Gas Cans and Liberty

Gas Cans and Liberty
by Dario McDarby


Thank goodness our political betters in Washington are assiduous in their duty to protect us and our children!

The perfect case in point: H.R. 814, Children's Gasoline Burn Prevention Act, introduced by Rep. Dennis Moore (D-Kansas) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-Alabama) that will force manufacturers of portable gasoline containers to provide government-approved "child-resistant" gas caps. The bill flew through Congress, passing the Senate by "unanimous consent," meaning the bill was not controversial enough to debate. Bush II signed it on July 17.

In its appearance, the act seems noble. At least that’s what the bill’s title tells us. How could it not be noble with the name "Children’s Gasoline Burn Prevention"? The bill will "require the Consumer Product Safety Commission to issue regulations mandating child-resistant closures on all portable gasoline containers."

Moore said on his website: "These standards would protect young children from tragic, yet avoidable, accidents." He became involved in this emotional crusade "after an incident in Leavenworth, Kansas, in which a four-year-old boy lost his life and his three-year-old brother was permanently scarred after they opened and spilled a gas can. The gasoline vapors were ignited by a hot water heater. Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident."

Unfortunately, stupidity is not isolated either. What parent, with a functioning brain, would leave a gas can near a water heater? The gas can, probably in most cases, is less the villain than the stupidity of parents that too often leads to the death or injury of their children. Curing stupidity, though, is not a governmental function.

The Congressional Budget Office said that "implementing the bill would cost $1 million, assuming appropriation of amounts necessary to issue the required report." What a pittance! Who but a miser or a paleo-reactionary would deny the nation of this protection?

The CBO said it "expects that the direct cost to comply with the mandates in the bill would fall below the annual threshold established by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) for private-sector mandates ($131 million in 2007, adjusted annually for inflation)." Again, a pittance for protection. What cur would say no, especially given the epidemic that must be facing our nation of nearly 300 million where 6.8% are children under 5!

That’s 19.5 million children, waiting like kindling, to explode in flame because the perfidious businessman wanted to produce a product that would fill a consumer’s need for a profit. Not now, though. Now, because our masters in Washington have removed this grave risk, no child shall ever be burned again by gas containers manufactured by uncaring businessmen. As we all know, one of the main purposes of government is to reduce all risk to zero, so no one will be injured and no one will fail. Our political betters will give us a stale existence in a gray land. But there won’t be any flaming children!!

And how many children have been maimed or killed by the nefarious gas can cap conspiracy? House Report 110-367, Children’s Gasoline Burn Prevention Act, states that, "Gasoline in cans not secured with child-resistant caps can pose a serious danger if small children gain access to them. CPSC data estimate that in a single year (2001), over 1,200 children under the age of 5 were treated in emergency rooms for injuries related to gasoline [Nota bene: not all were associated with the malevolent cans or their diabolical caps], either through fire, ingestion, or inhalation of fumes."

Note, too, "cans not secured." Even with "child-resistant" ’ caps, mandated by government, children can, and will, be burned, as our experience with "cap resistant" medicine caps has shown. (See, "Tots Often Foil Child-Resistant Drug Packaging," The Journal for Nurse Practitioners , Volume 1, Issue 2.)

Other CPSC data confirm that, "over an 11-year period, there were 33 cases which involved a child under the age of 5 gaining access to a gas can. Nineteen of these resulted in deaths. " There’s no mention whether the gasoline was in appropriate cans or in inappropriate containers, a common practice of those too cheap to ensure their safety and the safety of loved ones. Nor was there any mention of the number of children who were dissuaded by the child resistant caps already on cans. (Yes, cans come with caps that require more than a simple twist.) Or, again, how many cans with safe lids were left loose because of parental carelessness or laziness?

No bill forcing manufacturers to spend more to give us a government approved cap will trump the laxity of unconcerned parents. Of course, we have other federalized agencies such as state "protective" services to hound these miscreants.

So, in 11 years there were 33 cases with 19 deaths. That comes out to be 3 children a year "gaining access to a gas can," whatever that means. The fatalities break down to .5789 children over the 11 years. And, yes, that’s .5789 children too many. However, it’s NOT the fault of the manufacturer.

Nobody doubts that all deaths of children are tragedies. Whether we speak of the criminal murder of four million (4,000,000) American babies slaughtered in abortuaries or the .58 dying from a parental negligence and the villainous gas can, each death is a tragedy.

Perhaps more politicians should read the dispassionate speech of David Crockett, commonly called "Not Yours to Give." Crockett rose to speak before the US House of Representatives when a bill was taken up appropriating money for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. All expected him to support the charitable offering of the taxpayers’ money to the grieving widow. He spoke against it.

He said, "We must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living.

"We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money."

While Crockett spoke of direct charity payments to an individual, we can see the same element of theft and redistribution today. It doesn’t matter if it is the recently approved $50 BILLION for PEPFAR, the redistribution of tax payers’ wealth to "conquer" AIDS and other nastiness in the world outside of America (we’re always trying to conquer something or someone!) or the small, seemingly insignificant enforcement of unnecessary cap standards on gas-can manufacturing businesses. At heart the extorted wealth is NOT THEIRS TO GIVE!

The current confiscators of wealth justify their theft and redistribution as offering some direct or indirect benefit to the commonweal and national interest. They do good deeds; and that is the role of today’s Modern Total State, isn’t it. The gas can apparently is one serious offender of the commonweal that the collective powers of the State have to rise against it and use taxpayers’ fiat money to defeat it.

In fact, a major US manufacturer of these offensive objects is in the throes of three lawsuits. The usual ambulance chasers from the disreputable side of the legal profession collared three sad sacks who were injured when their cans ignited. Of course, there is no cute appeal to the cuddly feelings of The Mob for an Adults’ Gasoline Burn Prevention Act.

Anyway, who cares about adults? Adults, especially men, aren’t cuddly. Politicians can’t manipulate The Mob with endearing photos of apish men who stupidly set themselves on fire.

Nevertheless, Blitz USA, the can manufacturer, now faces the three suits because the company allegedly refused to protect the public by failing to install metal flame arresters in their products. That’s what the lawyers for the morons claim. Go to the Blitz website and follow the link that says "Safety Awareness." There the company informs its customers on the proper safe use of their products.

To ambulance chasers and other socialists, both in and out of our government, businessmen are a collectivity of evil trying to confound and rob or harm an unsuspecting public. To sensible people, a man or woman opens shop in order to fill a need by providing goods or services that will fill that need and ensure a profit. The former is the maniacal fantasy of paranoids. The latter is the world in which the rest of us live. Sadly the paranoids have access to the courts.

Let’s look at the cases, though. Three men were seriously injured. Their lawyers say it was the fault of the company. The company tells us that gasoline is dangerous and extremely flammable. Most of us have heard the warning, "Don’t pour gas on the fire!"

The plaintiffs in these spurious suits actually poured gas on various fires. One used gasoline poured from the can to start a campfire. Another attempted to start a debris fire by dumping gasoline on the debris. The third tried to start a fire in a barbeque pit. All, it seems, are contestants for future Darwin Awards.

Blitz USA issued a statement that says, "Several people have been burned in separate instances by misusing gasoline to start or rekindle campfires, trash fires, brush pile fires, or even fires in their indoor fireplace." It seems a portion of The Mob has never heard "Don’t pour gas on a fire," or, "It’s like pouring gasoline on a fire." Sadly, businesses are made to account for stupid people who misuse things. Thieving lawyers will make sure they pay.

David Crockett, barely literate, puts to shame the political detritus that passes as our elected representatives. Crockett was no PhD, thank God. He merely was a man of common sense who knew how humans worked and how their actions translated into economic sense or nonsense. It’s sad that the current ejaculation by our politicians for universal mediocrity through the curse of "democracy" has diminished us and our institutions. Outside of Dr. Paul, we have no David Crocketts in Washington.

Though "unanimous consent" of the masters may have overwhelmed common sense in this small, seemingly meaningless law, we still need to object to it on the principle of Iota unam. And what’s that?

"Iota unum, aut unus apex, non praeteribit…" ("Not one jot, nor one tittle, shall pass away…") Matthew 5:18

That’s part of the battle-cry in the spiritual, economic, and political realms of life, though too often unspoken. We will not give one modicum of our economic liberty to the gluttony of the beast. We live in monstrous times and whether it’s the seemingly insignificant laws doing battle against malevolent gas cans, or the poison of FISA and the Patriot Act, or the countless socialist economic bills plaguing our economic liberty, "Iota unum, aut unus apex, non praeteribit…"!!

We do not defend the honor of the lowly gas can. We defend greater things, namely liberty and property.

July 19, 2008

Dario McDarby [send him mail] is an old man who lives in an old farmhouse with his old wife and old dogs in Maine and, as he awaits the end of his days, tries to appreciate the greatness of God, and His gifts of Faith, Freedom, and Private Property.

Copyright © 2008 LewRockwell.com

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/mcdarby5.html