stewart38
26th-October-2004, 02:25 PM
On the one hand Liverpool City Council have now ban smoking in all public places and on the other we have the government wanting to relax the gambling laws
If you assume passive smoking kills then there is a strong argument for banning smoking in all public spaces including some ceroc venues . ie evidence suggests people die from inhaling passive smoke and they may not wish to choose that option for an early death
What about gambling and a relaxation in the laws ‘may’ increase problem gamblers from 300,000 to 600,000. However who knows?
What if you guaranteed a relaxation in gambling would lead to a doubling of ‘problem gamblers’ should then such a relaxation go ahead?
When should the state ‘step in’.?
Alcohol has a higher addiction rate then cannabis but the government doesn’t band it as its part of our culture.
Pollutants from cars may kill 1000s but its part of our lives we don’t ban cars?
I would ban smoking in public spaces (and I’ve changed my mind on this very recently)
Allow more gambling with safe guards (I’m still a bit on the fence)
Legalise all drugs with safe guards (Banning them doesn’t work)
Keep cars and remove 75% of speed cameras (and take the risk !)
We have had threads about smoking ,addiction/drugs, speeding not sure on fox hunting etc
Many of these are highly emotive with people seeing them as black or white I don’t know where the state should draw the line ? :sick:
Finally I find it funny that the Daily Mail has campaigned long and hard against the proposed new gambling legislation and then has an article written by Michael Winner that ‘mumsy’ lost millions in casinos in Monte Carlo . The article ends that he went there with girlfriend etc . I lost the message ie it wasn’t good for her but ok for him, so why not for the masses ?
If you assume passive smoking kills then there is a strong argument for banning smoking in all public spaces including some ceroc venues . ie evidence suggests people die from inhaling passive smoke and they may not wish to choose that option for an early death
What about gambling and a relaxation in the laws ‘may’ increase problem gamblers from 300,000 to 600,000. However who knows?
What if you guaranteed a relaxation in gambling would lead to a doubling of ‘problem gamblers’ should then such a relaxation go ahead?
When should the state ‘step in’.?
Alcohol has a higher addiction rate then cannabis but the government doesn’t band it as its part of our culture.
Pollutants from cars may kill 1000s but its part of our lives we don’t ban cars?
I would ban smoking in public spaces (and I’ve changed my mind on this very recently)
Allow more gambling with safe guards (I’m still a bit on the fence)
Legalise all drugs with safe guards (Banning them doesn’t work)
Keep cars and remove 75% of speed cameras (and take the risk !)
We have had threads about smoking ,addiction/drugs, speeding not sure on fox hunting etc
Many of these are highly emotive with people seeing them as black or white I don’t know where the state should draw the line ? :sick:
Finally I find it funny that the Daily Mail has campaigned long and hard against the proposed new gambling legislation and then has an article written by Michael Winner that ‘mumsy’ lost millions in casinos in Monte Carlo . The article ends that he went there with girlfriend etc . I lost the message ie it wasn’t good for her but ok for him, so why not for the masses ?