If you’re a normal, healthy person and you see that a cool new pizza place in your neighborhood has put a ping pong table outside, you’d probably think it’s a charming addition to the neighborhood. If you’re a petty local politician, on the other hand, you might stand across the street with a video camera and make an asinine YouTube video suggesting the table ought to be banned. That’s what Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner Frank Winstead did:
As I’ve said before, there are people like this, and they are why the nanny state keeps growing.
[H/t To The People.]
But what of the potential liability of the certain-to-be errant ping pong balls? What happens when they fly into car windshields? Or when kids or drunk guys run into oncoming traffic to chase one down? Or when they hit someone walking down the sidewalk? Or they’re left on the ground and tripped on? Or eaten by a dog whose system can’t handle the plastic?
I’m not saying we should ban it, but these are questions that should at least be addressed.
Comment by Zhubin — July 24, 2007 @ 9:31 am
Well sure, when and if that ever becomes a problem. But I would guess there’s already lots of case law to handle those kinds of situations.
Comment by Jacob Grier — July 24, 2007 @ 9:52 am
I think Winstead’s next video should be of a hot chick in a bikini out on some sidewalk somewhere. He can label that a “traffic distraction” too.
Comment by Jeff — July 24, 2007 @ 11:01 am
Jeff, I’ve argued many times that there should be a law against jogging while hot. I have had many near car accidents due solely to the fact that the government does not regulate the level of hotness of female joggers.
Comment by Mike — July 24, 2007 @ 11:19 am
Well, yeah, but there’s case law to handle any situation when looking in retrospect. The issue is whether foreseeable liabilities warrant preventative measures. I’m not saying they necessarily do in this situation, but the determination should be made.
And if the ping pong table represents a significant danger to public safety, then government shock troops should be sent in to smash the table and shoot up the bar. Also, they should check to make sure no one is smoking inside.
Comment by Zhubin — July 24, 2007 @ 11:36 am
Why can’t people just be held responsible for their own actions? What is this, California? I think there’s a correlation between the number of laws a city has and the average intelligence of its inhabitants, i.e. legislation makes you stupid.
Comment by D White — July 24, 2007 @ 1:14 pm
Dude, holding people responsible for their own actions is expensive. You can’t just stand out on the saloon porch and call them out for a reck’ning these days. You have to get a lawyer, file suit, clog up the courts, make new case law, go through appeals, enforce judgments, and so on. In many instances it’s just more cost-effective to have an ordinance on the books.
Comment by Zhubin — July 24, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
I think the ping pong table is a stupid idea. Yes, the ball is going to hit someone’s windshield and they may try swerving and there you have a traffic accident.
My problem with some Lib perspective is that it seems to coldly dismiss any concern for public safety. I guess the rationale is - if it’s dangerous for the pizza place then thanks to the market, they’ll take it down.
Do we really have to wait for the accident? What is the owner isn’t smart enough to even consider that? This is a no-brainer - the table is hazard. It maybe an unpopular opinion here but I’m ok with being the voice of reason.
Comment by AS — July 29, 2007 @ 10:44 pm