German city uses water-repellent paint to splash public urinators with their own pee

This is how governments ‘solve’ problems…

Will S.' Random Weirdness Blog

Their tax-euros at work…

pissrepellantThat’s ‘hydrophobic’, not ‘hyrophobic’, you tax-funded crown corp journo morons evidently not possessing a spellchecker…

Some aren’t fans of the initiative, however, saying that a better solution would be to install more public toilets instead of using an expensive substance to combat the problem (for the record, it costs about €500 — or $684 CAD — to cover a six-square metre area with hydrophobic paint.)

Indeed!

Others point out that public urinators could simply “pee diagonally” to avoid any splash-back.

Just like playing pool, or optics: angle of incidence = angle of reflection. 😉

D’Oh!

View original post

Advertisements

Australian state government wants man to pay to use his own bridge, on his property

Incredible…

After brush fire destroyed a bridge to his Kinglake, Australia, property in 2009, Anthony McMahon grew tired of waiting for the government to rebuild it. So, with financial help from Rotary and a Catholic agency, he rebuilt it himself. Now, the government is demanding he pay a $170 annual license fee to use the bridge.

Mayor Targets 90-Year-Old Veteran For Feeding Homeless Without Government Aid

Backed by the police, of course.

A squad of about 10 uniformed police stood by as Capt. John Labandera, at first speaking over a battery-powered megaphone, asked Abbott to ‘cease and desist’ from serving meals to about 75 homeless people who had to maneuver through a throng of reporters and television cameras to get plates of tilapia, spaghetti and meatballs, tofu and fruit salad.

The U.S. Government Once Poisoned Already-Denatured Alcohol to Scare People Away From Drinking

You can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, and all that kind of rationalization of state evil…

Today I found out that in an effort to scare people away from drinking alcohol, the American government once poisoned certain alcohol supplies; this resulted in the death of over 10,000 American Citizens.

This, of course, was during Prohibition. The government became frustrated with the fact that despite the manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcohol being banned, the number of people drinking alcoholic beverages was markedly higher than it was before Prohibition. So to try to get people to stop drinking, the government decided to try a scare tactic.

One way bootleggers of this time made alcoholic beverages was to use denatured, industrial alcohol as the base. Denaturing the alcohol is simply a process to make it undrinkable, usually by adding something that makes it taste or smell disgusting or will induce vomiting.

[…]

During prohibition, this denatured alcohol was often stolen from companies that made industrial alcohol used in various paints and solvents and the like. The bootleggers would then have their own chemists whose job it was to make the alcohol palatable again, basically undoing the denaturing process or to “renature” the alcohol.

With an estimated 60 million gallons of industrial alcohol stolen annually in the 1920s to be later renatured and sold as drinkable alcohol, the government, under President Coolidge, decided to up the stakes and make some of the denaturing formulas lethal, instead of just designed to make the alcohol unpalatable. To do this, they’d generally add things like methyl alcohol (the main denaturing chemical at 10% added, even today); other chemicals added are things such as kerosene, brucine, gasoline, benzene, cadmium, formaldehyde, chloroform, carbolic acid, acetone, and many others that were difficult for the bootlegger’s chemists to get out when they’d renature the alcohol.

After the first 100 or so people died shortly after the new denaturing process was released around Christmas, health officials were outraged and the news media picked up the story as intended. Unfortunately, the government’s plan didn’t quite work from that point on. It didn’t scare people away from drinking and rather had little to no effect on people’s consumption of alcohol; instead, the estimates are that it resulted in the deaths of over 10,000 people with a much larger number severely sickened and many blinded by the poisoning.

As New York City’s medical examiner Charles Norris stated: “The government knows it is not stopping drinking by putting poison in alcohol. Yet it continues its poisoning processes, heedless of the fact that people determined to drink are daily absorbing that poison. Knowing this to be true, the United States government must be charged with the moral responsibility for the deaths that poisoned liquor causes, although it cannot be held legally responsible.”

[…]

People at the time, though, were split on the poisoning program, even with the deaths that were happening because of it. One side felt that the people who were drinking the illegal alcohol got what they deserved, particularly because they knew the risks and broke the law anyways; the other side felt it was a national experiment on exterminating members of society that the government felt were undesirable as American citizens. As one Chicago Tribune article in 1927 stated: “Normally, no American government would engage in such business. … It is only in the curious fanaticism of Prohibition that any means, however barbarous, are considered justified.”

[…]

the government knew full well that people would be drinking this poisoned alcohol and they hoped the deaths that resulted from this would scare other people away from drinking. Further, when it was clear that it wasn’t scaring anyone away from drinking and literally thousands were dying per year with significantly more than that severely sickened, they kept the program going anyways

Cops Won’t Let Journalist Take Pics of Ugly Government Buildings, Because 9/11!

Overly suspicious control freaks…

Washington, D.C. is home to many government buildings that are as ugly on the outside as they are the inside. BuzzFeed’s Benny Johnson biked around town earlier this week snapping photos of a few of the most hideous examples, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation headquarters, the U.S. Post Office Building, and the Department of Health and Human Services. You can see the results here.

Today, in a follow-up article, Johnson explained that taking the photos was no easy task—cops actually attempted to thwart him at every turn. Even though representatives for the various departments confirmed to Johnson by phone that it was perfectly fine to take pictures of the buildings, law enforcement agents contradicted that directive over and over again.

[…]

Don’t the cops have anything better to do than hang around outside government buildings, casually invoking national security when a reporter tries to snap some clearly innocent photos? Maybe they’re self-conscious or something.

For more on this subject, check out Reason TV’s “The Government’s War on Cameras.”

Make a law, punish citizens instead of state agents for breaking it…

Anarcho-tyranny, indeed…

Last year, federal and North Carolina and Georgia state wildlife law enforcement announced the results of Operation Something Bruin, a joint investigation that resulted in bear-poaching charges against 80 people. But an investigation by an Atlanta TV station found that charges against many of those people have since been dropped for lack of evidence and others were allowed to plead guilty to misdemeanor charges such as driving on a closed forestry road. In fact, the investigation found that law enforcement officers, not the alleged poachers, killed many of the bears.