Congress ought to place a ban on food advertisments that target children under the age of twelve.

First I would like to state that I do reconize obesity as a problem in America, hoever placing a ban on all food advertisments that target children is not the way to solve this problem. My argument against such as ban is centered around three main reasons; 1. It is the job of the parents to decide what is appropiate food for their kids not the government. 2. The government would not do a good job deciding which advertisements are targeting children and this would cause the government to waste more of the taxpayers money. 3. There are non-governmental alternatives to decrease the amount of such advertisements. It is the Parent's responsibilityOne of the largest problems in America in regards to parenting is when parents put what is traddionally their responsibility on government programs and agencies. Examples of this include sexual education and other life lessons that are required to be taught at many elementary and middle schools. Because of such programs many parents think that they don't need to talk to their child children about those topics. The more we let governmet dictate what is appropiate for children and what is not the less responsibility each parent feels he or she has in such matters. If congress were to ban all food advertisements that target children than parents would assume that they would not have to worry about explaining to their kid why they shouldn't eat somtbing just because it looked good in the advertisement. This may not be the most important thing a parents have to teach their kids but if we enacted alot of laws that had side effects of parents not teaching their children all of the little lessons in life then the children will start having big problems as they get older. Wide interpretation and a Waste of Money A law such as this can be interpretated in many ways. How we would be able to define advertisements that target children is beyond me, for many ads target multiple age groups. If Mcdolnalds showed a commercial where a 14 year old was doing tricks at a skateboarding park then ronald hands him a bag of mcdonalds when hes done, is targeting teens, children or both. One could argue either way. To enforce this law the government would need to create a new agency or sub agency. This would just be more of the taxpaer's dollar being wasted on laws that are uneccessary. There Are Better Alternatives There are ways in which people can solve social problems without government intervention and it is almost always better. If there are enoguh people that feel strongly on a certain issue they can pressure society to change without the use of the government intervention. If enoiugh parents were upset about the number of fast food ads their children were watching on cartoon network, than they could cimply call up the network and ask them to stop showing too many fastfood ads or else they won't let their child watch cartoon network. If Cartoon Network got enough complaints than, out of fear of losing veiwers, they would decrease the number of fast food ads that they air. Private organizations that included many parents could put alot of preasure on companies and businesses that air these ads in the first place. These methods would be much more effective and cheaper than a government solution.