This may affect my willingness to fund money for them," said Supervisor Bill Russell. "That's just the way I am."

"This may affect my willingness to fund money for them," said Supervisor Bill Russell. "That's just the way I am."

A local Mississippi Head Start program that enforced a ban on Santa Claus from visiting children last month is now at risk of losing funding in the upcoming year. Concerned members of DeSoto County’s Board of Supervisors say the ban conflicts with Head Start’s “set of core values which … respects families, cultures and diversity.”

Prior to Christmas, a memo from Head Start state headquarters in Holly Springs implored employees in the program’s 367 pre-school centers to refrain from displaying Santa Claus and Christmas-themed decorations. Specifically, Head Start’s Virda Lee warned, “Please DO NOT invite Santa to your center.”

A “Winter Wonderland” theme featuring snowmen and snowflakes, however, was suggested by Lee as a suitable alternative during the season otherwise known as ‘Christmas.’

While Christmas was shunned in the name of promoting ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ to Head Start’s young participants, it was revealed by Gov. Haley Barbour’s spokesman this week that the ban on all things Christmas appears to be the handiwork of a naughty elf, aka Virda Lee, because it’s definitely not the “official position” of the statewide program.

DeSoto County’s Board of Supervisors said they want answers from Head Start regarding its official position on Christmas before making critical funding decisions later this month.

“We have an American culture, and every time we turn around it gets chipped away and chipped away, and I’m getting tired of it,” said Supervisor Allen Latimer.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Pennsylvanians Now Free to Gratuitously Drop ‘F-Bomb’

Hey, kids! The ACLU and Commonwealth of Penn. say it's okay to fire away, as long as it's "non-threatening!"

Hey, kids! The ACLU and Commonwealth of Penn. say it's okay to fire away, as long as it's "non-threatening!"

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) secured a victory Tuesday for Pennsylvanians who enjoy dropping the ‘F-bomb’ without fear of reprisal from law enforcement officials.

ACLU lawyer Mary Catherine Roper says Penn. state troopers issued “more than 700 disorderly conduct citations for cursing in a recent one-year span, and local police hundreds more.”

Roper claims citizens’ newfound freedom to use expletives in common “non-threatening” conversation will cut down on needless legal costs endured by violators and the court system.

How do you interpret this ‘victory’ for civil liberties if you’re a parent or teacher? Afterall, this is a victory for protecting freedom of speech as prescribed by the 1st Amendment.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Bureaucrats Force Fire Trucks to Take the Long Route

"Over the river and through the woods, to put out the fire we go!"

"Over the river and through the woods, to put out the fire we go!"

Living south of a well-traveled bridge in one Mass. suburb could now mean the difference between life and death for local residents. State officials recently revised weight restrictions for “heavy trucks” crossing Haverhill’s Basiliere Bridge to include critical ladder trucks.

“It’s not ideal and we want it fixed as quickly as possible, but it’s not a source for panic,” a complicit Mayor James Fiorentini told the Eagle-Tribune. “The state has told us the restriction applies to the firetrucks. We’ve asked them to consider allowing the ladder trucks to use the bridge and they said they will get back to us. If the answer is still no, we’ve asked them to fix the bridge as quickly as possible.”

Ain’t that sweet? Mayor Fiorentini would rather allow the ‘bureaucratic process’ to run its course than do whatever it takes as quickly as possible to protect local residents whose homes and lives are at stake.

Here’s the kicker: Since the weight restrictions were enacted, no city agency has ever monitored the bridge for “heavy trucks” exceeding the posted limit, says the city’s Public Safety Committee chairman. Admittedly, the only truckers following the ill-conceived law are Haverhill firemen who are being forced to take the long route with their ladder trucks!

Someone needs to kick Mayor Fiorentini’s butt into high gear. Here’s his contact information:

Mayor Fiorentini’s on-line Constituent Services (online form)
— or —
Personal email: jimfior02@aol.com

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

City Bans Puffing, Petting and Eating Behind the Wheel

Do we really need a law telling motorists they can't pet their dogs while driving? Nanny state bureaucrats in Troy, Mich., think so ...

Do we really need a law telling motorists they can't pet their dogs while driving? Nanny state bureaucrats in Troy, Mich., think so ...

One city’s efforts to ensure motorists stay focused on the road ahead seems like a bit of overkill, but we’ll let you be the judge:

Bagel-chomping motorists prone to texting while driving beware: Police in a Detroit suburb have officially begun looking for you.

Troy police began enforcing the city’s new driving while distracted ordinance, which went into effect Saturday.

The ordinance passed last year in the city about 15 miles north of Detroit aims to crack down on distracted drivers whose bad behind-the-wheel behavior includes using a cell phone, eating, grooming and interacting with pets. Motorists face fines from $75 to $200.

The newly enacted law targets motorists for fines if they “temporarily remove both hands from the full grip of the wheel.” While lighting and smoking cigarettes is not specifically cited in the law as a violation, “[v]irtually any activity could be included at the discretion of an officer,” writes the Detroit Examiner’s Richard Weaver.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Bureaucrats Transforming Schools into “Sweet-Free Zones”

"Yes" is not in nanny state food cops' limited vocabulary.

"Yes" is not in nanny state food cops' limited vocabulary.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that the St. Paul school district will make all public schools “sweet-free zones” by the end of the school year. Opponents of the plan say “there is little proof such policies work” and that “it’s a school’s role to teach — not force — students to eat healthy.”

The school district’s unproven and experimental anti-obesity crusade is being fueled by “a series of state and federal grants, the largest of which will end this school year.”

Agree or disagree with St. Paul Public Schools’ crusade to rid all “sweet, sticky, fat-laden [and] salty treats” from kids’ lunchboxes and cafeteria trays?

Contact Superintendent Valeria S. Silva if you think parents, not bureaucrats, should determine what’s best for their own children to consume in school cafeterias:

Email Superintendent Silva: supt.silva@spps.org

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine

Court Confiscates Lawyer’s ‘Contraband’ Candy

Gene Gulinson might be a sucker for jawbreakers, but do you think he's a lawbreaker, too?

Gene Gulinson might be a sucker for jawbreakers, but do you think he's a lawbreaker, too?

An Arizona attorney says that after thirty years of trying cases in Phoenix courthouses, no one has ever raised an issue about his sweet tooth. That all changed when guards recently confiscated Gene Gulinson’s jawbreakers and prohibited his bag of pastries, reports UPI:

Gene Gulinson, who practices in Phoenix, said his treatment at the Highland Justice Court in Gilbert damaged his reputation, The Arizona Republic reported. He is seeking $75,000 from the town.

Gulinson, in his notice of claim, said he has brought candy into courthouses dozens of times over the past 30 years without any trouble.

The trouble began when Gulinson went to the courthouse for a pretrial conference with a client who had two traffic tickets. He said guards first told him he could not enter carrying a bag of pastries a client had given him.

After he got rid of the pastries, guards searched his briefcase and found the jawbreakers.

A town spokeswoman said food is not allowed in the court, although Gilbert makes an exception for babies.

Another frivolous lawsuit or do you think Gulinson’s case has teeth? Afterall, parents are allowed to bring food in to the courtroom and their kids probably make bigger messes than attorneys wearing expensive suits they’d prefer not to soil.

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to Newsvine