Your tax dollars at work

[Little-Acorn]

The Department of Homeland Security is hard at work, exercising their Constitutional mandate to educate us about... turkey fryers.

Thank God the government is here to do that for us. Can you imagine what horrors would ensue if we didn't have them around to tell us about these things?

I mean, we might actually have to start taking care of OURSELVES!!!

Oh, the humanity!

-------------------------------------------

http://campaign2012.washington*****...-confidential/dhs-issues-turkey-fryer-warning

DHS issues Turkey fryer warning

November 22, 2011 10:53am

by Charlie Spiering
Commentary Staff Writer

The Department of Homeland Security is taking any threat seriously during the Thanksgiving holiday, including the ominous threat to our national security posed by turkey fryers.

"How dangerous can turkey fryers be?" asks a warning issued on the official DHS Twitter account. "Make sure the turkey is completely thawed before placing in a fryer, or this may happen."

The department linked to an ominous video highlighting the dangers of deep frying a turkey.

"Use turkey fryers outdoors at a safe distance from buildings." the DHS tweeted, "Never use turkey fryers in a garage or on a wooden deck."

 

[DogPants]

Does the government obligate anyone to listen to or follow this safety information?

 

[Little-Acorn]

It would be a good idea to cut DHS's budget next year (I mean a real cut, not just a DC-style reduction in the rate of increase) by the amount they spent to send out these "warnings".

And then cut it some more, by the amounts they have spend doing other equally unnecessary "warnings".

They'd stop doing them pretty quickly. A win-win situation.

 

[DogPants]

If turkey fryers are safe, why does Underwriter's Laboratories (a private company) refuse to certify them?

 

[Little-Acorn]

If turkey fryers are safe,

Where do you get this notion?

 

[Dr.Who]

Does the government obligate anyone to listen to or follow this safety information?

If they did oblige, i.e. use force, then it would be worse than it is. As it is they used taxpayer money to sponsor a "public service announcement" that is clearly not under the scope of the department of homeland security. Next instead of catching terrorists they will be making condoms available to first graders. Is it too much to ask that the DHS just focus on terrorists?

And why does the DHS have an official twitter account? Is tweeting the kind of serious counter terrorism that we would want?

 

[Dr.Who]

If turkey fryers are safe, why does Underwriter's Laboratories (a private company) refuse to certify them?

The next time someone tries to get a turkey fryer into the cockpit of a jet airplane it will be the concern of the DHS.

Until then your point that a private company has already done a very good job of warning people that they are not safe is well taken.

 

[DogPants]

Where do you get this notion?

Do you think they are unsafe?

--------------------------------------------------------

If they did oblige, i.e. use force, then it would be worse than it is. As it is they used taxpayer money to sponsor a "public service announcement" that is clearly not under the scope of the department of homeland security. Next instead of catching terrorists they will be making condoms available to first graders. Is it too much to ask that the DHS just focus on terrorists?

So, is the problem that the government is issuing safety information about unsafe appliances? Or is it that the wrong department of government is doing so?

And why does the DHS have an official twitter account? Is tweeting the kind of serious counter terrorism that we would want?

Probably so that it can use social media to inform people about possible terrorist threats.

------------------------------------------------------------------

The next time someone tries to get a turkey fryer into the cockpit of a jet airplane it will be the concern of the DHS.

Again, is the problem that the government is issuing safety information about unsafe appliances or is it that the wrong department of government is doing so?

Until then your point that a private company has already done a very good job of warning people that they are not safe is well taken.

UL has made no effort to warn the general public. All it has done is explain to turkey fryer manufacturers that they will not certify their products.

 

[dogtowner]

Do you think they are unsafe?

a rock is unsafe in the wrong hands

So, is the problem that the government is issuing safety information about unsafe appliances? Or is it that the wrong department of government is doing so?

wrong dept. perhaps Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The Homeland is under no threat from turkeys.

Probably so that it can use social media to inform people about possible terrorist threats.

assuming anyone follows them.

UL has made no effort to warn the general public. All it has done is explain to turkey fryer manufacturers that they will not certify their products.

have they ever ? they rely on the presence of their logo to speak their ok or not.

 

[DogPants]

A rock is unsafe in the wrong hands.

Do you think that turkey fryers are unsafe when they are being used as they were designed to be used?

Wrong dept., perhaps Consumer Product Safety Commission.

The Homeland is under no threat from turkeys

So, you then have no problem with government issuing safety information abut unsafe goods and services, as long as the proper department does it?

assuming anyone follows them.

Yes.

have they ever ? they rely on the presence of their logo to speak their ok or not.

Exactly. It is not UL's job to warn the public.

 

[dogtowner]

Do you think that turkey fryers are unsafe when they are being used as they were designed to be used?

of course not. but guys all buzzed on whatever at halftime when ordered to 'go cook the turkey in that contraption of yours' may make for a dodgy situation.

So, you then have no problem with government issuing safety information abut unsafe goods and services, as long as the proper department does it?

I didn't say that. However if there has to be such a department then they should handle it.

Exactly. It is not UL's job to warn the public.

Its no one's job to do that outside of perhaps the media. But informing the public is the job of UL. Assuming you trust them. Have to ask who pays them. Kind of like the BBB, it is not gospel.

 

[DogPants]

of course not. but guys all buzzed on whatever at halftime when ordered to 'go cook the turkey in that contraption of yours' may make for a dodgy situation.

Are you saying that they are safe if people are well informed and use them intelligently?

I didn't say that. However if there has to be such a department then they should handle it.

Okay.

Its no one's job to do that outside of perhaps the media. But informing the public is the job of UL. Assuming you trust them. Have to ask who pays them. Kind of like the BBB, it is not gospel.

I am aware of what UL's mandate is and how they work.

Who should inform the general public about possible risks?

 

[dogtowner]

Are you saying that they are safe if people are well informed and use them intelligently?

yes, if they are used as directed.

I am aware of what UL's mandate is and how they work.

Who should inform the general public about possible risks?

as noted before, no one save the media if they so choose to direct their resources that way.

 

[DogPants]

yes, if they are used as directed.

So, you are saying that there is a good reason to make sure that everyone using a turkey fryer is using it in a responsible manner.

as noted before, no one save the media if they so choose to direct their resources that way.

Then how would people know how to use turkey fryers safely?

 

[dogtowner]

So, you are saying that there is a good reason to make sure that everyone using a turkey fryer is using it in a responsible manner.

no

Then how would people know how to use turkey fryers safely?

read the instructions, do their own research, go watch Joe next door and see how he does it and manages to not blow himself and his home up.