Miss. Bill to Ban Obese from restaurants

[MotorTink]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:25am

Gotta love tax dollars at work -


Sorry, you’re too fat to eat here
Miss. bill would ban restaurants from serving obese customers

JACKSON, Miss. - A state lawmaker wants to ban restaurants from serving food to obese customers — but please, don’t be offended.

He says he never even expected his plan to become law.

“I was trying to shed a little light on the number one problem in Mississippi,” said Republican Rep. John Read of Gautier, who acknowledges that at 5-foot-11 and 230 pounds, he’d probably have a tough time under his own bill.

More than 30 percent of adults in Mississippi are considered it obese, according to a 2007 study by the Trust for America’s Health, a research group that focuses on disease prevention.

The state House Public Health Committee chairman, Democrat Steve Holland of Plantersville, said he is going to “shred” the bill.

“It is too oppressive for government to require a restaurant owner to police another human being from their own indiscretions,” Holland said Monday.

The bill had no specifics about how obesity would be defined, or how restaurants were supposed to determine if a customer was obese.

Al Stamps, who owns a restaurant in Jackson, said it is “absurd” for the state to consider telling him which customers he can’t serve. He and his wife, Kim, do a bustling lunch business at Cool Al’s, which serves big burgers — beef or veggie — and specialty foods like “Sassy Momma Sweet Potato Fries.”

“There is a better way to deal with health issues than to impose those kind of regulations,” Al Stamps said. “I’m sorry — you can’t do it by treating adults like children and telling them what they can and cannot eat.”


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22997073/wid/11915773?gt1=10914

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:26am

They're gonna ban the obese in Mississippi??????


Who the hell is going to show up?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:45am

Do we need to tackle the issue of obesity in this country?

Yes.

But this is sickening.

[madbrian]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:53am

“I was trying to shed a little light on the number one problem in Mississippi,” said Republican Rep. John Read of Gautier

I've never been to Mississippi, but I'm guessing that their number one problem is something other than obesity.

[Calvin]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:55am

My goodness. The only way they could hurt restaurants more in Mississippi is to require a literacy test.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 10:57am

I wonder if the plan included a scale, tape measure, and judge sitting out front.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:15am

This is ridiculous, granted, BUT bars aren't allowed to serve visibly intoxicated patrons.

And Mississippi doesn't have any problem dictating who gets married...hm.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:18am

"This is ridiculous, granted, BUT bars aren't allowed to serve visibly intoxicated patrons."

Probably because a drunk person might be getting behind the wheel of a car, no?

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:24am

Sure, but not so much in NYC...how many of the drunken patrons are driving here? That IS the purpose of that those laws, but it's not always the case.

Bartenders don't ask, "Hey Otis! You drivin'?"

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:27am

I think the point of that law is to try and prevent the drinker from being dangerous to himself as well as others. Driving isn't the only way that could happen.

p.s. Otis isn't about to admit he's going to drive. In that state of mind, he probably can't even remember if he owns a car or not!

[robbiej]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:27am

But isn't public drunkenness (sp??) actually against the law here (and other places)? So, bartenders and establishments are actual complicit in the crime. Public fattyness isn't against the law. Anywhere. Yet.

Plus, public fattyness isn't a danger to one's self AND OTHERS. Public drunkenness is.

[madbrian]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:30am

As long as we're pointing out the inconsistencies with the comparison, someone who is drunk doesn't need another drink. Even if someone is obese, he or she still needs food.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:40am

Must be a lot of obese people here on BWW. I see nothing wrong with it. In fact, I'd go a step further and arrest obese people, for even attempting to eat in a public place. Why should non-obese people be subjected to the sight of obese people eating?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:41am

We should be educating people.

We should be demanding that the food industry operate at the highest levels of standards--making nutritional information available. Making fat and sugar contents known (my friend was irate when he discovered that even when he ordered his McDonald's coffee with skim and Splenda, they still put in their corn syrup).

Plus, there are many people who are not fat because of diet and execise issues. They are heavy because of health issues not caused by being obese to begin with.

Educate--not discriminate.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:49am

You really think that jerby? None of the obese people I know have health issues that prevent them from achieving a healthy weight.

And wow, even when i say I know it's ridiculous, people just skim RIGHT over it! It's a SIMILAR law, predicated on the bartender's PERCEPTION of drunkeness--jesus!

And yes, madbrian, the obese still needs the food in order to survive, probably not whatever they've BEEN eating....

I think jerby has a good idea with putting fat and calorie counts on everything--but people are going to eat what they want, smoke and sniff what they want regardless of laws, me included!

[Calvin]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:55am

McDonald's puts corn syrup in coffee? Ick! For what?

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 11:57am

"And wow, even when i say I know it's ridiculous, people just skim RIGHT over it! It's a SIMILAR law, predicated on the bartender's PERCEPTION of drunkeness--jesus!"

I think I'd rather the bartender err on the side of safety. You're skimming over the point that a drunk could be dangerous to you and I, as well as themself. If the supposed drunk person is so visibly inebriated, then my hat's off to the bartender who refuses to serve him/her.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 12:01pm

Jerby, where are you getting your information about McDonalds coffee? I have googled and can't find it.

[Jane2]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 12:05pm

If that's true about the coffee, I'm totally grossed out. As Calvin asked, what's the need for it in coffee?

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 12:15pm

I hope they ban ugly people too...

...and the ederly...they just creep me out!

[Calvin]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 12:16pm

Can you imagine having to wait behind a velvet rope to get into Ruby Tuesday?

[tazber]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 12:19pm

Humiliation: the great motivator.


This is what Mississippi politicians do with their time? No wonder they're a punch line.

[lildogs]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 1:03pm

The point was that both the proposed law and the drinking law are judged by a subjective observer. The visibly intoxicated to one bartender may be the jovial patron to another--THAT'S MY POINT.

The real reason bars cut people off is fear of legal responsibility. They may SAY it's for the public safety, but if they were truly concerned about the public safety, they wouldn't be in the alcohol business.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 1:08pm

I'm referring to people with thyroid conditions, etc.

My friend had no idea as they don't pump the syrup in full view. But one day, to his horror, he saw the person preparing his coffee in full view.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 2/5/08 at 1:10pm

Sounds more like a person specific thing than an all encompassing McDonald's thing.