The “abundance” discourse, sparked by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson’s book of the same name, has directed a lot of attention to liberal America’s failure to build.
Blue cities and blue states can’t deliver projects on time and on budget, which is dragging down economic growth and sending people fleeing to red states that can.
As much truth as there is to that complaint, it ignores the other reason people hate progressive governance: the complete inability of politicians and bureaucrats to keep their noses out of individuals’ private business.
Earlier this week, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on an in-the-works proposal from the city’s Commission of Animal Control and Welfare to ban the sale, and potentially even the use, of glue traps.
Per the Chronicle‘s reporting, the commission—an advisory body that makes policy recommendations to the San Francisco government—is considering such a ban because of the allegedly cruel nature of glue traps.
Animals left in the traps can end up dying a slow death and will often hurt themselves trying to escape. Wildlife can be unintentionally caught in the traps. The live animals caught in glue traps can also leave behind urine and feces, which can pose a health hazard.
These criticisms are not new. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends against the use of glue traps because of their potential to spread disease. Rep. Ted Lieu (D–Calif.) introduced unsuccessful legislation criminalizing the sale and use of glue traps last year.
On purely utilitarian grounds, these criticisms of glue traps have to be balanced against their obvious benefit as a cheap and effective means of pest control.
Ever since we’ve moved inside, man has been locked in a never-ending struggle with various creepy, crawly pests of the Earth trying to follow us there.
Glue traps are an essential weapon in this war.
They block entry points into homes and businesses much more effectively than snap traps. They’re a lot cheaper than poison, which also poses a hazard to human health. They really have no substitute when your pest problem is large bugs that come in from outside the home.
The Chronicle cites the advice of pest control experts who say that plugging holes that pests use to get inside homes is the most effective way of ending infestations.
As true as that might be, finding and blocking every entry point can be very difficult in older homes and multifamily buildings. Given how little San Francisco builds, much of the city’s housing stock is made up of porous, aging buildings.
Renters may well also have a hard time convincing their landlords to do everything necessary to pest-proof their units.
For all these reasons and more, glue traps are indispensable.
They’re, of course, not the best option for everyone. People who might not have the fortitude to quickly kill rodents they catch with glue traps shouldn’t use them. If one has pets or small children, they can also cause more problems than they solve.
I, too, would recommend people in those situations avoid the use of glue traps. Freedom enables people to make decisions that best suit their own individual circumstances.
San Francisco’s government attracts endless, well-deserved scorn for all the petty restrictions it imposes on its residents. People who want to drink out of a plastic straw or put a table and chair in front of their business risk any number of sanctions from city hall.
A glue trap ban might seem like another petty, risible government intrusion. In fact, it’s much more serious.
There are few things more fundamental to the exercise of individual liberty than the right to defend the integrity of one’s home.
As I wrote when Lieu first proposed a national glue trap ban, “So long as people have the option of humanely dispatching mice with poison, electrocution, or neck-snapping metal bars, I’d also like to have the right to use traps that work.”
