San Francisco Chronicle Headline I Wouldn’t Be Surprised to See

Posted by Harvey on January 12, 2013 12:00 pm

Oil Tanker Strikes San Francisco Bay Bridge, City Council to Vote on Bridge Ban

Send to Kindle

(5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

This entry was posted on Saturday, January 12th, 2013 at 12:00 pm and is filed under One-Shots. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “San Francisco Chronicle Headline I Wouldn’t Be Surprised to See”

1. DonMegel says:
   January 12th, 2013 at 12:10 pm

   Do you know how many people are killed every year on or around bridges? Bridge collapses could literally kill hundreds of children if they are on said bridge. They must be stopped

2. Tau Dades says:
   January 12th, 2013 at 1:20 pm

   they would just ban assault tankers…

3. Iowa Jim says:
   January 12th, 2013 at 4:35 pm

   It would be just like the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to try to ban the Bay Bridge. It isn’t theirs to ban. It’s part of Interstate 80. They can’t even prohibit its entry into San Francisco, because it continues as Interstate 280. The Board of Supervisors has, in the past, tried to impose mandates on
   federally-regulated businesses. About a dozen years ago, it banned the imposition of fees charge to people using an ATM that didn’t belong to the bank that issued the ATM card. The law lasted about twenty nanoseconds in federal court; national banks pointed out that they were engaged in interstate commerce, and that they were already regulated by the federal government (states can actually regulate interstate commerce if the federal government isn’t regulating it; the US Constitution says that the federal government may regulate “commerce between the states”, but it doesn’t say that states can’t also regulate it).

Leave a Reply