Government Shutdown Day II: Cernovich, McInnes and Molyneux Form Competing Cannibal Rape-Gangs

[Kath]

Typical lawyer response.
No need for regulations, you can pay me to sue on behalf of your dead relative after the fact.
Doesn't even matter if you win or lose so long as I get paid.
I'll act on behalf of the cash cow, I mean stiff, I mean the deceased.

You implied that your government doesn't need to sample food of restaurateurs who claim allergen free on their menu items.

Quote: They sure as hell will if someone dies from a nut allergy if the food was declared nut free and yes allergens have to be highlighted on menus.

How's this different?

[Montegriffo]

Typical lawyer response.
No need for regulations, you can pay me to sue on behalf of your dead relative after the fact.
Doesn't even matter if you win or lose so long as I get paid.
I'll act on behalf of the cash cow, I mean stiff, I mean the deceased.

You implied that your government doesn't need to sample food of restaurateurs who claim allergen free on their menu items.

Quote: They sure as hell will if someone dies from a nut allergy if the food was declared nut free and yes allergens have to be highlighted on menus.

How's this different?

The difference is that without regulations the onus would be on the customer to verify that a meal is nut free (the situation before the new regs). With the regulations, the onus is on the restaurant to ensure a meal advertised as nut free is safe for the customer to eat (the current situation).

[Kath]

The difference is that without regulations the onus would be on the customer to verify that a meal is nut free (the situation before the new regs). With the regulations, the onus is on the restaurant to ensure a meal advertised as nut free is safe for the customer to eat (the current situation).

Glad we agree. Get rid of the stupid approval monkeys and just enforce laws.

[Speaker to Animals]

Typical lawyer response.
No need for regulations, you can pay me to sue on behalf of your dead relative after the fact.
Doesn't even matter if you win or lose so long as I get paid.
I'll act on behalf of the cash cow, I mean stiff, I mean the deceased.

We already label for common allergies and the nutrition label has to include what is in there.

[Montegriffo]

The difference is that without regulations the onus would be on the customer to verify that a meal is nut free (the situation before the new regs). With the regulations, the onus is on the restaurant to ensure a meal advertised as nut free is safe for the customer to eat (the current situation).

Glad we agree. Get rid of the stupid approval monkeys and just enforce laws.

Regulations are the law in this case.
Enforcing the law means enforcing the regulations. That requires regulators. How do you not see that?

[Montegriffo]

Typical lawyer response.
No need for regulations, you can pay me to sue on behalf of your dead relative after the fact.
Doesn't even matter if you win or lose so long as I get paid.
I'll act on behalf of the cash cow, I mean stiff, I mean the deceased.

We already label for common allergies and the nutrition label has to include what is in there.

You mean you have food regulations which are enforced by law.

Regulators enforce the law.

[Fife]

How can you have any pudding if you don't eat your meat?

[Kath]

Regulations are the law in this case.
Enforcing the law means enforcing the regulations. That requires regulators. How do you not see that?

I do. You're applying a different standard for your restaurants over our beer makers. You want our beer makers to fill out a lot of paperwork and submit samples for approval, but your restaurant owners don't do that.

A law against poisoning fellow citizens is fine. Hiring an entire building of people to read through paperwork, is not.

[Montegriffo]

Regulations are the law in this case.
Enforcing the law means enforcing the regulations. That requires regulators. How do you not see that?

I do. You're applying a different standard for your restaurants over our beer makers. You want our beer makers to fill out a lot of paperwork and submit samples for approval, but your restaurant owners don't do that.

A law against poisoning fellow citizens is fine. Hiring an entire building of people to read through paperwork, is not.

Not really. I'm saying both should make sure their claims are verifiable.
Restaurants have regular visits from Environmental Health Officers who have the responsibility to make sure they comply with all food regulations including food allergies.
They don't have to check that every single meal served complies but they do make sure you have procedures in place to guarantee compliance (to the best of your ability).
Brewers also have regular checks to make sure their beer is the strength they say it is. My father used to do it when he was a Customs and Excise officer, sometimes I used to go with him.

[Speaker to Animals]

Typical lawyer response.
No need for regulations, you can pay me to sue on behalf of your dead relative after the fact.
Doesn't even matter if you win or lose so long as I get paid.
I'll act on behalf of the cash cow, I mean stiff, I mean the deceased.

We already label for common allergies and the nutrition label has to include what is in there.

You mean you have food regulations which are enforced by law.

Regulators enforce the law.

I like consumer protection regulations. I like knowing what is in my food, etc. Fife is an anti-consumer maniac.