First Nanny State post in a while, but a funny one.

The Japanese automaker has issued a recall for 52,000 Mazda6 sedans due to potential obstruction in the vehicles evaporative systems. Apparently, the evaporative canister vent line of certain 2009 and 2010 Mazda6 models is the perfect home for a species of spider. If the web clogs the line, excessive negative pressure may build up in the vehicles fuel tank, which is likely to eventually cause a crack in the tank itself.

via Autoblog — We Obsessively Cover The Auto Industry.

Wow – really? Some of these recalls seem to be downright ridiculous. I remember a Ford recall from a few years ago wherein a leaky gasket could drip power steering fluid onto another gasket, which if it then leaked in turn could drip oil onto a manifold, which if sufficiently leaked upon, could accumulate enough sludge to contact an electrical bit, which if improperly sealed could cause a fire. OK, fires are bad, but is the onus really on manufacturers to conceive of every possible rube goldberg happenstance or chain of events that might befall car and driver? Same thought applies to Toyota’s floor mat issues.

Anyway, if you drive a Mazda, watch out for the creepy crawlies under your hood that are plotting to make your gas tank explode.

What Chinese parents understand is that nothing is fun until you’re good at it. To get good at anything you have to work, and children on their own never want to work, which is why it is crucial to override their preferences. This often requires fortitude on the part of the parents because the child will resist; things are always hardest at the beginning, which is where Western parents tend to give up. But if done properly, the Chinese strategy produces a virtuous circle. Tenacious practice, practice, practice is crucial for excellence; rote repetition is underrated in America. Once a child starts to excel at something—whether it’s math, piano, pitching or ballet—he or she gets praise, admiration and satisfaction.

via Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior – WSJ.com.

I have to imagine (as a non-parent) that there other factors that contribute to a child’s “success.” The definition of “success” for example, or the peer groups that they are exposed to. Nonetheless, an interesting perspective on a key psychological difference between two societies.

I very am confused by the mixed message our government is sending. The message is that they don’t really want us to smoke because smoking is bad for us, hence the warning labels, yet they will allow the sale of this killer product. Let me use an analogy to show the absurdity of how this is being handled. A car seat is proven to be dangerous and could kill one in 1,000 babies placed in it. Would the government allow the sale of this car seat as long as there is a big warning label slapped on it? Of course not. They would pull this product from the market and ban its sale. [Calgary Herald]

The government isn’t really sending mixed messages. What they’re saying, with the heavy taxation of cigarettes and the warning labels, is that informed [warning labels] consenting adults can decide for themselves what level of risk they want to take on, provided that they’re willing to fund their future care [taxes]. Government’s role here is to enforce the “informed” part and plan for the funding part [no comment on how well that's being done in each province]. Yes, I know that this doesn’t really hold, as cigarette taxes don’t go directly to provisioning future health care for lung cancer sufferers, but the spirit of the tax is “you choose, you pay” – i.e.: making externalities concrete.

In the case of a car seat, a baby is incapable of being informed about much or consenting to anything, and the government is making a judgment on the risks (death of a child) vs. the cost (erosion of freedom of the parents). What if that carseat were allowed to be sold, but 3/4′s of its box had to be covered in a graphic image of a car accident, and a message to the effect that this car seat was more likely to cause death?

SANDY SPRINGS, Ga. – A fourteen-year-old autistic boy is facing terrorist charges after a sketch he made in school.

via Autistic Boy Charged With Making Terrorist Threats Over Stick-Figure Sketch.

The reason for the arrest was a tweet I had posted on the social network Twitter, which was deemed to constitute a bomb threat against Robin Hood airport in Doncaster: “Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!” You may say, and I certainly realise now, it was ill-advised. But it was clearly frustration, caused by heavy snowfall grounding flights and potentially scuppering my own flight a week later. Like having a bad day at work and stating that you could murder your boss, I didn't even think about whether it would be taken seriously.

via My tweet was silly, but the police reaction was absurd | Paul Chambers | Comment is free | The Guardian.

“For the first time, the nation will have goals, benchmarks, and measurable outcomes that will help us tackle the childhood obesity epidemic one child, one family, and one community at a time,” Obama says in a news release.U.S. kids haven't always been obese. Only one in 20 children ages 2 to 19 was obese in the 1970s. But around 1980 child obesity began to rocket to today's stratospheric level: Nearly one in three kids is overweight or obese, and nearly one in five is frankly obese.

via Michelle Obama’s Plan to End Childhood Obesity Epidemic.

Edit: I shared Scary’s post on Reddit, which is always seems to stir up good debate.

There are many arguments in support of banning the burka that, at first blush, are convincing. The burka is not proscribed by the Koran or mainstream Islam. Many consider the garment to be symbolic of oppression; the woman within has no identity, no contact with the outside world. Some call it a “prison”, enslaving its wearer to her husband. These are an affront to the values of Western nations, Canada included.

None of these arguments, though, present a transgression of recognized human rights as long as burka fashion is voluntary. In other words, if someone wants to wear it, why shouldn’t she (or even he) be allowed to? More importantly, if someone truly feels that they have a religious duty to wear it, then we also risk trampling on another freedom, that of religion…

…Sarkozy has the right to condemn the Burka, even when speaking as the representative of the French people. I would even argue that he has the duty, since a vast majority find the practice to be repulsive. He should not, however, seek to use the powers of the state to compel women to dress a certain way in public, contrary to their religious beliefs…

…For that would be forcibly taking these women from the only prison they know, and in the process subjecting all of us to a bigger prison – that of the nanny-state.

[Scary Fundamentalist]

I would be fine with this as an option for pedestrians (especially kids), were it not for this:

…there have been no recent major pedestrian accidents in those areas, Judson said. [PennLive]

Ah. Good. So the city council and police department are busy creating solutions for problems that don’t exist.

This example makes me think of the school buses in Winnipeg. I’m not sure what they’re like wherever you are, but here they are an agglomeration of mechanized arms (that stop kids from crossing the street in front of the bus), flashing & pivoting stop signs, strobe lights (a big one on top of the bus), and so on. Does all of this have an impact on school bus related accidents? Would drilling into kids commonsense rules of behaviour do the same, and instill some sense of personal responsibility?

That’s the most insidious evil of the Nanny State – the abdication of personal responsibility in favour government hand-holding.

Kitchen knives are apparently the most commonly used murder weapon in Britain, absent firearms. Fortunately, there’s now an alternative.

Up next: blunting the “pocket terror” of stabby pens and pencils, and forest patrols to elimate pointy sticks. I’m on the “nanny state” side here: if someone wants to do grievous harm, they’ll find a way, regardless of many edges the government blunts. Violence in society is a social problem, not an access problem. [Note: I support gun control]