Like so may people, on many social issues, Ms Bjarnason demonstrates a failure to see beyond the headlines and make the effort to understand the underlying facts and issues.

The “safe ink in jail” program was about “other issues that needed addressing”. I would like to suggest that Ms Bjarnason, and any others who agreed with her statements, acquaint themselves with the reasons behind this pilot program.

While I may like the idea of “safe ink” and tattooing in prison, the success of this approach in addressing the problems caused by unsafe ink in prisons, means that I do support keeping and expanding this program. No doubt part of this support is because I have no false expectations that unsafe ink and tattooing are preventable, except at prohibitive costs to the taxpayer and society.

To make decisions on issues and actions based on thoughtless reactions to superficial headlines or catch phrases, paying no heed to the actual facts, leads not only to bad policy but so often to significantly increased hidden costs – in terms of dollars and (common) sense.

This public preference for making decisions, forming opinions or voting on the basis of this sounds terrible (good), this agrees with what I believe and/or don’t confuse me with the facts approach “is ridiculous”.