Syun

Done. One thing that ought to be widely brought up as an argument against, besides the obvious, is that this regulation (as I understand things) is being proposed under the authority given to regulators under the Chevron deference law of I think 1984. In any case, this was thrown out by the supreme court last year, and quite correctly. The case that got it thrown out was about the ATF’s ability to make up whatever gun laws they wanted to. Dems argued that it needed to be preserved because it allows agencies to regulate things, but I asked myself if that was true, and decided that the wild deregulation of the 80s were enabled by it, and that things like net neutrality were able to be killed by appointed bureaucrats because of it. The argument for it is that lawmakers shouldn’t have to be subject experts on everything, but the argument against it is that any law too vague for a legislator to understand is unconstitutionally vague and laws should be required to be written well. Also, it’s the job of congress to make laws, not appointees of whatever President who happens to be sitting in office who’re doing as they’re bid.

At this stage, anything pushing back on executive power is a fine thing indeed.

Yeah, there’s enough posted on the open web that one might, if unfortunate, encounter it. I’ve seen it randomly put up on FB once, by some spam account.

Then there was this creep running for office in Virginia on a platform of enslaving women and getting rid of age of consent laws… I unwisely went to his campaign site to see just how nuts he was, and the guy actually posted CP on there, with a “If elected, I’ll legalize THIS” rant underneath. It was pretty appalling. He was promptly thrown out of the Libertarian party, and soon afterward went to prison for exactly what you’d expect… and he thankfully killed himself pretty quickly.

It was relatively recently when I learned how prevalent it is on twitter. What I’ve learned about CP on the internet is that it’s all over the open web, but the platforms it’s shared on don’t seem to be very interested in cracking down. If the EU wanted to do something about it, they’d light a fire under some asses to regulate their own sites rather than roll out nonsense like this law.

It’s pleasantly surprising that they aren’t deep sixing the lifetime pass.

Yet.

Yeah, they threw LNT straight out the window and down the open manhole with flames shooting out of it with great delight. If you search for pics of the place, claiming “leave no trace” is beyond farcical.

This is gospel truth and people downvoting this are delusional.

The places with the fewest places to deposit one’s trash are always the ones with the most litter. Always.

If someone wants another person to adapt a behavior, from a purely practical standpoint, that person must make the other person’s job easier or it will simply not work to get them to adapt. If this wasn’t a forest (such as it is, it being the UK), the only proper thing to do would be to dump as much trash there as possible while demanding the bins back until they get the message and cave in. I could write a whole book here about how the packaging industry paid lobbyists and PR firms to put the blame on consumers for the useless crap they make existing in the first place, and shaming them into keeping it out of sight and thus out of mind. I won’t. But it’s a tale vile enough that it convinced me that there’s a time and a place for littering as protest. The woods aren’t the place.

Besides, there ARE receptacles that are critter resistant. This is an absolute cop out, and seeing how landscaped the area is, a couple of bins would hardly scar the landscape. This is pure crap. I looked the place up, and it’s NOT the kind of place where you deny people trash receptacles, nor is it the kind of place you can credibly base your argument on “we don’t want animals to get used to people”. Good lord, what a bunch of idiocy.