Hacker News Reader

Comment by lemming | Hacker News Reader

Of course I'd prefer it another way. Whether you like it or not, businesses are subject to all sorts of regulations from governments. Maybe you're a believer in the free market; I'm not. I'd like businesses that make their living exploiting people to be regulated.

View on HN

Of course, but those regulations come from somewhere, they come from court cases, from subject matter experts' testimonials, from balanced review of views and facts on both sides. We don't want a random politician with questionable morals and unknown contributors banning products or whole sectors of the market bypassing courts and due process.

To be fair, restrictions on tobacco products are well supported by the majority of, at the very least non-smokers, voters in most Western countries. You don't see massive demonstrations or petitions to reinstate the right to smoke in office, restaurant, public place, etc. In some case, it might be more dubious, but for tobacco consumption I think the trend is pretty clear.

Anecdotally, many smokers also support continued regulations on tobacco products. Tobacco companies have very little sympathy in the zeitgeist.

Court cases are ultimately decided based on the law which, as you know, is created and enacted on via a parliament or congress of elected politicians. Yes, even case law. Unless you think that a court can rule outside the law?

It might depends if you live in common law or civil law country. In the former case, you could say that sometimes a judge could create a law. Less so in the latter case. GP is very likely coming from the common law perspective.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com