We have all heard of “dumpster babies,” abandoned newborns left to die by unfit parents.

And now, courtesy of Nebraska’s not-too-careful legislature, we have “dumpster teens” — near-adult youngsters left with the state of Nebraska by their parents, following last July’s loosening of the state’s child neglect statute.

The legislature, trying to prevent dumpster babies, weakened penalties to irresponsible parents who at least show the tiniest responsibility by not leaving infants in dumpsters, or the like, to die, but rather leaving them at hospitals for someone else to take up care.

Little did they expect parents to abandon growing children, including teenagers.

Though unintended, the effects were, well, ludicrously predictable. The legislators had used the word “child” rather than defining it more narrowly to “newborns.”

A special session has now been convened, and the law tidied up to include only infants 30 days or younger. But not before dozens of young people were abandoned. Some parents travelled across state lines to get rid of their kids.

Strange that the same legislature that outlawed non-residents from helping circulate petitions in Nebraska would allow non-residents to drop off their unwanted children in the state. But I digress.

Nebraska legislators may have meant well, but they ignored a basic principle: Some obligations should not be made too easy to break.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

An “Untouchable” in India’s caste system has changed his mind.

Chandra Bhan Prasad, an Indian writer and activist, was once the worst kind of socialist. According to a profile in the New York Times, he had been the kind of Maoist revolutionary who “carried a pistol and recruited his people to kill their upper-caste landlords.”

Now Prasad says the best way to lift low-caste members of society out of poverty is to increase economic freedom, let capitalism flourish. He accuses hardcore leftists of “hatred for those who are happy.”

Prasad is conducting a survey of India’s untouchables to learn about the impact of the economic liberalization that has been underway in India since the early ’90s. His survey finds that they are less likely to be confined to the traditional jobs of their caste, like skinning animals. And that they enjoy more social privileges than they once did.

The Times reporter advises that the results of greater economic freedom are uneven, that many untouchables are still mired in poverty while members of the upper caste still possess great advantage. Not very surprising, eh? You can’t expunge decades and centuries of bad policy and entrenched prejudice with a snap of the fingers.

On the other hand, if you want to bring millions out of grinding poverty, the abundant wealth created by capitalism sure comes in handy. Socialism will keep them poor just fine.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

When Samuel Wurzelbacher hit the news as “Joe the Plumber,” his story played well. Presidential candidate Barack Obama had been going door to door, with cameras, in an elaborate meet-and-greet binge. When he got to Wurzelbacher’s door, he got an earful. And John McCain got one of his few opportunities to really do some damage to the Obama juggernaut.

Now, the election is over, and new causes will be celebrated and reviled. But Joe’s right to speak his mind remains a live issue, one that we should all worry about.

Yes, there’s more to this story than you may have heard.

Here’s the rest of the story: Soon after his newfound notoriety, the real Joe, Mr. Wurzelbacher, found himself under investigation by the local police.

It’s an old, ignoble tradition throughout much of the world: A person speaks up, out come the billy clubs.

Fortunately, the investigation into his private records was nipped in the bud. The records clerk who actually made the inquiry has found herself under investigation. She’s even been charged with “gross misconduct” for allegedly making an improper, politically-based inquiry.

We’ll see if the investigation goes further than just this one clerk. The higher-up who approved the probe, Helen Jones-Kelley, director of the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, has defended her move. Will her maximum contributions to Mr. Obama’s campaign be judged irrelevant?

We’ll see.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Bill Malcolm has grown potatoes, onions, asparagus and other veggies in his garden in Marlbrook, Worcestershire, for eight years. Unfortunately, in the past four months he has been burgled three times. Thieves stole £300 worth of garden tools. (That’s not weight, that’s British currency.)

So Mr. Malcolm erected a wire fence with a row or two of barbed wire on top. To discourage thievery.

A professional thief could make short order of the fence. But our English gardener figured that it wasn’t the pros who had stolen from him. So he proceeded.

And then came the Bromsgrove district council, which ordered the gardener to take down his fence . . . or have it be taken down by force of law.

Why?

The local government was afraid it might get sued by a thief who scratched himself on the barbs of the wire.

The fact that the thief would have been in the wrong, for trespass and for intent to steal, that didn’t matter to the council. They were only afraid of being sued.

They gave friendly advice to Bill Malcolm: Not to leave his tools at his garden, in the shed, but to take them home with him.

If you think this is idiotic, I haven’t told you the punch line. That same government, a few weeks before, said not to lock sheds, in case burglars damaged them while breaking in.

It’s nice to know what government is for, eh? That is, insanity.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Here’s one way to reduce your crime statistics: jail victims who report crime.

That’s the latest method of crime-stopping in Shreveport, Louisiana. Starting October 15, gas station owners and even attendees will be culpable if a thief gases up and drives away without paying. Owners and employees will face fines and even jail time. The reasoning is that they are partly “responsible” for the crime by not requiring all customers to pre-pay.

I can’t say it’s the dumbest law out there because, well, there are so many dumb laws. It’s a very competitive field.

Councilman Monty Walford, who voted against the new ordinance, wonders whether the city will now require that grocery customers give a deposit before entering the store.

Police Chief Henry Whitehorn came up with the idea of penalizing Shreveport gas stations when drivers rob them. Whitehorn babbles that it’s a crime prevention measure. Station owners protest that it’s more customer-friendly to let customers pay after gassing up. In any case, how they conduct business is, obviously, their own business.

All kinds of mandatory restrictions on ways of doing business might “prevent crime.” How about forcing shop owners to force customers to crawl through a concrete maze before reaching the shelves . . . then submit to strip searches as they leave? Sure, such a law would be costly, but it would “prevent crime.”

Except for the crime of the law itself.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.