Cigarette-buying age set to rise

mkpdavies · 01-01-2007, 03:03 PM

Quote:

it is the duty of the government to restrict them for the greater good

That is bordering on Blair style fascism.

Whose idea of greater good? Shouldn't the parents be the judge of that for their child, or should we all just surrender to the machine.

The duty of the government is to keep out of things and only intervene if absolutely necessary.

Westcountryman · 01-01-2007, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Quote:

it is the duty of the government to restrict them for the greater good

That is bordering on Blair style fascism.

Whose idea of greater good? Shouldn't the parents be the judge of that for their child, or should we all just surrender to the machine.

The duty of the government is to keep out of things and only intervene if absolutely necessary.

Sure, let people smoke at 6 if their parents think its ok, and we can all watch with glee as the NHS collapses.

mkpdavies · 01-01-2007, 03:21 PM

Why not rap them up in cotton wool, ban all food but cellary, cars, contact sports and everything else that makes life bearable too.

You want your way of life force on others. Sorry but that makes you a fascist.

I could understand if you wanted the NHS to have certain terms (as long as people had the right not to pay for it too if they want), but no that isn't good enough. You want to use the system as an excuse to enforce your personal life choices.

If that's not fascism, then I don't know what is.

harryaldridge · 01-01-2007, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ModernUKIP

Social attitudes are also coming round to the point that drugs are seen as increasingly acceptable part of society. However, since they are invariably harmful, it is the duty of the government to restrict them for the greater good, and the prohibition of drugs is something I will support 'til the grave.

Why should the government protect people from their own free will?

Drugs are harmful and so the government should provide information on their effects. Personally i think legalising drugs is tho only way to ensure peopel are not given 'dirty' drugs which are more harmful than pure drugs.

In addition you say that they should be restriched "for the greater good". Drugs do not have the negative externalities or "neighbourhood effects" in the way cigarette smoke does. Drugs can however lead to crime and people unable to get jobs etc etc. Thus if drugs were legalised crime would be less of an issue as the supply could be regulated and not priced according to 'underground' prices. If a person is unable to get a job because of their own actions then that has no negative effect on other people.

I also believe social attidues to drugs will change in the same way for smoking however this will take time. I do not think restricting drugs is at all sensible and will not solve the problem.

Westcountryman · 01-01-2007, 03:25 PM

Drugs are not 'victimless' by any means. I for one, would not want my child mowed down by someone driving who was suffering from psychosis.

Westcountryman · 01-01-2007, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Why not rap them up in cotton wool, ban all food but cellary, cars, contact sports and everything else that makes life bearable too.

You want your way of life force on others. Sorry but that makes you a fascist.

I could understand if you wanted the NHS to have certain terms (as long as people had the right not to pay for it too if they want), but no that isn't good enough. You want to use the system as an excuse to enforce your personal life choices.

If that's not fascism, then I don't know what is.

No, it's safeguarding the majority. Drugs et al have serious consequences for others in addition to the user. However, if you really want to allow 6 year olds the choice to smoke and people to take drugs, but deny them NHS treatment, then I'm game. I'll put the kettle on and watch the Country rip itself to shreds.

Oh, should we allow the guardians of society - The Police - to be off their face too?

In such a society, my only hope would be that the private sector sacks every sucker who takes drugs habitually, if only for the effect on productivity.

mkpdavies · 01-01-2007, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Drugs are not 'victimless' by any means. I for one, would not want my child mowed down by someone driving who was suffering from psychosis.

So you would ban alcohol then? Sharp Knives? How about cars altogether?

Anything can be misused and will be even if it is banned.

Having real punishements for those that DO misuse and cause harm is the only real deterent that will have effect.

cookie65 · 01-01-2007, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Sure, let people smoke at 6 if their parents think its OK, and we can all watch with glee as the NHS collapses.

Smoking related disease costs the NHS(our NHS that we pay massive taxes for irrespective of cause) 1.7 billion pounds per year

Revenue from tobacco 10.5 Billion pa

Yes I think it is a good move to put the Buying age up and I would agree that the Age for smoking should be raised to 18 as well. Lets make it a clean sweep and put Car driving to 18 and also the age of consent as well.
A pregnant 16/17 year old is bang to rights as she is carrying the evidence, a smoking gun if you like.
I think the welfare culture costs us far more than Smokers

Westcountryman · 01-01-2007, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Having real punishements for those that DO misuse and cause harm is the only real deterent that will have effect.

Agreed, but given how bad enforcement of the law is already, I fear we'd just witness the Country descend into lawlessness - or are we there already? :x

I've also got to ask, would there be a defence of 'sorry m'Lud, I didn't mean to rape her, I was off my face on crack'? I can foresee a large increase in diminished responsibility claims...

Westcountryman · 01-01-2007, 03:36 PM

Quote:

I think the welfare culture costs us far more than Smokers

A third of the national budget, in fact.

01-01-2007, 03:21 PM	#13 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	Why not rap them up in cotton wool, ban all food but cellary, cars, contact sports and everything else that makes life bearable too. You want your way of life force on others. Sorry but that makes you a fascist. I could understand if you wanted the NHS to have certain terms (as long as people had the right not to pay for it too if they want), but no that isn't good enough. You want to use the system as an excuse to enforce your personal life choices. If that's not fascism, then I don't know what is. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

01-01-2007, 03:25 PM	#15 (permalink)
Westcountryman Uber Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: The Westcountry. Posts: 5,922 Party: None	Drugs are not 'victimless' by any means. I for one, would not want my child mowed down by someone driving who was suffering from psychosis. __________________ Manus haec inimica tyrannis ense petit placidam sub libertate quietam - "This hand of mine, which is hostile to tyrants, seeks by the sword quiet peace under liberty."

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode