Freedom of choice

[Wilts#Dave]

On 11/04/2023 at 20:51, Scully said:

Yes, I agree much of it’s down to money, but in this case the hypocrisy always jars on me, as the same policy never seems to apply to alcohol. If it’s down to NHS financial burdens then I’m pretty sure alcohol will be up there with cigarettes by comparison. 
The role of governments in my opinion is to only interfere in the lives of those who break laws, and for the remainder of the time to mind their own business. 
I wouldn’t mind, but when they introduced the smoking ban, exemptions were made for ( amongst other places and occasions ) palaces, and as chance 🤔 would have it, Westminster is a palace! 

Does make me laugh that alcohol is never targeted in the same way…..because so many of the top brass are hooked on it and would never give it up! Yet alcohol causes far more wider problems than the health implications of smoking. 
I no longer smoke and haven’t done for years, but did enjoy it in my youth when we could all smoke inside pubs etc. 

Drinking, again I used to recreationally fairly heavily when I was younger as most do and should be able to experience, but could live without it now. 

Things that don’t affect those who make the rules are easy for them to target, the same goes for shooting…..we’re in the minority and those who have no desire to do so are more than happy for it to be banished forever!
 

Obviously some rules need to be in place, but where do you draw the line is a tricky subject. 

[discobob]

People don't realise that our "freedom of choice" is being removed bit by bit - death by a thousand cuts - give them an inch and they will take a mile - whichever metaphor you want really.

The removal of smoking will remove the taxes (hey ho - everybody else's taxes go up to make up the shortfall). The same is going to happen with cars. They will make it so expensive to drive (fines/ULEZ/Per Mile charging) - people will stop driving and get rid of their cars where they can - but they (government) will still want their taxes and will come after everybody else to fill the gap.

Wait until they start on the housing stock - dictating that houses have to have a certain EPC - and this will then be tightened up year on year - and you won't be able to sell until you get it to the level, unless it is to certain "approved" organisations who will offer you bottom dollar for it. Did I forget to mention that there would more than likely be fines for not bringing it up to standard in X time - or at least a weighting put on your council tax bill??

Also, they are looking at getting rid of livestock - but don't worry - the new cattle will be us and the Government (and other super-national bodies) will be milking us for cash.

[Vince Green]

The question of smoking is a complex one. People should be allowed to smoke if they want to but ONLY if it doesn't impact on others . Often it does.

Even people sitting outside pubs and restaurants are blowing their smoke back into the building or all over others sitting outside.

The question of smoking when driving is another issue. This time a safety one. I don't think it should be allowed, it's banned in many countries.

Edited April 14, 2023 by Vince Green

[enfieldspares]

On 11/04/2023 at 18:35, Scully said:

What happened to it? I’m referring specifically to the governments latest campaign to stop folk smoking.

Who's going to make up the ;lost tax revenue SCULLY if smoking ends completely? I agree with the indoor ban in entertainment venues, public houses and cafes and etc.. Too many have been harmed or cut short through passive smoking.

[243deer]

2 hours ago, Vince Green said:

The question of smoking when driving is another issue. This time a safety one. I don't think it should be allowed, it's banned in many countries.

Vince, sorry, but I think this is cobblers fella. If smoking was a significant cause of accidents in any way the insurance companies would ask if you smoked and vary your quote accordingly, they do not, simples.

Personally I think banning anything should be banned, fed up with being dictated to by vocal minorities who often know - not a lot (to avoid swearing filter) - about not a lot

[Vince Green]

5 minutes ago, 243deer said:

Vince, sorry, but I think this is cobblers fella. If smoking was a significant cause of accidents in any way the insurance companies would ask if you smoked and vary your quote accordingly, they do not, simples.

Personally I think banning anything should be banned, fed up with being dictated to by vocal minorities who often know - not a lot (to avoid swearing filter) - about not a lot

So it's illegal to smoke in a van, taxi or a lorry but not in a private car? That seems a little strange to me

[Gordon R]

Quote

So it's illegal to smoke in a van, taxi or a lorry but not in a private car? That seems a little strange to me

These are classed as workplaces.

[old man]

Freedom of choice as defined by any government will possibly be dictated by whoever is behind the scenes with their hands up the rear ends of said politicians either grasping or waiving money?

The only objective is to remove or destabilise as dictated  at the time from the rear?

[discobob]

7 hours ago, discobob said:

will be milking us for cash.

And with CBDC - they won't even have to put any effort into milking us.