[catpuppy]

I would almost bet that more people are injured traveling to and from and while attending "government sponsored displays" than would be injured if people everywhere were free to use fireworks.

Whatever the case, folks should be allowed to use them. The occasional injury--tragic though it may be--should not be justification for a super nanny state that denies all of us the opportunity to decide for ourselves whether to accept the risks associated with fireworks in exchange for the enjoyment of using them in celebration.

[Conservababe]

Oh, but the gov'ment will always say that by denying you, it is for the welfare of others.

This fire fighter, who should have known better, put a recycling/mulch bin right up against his garage wall. Duh? Did he not know that these bins form combustible gases? Despite many comments to him regarding his stupidity, he kept on with his actions to have bottle rockets banned. Hey, any spark could have caused this explosion.

[lodwick]

Yes, and Amen, CP.

Please let us blow ourselves up, should we be so inepet, fedgov...that will leave more SocSec $$$ for those that live.

[.38sw]

The occasional injury--tragic though it may be--should not be justification for a super nanny state that denies all of us the opportunity to decide for ourselves whether to accept the risks associated with fireworks in exchange for the enjoyment of using them in celebration.

Oh, I agree. When I moved here, I was stunned when I found out that all fireworks were banned. They also use the excuse of "fire hazard", since there are a lot of dry hills around. This time of year, all of the annual grasses have dried completely to form the "golden hills" of California. But the nanny state just can't leave us alone.