I'm still reading the blogs on my list though, and having just read this story by Longrider, my piss boiled completely over, enough to make me drop everything and make time for a rant.
A town is set to become the first in Britain to ban smoking from its streets.
My first thought on reading this was, who the hell has the authority or the remit to ban smoking outdoors in all public places. Then I remembered that these fuckwits in local government believe they can do what ever they like, without mandate and regardless of what the people think. Nobody ever seriously opposes them anyway.
The muppet who came up with this idea seems to be the worst of the worst, certainly the biggest pillock I have seen offer an opinion in the national press for a long time.
Councillor Paul Bartlett *pdf, 50, wants to create a new bylaw to outlaw smoking in any open place or public street in the market town of Stony Stratford, Buckinghamshire.
The time has come where the anti-smoker can say anything, absolutely anything to further their cause, no matter how stupid, how unfounded and how totally in the face of science it flies.
Even so, this bell-end takes the cake for blatant nonsense.
Father-of-two Mr Bartlett believes that the smoking ban would ‘make the environment cleaner’ and prevent ‘harm’ to children.
A smoking ban in the streets would make 'the environment cleaner'? I assume by environment he is only referring to ciggy butts dropped in the street rather than treating tobacco smoke as a pollutant. He also says it costs millions to clear street rubbish. It doesn't cost millions to clear fag butts as these would just be part of the overall rubbish. Where I live it's a proper chav town but there are plenty of public litter bins and they all have ash trays in the top. This is a much better solution to 'litter' than an outdoor smoking ban. What's next? Ban Greggs?
As for 'harming children' and preventing harm to children', what a load of bollocks. The indoor passive smoking argument is full of holes; outdoors there is no risk from tobacco smoke whatsoever.
I love the way these nutters always pretend to have the interests of children at heart. They pick an argument that holds no water and does nothing more than build their own ego's, then they make it difficult to argue, lest you are seen to be unsympathetic to the 'plight' of defenceless children.
It gets better,
He said: ‘Why should people have the freedom to smoke in my face, pass on diseases and spoil the environment?
‘When you walk through the high street in any town smoke is in your face and harming you and any children there.
People do not smoke in you face you utter buffoon. If someone walks past you with a ciggy you might get a momentary faint wiff of smoke. The same happens if you walk past a pie shop or someone who has just farted. Smells, good and bad, are all around us. Get over it. A wiff of heavily diluted outdoor smoke will certainly do no harm to you or your precious children. As for passing on diseases, you cheese dick, WTF?
‘Smokers then get their butt, which is full of saliva, and chuck it on the floor.
‘It costs millions to clear street rubbish, and goodness knows what a child could pick up from them.
‘If I make the environment cleaner and save on council tax, sometimes you have to take the bull by the horns.’
Saliva now? Jeez. Children catching diseases from picking up ciggy butts in the street? Even if that argument was remotely plausible, my response would be tell your idiot spawn not to pick them up then. Kids can catch all kinds of crap from picking up shit in the street, not just fag butts.
And you reckon it will save on council tax? I doubt you would give any of it back to the people, even if you could make a saving, which is doubtful.
Bull by the horns? Bullshit more like.
Mr Bartlett now hopes to introduce a new bylaw to the 12,000 population Stony Stratford outlawing public smoking.
My first reaction is to suggest the residents of Stony Stratford vote you out on your arse at their first opportunity. The more I think about it, the more I would like to see them have you swinging from a lamp post, you utter shit.
Amanda Sandford, spokeswoman for Action on Smoking and Health, today praised the proposed ban.
Oh do shut the fuck up.
At the same time we are hearing this rubbish, another cretin, this time from the BMA is telling us that,
Smoking in your car is more damaging to health than breathing in exhaust fumes,
Can you beleive it? More damaging to health than breathing in exhaust fumes.
Popping a pipe from the exhaust into the car is a tried and tested method of committing suicide. So is slitting your wrists, hanging yourself and drowning, all less dangerous than smoking a fag in the car by this idiot's 'logic'.
Douglas Noble, a British Medical Association public health expert, made the claim as his colleagues called for tougher tobacco and alcohol controls.
How this loon can be referred to as a 'public health expert' is totally beyond me.
London-based Dr Noble said: 'In cars, particle concentrations are 27 times higher than in a smoker's home and 20 times higher than in a pub, in the days when you could smoke in public places.
I won't go into the rubbish science behind these often rebutted statements. There are many places that make the case far better than I could. Try here, here and here for starters.
'It would be safer to have your exhaust pipe on the inside of your car than smoke cigarettes in terms of fine particular matter released.
I know the anti-smoking debate has drifted into farcical nonsense, but how can any so called, educated person believe in this arrant rubbish and hope that others will too?
'A ban would protect pregnant women and children.'
No it wouldn't
This has gone far enough. The BMA needs to be disbanded, Amanda Sandford and her cronies need to have their funded stopped and Councillor Bartlet needs to be left swinging from a tree as an example to others.
This has gone far enough.
14 Comments:
Post a Comment