Maybe, but... building codes and regulations != nanny state in my opinion. Nanny state is more like banning soda, supersize meals at restaurants, etc. to protect people from themselves.
"Sorry, but you can't be trusted to make good choices about what you put in your body, so we will make laws that force you to make better choices"
Incidentally, it's quite common that people can't be trusted to make good choices about such things.
Forcing people to make good choices isn't a priori absurd. See: seatbelts.
How much of that is being constantly bombarded with marketing (psychological priming) that brainwashes us into making poor decisions? Totally agree though, we as humans are our own worst enemies.
I'm more concerned with corporate control, especially re health care. I know people who have to walk in circles during meetings because their step count is too low for their weight, and that is just the tip of the iceberg.
Why should I, a skinny fit person with self control, not be allowed to buy a supersized meal after running a half marathon? I'm being punished because of the choices of the obese.
You might not like nanny state regulations as much if it impacted something important to you - like limiting internet usage for example.
"People have no self control when it comes to internet and especially social media usage, new ISP regulations will disconnect your internet temporarily if it detects you have been using social media for too many consecutive hours"
In contrast, obesity penalties at the level of some insurance companies is really extreme, to the extent of controlling their daily actions, and leading them to seriously consider use of dangerous weight loss drugs (amphetamines basically) and major gastric surgery.
There is no need to construct an enormous and improbable straw man if you want 'nanny state' regulations, there are plenty of examples. For example, alcohol sales policy. Why can you buy lite beer in many places in the US, but not full strength beer or wine or spirits? It isn't because of cheap drunks -- they are cheap and buying in bulk, a $40 bottle of wine isn't going to interest them. It is a hodge podge of local and state govt regulation with little tangible benefit.
The difference between good and bad regulations is often whether they are based on evidence and statistical re-evaluation, or knee-jerk politics. Well considered policy will identify groups that suffer detriment. I can't identify a group that will be harmed by discouraging discounted soda.
Collective rational thought also brought us such wonders as eugenics, phrenology...
I'm no fan of sugared beverages, nor do I consume them with any regularity, but it isn't my right to tell people they can't enjoy them because some people abuse them. Ordinary people have every option not to buy or keep soda in their house or near them at work; ordinary professional and personal interventions are sufficient to stop people from drinking them.
I have met a lot of obese people who avoid soda for its health risks, it is not a sufficient intervention on its own to change most people's dietary issues.
Now, if you want to talk about making soda, candy, sweet pastries, and low-value juice from SNAP, that's a different matter. It should not be criminal for me to put sugar in seltzer water and sell it to willing people.
Ostensibly not. Even more evident for people who smoke. Absolutely zero reason to do that, only negative effects. It's wreckless and careless behavior on anyone who allows it.
How about extending this to ending the war on drugs?
I'm in favor of (what I consider to be) non-nanny regulation around drugs though - ban advertising (I actually think alcohol ads should be banned as well) and certain drugs should only have generic labels listing chemical information, should be age-restricted, and behind-the-counter (by request only).
What if you don't want a fence? What if the HOA gets slowly subverted by a bunch of nosy types that just want to make sure everything is perfect and nobody steps out of line? The legal authority of an HOA is surprising in some parts of the US. Don't pay your dues and they can seize your property.
Your property values are going to increase if the area is desirable and the economy is doing well. You don't need a fascist HOA to take care of that.
North America has this unreasonable fixation on property values because of how over-invested most people are in their homes.
Flint, MI government intentionally exposed its people to lead poisoned water.