Thread: Nanny State Again

Dairy farmers found guilty of selling raw milk win Supreme Court appeal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Dairy farmers found guilty of selling raw milk win Supreme Court appeal - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

On a technicality.

It seems both the original magistrate and the supreme court agree that he was selling milk under the law and could face a fresh trial if the govt prosecutor(?) deems it in the public interest.

Originally Posted by ramblingboy42

What is this "raw" milk?

When did natural milk become "raw"?

The milk 'we' drink is the one that should be labelled as modified from it's natural state , pasteurised, homoginised, full cream, low cream, low fat, no fat, lactase added etc

Why do we have to continually have to protect people from their own deliberate actions.?

It is a personal choice deliberately made.

I have a personal choice , I don't drink milk , I choose to drink Soy.

I used to drink soy milk I actually really liked it but it turns out it is seriously bad for you google the health problems of soy milk..
Chris

He found while the "cow share program" did in fact constitute a sale under the Food Act, errors by the magistrate and prosecutor meant a fresh trial was needed.

Justice Tim Stanley agreed with the magistrate the cow share program was a sham and the Tylers were selling raw milk to consumers.

so everyone agrees they were breaking the law, but a new trial is needed.

Originally Posted by Eevo

how many have died?
how many deaths should be acceptable?

A bit like your argument about firearms, hmmm.. I dont know the case in hand but I am guessing the parents were giving the kids this milk to drink as they stupidly thought it was natural and better. Botulism and other horrible bugs they decided were worth the risk. Not the problem of the product but the stupid parents.
Chris