Commentary by Samuel Strait – July 16, 2022 In order to truly finish the conversation about why government shouldn't be quite so eager to legislate the vagaries of childhood misbehavior and allow that child to learn how to make decisions, good or bad, one should also consider the effect it has on the ability of the parent in the equation to also learn how to become a "parent". What I am referring to, in case my readers have not read my comments in the article, the "5-0 Club" found previously in the CCTimes, is surrounding an effort by our local Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Valerie Starkey, in particular, to provide corrective measures via ordinance regarding the escalation of the use of vaping products by our youth in Del Norte County. Aside from the obvious problems with Supervisor Starkey's misguided efforts to "protect children", local small businesses already suffer from a number of disparities brought about by local government, Measure "R" being one of them, when in competition for dollars with our neighbor to the North. Additional ordinances in the form of a vaping products ban simply send more dollars to Brookings and do absolutely nothing to change the dynamic of teenage vaping. Clearly Ms. Starkey would do well to listen to her fellow Supervisor, Darren Short, when he said quite clearly that teenage "vapers" do not shop in local businesses, but gain their supply from other sources. Thus a "ban" on sales would serve no purpose to curb teenage vaping in the County. That; however, is beside the point, which is, how are our youth going to learn to make decisions if the powers to be, are ever increasing their efforts to make decisions for them? When will youth everywhere emerge from the growing helicopter umbrella of local government always citing the same mantra, "its for the children's own good". When will children ever be allowed to "grow up"? In Supervisor Starkey's rather bleak world, maybe never. At some point the youth, at least in this area, should be allowed to make their mistakes in the hope that better decision making will emerge as a result and an adult with decision making skills would be in their future. While Supervisor Chris Howard was at a loss to justify this particular form of government overreach, he clearly was of the mind that societal issues were at the heart of why this ordinance might be positive. In doing so, he inadvertently opened up another form of government over reach without realizing it. When a parent no longer has the inclination to provide a positive parenting example, referred to by Supervisor Howard as "soft parenting", at what point does the government "nanny state" cause that scenario to develop. Has government so over stepped their role as doctrinaires in the lives of children as to make them become ineffective parents? While I can say that the zeal with which Supervisor Starkey attacks what she "feels" is an important problem to address, has she inadvertently caused additional problems without ever addressing what she felt would correct the problem in the first place? Is a local ban on vaping products really going to change anything at all? Has this become more like tilting at proverbial windmills for local government, where someone else will suffer the consequences of a rather poorly thought out course of action? Will local government become the much despised "helicopter mom" while at the same time make it difficult for a child to make wise decisions in the future and ultimately make that same child an ineffective parent for his own children? At what point is corrective action by a growing government "a bridge too far?" Perhaps, Ms. Starkey and the three other members of the local Board of Supervisors need to take a more "hands off" approach and let parenting have a chance. It is very clear that if the problem exists in our local schools to the extent being proclaimed, educators need to put away their "touchy, feely hats" and gets some parents involved with their children. Government action should be a last resort, that's a parenting task.