7 ms·

Putting aside the bait, the whole story with a Kinder Eggs has become a tale told to illustrate a point, but the story itself is nonsense. The US didn’t specifi

Putting aside the bait, the whole story with a Kinder Eggs has become a tale told to illustrate a point, but the story itself is nonsense. The US didn’t specifically ban them, they simply fall under a (sensible) pre-existing law and no one gives enough of a crap to change it. Simply put it’s banned to sell candy with something inedible inside of it. This law goes back to the 1930’s and frankly, makes a lot of sense in the general case. Besides, slightly modified kinder eggs are sold in the US.

acqq 7y ago
Non-US version: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise US version: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Joy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Joy "Kinder Surprise eggs are legal in Canada and Mexico, but are illegal to import into the US. In January 2011, the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) threatened a Manitoba resident with a $300 (Canadian dollars) fine for carrying one egg across the US border into Minnesota.[43] In June 2012, CBP held two Seattle men for two and a half hours after discovering six Kinder Surprise eggs in their car upon returning to the US from a trip to Vancouver. According to one of the men detained, a border guard quoted the potential fine as US $2,500 per egg.[44]"
- donatj 7y ago
  Like sure, ban the sale, but why the ownership or importation without intention to sell? That seems to overstep the actual usefulness of the law. Like I can put toys in candy in my home and presumably if I don’t try to sell it, it’s legal.
- randall 7y ago
  Holy shit. When I came back from germany 2 years ago I brought like a whole box of them for my kids. That would have been like a $75,000 box.
coldtea 7y ago
>Putting aside the bait Also known as: "quite logical and sensible comparison everywhere else in the world". >but the story itself is nonsense. The US didn’t specifically ban them, they simply fall under a (sensible) pre-existing law and no one gives enough of a crap to change it. Which doesn't change the essence of the story, which is not that the Kinder eggs where purposefully banned themselves, but simply that Kinder eggs are banned (and in general, that they'd ban something like Kinder eggs and co).
lugg 7y ago
So all you've really said is that this hypocrisy has been around since the 1930s. Not putting inedible stuff in candy does make sense to me in the general case. But frankly, so does basic gun control so what the fuck do I know. I would also like to add I am of the personal view gun control is very much so unconstitutional. But I also don't think that wanting some basic gun control is a wrong thing. All that contradiction means is that we need to have a very careful discussion before drafting a very careful amendment. It's pretty easy to permit the right to bare arms while still preventing the sale to anybody off the street. It won't fix everything, but it gets us a hell of the way there. Being worried about a slippery slope is a concern, that is why I said careful amendment.

acqq 7y ago

Non-US version: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Surprise US version: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Joy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinder_Joy "Kinder Surprise eggs are legal in Canada and Mexico, but are illegal to import into the US. In January 2011, the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) threatened a Manitoba resident with a $300 (Canadian dollars) fine for carrying one egg across the US border into Minnesota.[43] In June 2012, CBP held two Seattle men for two and a half hours after discovering six Kinder Surprise eggs in their car upon returning to the US from a trip to Vancouver. According to one of the men detained, a border guard quoted the potential fine as US $2,500 per egg.[44]"

donatj 7y ago
Like sure, ban the sale, but why the ownership or importation without intention to sell? That seems to overstep the actual usefulness of the law. Like I can put toys in candy in my home and presumably if I don’t try to sell it, it’s legal.
randall 7y ago
Holy shit. When I came back from germany 2 years ago I brought like a whole box of them for my kids. That would have been like a $75,000 box.

coldtea 7y ago

>Putting aside the bait Also known as: "quite logical and sensible comparison everywhere else in the world". >but the story itself is nonsense. The US didn’t specifically ban them, they simply fall under a (sensible) pre-existing law and no one gives enough of a crap to change it. Which doesn't change the essence of the story, which is not that the Kinder eggs where purposefully banned themselves, but simply that Kinder eggs are banned (and in general, that they'd ban something like Kinder eggs and co).

lugg 7y ago

So all you've really said is that this hypocrisy has been around since the 1930s. Not putting inedible stuff in candy does make sense to me in the general case. But frankly, so does basic gun control so what the fuck do I know. I would also like to add I am of the personal view gun control is very much so unconstitutional. But I also don't think that wanting some basic gun control is a wrong thing. All that contradiction means is that we need to have a very careful discussion before drafting a very careful amendment. It's pretty easy to permit the right to bare arms while still preventing the sale to anybody off the street. It won't fix everything, but it gets us a hell of the way there. Being worried about a slippery slope is a concern, that is why I said careful amendment.