Regulation: Good or bad

It all depends on how the "regulation" of the trade will work...

If it is going to be some untrained politically appointed official, you will wish you didn't become a member of the business he/she is regulating...

Regulation can also lead to a false sense of security, how many "regulated" professions out there have 'hacks' and 'discount guys' working in them ??? Such regulation of the trade won't prevent any of those things from happening, only make it harder for someone to do LEGALLY...

Your quotes, wherever they came from, look nice, but wjhat was the context of the larger discussion...

I would just remember that once something becomes regulated, it is very hard if not impossible to *unregulate* it...

Evan, ~~ formerly a maintenance man, now a college student

Regulation will not do that.

Regulation is only another tax. Stupid people are encouraged to pony up their nonrefundable application fees and hack away.

wankers here in Brisbane Australia have been crying out to the government to" please regulate them"

Unbelievable Hey !

"Stormin Mormon" <cayoung61-#spamblock*-@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ZLrae.4252$ snipped-for-privacy@twister.nyroc.rr.com...

yes and better

And it has been proven that for everything from the definition of criminal offenses to the definition of marriage that different things work in different states...

Perhaps rather than just telling us "yes and better" Key that you might describe what apects of the regulation "help" in your opinion... You might also provide us with links to any official governmental websites from your state that describe the regulations, so we might be able to judge for ourselves... Without the neccessary context of how the regulation works, one can not make decision as to whether it is good or bad...

Evan, ~~ formerly a maintenance man, now a college student...

fair enough... its better from the customers point of view. don't know about the rest of you but we sale professional service to our customers and they come first. it has also put out some of the smiths that had no business in business. you know, the ones that didn't have insurance or the correct training to be doing the work that they were charging their customers for. to me, they were giving their customers false expectations.

my2¢

Good suggestion-You should do that, Key!

That would be interesting.

goma.

what exactly are you responding to ? you didn't use a quote.

I suspect the brief answer is "yes." Depend on EXACTLY what kind of regulation you're talking about.

If the regulations are written with input from the locksmithing industry, I can see them being a reasonable thing. If they're written by someone else, there's the risk of them being entirely unreasonable.

As a part-timer, I'd want to make sure they allowed room for serious amateurs. I'm not sure how to write a reasonable definition of "serious", unfortunately.

My personal preference would be for the government to simply endorse the ALOA proficiency tests or something very similar to them, and to recommend that folks patronize folks who have demonstrated some level of skill, rather than legislating per se. And I wouldn't object to licensing just to make people put themselves on record as a way of screening out fly-by-nights.

we had an 'almost law' here some years back.. it was well written..

it would be illegal for ANYONE, other than an alarm company to install ANY lock ANYWHERE you could not 'change your house lock', the mechanics could not change a lock on a car.. no safe deposit work, NO NOTHING, except for an alarm company to do the work..

NO EXCEPTIONS.

training required 2-3 years of electrical background, working for a LICENSED company, etc.. locksmiths need not apply..

the ONLY THING allowed was the hardware stores to 'copy keys'

--Shiva--