search
top

More Proliferation of Felonies

Apparently it’s already a misdemeanor to put corn syrup or cane sugar in a bottle and call it maple syrup. Apparently that’s not enough for the Congressional Delegation from Vermont. Because we need more federal felonies or something.

6 Responses to “More Proliferation of Felonies”

  1. A Critic says:

    They should make it a capital crime, punishable by drowning in the fake syrup.

  2. Sterling Archer says:

    The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

    Ayn Rand

  3. Sigivald says:

    Apparently it’s already a misdemeanor to put corn syrup or cane sugar in a bottle and call it maple syrup

    False advertising and all that; 15 USC 1452, ref. esp. 21 CFR 168.140 (defining Maple Syrup under the law, in a very reasonable way).

    The libertarian in me has no objection to “you can’t lie about what a product is” laws.

    The felony thing, though, is patent BS.

  4. Ian Argent says:

    Doesn’t VT put an admitted Socialist into the Senate every 6 years, though?

  5. dustydog says:

    I propose that the FDA inspect all maple syrup coming out of Vermont-based companies, and shutting them down if their maple syrup isn’t maplely enough. Get the companies screaming for the law to scream for its repeal.

  6. Alpheus says:

    I think I’ll bring this up every time such a law is proposed or passed: there was once a time where a “felony” conviction meant you would be executed. We need to remember that. Every time a law is offered as a “felony”, we should ask ourselves, “is this really so serious a crime that a person should be executed for committing it?”

    Murder, rape, robbery (theft by threat of murder), *large scale* theft and fraud, I can see calling “felony”. Selling fake Maple Syrup as “real”? I’m not so sure about that.

    Yes, we barely have a death penalty–which is a good thing–but why in the world do we make it possible to have a system of punishments, where some “misdemeanors” are more seriously punished than some “felonies”? Or even for some murders?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Another Second Amendment Victory | Shall Not Be Questioned - [...] agree that not all felony convictions should be disabling, especially when you have lawmakers that want to do things…
top