With the dawn of the new year, some 40,000 new laws went into effect across the 50 states.

Here’s a sampling from around the nation for your consideration. We’ll sort the examples into two groups. You can decide which laws bring a smile — and which cause indigestion.

Group 1:

One state legislature authorized “creating a license plate for music teachers.”

Another state bans “people under the age of 18 from using tanning beds.”

California, where else, prohibits the production, distribution or sale of beer to which caffeine has been directly added as a separate ingredient. Go figure?

Also, California now prohibits the possession, sale, trade or distribution of shark fins. The electronic media had fun reporting that, but failed to include that Oregon also bans this.

And, Oregon’s legislators passed a package of bills they claim “aims (no pun intended) to increase compliance with the requirement to report any hunting activity.” Why would any government want to do that?

Well, another bill “gives an incentive for individuals to comply with the requirement by allowing the State Fish and Wildlife Commission to issue free tags to hunt antelope, deer and elk to a select number of hunters.”

And (I bet this will not surprise most readers) another Oregon law “allows the department to impose a $25 surcharge on the hunting license renewal of anyone who fails to file a report.”

Now, back to California where now, “it is a misdemeanor to openly carry an exposed, unloaded handgun while in a public place or on a public street in an incorporated city, or in specified prohibited areas of an unincorporated county.”

In Kentucky, legislators amended a law adding “provisions for those who commit elder and vulnerable adult abuse, neglect and financial exploitation.” The amendment “… trigger(s) an offender’s forfeiture of the right to inherit property from the victim.” That part does make some sense if there is a conviction.

However, I’m not so sure about the rest of the Kentucky law. “If there are no other beneficiaries, the property will go to the state’s elder and vulnerable victim’s trust fund.” 

The sounds like an expansion of ‘government takings’. (Attorneys, comment with pro’s and con’s.)

Here’s a few more. Let’s call this: Group 2. See if you discern a pattern?

Legislators in North Carolina approved a law that prohibits “an individual from running on the same general election ballot for more than one office. The “Tar Heels” got that right.

Texas will now require “deputy and volunteer voting registrars … to meet the same requirements as a registered voter,” that is, “be U.S. citizens and eligible to vote in the state of Texas.”

The same Texas law also “prohibits performance-based compensation for voter registration drives.” Ah, solid sensible wisdom from the “Lone Star” state. 

Let’s hope the other states do the same.

Meanwhile, in Alabama, a major provision of the state’s immigration law took effect. Gov. Robert Bentley described E-Verify as his “… favorite part of the Alabama immigration law because it provides employers a way to make sure (non-citizen) employees are legal.” That makes sense, too. As do those few other new state laws cited in Group 2.

What doesn’t are those new state laws, exampled in Group 1 that represent either unnecessary laws or outright encroachments into the freedoms, privacy and self-determination of individual citizens.

The bottom line is this: The numbers don’t lie; 40,000 new state laws — no matter how big government statisticians choose to slice and dice the number or content of each law — confirm that government at all levels has gone way beyond limits.

Richard Olivastro is president of Olivastro Communications. Contact him at: RichOlivastro@gmail.com or by phone at 1-877-RichSpeaks.