Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Occupational Licensing Gone Wild

Public Enemy and Criminal Barber Dale Smith

An 82-year old Oregon barber (pictured above) with more than half a century of experience cutting hair (he was first licensed in 1957) is accused by government authorities in Oregon of "criminal barbering" because his government license to cut hair inadvertently expired in 2006.  Now state regulators want him to go back to barber school and pass a series of exams before he will be allowed to cut hair again legally. His barber shop is currently shut down to protect the public from getting their hair cut by this unlicensed, criminal barber.  

HT: Wayne Sanman 

See related CD post here of armed government SWAT team raids on Florida barber shops last November.  

27 Comments:

At 1/25/2011 9:40 AM, Blogger Junkyard_hawg1985 said...

"It's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for." - Will Rogers

Apparently, people in Oregon aren't so lucky.

 
At 1/25/2011 10:21 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

His license expired five years ago and he did not know about it? Try explaining that one to the cop and judge when you get caught driving with a license that expired five years ago. That calls everyday mental abilities into question.

 
At 1/25/2011 10:27 AM, Blogger Michael Hoff said...

All of this licensing nonsense is nothing more than a state revenue grab. Pennsylvania is notorious for it. They wrap in in false robes of concern for our helpless little citizens who can't possibly fend for themselves in this big, mean world, but it's all just a damned cash grab.

I hope this guy continues to cut hair in his basement for cash under the table. Then not only does the state not get his licensing money, they lose out on tax revenue, too. Nice job creating a new black market, Oregon.

 
At 1/25/2011 10:57 AM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Poor memory or bad eyesight? The license is only good for two years, and it has to be displayed by his barbering chair:

"690.085 Renewal of certificates, registrations and licenses. (1) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, a certificate issued by the Oregon Health Licensing Agency expires on the last day of the month, two years from the date of issuance. A certificate may be renewed prior to the expiration date by payment of the required renewal fee and compliance with other requirements as established by the Board of Cosmetology.

690.095 Display of certificate, registration, license, permit or freelance authorization. Every holder of a certificate, registration, license, permit or freelance authorization must display the document in public view where services are being rendered. [1977 c.886 §10; 1979 c.663 §1; 1993 c.267 §10; 1999 c.425 §15; 2009 c.701 §38]"

 
At 1/25/2011 11:05 AM, Blogger Buddy R Pacifico said...

The Outlaw Barber, Mr. Smith, will have to complete 1100 hours of schooling and pass the barber exam to satisfy OR state requirments.

BTW, exclusive photo of barbershop raid here.

 
At 1/25/2011 11:38 AM, Blogger jcarroll1948 said...

Gee, wonder if Obama invites him as one of his special guests at the State of the Union spectacle tonight? I believe one of the new themes is supposed to be reducing unnecessary regulation. (In case anyone is wondering, yes,I am being cynical.)

 
At 1/25/2011 12:11 PM, Blogger Hydra said...

Maybe we need a license for government bureaucrats.

 
At 1/25/2011 12:21 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Mr. Smith is not arguing about unnecessary regulation as the posters are inferring. In fact, he is arguing the state did not do enough because it did not warn him his license was expired. A license that he had to pass over 1000 times expired in his own shop. As someone who deals on both sides of compliance/regulations and also teaches them, that raises red flags about what is really going on.

You have to take Mr. Smith at his word, but I would wonder about other possible reasons for the long license lapse such as dementia, can't pass a required physical exam from dementia, bad eyes, epilepsy, Parkinson’s . . . . Saying he did not think he should have to have a license after having so much experience would make me feel much better if I were his customer. Who wants scissors or razors coming at them when trapped in a chair and the barber having a fit or seizure?

 
At 1/25/2011 12:24 PM, Blogger JB Powers said...

"Who wants scissors or razors coming at them when trapped in a chair and the barber having a fit or seizure?"

The customers, apparently. If they did not want their haircut, they would not go there.

JBP

 
At 1/25/2011 12:36 PM, Blogger KauaiMark said...

Am I committing a crime every couple weeks when I buzz cut my own and my grandson's hair with $18 clippers I bought at WalMart without a license?

Pretty soon the govt will require a license to breath from government owned air space.

 
At 1/25/2011 12:59 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

You guys are all arguing that the barber should not have to have a license. I think a lot of us agree that the government has way too many regulations. But that's not Mr. Smith's argument at all. He essentially argues for more government interference (a warning for his inadvertently (forgotten?)) expired license.

You have do your own thinking and get past the sensationalist viewpoint of the title of the post and article and see what Mr. Smith actually states in the referenced article. We can’t just assume Mr. Smith has a hidden agenda without any evidence. He wants a special waiver, and that should probably be judged on a case-by-case basis.

 
At 1/25/2011 1:06 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Welcome to the police state. When honest people are being shaken down by governments hungry for revenue to pay state employees earning twice the market average you no longer have a free country, no matter how many speeches are made about American values and virtues.

 
At 1/25/2011 1:27 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Mr. Smith is not happy with a partial victory for a five-year lapse in his memory and apparently wants a new state license warning policy, another regulation, to see it does not happen again? Where does personal accountability for our own actions start and end? Let’s all try Mr. Smith's approach with the IRS and our income taxes this year.

 
At 1/25/2011 1:37 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

Where does personal accountability for our own actions start and end?

They start and end with his customers, who have been going to him for his 50 years as a barber. What gives the state the right to intervene?

 
At 1/25/2011 2:02 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Vange,

Let's agree there are way too many rules and regulations and move on giving Mr. Smith's case the attention it so rightly deserves. He was not complaining about having to be licensed as a barber in Oregon.

First, you have to separate the general from the particular. How many practicing barbers have a five-year lapse in licensing renewal? If a lot, why? If only a few or one, how does Mr. Smith's case differ from his fellow barbers, and why should he be made the exception to the rule?

That Mr. Smith received a positive outcome of a compromise from a governmental unit should be celebrated as the victory it represents. A partial win in a dispute is still a win.

 
At 1/25/2011 2:02 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Walt,
I agree that his argument is flawed and I see what you're saying.

It's kind of similar to the fact that it took the people who want control everything we do 6 years to notice they were collecting taxes from an unlicensed barber. I wonder if these idiots have to go back to bureaucrat school....

 
At 1/25/2011 2:12 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

First, you have to separate the general from the particular. How many practicing barbers have a five-year lapse in licensing renewal?

You are missing the point. You don't need to license barbers. The last time I checked a bad haircut was not fatal and easily correctable. People are not stupid and have no trouble discriminating between good and bad barbers.

 
At 1/25/2011 2:14 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

It's kind of similar to the fact that it took the people who want control everything we do 6 years to notice they were collecting taxes from an unlicensed barber. I wonder if these idiots have to go back to bureaucrat school....

I think that you are missing the argument too. There is no need for licensing barbers because producers and consumers of hair cutting services do not need the government to intervene. I don't care if my barber is licensed. All I care about is if he is any good and it does not take me long to figure that part out.

 
At 1/25/2011 2:27 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Mike,

The taxing agency and licensing agency probably don't talk to each other, and they wouldn't unless it meant more revenue. It is about money, but the first rule of problem solving is to complain to the person who has the power to make the changes you want to make. Usually the legislature makes the laws, and the regulatory agency just enforces them. An “I should not have to have a license to . . .” complaint is a complete waste of time at a licensing agency. A waiver request is a reasonable and proper duty of a licensing agency. Mr. Smith received a partial waiver, so he should just smile and consider that a win until next time.

Vange, licensing barbers was not Mr. Smith's complaint. Having to take the test and exam was the issue. You have to frame the problem to solve it. I will agree we have too many laws and regulations.

 
At 1/25/2011 3:27 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Walt & Vange,
Relax....it was a joke.

You're right, the tax and license folks probably don't interact at all. That's the joke. Can you imagine any business that didn't have info flow between billing and collections?

BTW, if you haven't seen the episode of Stossel about unnecessary licensing, you should try to find it online....it's a good one.

 
At 1/25/2011 3:30 PM, Blogger juandos said...

Well Oregon is a state rife with liberal moonbats so this is hardly a suprise...

This is an update to the story: Decision: Veteran barber can skip school, but has to take test

This is how liberal moonbats think...

This nugget of nuttiness is from the office of the mayor of Portland, Sam Adams (one time charter member of NAMBLA)...

STUDY: Bike projects create more jobs than road construction

Yep! People get the government they deserve...

 
At 1/25/2011 3:41 PM, Blogger Walt G. said...

Do all the other barbers in the state now get a five-year waiver of their licensing fees or is this just reserved for older people ? :) Just watch, somebody is going to be in the "I didn't get mine" line now. Sounds like a special interest group reward to me.

I'm kidding here, but it could happen. Decision makers struggle with this all the time. Actions have reactions.

 
At 1/25/2011 3:44 PM, Blogger VangelV said...

BTW, if you haven't seen the episode of Stossel about unnecessary licensing, you should try to find it online....it's a good one.

If it is the one that I am thinking of, I saw it. And you better be careful joking on this site because some stuff that you assume has to be a joke or attempt as irony is actually a serious position for the person making it. For my part, unless the author is very clear about the joke, I take everything literally.

 
At 1/25/2011 4:42 PM, Blogger Buddy R Pacifico said...

UPDATE: . As Juandos pointed out, a compromise may have been reached. The outlaw barber is thinking about taking the test again ( KGW TV video). Until or unless Mr. Smith takes the test, competition from his $8.00 haircuts is stifled.

 
At 1/25/2011 4:43 PM, OpenID Sprewell said...

Regarding Stossel's licensing show that Mike referenced, while it has been taken down from the official Stossel page at hulu.com, it's still available elsewhere. Stossel's show is excellent, best show on TV right now, I don't miss it. As for Portland's dumb laws, good reason to never move there.

 
At 1/27/2011 10:16 AM, Blogger Tom said...

Criminal government.

 
At 2/02/2011 2:30 PM, Blogger Bryan C said...

"A partial win in a dispute is still a win."

Really? The government spent taxpayer's money, resources, and man-hours to enforce a stupid licensing requirement that shouldn't even exist. And the barber lost business, time, and money trying to fix the problem the state created in the first place. Who "won" anything here?

And, yes, I understand that that's not this fellow's argument. We're all free to draw different lessons from life. And he does have a point. If these barber's licenses are actually needed to serve some greater public purpose, then the state has assumed a duty to make sure that their expiration is promptly noticed and investigated. Apparently they don't really care. So is it worth doing, or isn't it?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home