This blogpost is closed for comments.

Oldest First
  • 4Liberty Feb 25, 10:28 a.m.

    Government by the People, for the People, and at the consent of the Governed implies that said government can only be empowered with authority that each individual posseses.

    I dont have the authority to tell you what to do. No matter how many people I find that agree with me, none of them have the authority to tell you what to do. Collectively, we dont "create" that authority by right of numbers outside of the immoral use of uninstigated force. None of us have that authority to grant to a Representitive.

    So where are they getting this authority?

    It is just another example of 'little tyrants' usurping authority.

  • 4Liberty Feb 25, 10:25 a.m.

    Some pretty awful non sequitur going on in here. Here is a classic example:

    "yeah! When did protecting public health and safety become the responsibility of the government? We should trust private industry to look out for us."

    Deciding that protecting public health and safety is not THE responsibility of the government doesnt mean that you have to trust private industry to do it for you. No where in that statement did you allow for the personal responsibility that each of us has over our own lives.

    Both sides in the GA are wrong on this IMO. Considering a law on this is a misguided venture that only results in further government intrusion in our lives. Saying you have to "consider" the paid lobbyists data as if he deserves "equal consideration" is also rediculous. The legislators, collectively, should first be answering this litmus test, prior to even holding a hearing on a bill: "Is this something that I as an individual could ethically force on my neighbor?"

  • Wirklich Feb 20, 5:22 p.m.

    Though it is illegal for children to purchase cigarettes, some still smoke. But we have the age limit law in place because we don't want them to have free access to something that is proven to be harmful. All valid scientific research indicates that tanning beds are also harmful. I see no reason why we can't set an age limit on free access to this sort of business as well.
    Sure, they can have a tanning bed lobbyist give his sales pitch, but to actually heed this person who lacks any credibility (he is selling tanning beds!!)and at the same time, stand in opposition to the advisement of major health organizations, is irrational. Another example of the sort of legislators we have to contend with for a few more years.

  • rand321 Feb 20, 4:06 p.m.

    Apparently the new NC GOP leadership seems as intent as the old Democrata on telling you what is best for you, your kids and your family.

    This is less government????

  • CaryEngineer Feb 20, 3:58 p.m.

    Frizz "Soft drinks?"
    Where have you been? NYC has already legislated soda sizes...supposed to take effect in 3 weeks.
    Our Government is so efficient and coherent in everything it does, there is no need for personal (or parental) responsibility any more...haven't you heard?
    And yet we keep electing them...sigh.

  • logical Feb 20, 3:45 p.m.

    It is about time the government stepped up and told us how to be parents. I thought I was going to be responsible for raising my children on my own. Whew! What a relief!

  • JustAName Feb 20, 3:42 p.m.

    "I don't think there needs to be a ban...I think parents need to tell their 14 year old daughters that you shouldn't lay in a cancer box to bronze your skin." - JennyB

    Exactly. They should do it the old school way, with some Hawaiian Tropic and laying out in the sun for hours.

  • dougdeep Feb 20, 3:39 p.m.

    "If parents learn how to say no we wouldn't have to waste time and resources on things like this."

    And teens go and do it anyways. What planet do you live on?

  • BuglessDuster Feb 20, 3:38 p.m.

    This is slightly off topic, but if a 14-year old girl can have surgery without her parents' knowledge shouldn't they be responsible enough to make the "choice" to lie in a tanning bed?

  • Reformed Liberal Feb 20, 3:36 p.m.

    I used to work with a waitress that would tan 3-4 times a week and she would wonder why her skin was flaking. Why regulate it when health insurance companies can just deny coverage for skin cancer caused by tanning excessively? Tan all you wan't I don't care, we want to get rid of social health care anyways.

  • Pirate01 Feb 20, 3:34 p.m.

    I agree with the science but do not think there should be a law. We do not need more laws. People need to be responsible for their own lives.

  • Minarchist Feb 20, 3:31 p.m.

    "Why is government involved in this at all. Not a government issue."

    yeah! When did protecting public health and safety become the responsibility of the government? We should trust private industry to look out for us.
    Kaitlyn
    February 20, 2013 2:46 p.m.
    Report abuse

    UMM maybe you should try personal responsibility and look out for yourself and your family???

  • JennyB Feb 20, 3:21 p.m.

    I don't think there needs to be a ban...I think parents need to tell their 14 year old daughters that you shouldn't lay in a cancer box to bronze your skin.

  • dmj Feb 20, 3:04 p.m.

    Wait, there's such a thing as a tanning bed lobbyist??!!!

  • rationality Feb 20, 2:59 p.m.

    I believe we should march into both the federal and state legislature and demand that they take up bills declaring the passage of time to be illegal. Each second that goes by we all age, and as we age, our cells all deteriorate. Eventually, through deterioration, we will all die. Since the government is all-knowing and can think and act for us all, then it can stop us from dying. Surely that is the case.

    I still can't believe people believe that government is out for your best interests.

  • dipenkara Feb 20, 2:58 p.m.

    All this over the issue of allowing 14,15,16 and 17 year olds to use tanning booths. Pale faces at the prom! NOOOO! only in america.

  • Kaitlyn Feb 20, 2:46 p.m.

    "Why is government involved in this at all. Not a government issue."

    yeah! When did protecting public health and safety become the responsibility of the government? We should trust private industry to look out for us.

  • yellow_hat Feb 20, 2:28 p.m.

    "It's not in his best interest to support something that's going to be detrimental to people's health,"

    I cannot believe one of our elected representatives is actually this naive. We have the full medical community on one side, and a industry lobbyist on the other, and we are going to give them equal weight on the science? Really?

  • ScientiaVinces Feb 20, 2:27 p.m.

    Profits first in North Carolina, Inc.™!

  • JustAName Feb 20, 2:25 p.m.

    You know what, teens know that smoking is bad for you. We've know this for decades. Teens still smoke. Make sure they are informed of the situation and then keep your government nanny fingers out of it.

  • Frizz Feb 20, 2:25 p.m.

    If our government is so concerned about the health and well being of the citizens of North Carolina why don't they make Alcohol and Tobacco illegal? There's more than enough data available that shows the health concerns associated with the both products yet the State makes only a minimum of effort to curb the use of either product. And the State winks and nods at the health risks to others caused by the consumption of these two products.

    What will the government go after next? Cheeseburgers? Bacon? Soft drinks?

  • I know some stuff Feb 20, 2:21 p.m.

    why is this worthy of even ONE MINUTE of the 'lawmakers' time?
    If they can drive a car at 15/16, they can decide to listen to the medical experts on melanoma, or not.
    Why does does this even consume government? Please focus on what's important....and it's not that OTHER story on this WRAL page, about being TOPLESS. We are a screwed up society.

  • rushbot Feb 20, 2:17 p.m.

    kdawg said at 1322 today: "
    Only North Carolina's new legislature would listen to a tanning bed lobbyist out to make money instead of science and hard facts about skin cancer. Perhaps the legislature should reconsider "separate but equal," since separate would make more money for the water fountain and bathroom fixture industries. Our new state government is a joke. Great job voters." .. .. .. ..I agree with you!!!

  • sst100 Feb 20, 2:16 p.m.

    "Neither source is credible."- goobnav

    Classic overstatement. It is also speaks to rampant public science illiteracy. The general public (and many legislators) do not understand how basic science works; namely, science is always trying to generate data to refute the "standard understanding" of the time. Ideas are supposed to be challenged- it only then do we know they are right. So, there will always be a thread of controversy, some contrary data, and yes, people trying to manipulate it for their own gain. But that does not mean there is no credibility in scientific research.

    To suggest, though, that one lobbyist who is paid to lie, misrepresent and distort has the same credibility as peer-reviewed science is absurd.

  • Wirklich Feb 20, 2:05 p.m.

    Impreach-the-Czar, You really believe that the scientific evidence presented by the following organizations are less credible that a tanning bed salesman???
    (American Cancer Society, the North Carolina Medical Society, the North Carolina Pediatrics Society, the North Carolina Oncology Society, the North Carolina Dermatologists and the Child Fatality Task Force.)
    Sadly, this lack of reasoning is also evident among the current legislative regime. Reality check!

  • justaconservativeguy Feb 20, 2:01 p.m.

    Why is government involved in this at all. Not a government issue.

  • blkmamba Feb 20, 1:50 p.m.

    So not important to so many, as I'm sure mommy and daddy were paying for it, they gave consent! Just like soda, that's not a problem that needs a bill! Let the parents parent!

  • smegma Feb 20, 1:49 p.m.

    whew thank goodness for Gov's pre-crimes unit. without these liberty laws we'd have an epidemic of crispy fried teens everywhere

  • rand321 Feb 20, 1:47 p.m.

    Sounds as if the GOP wants to join Obama on his health care (not to mention NYC with their drink ban) to tell Americans what is good for their health. Why not let the families decide who tans or does not tan!

    NC Lawmakers--we want LESS government, not MORE!!! NC GOP, Obama is putting government more into our lives...he does not need your help!

  • Crumps Br0ther Feb 20, 1:42 p.m.

    Please wont someone think of the children!

  • kdawg Feb 20, 1:22 p.m.

    Only North Carolina's new legislature would listen to a tanning bed lobbyist out to make money instead of science and hard facts about skin cancer. Perhaps the legislature should reconsider "separate but equal," since separate would make more money for the water fountain and bathroom fixture industries. Our new state government is a joke. Great job voters.

  • Kaitlyn Feb 20, 1:22 p.m.

    "Melanoma, Levy told the committee, "does not have direct relationship with sunlight. It is a complex relationship if at all."

    A complete lie from a hired gun for the tanning industry.

    Tobacco companies still find so-called scientists who are paid to argue there is no causal link between smoking and lung cancer.

    We are supposed to believe these hired quacks? Please.

  • Terkel Feb 20, 1:21 p.m.

    "It's not in his best interest to support something that's going to be detrimental to people's health," she (Avila) said of Levy.

    WHHAAAAAAATTT????? It's how he makes his living!

    And she's in charge of the DHHS Budget. Paging Dr Wos...

  • Boot-the-DC-Tyrant Feb 20, 1:19 p.m.

    Data is useless until it's manipulated enough to benefit the left.

  • LovemyPirates Feb 20, 1:14 p.m.

    When will we hear of a bill banning teens from getting behind the wheel of powerful and fast cars? These kill many teens each year.

  • imsosorry Feb 20, 1:09 p.m.

    Theyll just find someone who has one in their home and use it.

  • redapace Feb 20, 1:07 p.m.

    "Let's ask: Who is more credible and trustworthy, professionals who care for the medical needs of youth OR a person who is paid to sell a product or service, regardless?"

    The important question (as far as our politicians are concerned), is, who gives more money to the politicians?

  • Wirklich Feb 20, 9:22 a.m.

    In addition to scientific research support, the bill has the backing of the American Cancer Society, the North Carolina Medical Society, the North Carolina Pediatrics Society, the North Carolina Oncology Society, the North Carolina Dermatologists and the Child Fatality Task Force, which recommended the legislation.

    Let's ask: Who is more credible and trustworthy, professionals who care for the medical needs of youth OR a person who is paid to sell a product or service, regardless? Yet another example of an legislator who is willing to throw logic and humaneness out the window to fulfill a "behind closed doors" promise, and likely receive some "kick back" in return. A few jobs are not worth jeopardizing the health of children. (This is small scale example of greed when compared to the fast track to fracking fiasco- jeopardizing clean water and health to make a few bucks.)

  • alwaysconcernedmom Feb 20, 9:00 a.m.

    If parents learn how to say no we wouldn't have to waste time and resources on things like this.

Oldest First