ANY CLAIM OF SO-CALLED “unintended consequences.” Idiots with a landfill fetish manage to mau mau local governments into banning plastic grocery bags. To be replaced by reusable cloth bags. Which turn out to be hotbeds of filth and disease. Causing deaths due to e coli.
Any claim that the consequences were unintended must rest on the contention that they were unforeseen, could not have been foreseen.
These consequences in this particular case were foreseen. Warnings were issued. The facts of the matter were poo-pooed by the guilty parties. Now they must pay.
Glenn Reynolds urges jail time or civil suits. In my opinion, neither goes far enough. Given there is no moral (or, I suspect legal) justification for the ban, since it arises out of an irrational prejudice in the first place, the bans themselves ought to be judged egregious abuses of government power, and those imposing them acting outside the proper uses of that power.
As such, I ask: what is the moral difference between these crimes and felony murder? I believe that jeopardy of life should attach.
And, no, washing the bags is not consistent with the claims for the fetish. So don’t even try to start. That uses more energy, and water, causes more pollution, than manufacturing and disposing of thousands of plastic bags. If I use twenty bags every two weeks, in a year, I use 520 bags. Minuscule, even when scaled up to the whole population. Also, I mostly use paper bags, which are more readily re-usable, as well as better biodegradable OR recyclable than either plastic OR cloth bags. So, STFU. Just. Shut. The. Fuck. Up.