NationStates Jolt Archive

Is Britain becomming a nation of moralistic extremists? I heard today of several stories that illustrated that people are being stopped taking pictures of their own children at playing football as "The pictures might be leaked onto the internet for peodophiles." One gentleman was stopped watching his granddaughter's ballet recital because he was a man and a bloke was stopped from changing his own son in the wings at his school play because he was not CRB checked. We are the most filmed society in the western world with approx 1 cctv camera to every 14 people. And now the countdown to the smoking ban (approx 100 days). Whilst Germany and Denmark of proposing partial bans, allowing certain smoking areas, England's ban will come into place on the 1st of July, despite problems with Scottish pubs laying off staff, and at least one death (in a care home a carer forgot the resident was outside having a cig). Why in this country do we pander to the hysterical? Why are we unable to relax in our own country?

http://www.freedom2choose.co.uk/

Is Britain becomming a nation of moralistic extremists? I heard today of several stories that illustrated that people are being stopped taking pictures of their own children at playing football as "The pictures might be leaked onto the internet for peodophiles." One gentleman was stopped watching his granddaughter's ballet recital because he was a man and a bloke was stopped from changing his own son in the wings at his school play because he was not CRB checked. We are the most filmed society in the western world with approx 1 cctv camera to every 14 people. And now the countdown to the smoking ban (approx 100 days). Whilst Germany and Denmark of proposing partial bans, allowing certain smoking areas, England's ban will come into place on the 1st of July, despite problems with Scottish pubs laying off staff, and at least one death (in a care home a carer forgot the resident was outside having a cig). Why in this country do we pander to the hysterical? Why are we unable to relax in our own country?

http://www.freedom2choose.co.uk/

Bliars nanny state huh!

Because Britain is quite possibly the worst state to live in, in the west, ever at present.

How can we stop the tide though?

How can we stop the tide though?

Sit on the beach; demand the waves retreat.

Sit on the beach; demand the waves retreat.

Don't be a Cnut - What has happened to reasonable behavior?

How can we stop the tide though?

Blow up the moon.
Or buy Ariel instead.

Seriously... erm... I can't think of anything.

your government isnt doing anything that the majority of you dont approve of.

but dont y'all get sick of being watched wherever you go? guilty or innocent, someone is watching you whenever you go out in public. it would get on my nerves.

your government isnt doing anything that the majority of you dont approve of.


Um, the Iraq war?

But hey, don't debate me on it. I am just suggesting.

your government isnt doing anything that the majority of you dont approve of.

but dont y'all get sick of being watched wherever you go? guilty or innocent, someone is watching you whenever you go out in public. it would get on my nerves.

I'm afraid you are wrong - a majority of people were against invading Iraq - A majority of people do not want to be stopped taking pictures of their own children in public - I think most people don't want to be watched all the time - and among actual pubgoers the ratio of smokers to non-smokers is about 50/50.

Democracy is dead in the west. We can't export faulty goods.

Don't be a Cnut - What has happened to reasonable behavior?

But I'm good at it. And "reasonable behaviour" was a myth, dispelled in the '70s.

And seeing as I'm posting, I might as well put something "serious"; I listened to the Jeremy Vine show earlier, and I thought the OMGPAEDOPHILES! nonsense regarding the pictures was silly too. But what do you expect? It sells newspapers.

But the smoking ban? Good thing, sign me up. I note that many people who claim it's bad are enthusiastic about screaming "DEMOCRACY!", without noticing that most people are in favour of it. That's democracy for you :D

How can we stop the tide though?

Revolution!

your government isnt doing anything that the majority of you dont approve of.
Exactly. The British public are morons.

but dont y'all get sick of being watched wherever you go? guilty or innocent, someone is watching you whenever you go out in public. it would get on my nerves.

See above.

Um, the Iraq war?

But hey, don't debate me on it. I am just suggesting.

did y'all re-elect the man who got you into that war?

But I'm good at it. And "reasonable behaviour" was a myth, dispelled in the '70s.

And seeing as I'm posting, I might as well put something "serious"; I listened to the Jeremy Vine show earlier, and I thought the OMGPAEDOPHILES! nonsense regarding the pictures was silly too. But what do you expect? It sells newspapers.

But the smoking ban? Good thing, sign me up. I note that many people who claim it's bad are enthusiastic about screaming "DEMOCRACY!", without noticing that most people are in favour of it. That's democracy for you :D

See freedom2choose. And the 11% drop in drinks sales in Scotland. Plus the way it can be managed - as shown by Germany and Dem#nmark - the total ban in England is hysterical. Plus note that among pubgoers the smoking rate is about 50/50 - room for compromise - I mean bush won on a lower margin!

But the smoking ban? Good thing, sign me up. I note that many people who claim it's bad are enthusiastic about screaming "DEMOCRACY!", without noticing that most people are in favour of it. That's democracy for you :D
Hey, I couldn't give a shit about democracy. My only problem with it is when certain so-called democracies act like nanny states and still want to be considered democracies (the EU is a good example of such behaviour).

If legislation limits personal freedoms, I am against it, be it democratic or otherwise. Banning smoking in pubs? Not your business to do so. In publicly-owned spaces? Perhaps, if a majority approves.

That said, Britain sucks. Lovely country, terrible government. Once I've finished my studies I'll be leaving.

did y'all re-elect the man who got you into that war?

Not yet, and anyway he is going to stand down.

did y'all re-elect the man who got you into that war?
When you're given the alternative between a moron and an idiot, it's best to go with the one you're most familiar with. Britain is itself very much a two party system.

Um, the Iraq war?

But hey, don't debate me on it. I am just suggesting.

I'm afraid you are wrong - a majority of people were against invading Iraq - A majority of people do not want to be stopped taking pictures of their own children in public - I think most people don't want to be watched all the time - and among actual pubgoers the ratio of smokers to non-smokers is about 50/50.

Democracy is dead in the west. We can't export faulty goods.

Telepathy??

I don't think democracy is dead. Jus' dysfunctional, as government starts to interfere in every part of your lives and shoves down your throats mindsets and practices.

(Oh, and I am using 'your'. Evidently I do not live in the "West". Having too much dysfunctional democracy to even care. It's a daily part of our lives.)

did y'all re-elect the man who got you into that war?

*buzzer sound* I'm not American. ;)

When you're given the alternative between a moron and an idiot, it's best to go with the one you're most familiar with. Britain is itself very much a two party system.

How 'bout them Lib Dems??

How 'bout them Lib Dems??
Are you joking? :) They tried to reform the system a number of years ago with a plan they branded the "Single Transfer Vote". It was a good idea as it'd reform Britain's system considerably, but it failed to pass. That aside, I am not fond of them either. They're just a watered down version of Labour, at best.

Are you joking? :) They tried to reform the system a number of years ago with a plan they branded the "Single Transfer Vote". It was a good idea as it'd reform Britain's system considerably, but it failed to pass. That aside, I am not fond of them either. They're just a watered down version of Labour, at best.

Ah ok. I'm not from Britain, but I knew that those Lib Dems snapped up Tory seats in Scotland and northern England in the early 90's, giving some sort of a three-party system. Oh well, what do I know :rolleyes: . At least it's not just Republican or Democrat.

(Yeah, I know folks can vote for Badnarik and the Libertarians in 2004, but they aren't a viable party as of now.)

If legislation limits personal freedoms, I am against it, be it democratic or otherwise. Banning smoking in pubs? Not your business to do so. In publicly-owned spaces? Perhaps, if a majority approves.


Isn't a personal freedom, though, is it?

I couldn't care less if some bloke in the pub decides to take ecstasy or LSD, because it affects me not one jot. That is a personal freedom. Their smoke dissipating all over the place does affect me, and everyone else, whether they like it or not.

Isn't a personal freedom, though, is it?

I couldn't care less if some bloke in the pub decides to take ecstasy or LSD, because it affects me not one jot. That is a personal freedom. Their smoke dissipating all over the place does affect me, and everyone else, whether they like it or not.
Right, so don't go to a pub where people are smoking if that's your problem. It's up to the owner to disallow it or not.

I forget who it was but someone once said:

"The people rarely get the government they want, but they always get the government they deserve".

I see the truth in that statement. As such I have always believed that the right to vote was not so much a right as a privilege. When voting time comes around I always ask around as to who is going to vote which way and the most common answers are:

"I'm going to vote for xxx because that's who yyy is voting for"

"I'll vote for whoever my partner tells me to"

"Anyone that isn't <insert current party name>"

"I'm not going to bother voting"

The sad fact is that most of the people who do vote have no idea what they're voting for. They join in the chorus of "Our government sucks" every time and just vote for the next one in the round robin or simply stick with the way they always vote. I include myself in that. I've always voted according to my father's choice so I'm just as guilty.

Yet I believe the right to vote is a privilege. I don't see that it would be wrong to not automatically entitle anyone over the age of 18 to vote and instead impose a simple test that determines whether they should be allowed to vote or not. It doesn't need to be a hard test. Simply ask a few questions on the manifesto's of the main players. If they can get 60% or more then they've likely shown that they at least know what their own party is on about and have therefore earned their voting slip.

Not yet, and anyway he is going to stand down.

didnt y'all re elect him in '05?

all im saying is that when you re elect the guy who got you into a stupid war, it must have been OK with the majority on some level.

didnt y'all re elect him in '05?

all im saying is that when you re elect the guy who got you into a stupid war, it must have been OK with the majority on some level.

Because of the way our electoral system works Labour got back in with less than 25% of the electorate voting for them.

Because of the way our electoral system works Labour got back in with less than 25% of the electorate voting for them.
Indeed. I wonder if there will be any additional efforts in the future to reform it.

Right, so don't go to a pub where people are smoking if that's your problem. It's up to the owner to disallow it or not.

I try not to.
Unfortunately, before the ban loomed, I'd never even heard of a non-smoking pub. I'm still yet to actually see one.

Does rather limit one's choices, no?

Indeed. I wonder if there will be any additional efforts in the future to reform it.
Not for so long as it's in the Powers That Be's best interests that it's broken ;)

Of course we voted for Blair. Who were the other options... a drunken scotsman or a balding vampire. The Iraq war, pretty messy but nessecary, smoking ban yay! I think blair has the right idea. Other than tuition fees. Perhaps one day I will be able to opress the citizens of Britain with my own Ideals.

Does rather limit one's choices, no?
Only if your imagination is limited. I've found that there are plenty of ways to keep myself and company amused without going to the watering holes referred to as pubs over here. Not that I mind the smoking at all. I just dislike the venues.

I try not to.
Unfortunately, before the ban loomed, I'd never even heard of a non-smoking pub. I'm still yet to actually see one.

Does rather limit one's choices, no?


Not for so long as it's in the Powers That Be's best interests that it's broken ;)

Two Wetherspoons pubs in Canterbury - one smoking - one none smoking. Same pub operator, same prices same town. It works.

Ecstacy is another hysteria that has resulted in it being made illegal - thousands take it every week and hardly anyone dies - but you can't smell it. Even Germany can manage a compromise of the smoking thing and we beat them in two world wars!

Two Wetherspoons pubs in Canterbury - one smoking - one none smoking. Same pub operator, same prices same town. It works.

Note I said "before the ban loomed". It wasn't until then that Wetherspoons started running non-smoking pubs.
Besides, Canterbury is a long way to go for a pint for me. There's only one Wetherspoons "nearby" - Kettering, ten miles away - and I don't think that's non -smoking anyway.

Meh, smokers've lost. Go and stand outside. The fresh air will be good for you.

Note I said "before the ban loomed". It wasn't until then that Wetherspoons started running non-smoking pubs.
Besides, Canterbury is a long way to go for a pint for me. There's only one Wetherspoons "nearby" - Kettering, ten miles away - and I don't think that's non -smoking anyway.

Meh, smokers've lost. Go and stand outside. The fresh air will be good for you.

It wasn't good for the old timer that died from exposure having been forced to smoke outside in Scotland. The Germans and Danes are planning partial bans - does that mean that we are less able to provide for all people than the Krauts?. And before the ban loomed - The Strand in Preston was a non-smoking pub (went bust). With smoking ratios amongst pub goers at 50/50 alot of the people that want a smoking ban wont even be affected - like Scottish MP's voting for tuition fees in English universities whilst their own remain fee free. A majority of people in Scotland would welcome a relaxing of the smoking ban to allow bingo halls and private clubs to allow smoking in certain areas. One year on and a balance could be reached.

It wasn't good for the old timer that died from exposure having been forced to smoke outside in Scotland.

Doing one thing that kills you may be regarded as misfortune, to do two looks like carelessness

Britain giveth great humour and Britain taketh away. Censoring stuff in the name of PC and setting up that many cameras is stupid and paranoid. Really, really, really paranoid.

Right, so don't go to a pub where people are smoking if that's your problem. It's up to the owner to disallow it or not.

I was never able to form a view and take a side in that argument. I was basically shoehorned into the non-smokers side because I hate the stuff and wish it would go away. But still. Why should it be up to the person without a dangerous and addicting habit to change?

Britain giveth great humour and Britain taketh away. Censoring stuff in the name of PC and setting up that many cameras is stupid and paranoid. Really, really, really paranoid.



I was never able to form a view and take a side in that argument. I was basically shoehorned into the non-smokers side because I hate the stuff and wish it would go away. But still. Why should it be up to the person without a dangerous and addicting habit to change?

NHS spending on illness due to smoking in 2006 was 1.7 billion

Revenue fron smoking was 7.2 billion.


I say ban dogs - I am alergic to them and they make me ill. I smoke loads and only dogs make me cough properly. pluss the poo in our streets and parks. Come to think of it ban grass as well (plus trees and all windbourne pollen producing plants) - I have hayfever. Also I hate sweaty people who refuse to use deoderant - ban them from pubs, and people with very loud voices - they annoy me, I hate them and wish they would go away. You can please some of the people all the time but you can't please all the people some of the time.

It is up to the people with the dangerous and addictive habbit to change - but not in such a radical and oppresive way as the non-smoking lobby and the government are enforcing. Since airlines banned smoking on flights the air quality has dropped due to reduced spending on ventilation. So instead of smoke being properly vented away from non smoking areas the air is now recycled - you are beathing in other people's farts and halitosis.

The point of this thread was the hysteria surrounding certain aspects of life - one person is outraged and there is a ban on all such activity - Some Australian and Calafornian areas are planning or have introduced bans on smoking in open public spaces such as bus stops and parks. So you can breath in the deisel fumes or step in the dog poo as long as you can't smell smoke (if the wind happens to be blowing in your direction so as to favour such a situation).

I despise smokers. I remember my high school days, i used to punch anyone i knew who smoked.

Although this English thing doesn't affect me directly, i support any and every ban in relation to smoking. I would support illegalizing smoking. I don't see how it is any different to cocaine, heroin, ice or any other illegal drugs. Just because the dangerous affects are more long term then illegal drugs does not mean they are any less real.

Also, if i went to England, i should not be stopped from going into a pub. I refuse to be in the same room as someone who is currently smoking. And seeing it is the other person who is engaged in the habit that is harming me, i should not be the one who has to leave.

I say, ban all smoking in all areas outside of private homes. (Because i know there is no chance of a total ban, too much tax money for the government to lose.)

I despise smokers. I remember my high school days, i used to punch anyone i knew who smoked.
Although this English thing doesn't affect me directly, i support any and every ban in relation to smoking. I would support illegalizing smoking. I don't see how it is any different to cocaine, heroin, ice or any other illegal drugs. Just because the dangerous affects are more long term then illegal drugs does not mean they are any less real.

Also, if i went to England, i should not be stopped from going into a pub. I refuse to be in the same room as someone who is currently smoking. And seeing it is the other person who is engaged in the habit that is harming me, i should not be the one who has to leave.

I say, ban all smoking in all areas outside of private homes. (Because i know there is no chance of a total ban, too much tax money for the government to lose.)


Firstly your non smoking adversly affects those that do. By punching them you were doimg more harm to them than they were to you. If seperate smoking rooms were in pubs you wouldn't have to be in the same room.

Your intollerance and bigotry seem astounding. The atitudes you display are far more harmfull to society than any drug, legal or ilegal.

Is Britain becomming a nation of moralistic extremists? I heard today of several stories that illustrated that people are being stopped taking pictures of their own children at playing football as "The pictures might be leaked onto the internet for peodophiles." One gentleman was stopped watching his granddaughter's ballet recital because he was a man and a bloke was stopped from changing his own son in the wings at his school play because he was not CRB checked. We are the most filmed society in the western world with approx 1 cctv camera to every 14 people. And now the countdown to the smoking ban (approx 100 days). Whilst Germany and Denmark of proposing partial bans, allowing certain smoking areas, England's ban will come into place on the 1st of July, despite problems with Scottish pubs laying off staff, and at least one death (in a care home a carer forgot the resident was outside having a cig). Why in this country do we pander to the hysterical? Why are we unable to relax in our own country?

http://www.freedom2choose.co.uk/

We have the hysterical 'you cant take pictures of your own children' mainly because the media bash on about kiddie fiddlers lurking under every bush and on every street corner, ready to snatch and eat your children... or at least post piccies of them on the internet

The CCTV cameras are there for 2 reasons
1. Because we've allowed our children to have no disipline in their lives they dont know how to behave when older and out for a drinking session...or indeed out during the day too
2. They are cheaper than employing policemen ( the main one)

As for the smoking ban, a bloody good idea for workplaces since I have to work 2 feet from a smoker and I hate the bloody stuff (and having to have a fan on all day blowing the smoke away)
The second hand smoke thats been through a cigerette filter and someones lungs is'nt too bad its the acrid smoke that comes from a lit cigerette I find most annoying:upyours:

a smoking ban in pubs ... a pub in west sussex featured on BBC news recently banned smoking as an experiment and business went up 15%:cool:

El-presidente Boris

We have the hysterical 'you cant take pictures of your own children' mainly because the media bash on about kiddie fiddlers lurking under every bush and on every street corner, ready to snatch and eat your children... or at least post piccies of them on the internet

The CCTV cameras are there for 2 reasons
1. Because we've allowed our children to have no disipline in their lives they dont know how to behave when older and out for a drinking session...or indeed out during the day too
2. They are cheaper than employing policemen ( the main one)

As for the smoking ban, a bloody good idea for workplaces since I have to work 2 feet from a smoker and I hate the bloody stuff (and having to have a fan on all day blowing the smoke away)
The second hand smoke thats been through a cigerette filter and someones lungs is'nt too bad its the acrid smoke that comes from a lit cigerette I find most annoying:upyours:

a smoking ban in pubs ... a pub in west sussex featured on BBC news recently banned smoking as an experiment and business went up 15%:cool:

El-presidente Boris

That's an experiment - in reality one third of Scottish pubs have admitted they have had to lay off staff due to a downturn in custom.

A smoking ban is a good idea for certain workplaces - if you work in an office you should'nt have to breath other people's smoke, but if you work in a pub it can come with the teritory. Three words - learn to type. Most of the pubs I go into don't allow smoking at the bar, and with the fans behind the bar to keep the temp down (I worked behind a bar and the fridges create alot of heat) very little smoke gets to the staff.

Is Britain becomming a nation of moralistic extremists? I heard today of several stories that illustrated that people are being stopped taking pictures of their own children at playing football as "The pictures might be leaked onto the internet for peodophiles." One gentleman was stopped watching his granddaughter's ballet recital because he was a man and a bloke was stopped from changing his own son in the wings at his school play because he was not CRB checked. We are the most filmed society in the western world with approx 1 cctv camera to every 14 people. And now the countdown to the smoking ban (approx 100 days). Whilst Germany and Denmark of proposing partial bans, allowing certain smoking areas, England's ban will come into place on the 1st of July, despite problems with Scottish pubs laying off staff, and at least one death (in a care home a carer forgot the resident was outside having a cig). Why in this country do we pander to the hysterical? Why are we unable to relax in our own country?

http://www.freedom2choose.co.uk/

I'm glad I don't live there.

I'm glad I don't live there.

I'm glad I dont live in Calafornia or New South Wales.

I listened to the Jeremy Vine show earlier

Hey hey, we should start a Radio 2 Club. :p

Hey hey, we should start a Radio 2 Club. :p

With popmaster and everything?

We already have a Daily Mail club - the hysterical whingers.

With popmaster and everything?

Fantastic! :D

Well, it would be fantastic, if I could ever get more than 3 points in it! :p

I'm rubbish at Popmaster too :p

The Big Quiz I can do, usually...

I'm rubbish at Popmaster too :p

The Big Quiz I can do, usually...

I had a text read out by Ken Bruce yesterday. I was disproportionately chuffed at that. :cool:

Though I live in the USA, I totally support the smoking ban.

Why? Ever since I moved back to the USA from the UK (at age 6) my parents took up smoking again. For the last nine years I've inhaled cigarette smoke, and I am asthmatic.

I'm not one to yell "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!" (in fact, I'm writing some stories about the bad effects of that), but if you're the child of two smokers, then you kind of do have to say that. Children of smokers are more likely to fall victim to colds, asthma, and ear infections. At the age of seven, I had ear infectons ALL THE TIME. It wasn't pleasant at all, and eventually I needed surgery. I can't run long distances because I can't breathe after a certain amount of time.

Not to mention, secondhand smoke can cause lung cancer and aggravate allergies (I know a girl who passed out whenever she was nea cigarette smoke). Cigarettes also contirbute to air pollution. Non-smokers have the right not to inhale cigarette smoke, and while smokers may have the right to smoke where they like, it's common courtesy not to smoke in the same room (or car) as a non-smoker who doesn't want to inhale the smoke.

Cigarettes are not even good for you, anyway. They should be illegal. They're addictive after 3 of them and not only cause cancer, but other heart and lung problems too. My parents' families both have histories of heart and lung problems, and because I'm the daughter of two smokers, I'm probably doomed to the same fate.

Are you complaining about the smoking ban now?

Though I live in the USA, I totally support the smoking ban.

Why? Ever since I moved back to the USA from the UK (at age 6) my parents took up smoking again. For the last nine years I've inhaled cigarette smoke, and I am asthmatic.

I'm not one to yell "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!" (in fact, I'm writing some stories about the bad effects of that), but if you're the child of two smokers, then you kind of do have to say that. Children of smokers are more likely to fall victim to colds, asthma, and ear infections. At the age of seven, I had ear infectons ALL THE TIME. It wasn't pleasant at all, and eventually I needed surgery. I can't run long distances because I can't breathe after a certain amount of time.

Not to mention, secondhand smoke can cause lung cancer and aggravate allergies (I know a girl who passed out whenever she was nea cigarette smoke). Cigarettes also contirbute to air pollution. Non-smokers have the right not to inhale cigarette smoke, and while smokers may have the right to smoke where they like, it's common courtesy not to smoke in the same room (or car) as a non-smoker who doesn't want to inhale the smoke.

Cigarettes are not even good for you, anyway. They should be illegal. They're addictive after 3 of them and not only cause cancer, but other heart and lung problems too. My parents' families both have histories of heart and lung problems, and because I'm the daughter of two smokers, I'm probably doomed to the same fate.

Are you complaining about the smoking ban now?

But the smoking ban does not allow for smokers to have their own smoking rooms/clubs. Infact a UCL study shows that smoking bans in pubs increases the risk of children being exposed to smoke in the home.

Are you complaining about the smoking ban now. Plus if you have a family history of heart and lung problems the fact that your parents smoke is a small factor in your fate.

Life is a terminal illness. I do not know anyone who has survived. But I do know some who have enjoyed the journey by adopting a live and let live or die philosophy.

I had a text read out by Ken Bruce yesterday. I was disproportionately chuffed at that. :cool:

:eek:

And I wasn't listening carefully, it could've helped crack your Secret Identity!
Of course, you'd've used a pseudonym. Can't have Ken getting big-headed that Prince Harry enjoys his show...

I've had a couple read out. One by Janice Long (an amusingly wrong answer to her quiz), and one by Richard Allinson who used to do the 10.30pm slot. They both made me grin. Fame, and yet maintaining anonymity! :)

Life is a terminal illness. I do not know anyone who has survived. But I do know some who have enjoyed the journey by adopting a live and let live or die philosophy.

Also known as the "I'm gonna do whatever I want and if you don't like it that's your problem" philosophy. :rolleyes:

Also known as the "I'm gonna do whatever I want and if you don't like it that's your problem" philosophy. :rolleyes:

No. That would be the non-smokers lobby atitude. If people want a seperate room to smoke in that is between them and the publican in charge. The non smokers seem to think that their atitude of "I dont like it and therefore everyone shouldn't do it" can apply to real life. The evolution of the ban is already evident in Scotland with surveys showing many people in favour of exemptions to the ban. It is evident also in Germany and Denmark. Dealing in absolutes is a fool's paradise. Moderation and compromise are the ways to happiness not giving yourself a stomach ulcer because someone indulges in something you do not like.

No. That would be the non-smokers lobby atitude. If people want a seperate room to smoke in that is between them and the publican in charge.

The publican in charge and the staff he hires to work in that smoking room. Something the smoking lobby seems to have trouble remembering. Employers shouldn't have a choice about how safe they make their workplace.

The publican in charge and the staff he hires to work in that smoking room. Something the smoking lobby seems to have trouble remembering. Employers shouldn't have a choice about how safe they make their workplace.

A seperate smoking room without a bar. This would constitute an outside smoking area with walls and a roof perhaps - but no, smokers are not liked and therefore are the only minority in England still discriminated against without much outrage. Moderation and personal/private freedoms are something the anti-smoking lobby seem to have trouble remembering. This "think of the bar staff" arguement ranks alongside the "won't someone please think of the children" arguement. You also seem to forget that PRIVATE SMOKING CLUBS and PRIVATE CLUBS THAT ALLOW SMOKING are also not allowed under new legislation. If an adult seeking employment chooses to work in such an establishment when under the new laws every other pub would be non-smoking - that is their choice. Are we to think that potential bar staff are too stupid to make a decision. That is the essence of the nanny state.

A seperate smoking room without a bar. This would constitute an outside smoking area with walls and a roof perhaps

A lot of pubs in Ireland have that kind of set up. Surely an outdoor smoking area would be allowable.

- but no, smokers are not liked and therefore are the only minority in England still discriminated against without much outrage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_complex
Moderation and personal/private freedoms are something the anti-smoking lobby seem to have trouble remembering. This "think of the bar staff" arguement ranks alongside the "won't someone please think of the children" arguement. You also seem to forget that PRIVATE SMOKING CLUBS and PRIVATE CLUBS THAT ALLOW SMOKING are also not allowed under new legislation. If an adult seeking employment chooses to work in such an establishment when under the new laws every other pub would be non-smoking - that is their choice. Are we to think that potential bar staff are too stupid to make a decision. That is the essence of the nanny state.

I don't see what's moderate about giving smoking establishments special rights to have a less safe environment for their staff. If you're going to take such a step for some publicans, then why not all, why not all employers, even the government? What would you do if you went into your place of work tomorrow and were informed that they were no longer going to do anything to keep said workplace safe for you and your colleagues to work in?

I'm glad I dont live in Calafornia or New South Wales.

California UBER ALLES!

A lot of pubs in Ireland have that kind of set up. Surely an outdoor smoking area would be allowable.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_complex


I don't see what's moderate about giving smoking establishments special rights to have a less safe environment for their staff. If you're going to take such a step for some publicans, then why not all, why not all employers, even the government? What would you do if you went into your place of work tomorrow and were informed that they were no longer going to do anything to keep said workplace safe for you and your colleagues to work in?

Seperate smoking rooms in Ireland? I thought they had banned it. I was describing a seperate room, outside of the main bar area.

All publicans have had this right for hundreds of years. It is the hysteria and scare stories that have prompted an outright ban in pubs, at the same time that alcohol has been described as more harmful than heroin. I have never seen a reasonable arguement that would stop smokers having their own pubs. And a judicial review in England and popular opinion in Scotland might soon concur.As for the government - they can still smoke in the 40 bars in the houses of parliament after the ban for the same reason they could get a drink whenever they wanted before the relaxation of licensing aws - it is a palace and therefore not as strictly controled by the laws of the land. Many of those MPs who voted for a ban can still puff away with their pint. The issue of wether a person can choose to work in a smokey environment (ie a specific pub that allows smoking) is still one of adult freedom of choice. By not allowing such freedoms we are entrenching the nanny state.

Seperate smoking rooms in Ireland? I thought they had banned it. I was describing a seperate room, outside of the main bar area.
Ireland has outdoor smoking areas, usually sheltered from the rain and in some cases heated(with those patio heater things). Our ban is against smoking in enclosed workplaces.


And by what magic do you propose keeping the smoke in the smoking room?
All publicans have had this right for hundreds of years.
People had the right to keep slaves for quite some time too, what's your point?
It is the hysteria and scare stories that have prompted an outright ban in pubs, at the same time that alcohol has been described as more harmful than heroin.
Drinking alcohol doesn't inherently harm everyone around you, nor does shooting up some heroin.
I have never seen a reasonable arguement that would stop smokers having their own pubs.
How many times do I have to say it? Employers are required to keep their workplaces safe for empleyees.
As for the government - they can still smoke in the 40 bars in the houses of parliament after the ban for the same reason they could get a drink whenever they wanted before the relaxation of licensing aws - it is a palace and therefore not as strictly controled by the laws of the land. Many of those MPs who voted for a ban can still puff away with their pint.
I'll give you that, it's ridiculous.
The issue of wether a person can choose to work in a smokey environment (ie a specific pub that allows smoking) is still one of adult freedom of choice. By not allowing such freedoms we are entrenching the nanny state.

You just go ahead and set a precedent for allowing employers to disregard the safety of their employees. Enjoy the sweatshops that'll pop up all over the country.

Ireland has outdoor smoking areas, usually sheltered from the rain and in some cases heated(with those patio heater things). Our ban is against smoking in enclosed workplaces.


And by what magic do you propose keeping the smoke in the smoking room?

People had the right to keep slaves for wuite some time too, what's your point?

Drinking alcohol doesn't inherently harm everyone around you, nor does shooting up some heroin.

How many times do I have to say it? Employers are required to keep their workplaces safe for empleyees.

I'll give you that, it's ridiculous.


You just go ahead and set a precedent for allowing employers to disregard the safety of their employees. Enjoy the sweatshops that'll pop up all over the country.


Smoke in a smoking room - hmmnn - I heard of this new thing called venilation - watch the news.

If drinking alcohol does not harm those around you - allow drink driving, and get rid of al the police in city centres of a weekend. It does no harm. As for heroin, prohibition of heroin = back market = crime. If drug related crime is not a problem stop the police investigating drug related crime. As you seem to think it doesn't hurt.

As for comparing people choosing to work in a smokey pub when there are oppotunities to work in a non smoking pub (if reason was applied to the legislation) with sweat shops - kind of like the hysteria that stops parents photographing their own children in public. Insane country the wil see the light eventually.

Smoke in a smoking room - hmmnn - I heard of this new thing called venilation - watch the news.
They have news stories about ventilation? Maybe it is a new thing then?

And your plan is adding up to be very expensive for the publican.

If drinking alcohol does not harm those around you - allow drink driving, and get rid of al the police in city centres of a weekend. It does no harm. As for heroin, prohibition of heroin = back market = crime. If drug related crime is not a problem stop the police investigating drug related crime. As you seem to think it doesn't hurt.
You misunderstood completely. If I sat beside you and drank a pint you would not be harmed at all. However if I sat behind you and started smoking you'd inhale second hand smoke, and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise that that's not good.
As for comparing people choosing to work in a smokey pub when there are oppotunities to work in a non smoking pub (if reason was applied to the legislation) with sweat shops - kind of like the hysteria that stops parents photographing their own children in public. Insane country the wil see the light eventually.

I'm just pointing out that the slope is steep and well greased. I don't think that humanity is yet at the stage where people will obey the law and do good by each other of their own accord.

Smoke in a smoking room - hmmnn - I heard of this new thing called venilation - watch the news.

If drinking alcohol does not harm those around you - allow drink driving, and get rid of al the police in city centres of a weekend. It does no harm. As for heroin, prohibition of heroin = back market = crime. If drug related crime is not a problem stop the police investigating drug related crime. As you seem to think it doesn't hurt.

As for comparing people choosing to work in a smokey pub when there are oppotunities to work in a non smoking pub (if reason was applied to the legislation) with sweat shops - kind of like the hysteria that stops parents photographing their own children in public. Insane country the wil see the light eventually.... *blinks*
http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/images/humor-penguins.gif

Anyway, no offense, but smoking isn't what nature intended, and I'd rather not be forced to breathe in your morally vacuous smoke-tainted breath. I mean isn't smoking just a way for nature to wein you out of the gene pool. Like, smoking causes impotence and everything. So if you can't get it up then, you can't pass along your genes.

And no, I'm not at all pissed off by one of your posts in another thread. Not at all.

"becoming"?

Oh, and not only is Britain ridiculous like that. You forgot it's government's total islamophobia.

http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/images/humor-penguins.gif


That is now my wallpaper.

http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/images/humor-penguins.gif

*steals*

They have news stories about ventilation? Maybe it is a new thing then?

And your plan is adding up to be very expensive for the publican.


You misunderstood completely. If I sat beside you and drank a pint you would not be harmed at all. However if I sat behind you and started smoking you'd inhale second hand smoke, and it doesn't take a brain surgeon to realise that that's not good.


I'm just pointing out that the slope is steep and well greased. I don't think that humanity is yet at the stage where people will obey the law and do good by each other of their own accord.

According to the news from Scotland your plan is very expensive for the publican. Many pubs already have good ventilation. If you sit in a ventilated indoor smoking area I would not inhale second hand smoke - the ban will be altered in time.

I was also pointing out that the slope is steep and well greased - don't take photos outdoors, don't smoke, don't drink, log in and out of your house so the government knows where you are - a slippery slope to the nanny state where adult freedoms are a thing of the past. As I said earlier - the Germans are planning a partial ban (which parliament was also offered to vote on) - how can the Germans have come up with a compromise when we can't? The same reason we are the most watched nation on earth? - the reason why one MILLION people can march against the war and not be listened to? - the same reason why you cannot protest within half a mile of the seat of government without being arrested? The smoking issue is (ironically) a smokescrene.People like you get caught up in the whirlwind of junkscience and miss your freedom being taken away.

*steals*

That is now my wallpaper.

Woo! I'm glad to have been of service. I found it on Stumble, and I'd kept it in a tab, waiting for a good opportunity to use it.

That is now my wallpaper.

Moi aussi!

... *blinks*
http://shemesh.larc.nasa.gov/images/humor-penguins.gif

Anyway, no offense, but smoking isn't what nature intended, and I'd rather not be forced to breathe in your morally vacuous smoke-tainted breath. I mean isn't smoking just a way for nature to wein you out of the gene pool. Like, smoking causes impotence and everything. So if you can't get it up then, you can't pass along your genes.

And no, I'm not at all pissed off by one of your posts in another thread. Not at all.


Puppets smell puppets.

You have just given reason for a private smoking club - horray! Then you wouldn't have to, and if you are who I think you are then I'd rather not be forced to smell the spunk on your breath (if not ignore). Plus lear to use spellcheck I don't bother but it is an issue for some.

Puppets smell puppets.

You have just given reason for a private smoking club - horray! Then you wouldn't have to, and if you are who I think you are then I'd rather not be forced to smell the spunk on your breath (if not ignore). Plus lear to use spellcheck I don't bother but it is an issue for some.

October3, still posting? And still posting bile.

Puppets smell puppets.*lolz* r i being accused of puppetry. :D

You have just given reason for a private smoking club - horray! Then you wouldn't have to, and if you are who I think you are then I'd rather not be forced to smell the spunk on your breath (if not ignore). Plus lear to use spellcheck I don't bother but it is an issue for some.Meh, you're still contributing to global warming. And you should stop eating beans as well. They make you fart, and methane is more virulent than CO2 when it comes to global warming.

Puppets smell puppets.

You have just given reason for a private smoking club - horray! Then you wouldn't have to, and if you are who I think you are then I'd rather not be forced to smell the spunk on your breath (if not ignore). Plus lear to use spellcheck I don't bother but it is an issue for some.

Holy shit. Did you just accuse the Infinite Dunes of being a puppet? That's just so far beyond the realms of what we are willing to put up with on NSG. We can put up with nazis, racists, batshit fucking insane people, conservative christians, and pretty much everyone else. But a guy with 50 posts is not in any position to call one of our more well-known members a puppet. It's just stupid.

According to the news from Scotland your plan is very expensive for the publican. Many pubs already have good ventilation. If you sit in a ventilated indoor smoking area I would not inhale second hand smoke - the ban will be altered in time.
Your own BBC thought differently before the Irish smoking ban came into place.
Linky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3015995.stm)
A TUC spokesman, Tom Mellish, told BBC Radio 5 Live that studies from eight countries showed places which became smoke-free zones attracted extra customers.

Also, article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) sets out the right "to just and favourable conditions of work". Can you find where it sets out ones right to smoke in a pub? I won't hold my breath.
I was also pointing out that the slope is steep and well greased - don't take photos outdoors, don't smoke, don't drink,
Not smoking or drinking is probably a good idea actually. You'll probably live longer that way.
log in and out of your house so the government knows where you are - a slippery slope to the nanny state where adult freedoms are a thing of the past.
Yes, adult freedoms like the freedom to work in safe environment, free from unnecessary health risks. A freedom which is far more important(at least I believe) than your freedom to smoke.
As I said earlier - the Germans are planning a partial ban (which parliament was also offered to vote on) - how can the Germans have come up with a compromise when we can't?
Ther Germans are the Master Race, duh :rolleyes:
The same reason we are the most watched nation on earth? - the reason why one MILLION people can march against the war and not be listened to? - the same reason why you cannot protest within half a mile of the seat of government without being arrested? The smoking issue is (ironically) a smokescrene.
It's your own fault, you get the government you deserve.
People like you get caught up in the whirlwind of junkscience and miss your freedom being taken away.

Junkscience?

Oh, and I can live without the "freedom" to smoke in my own or someone else's workplace.

Puppets smell puppets.

You have just given reason for a private smoking club - horray! Then you wouldn't have to, and if you are who I think you are then I'd rather not be forced to smell the spunk on your breath (if not ignore). Plus lear to use spellcheck I don't bother but it is an issue for some.

I'm spending far too much time in moderation thanks to you. Really, stop breaking the rules.

On second thought, I'm not too sure if that's flaming. I'll ponder on it before I hit submit reply.

But the smoking ban does not allow for smokers to have their own smoking rooms/clubs. Infact a UCL study shows that smoking bans in pubs increases the risk of children being exposed to smoke in the home. If the parents smoke, the kids are goig to be exposed to the smoke at home regardless of how many pubs there are. Do you honestly think that smokers *only* smoke in pubs? They smoke anywhere they can. If smoking at all isn't illegalized, then smokers can go outside, not stay inside and pollute other people's lungs.

Are you complaining about the smoking ban now. Plus if you have a family history of heart and lung problems the fact that your parents smoke is a small factor in your fate. :rolleyes: Yeah, being exposed to cigarette soke for most of my life wouldn't have a hand in my fate at all.

Life is a terminal illness. I do not know anyone who has survived. But I do know some who have enjoyed the journey by adopting a live and let live or die philosophy. If you're going around polluting the air and your own lungs, I'd say that's a "die" philosophy.

Your own BBC thought differently before the Irish smoking ban came into place.
Linky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3015995.stm)


Also, article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) sets out the right "to just and favourable conditions of work". Can you find where it sets out ones right to smoke in a pub? I won't hold my breath.

Not smoking or drinking is probably a good idea actually. You'll probably live longer that way.

Yes, adult freedoms like the freedom to work in safe environment, free from unnecessary health risks. A freedom which is far more important(at least I believe) than your freedom to smoke.

Ther Germans are the Master Race, duh :rolleyes:

It's your own fault, you get the government you deserve.


Junkscience?

Oh, and I can live without the "freedom" to smoke in my own or someone else's workplace.


Before the ban being the operative phrase - the ban has had a negative effect of bars in New York - the statistics used to show an increase in hositality trade included McDonalds, starbucks, restaurants that already were none smoking etc. Cooking the books in other words.

A judicial review is being partially based on article 8 of the human rights act.

Not smoking and not drinking is probably good for the individual but not society. Cost to NHS of smoking 2006 - 1.7 billion, revenue from ciggy taxes - 7.2 billion. Less taxes - less NHS - get health insurance then. But the poor non-smoking families won't be able to. Pensions - millions of people facing a shortfall in pensions - lots of pensioners dying as they chose between food and heat during the winter. More people alive in a finite space = misery. Public health laws are one of the causes of great misery in our society. Some are good, other not. People like you are blind to the consequences of everyone living to 100. What is the road to hell paved with?

If the parents smoke, the kids are goig to be exposed to the smoke at home regardless of how many pubs there are. Do you honestly think that smokers *only* smoke in pubs? They smoke anywhere they can. If smoking at all isn't illegalized, then smokers can go outside, not stay inside and pollute other people's lungs.

:rolleyes: Yeah, being exposed to cigarette soke for most of my life wouldn't have a hand in my fate at all.

If you're going around polluting the air and your own lungs, I'd say that's a "die" philosophy.

The UCL report says that the smoking ban increases childrens exposure - still exposed but moreso by a ban.

Why go outside - why not a smokers pub - if a non-smoker goes in that's their problem.

You said that your family had a history of heart and lung problems - how is not being exposed to any pollutants going to keep you out of the ground?

Before the ban being the operative phrase - the ban has had a negative effect of bars in New York - the statistics used to show an increase in hositality trade included McDonalds, starbucks, restaurants that already were none smoking etc. Cooking the books in other words.
Source?

A judicial review is being partially based on article 8 of the human rights act.
Article 8.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law
Seems fair enough to me.

Not smoking and not drinking is probably good for the individual but not society. Cost to NHS of smoking 2006 - 1.7 billion, revenue from ciggy taxes - 7.2 billion. Less taxes - less NHS - get health insurance then. But the poor non-smoking families won't be able to. Pensions - millions of people facing a shortfall in pensions - lots of pensioners dying as they chose between food and heat during the winter. More people alive in a finite space = misery. Public health laws are one of the causes of great misery in our society. Some are good, other not. People like you are blind to the consequences of everyone living to 100. What is the road to hell paved with?

Oh, and you seem to ignore that if people aren't spending money on fags they'll be spending it on something else. So the government will still be getting the tax revenue.

The UCL report says that the smoking ban increases childrens exposure - still exposed but moreso by a ban. Because we all know that smokers only smoke in pubs, and that most smokers go to pubs. :rolleyes:

Why go outside - why not a smokers pub - if a non-smoker goes in that's their problem. My point is that smoking is dangerous for those all around, not just the smokers themselves. If smokers would like their own pub, fine. But they shouldn't share one with the smokers if they don't need to. Which they don't.

By the way, alcohol and tobacco are good for the individual AND society. Less secondhand smoke, less drunk driving, less addiction and Big Tobacco and Budweiser couldn't manipulate people into buying their stuff.

You said that your family had a history of heart and lung problems - how is not being exposed to any pollutants going to keep you out of the ground? I'm going to be in the ground at some point. I realize that at 15 years old, so don't think that just because I'm a teenager I'd automatically think of myself as immortal if my parents weren't smokers. The rest of my family is also full of smokers. My half-sister smokes, my aunts and uncles smoke, my grandma smokes, hence the heart and lung problems. If I don't die of heart and lung disease as a result of genetics, I'll die of heart and lung disease as a result of cigarette smoke.

Really, whose puppet are you?

Source?



Seems fair enough to me.



Oh, and you seem to ignore that if people aren't spending money on fags they'll be spending it on something else. So the government will still be getting the tax revenue.

www.faac.ca/content/economic%20impact/smokingbanreport.pdf

For one.

What are they going to spend it on that is taxed at 80% - or are all these new non smokers just going to give money to the government out of the goodnes of their hearts?

Really, whose puppet are you?
...DCD?:p

What are they going to spend it on that is taxed at 80% - or are all these new non smokers just going to give money to the government out of the goodnes of their hearts?
Well, that's their choice. If the money is saved in a bank account, it pays tax on interest. If it's spent, it pays VAT, and the company you brought it from pays corporation tax on the profit. Plus, bars see their income increase (according to your source) and tax on that too. Money saved on the NHS. In reality, any change in revenue will be minute as a percentage of taxation and GDP.

Really, whose puppet are you?
October3's
www.faac.ca/content/economic%20impact/smokingbanreport.pdf

For one.

Strange, the findings of that report would imply that Ireland should be in a state of economic ruin. But we're still chugging along.
What are they going to spend it on that is taxed at 80% - or are all these new non smokers just going to give money to the government out of the goodnes of their hearts?
That's not the point, you were implying that the government would lose £7.2 billion of tax revenue. They would not.

...DCD?:p

Drunk Commies Deleted Again? :p

Well, he's not MTAE, he's not eloquent enough.

Drunk Commies Deleted Again? :p

Well, he's not MTAE, he's not eloquent enough.

He really is October3. Kat confirmed it.

October3's.

Don't know him.

Wait, didn't he get banned or something?

He really is October3. Kat confirmed it.

:eek: I see.

However, I don't recall any of October3's posts, so meh.

October3's
Or HunterST.

Strange, the findings of that report would imply that Ireland should be in a state of economic ruin. But we're still chugging along.
To the point where parties in NI are crying for the UK to adopt the Irish tax and spending model/levels. I'd go with that, too.

That's not the point, you were implying that the government would lose £7.2 billion of tax revenue. They would not.
And if they cancelled the £18 billion ID system, that more than covers it, and since one thing October3 doesn't like is being exchanged for another, it's whinge-neutral.

Drunk Commies Deleted Again? :p

Well, he's not MTAE, he's not eloquent enough.
That was a joke - I thought the tounge-poking would have showed that!:eek:

Don't know him.

Wait, didn't he get banned or something?

For a weekend. So I gues it would be "something". You can't tell you'r only 15 you hide it well.

*sniggers*

That was a joke - I thought the tounge-poking would have showed that!:eek:

I knew it was a joke. :p So I joked back, perhaps at DCD's expense, but meh :P

Are you complaining about the smoking ban now?
You bet.

Employers shouldn't have a choice about how safe they make their workplace.
It's pretty much common knowledge that a lot of smoking goes on in pubs. If you're not willing to put up with that as an employee, then don't work for one.

Anyway, no offense, but smoking isn't what nature intended, and I'd rather not be forced to breathe in your morally vacuous smoke-tainted breath.
Then don't use your PC either. "Nature" didn't intend it.


I was never able to form a view and take a side in that argument. I was basically shoehorned into the non-smokers side because I hate the stuff and wish it would go away. But still. Why should it be up to the person without a dangerous and addicting habit to change?
Monkey Nipples has already torn this position apart. However, it's up to the pub-owner how they run their establishment and what they allow or not. If you don't like smoking, don't go to a pub that allows it or doesn't have separate rooms!

For a weekend. So I gues it would be "something". You can't tell you'r only 15 you hide it well.

*sniggers*

You're October3!? :eek:

Nice way to post around a ban. :rolleyes:

You're October3!? :eek:

Nice way to post around a ban. :rolleyes:


Already stated I never posted around a ban - started posting a monkey nipples 20/03 October3 ban supposed to end 13/03. Nice way to talk nonsense - are you sure you are 15 and not adding 10 years to sound cool?

Already stated I never posted around a ban - started posting a monkey nipples 20/03 October3 ban supposed to end 13/03. Nice way to talk nonsense - are you sure you are 15 and not adding 10 years to sound cool?

from the photo i've seen yes she 15

He really is October3. Kat confirmed it.

Already stated I never posted around a ban - started posting a monkey nipples 20/03 October3 ban supposed to end 13/03. Nice way to talk nonsense - are you sure you are 15 and not adding 10 years to sound cool?

A moderater confirmed that you were really October3, so now you're STILL posting around a ban, blowing smoke about how much smoking is actually good for society, and then insulting my maturity.

:rolleyes:

A moderater confirmed that you were really October3, so now you're STILL posting around a ban, blowing smoke about how much smoking is actually good for society, and then insulting my maturity.

:rolleyes:

How in God's name can I be posting around a ban that ended on the 13/03. You really are too young to be any judge of society's ways. You are even to young to smoke, vote or drink alcohol. But adding your two cents anyway - another Scottish MP in the making - commenting on things that do not concern you.

How in God's name can I be posting around a ban that ended on the 13/03. You really are too young to be any judge of society's ways. You are even to young to smoke, vote or drink alcohol. But adding your two cents anyway - another Scottish MP in the making - commenting on things that do not concern you.

oh awake up i've seen girl's and boy's of 13 smoke and drink
oh she can't became a scottish mp if she don't live there

oh awake up i've seen girl's and boy's of 13 smoke and drink
oh she can't became a scottish mp if she don't live there


Just because some council estate kids smoke and drink at 13 is no indication of their viability to discuss such matters - as the legal ages attached to such dislpay. And the Scottish MP thing was a figure of speach - learn to read whole paragraphs.

You moron.

How in God's name can I be posting around a ban that ended on the 13/03. YOU'RE STILL OCTOBER3!!!
YOU ARE STILL A PUPPET!

You really are too young to be any judge of society's ways. Really? I can't be a part of society just because I'm 15? You are not only a puppet, but you're also a flaming retard. The mods are going to ban you any freaking minute! :mad:

You are even to young to smoke, vote or drink alcohol. so? I don't want to drink or smoke anyway. I think it's a shame that teenagers can't vote even when they are smarter than most adults. How are you allowed to vote then?

But adding your two cents anyway - Because you're to thickheaded to freaking listen.

another Scottish MP in the making - Scottish? I'm American. I don't think that an American can ever be a Scottish MP, regardless of age.

commenting on things that do not concern you Commenting on things that don't concern me? My parents smoke, that concerns me. The No child Left Behind BS concerns me, for I attend a public high school. Politics do affect those under 18, retard, so stop trying to shelter those of us who are smart enough to know what's going on but still under 18.

Just because some council estate kids smoke and drink at 13 is no indication of their viability to discuss such matters - as the legal ages attached to such dislpay. And the Scottish MP thing was a figure of speach - learn to read whole paragraphs.

You moron.

At least ISA's not advocating sheltering kids, nor is he using a puppet.

And you call him a moron?

Just because some council estate kids smoke and drink at 13 is no indication of their viability to discuss such matters - as the legal ages attached to such dislpay. And the Scottish MP thing was a figure of speach - learn to read whole paragraphs.

You moron.

funny we don't have council estate her and one's i've seen doing that there parent's had money and the only moron around here is you

YOU'RE STILL OCTOBER3!!!
YOU ARE STILL A PUPPET!

Really? I can't be a part of society just because I'm 15? You are not only a puppet, but you're also a flaming retard. The mods are going to ban you any freaking minute! :mad:

so? I don't want to drink or smoke anyway. I think it's a shame that teenagers can't vote even when they are smarter than most adults. How are you allowed to vote then?

Because you're to thickheaded to freaking listen.

Scottish? I'm American. I don't think that an American can ever be a Scottish MP, regardless of age.

Commenting on things that don't concern me? My parents smoke, that concerns me. The No child Left Behind BS concerns me, for I attend a public high school. Politics do affect those under 18, retard, so stop trying to shelter those of us who are smart enough to know what's going on but still under 18.


You just called me a retard several times - decending to my level are you - you flamer. I should report you for flaming. There is a reason why kids are still kids - because they are stupid. :upyours:

Well, it seems this thread's degenerated into a flamefest, so I'm done with it.

funny we don't have council estate her and one's i've seen doing that there parent's had money and the only moron around here is you

Funny, we don't have council estates here, and [the] one's i've seen doing that - their parent's had money. The only moron around here is you.

You just called me a retard several times - decending to my level are you - you flamer. I should report you for flaming. There is a reason why kids are still kids - because they are stupid. :upyours:

I don't see how you think you are an "adult"- because you're obviously quite stupid as the "kids" you feel superior to. 15 years olds are not necessarily kids, and just because you think I should be seen and not heard, you are officially a pseudo-adult.

Congrats. :mad:

It's pretty much common knowledge that a lot of smoking goes on in pubs. If you're not willing to put up with that as an employee, then don't work for one.
It used to be common knowledge that women shouldn't vote.

And just because it's expected that there'll be a lot of smoking in pubs doesn't make it ok

I don't see how you think you are an "adult"- because you're obviously quite stupid as the "kids" you feel superior to. 15 years olds are not necessarily kids, and just because you think I should be seen and not heard, you are officially a pseudo-adult.

Congrats. :mad:

I just love to tease the kids - they're so easy!

*pats Darknovae on head and sends her up to bed because she's tired and getting cranky*

<snip>
Stop flaming, and going on about Monkey Nipples being October3
<snip>

Just stop flaming.

Bah, reported to moderation, both of you.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b201/Medievalist/offcourse.jpg

*exits, stage right*

Funny, we don't have council estates here, and [the] one's i've seen doing that - their parent's had money. The only moron around here is you.

oh really just copy what i said as you can't think up some thing to say
so you know i post how i speck

And I just love seeing pseudo-adults think they're superior to me just because I'm 15.

I hope you meet Gary Glitter in the near future.

Screw it. I'm done messing with MN.

Screw it. I'm done messing with MN.

Told you she was tired and cranky - she'll be back after a nap.

Then don't use your PC either. "Nature" didn't intend it.Haha, my point was ironic. I was responding to a post by MN in another thread where the poster voices homophobic ideas, and suggests that homosexuality isn't natural.

Haha, my point was ironic. I was responding to a post by MN in another thread where the poster voices homophobic ideas, and suggests that homosexuality isn't natural.
Ah, gotcha. :D