Re:California to list glyphosate as cancer-causing
by jasode on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @12:12PM
(#14646697)
>The proposition was perhaps a good idea that was horribly executed. [...] There's no danger for excessive labelling, and the labels remove the liability for violations.
Well, there's that old saying: "The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly." -- supposedly Abe Lincoln
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+best+way+to+get+a+bad+la....
Re:California to list glyphosate as cancer-causing
by stcredzero on Tuesday June 27, 2017 @12:39PM
(#14646924)
was perhaps a good idea that was horribly executed.
This describes some rather large fraction of laws, period.
* Private citizens are able to initiate civil enforcement and collect penalties; it's not limited to regulatory agencies. Which virtually guarantees that enforcement is going to be about milking money rather than trying to actually reduce harm.
* There's no consideration for dosing, anywhere. So a potential trace contamination is considered as equal a violation as dumping vats of the stuff in the public water system.
* The requirement for listing a chemical is .001% of causing cancer of 70 years. That is a ridiculously low bar, which means many low-risk chemicals are going to be swept up.
* There's no danger for excessive labelling, and the labels remove the liability for violations.
Taken together, it's a recipe for companies to just slap the warning on everything.