Skip to main content

A fine line

Much energy is being spent arguing that a smoking ban is illiberal. The basis of opposition being that it is an unwarranted restraint on personal behaviour. If smoking only harmed the smoker, this would be true. The problem is that secondary smoking turns out to be extremely dangerous. So smokers harm themselves, which is acceptable, but they also seriously harm other people, which is not.

The only vague problem that I have with a ban on public smoking is that perhaps private smoking clubs could be permitted- but then obviously the staff would have to be smokers too, and anyway how do you police this without undermining the whole basis of the law? Nevertheless, perhaps a licensing regime, much like that for alcohol itself, might have been adopted.

I am against the state interfering in most aspects of personal behaviour: there is a fine line between protecting citizens and nannying them. This law is dangerously close to that line, but to be honest, over many years, I have got more and more fed up with the thoughtless and nasty behaviour of smokers.

As a barman, when I was a student, I had to clean the garden behind the bar. Despite plenty of ash trays I never failed to pick up less than 150 cigarette butts from the grass each day. A disgusting job, especially after rain. After that, I could not feel anything but supportive of those non-smokers who work in bars and who do not want to be exposed to secondary smoke and all the other nastiness of tobacco.

Comments

Jock Coats said…
>> ...over many years, I have got more and more fed up with the thoughtless and nasty behaviour of smokers.

Having been for many years a smoker of exemplary courtesy and consideration for others, I guess people will now moan at me for breathing smoke in their general direction near the front doors of their favourite establishments.

For I shall not be compounding the ill-health the tobacco may risk me having with pneumonia when the only shelter is under the front porch.
Anonymous said…
Yes Jock, I for one will be moaning at you for blowing smoke in my direction.

If I walked around air-stabbing knives I'd be arrested or removed from the pub, even if I didn't hit anyone. That's because putting other people at risk for your own fun is not acceptable.

Liberalism is about freedom of the individual. But when your actions impose on my freedom, MINE take precedence.
Jock Coats said…
Not what I said.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo