IT'S STARTED

Don't think that just because THIS has happened in a far away land like Bhutan that it won't and can't happen here.

I have been saying for years that criminalisation of smokers is the ultimate aim of the anti-smoker movement. It may take a while before our country becomes as fanatical as Bhutan but my guess is that UK smokers of my generation will be facing prison or quit within the next 20 years. The elderly are easy to bully after all.

Even though smoking bans began to be enacted in far off parts of the world long before they came to Britain, I believed that this country's values of fair play and respect for freedom of choice, "different" lifestyles, and moderate views would never allow it. I didn't know that the philistines had invaded the British Parliament.

I was against the UK blanket smoking ban for so many reasons - not least because it meant state control of private premises such as pubs - but the main one being that it broke down the barrier to the next stage of tobacco eradication and smoker criminalisation.

Anyone who thinks that can't happen here is deluded. You only have to look at Nick Hogan to see it's already happened. Court lists across the country are beginning to see law abiding people's names on them for the heinous crime of dropping a biodegradable cigarette end. It will get worse over the years until simple possession of tobacco is a crime.

The imprisoning of law abiding tobacco consumers comes to the Bhutan under the guise of this "Democracy" as one commenter points out but admits that fear of imprisonment is a strong motivator in quitting for good.

Democracy comes to Bhutan and instead of freedom we find that there are thousand rules to abide by. Bhutan is a country of many bans. I believe tobacco consumption etc should be left to individual’s choice, after all who doesn’t know its adverse effect on health.
However, just like there’s two sides to a coin, I’m glad the bill’s been passed, for my own selfish reason; I always wanted to quit but couldn’t do so. I hope I’d be able to do now for the fear of imprisonment.

I fear for the world the puritans are creating at any price. How far down this road will our stupid politicians take us?

HT - The Devil's In The Detail

BURKA BAN IS WRONG

I have to say that I'm a bit miffed about UKIP's plan to ban the burka because I support choice.

If woman wants to wear it, I don't have a problem with it, and if it is enforced as a means of oppression, then that should be dealt with as an honour crime or domestic violence issue. My disappointment with UKIP is because this is about a ban.

I joined UKIP because it was a non-racist, liberal party against that sort of thing. This smells a bit ugly but the wearing of the burka shouldn't be a taboo subject for debate either.

Banning things is with us. The smoking ban, and other assaults on people's lifestyles have started the ball rolling. What is said about freedom and choice is as relevant to smoking as it is to the Burka.

In this clip below, Nigel Farage talks about the reasons for UKIP's stance on this and below that a letter from Lord Pearson in the Times.

As the UKIP PPC for Louth and Horncastle, I can say that I will still align my political support with UKIP, where I hope to be able to influence and add my views to the discussion on the burka ban and a woman's right to choose her own mode of dress.

The following letter from UKIP Leader Lord Pearson was published in The Times on Weds 20 January :

Sir,

Alan Sked and Richard Milne (letters, Jan 19) have missed the deeper points about UKIP’s suggestion that the burka should be banned in public places. Your leading article (Jan 16) warned that our proposed ban on wearing the burka in public buildings could set us on the road to fascism. However, one of the 21/7 bombers escaped wearing the burka; the hidden face can also hide a terrorist.

When we talk of terrorism, we usually refer to a problem coming from within Islam. Of all the religions, Islam is the only one whose leaders do not wish their followers to integrate into our society, and Sharia, which can alas be described as gender apartheid, holds growing sway in too many parts of our country. So the burka is a symbol of separation, discrimination and fear.

Nor does it have any place in mainstream Islam. The Grand Mufti of Egypt has said it is “not Islamic”. The Muslim Canadian Congress has described it as a “political issue promoted by extremists”, and called for it to be banned.

Let us not forget that Islam is very different to our Judaeo-Christian culture. It is a religious, political and legal system rolled into one, a whole way of life based on the Koran, and the penalty for leaving it can be death. A ban on the burka would be for freedom, not fascism.

We must not run away from Islam, but debate it openly, particularly with the vast majority of Muslims who are our friends.

Lord Pearson Of Rannoch

Leader, UKIP

Here is a link to a piece in the Express about the need for a debate on the issue and I do, at least, agree with that if there are women out there who are forced into wearing the burka - in the same way that smokers are forced into exclusion.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/152664/We-need-a-proper-debate-on-banning-burkhas-in-Britain

FAILED SMOKING BAN BAD FOR HEALTH

Ah ha. Of course. A ban on smoking in public leads to more smoking at home, therefore more children at risk from leprosy. There lies the real reason why the Govt and the timid opposition are happy to see smoking banned at home and in cars.

However, if they bothered to look at the true scientific and social evidence, instead of being coerced by the powerful and well funded anti-smoking industry, they would see that second hand smoke is not fatal for children or anyone else.

At worst it's an irritant that can be adressed without the exclusion of a minority group from public and without the Govt getting into our homes and our private lives.

Patrick Basham, co-author of the report Are Smoking Bans Necessary? said there are viable alternatives to blanket public bans that address not only the health but also the irritant and annoyance concerns of those who don't like smoke.

"None of the reasons offered in defence of the smoking ban stands up to careful scrutiny," he said.

"The bans have not reduced smoking in the UK and they have had perverse public health consequences.

"The Govt maintains that the public smoking ban has forced record numbers of smokers to quit but such claims are not supported by the Health Survey for England, produced by the National Centre for Social Research and the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at University College London. According to the Health Survey, not only did the smoking ban fail to reduce smoking, it's first year saw an increase in cigarette consumption among males aged 18 - 34 and an increase in smoking among poorer classes."

Basham has examined the methodolgy used to scientifically assess the dangers of second hand smoke and found that various Govt and public health reports suggest that second hand smoke does NOT pose a serious health risk to non-smokers. They do, however, make smokers feel isolated and force them to stay at home more.

"Governments should remember that they can never predict the consequences of this unprecedented governmental intervention in our lives," Basham said.

* The report is launched at The Democracy Institute, Waterways Room, One Queen Anne's Gate, Westminster, London, SW1H, on Wednesday, December 16 at 11am.