|02-03-2015, 09:42 AM||#1 (permalink)|
Join Date: Feb 25 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ
Rep Power: 19
No babysitting in SD
OUR VIEW: Don't support 'babysitting' legislation on indoor tanning
By Daily Republic Editorial Board on Feb 2, 2015 at 3:57 p.m.
A national cancer advocacy group has lobbied in favor of a bill to prohibit minors from using any tanning devices. The legislation, House Bill 1166, uses research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that shows the dangers of indoor tanning.
That includes a 2014 study by the CDC estimated more than 400,000 cases of skin cancer may be related to indoor tanning in the U.S. each year, including 6,000 cases of melanoma. The study states about 13 percent of high school students and 21 percent of high school girls take part in indoor tanning.
Many states already set age restrictions for indoor tanning, and this isn't the first time such legislation has been proposed in South Dakota.
District 20 Rep. Tona Rozum, R-Mitchell, called the legislation "a babysitting bill."
We couldn't have described it better.
Although indoor tanning may lead to a higher chance at skin cancer, we feel the government shouldn't regulate someone's choices, unless it can put others in harm's way.
Indoor tanning only affects the person stepping into the tanning booth. If a person wants to be exposed to radiation that could lead to cancer, that's their prerogative. Does the government force us to wear sunscreen each time we step outside when it's sunny? No.
We feel a teenager's parents should make the decision on whether their children can go to tanning facilities.
As reported in a story from our paper last week, small businesses owners would also suffer from this legislation.
We're certain that indoor tanning facilities rely on events like prom and other school dances to bring in revenue. We're also certain most business owners make good decisions about those teenagers who use their facility and the frequency in which they tan.
Rather than spending time regulating teenagers from using tanning facilities, we feel those who support enacting this legislation should spend time spreading awareness about the potential dangers of indoor tanning.
To be a more progressive state, we need citizens who are informed to make their own decisions based on their opinions. If a teenager wants to get in a tanning booth, that decision should be up to the parents.
We don't need a government that babysits.
|03-15-2015, 07:59 AM||#4 (permalink)|
Join Date: Jan 5 2012
Location: Long Island
Rep Power: 6
Re: No babysitting in SD
Just had to turn away a 15 year old that came with her mother the other day. She will probably be out drinking 4 lokos and smoking weed anyway so I don't see what the big deal is. It's kind of BS but I'm not risking the fines. I'll keep quiet and next week I will get to work designing my "melanoma is a myth" shirts for the employees to wear
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)|