&gt;  It is logical to require you to have a license to fill a cavity for safety reasons.  It is not logical to require a license to cut hair.<p>It actually <i>is</i> logical to require a license to cut hair, specifically for safety reasons you mention.<p>Barbers &#x2F; Hair Stylists are waving sharp pointy blades around your scalp, eyes, ears, mouth. If you don&#x27;t know what your doing, you can cut or seriously injure someone (even just accidentally).<p>Additionally, those tools are easy transmission vectors for diseases (both from potential cuts, and from bugs like lice).<p>It doesn&#x27;t take a <i>lot</i> of training, the two years for licenses mentioned in the article is ridiculous and should be reduced.  (As an example, Michigan&#x27;s license requirements are less than half the time+cost of Nevada&#x27;s requirements mentioned in the article).<p>But Barbers have been licensed for 70-100 years (depending on the state), and there&#x27;s a good reason for that -- you really do want to ensure everyone practicing that profession has some basic safety training and experience first, and the government seems like the best organization to ensure happens.