« Obama Outspends Hillary on Superdelegates | Main | Clintonista: Comply with Socialized Medicine or Incur an "Outcome" »
February 16, 2008
UK May Require License to Smoke
The British nanny state continues to metastasize. The latest proposal is to require a license to smoke.
This would entail not only paying a £10 fee, but filling out deliberately convoluted forms as part of the application process. Julian Le Grand, a former Tony Blair advisor, boasts that the tediousness of having to deal with the bureaucracy will force people to behave as do-gooders desire:
You've got to get a form, a complex form — the government's good at complex forms; you have got to get a photograph. It's a little bit of a problem to actually do it, so you have got to make a conscious decision every year to opt in to being a smoker.
Not everyone is in love with the idea:
[Smokers' rights group] Forest spokesman Simon Clark said that when the cost of administration, extra bureaucracy and enforcement are taken into account, "the mind boggles".
Next on the agenda, given the current obsession with weight, will be a license to eat, to be withheld from those who abuse the privilege. No, wait — they already thought of that.

On a tip from mega.
Posted by Van Helsing at February 16, 2008 10:38 AM
Comments
Well, with what they say about "second-hand" smoke, 007 may need a "license to kill"!
Posted by: Proof at February 16, 2008 11:16 AM
And once smoking is wrapped in red tape, what other "unhealthy" pursuits will they require a license for? Salt must be rationed and you must produce a suitable for of ID in order to purchase your weekly recommended amount. Of course everything contains salt, so you must also fill in a form to calculate the amount of salt you eat, and any excess will be taken from your ration next month...
perhaps they'll spin this as the reason for having ID cards.
Posted by: Archonix at February 16, 2008 11:51 AM
I could care less if a person wants to destroy their health. But they have NO right to destroy MINE. These smokers stand outside of buildings, puffing away on their cancer sticks while the rest of us have to breathe it in as we walk by. If you want to smoke, smoke at home where I don't have to breathe in your cancer smoke, though I would fully support a complete ban on cigarettes.
Posted by: Kristy at February 16, 2008 12:22 PM
Thank you for that perfect example Kristy.
Posted by: Farmer Ted at February 16, 2008 2:49 PM
Speaking here from inside Blairstrip One, it is very much like living in an asylum taken over by the craziest inmates. Not Britannia any more, more like Arkham.
Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at February 16, 2008 3:16 PM
Kristy...
WAHH FUCKing wah.
Posted by: Alex at February 16, 2008 4:00 PM
What else do you want to ban Kristolf hitler?
Confetti? Fireworks displays? Spray Paint? anything with an odor or risk of respiratory problems if inhaled? Go huff a bag of fermented urine. find me someone who has suffered from outdoor second hand smoke. FIND ME ONE CASE!
Chances are the air in the city you live in is worse than 2nd hand smoke OUTDOORS.
Posted by: Alex at February 16, 2008 4:06 PM
"If you want to smoke, smoke at home where I don't have to breathe in your cancer smoke..."
Kristy, there is a movement to ban smoking in PRIVATE HOMES. Are you saying that you would fight that so that people can (as you say) "...smoke at home..."? There is a known case where a California woman SUED a man who lived a HUNDRED YARDS from her home because SHE SAID that the cigarette smoke in his house drifted into hers and CHOKED her!
Honestly now, tell us which party you would support in this case.
Posted by: KHarn at February 16, 2008 4:37 PM
The anti-obesity law proposed in the link at the end of this article is even more frightening in the scope of its totalitarianism. On the other hand, one could make a killing in black market cigarettes and Big Macs if both of these laws were passed...
Posted by: PabloD at February 16, 2008 4:44 PM
Of course everything contains salt, so you must also fill in a form to calculate the amount of salt you eat, and any excess will be taken from your ration next month...
Don't be absurd. Everyone KNOWS its ALWAYS been a ration of 4 ounces of chocolate. Double plus good! See you at the 2 Minute Hate! Down with Goldberg!
^_^
Posted by: Brooklyn Red Leg at February 16, 2008 5:06 PM
Oops...Goldstein, I meant Goldstein! No, please, not Room 101!
Posted by: Brooklyn Red Leg at February 16, 2008 5:07 PM
I see, get a license from the state to smoke; in other words this is precedent that there are no rights, only privileges granted by government.
Kristy first they take away cigarettes, but that's okay you don't smoke. Then they take away your right to eat what you want, but that's okay you eat right anyway and like the government menu. They'll get to you too Kristy. All in good time. The precedent is set. You no longer have rights, only privileges granted by government. This isn't about smoking. This isn't about eating. Are you free to live your life or are you not free? Personally, I'm willing to fight for my freedom. Some people have never even discovered theirs.
Posted by: Kevin at February 16, 2008 7:22 PM
Come on guys, Big Brother loves us and is just doing this for our own good.
For real though, was Orwell a psychic or something, or just plain genius? Did anyone see him in a heavily modified Delorean?
It looks like the UK is using 1984 as a how-to manual instead of a warning...
Posted by: Harris at February 16, 2008 7:58 PM
You can pry my cigar from my cold, dead fingers.
Posted by: Jimbo at February 16, 2008 8:24 PM
The other point here is that once all smokers are registered with the government, it means they're all nicely visible. It'll then be easy to start excluding them from e.g. healthcare, benefits, and so on, and to target which of them have children (for removal by the state) etc. All your victims on a nice database. They love databases, New Labour.
Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at February 16, 2008 10:58 PM
This seriously reminds me of that craptacular Stallone movie, "Demolition Man." Dennis Leary was awesome in it, though.
Posted by: CO of Fort Housewife at February 17, 2008 11:06 AM
Posted by: V the K at February 17, 2008 12:27 PM
I actually just dreamed about this. I was in my local shop trying to buy a bottle of water, but I had to show them a licence. All the newspapers were locked away in a glass cabinet and I knew this was so that only some people were allowed to read them/ buy them. Their headlines were about global warming, and it was snowing outside. The shop seemed to be like a soviet greengrocers, with a few dusty, mouldy vegetables sparsely populating the shelves. Finally I got the bottle of water, but I couldn't get it to light. Then thankfully I woke up.
Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at February 17, 2008 3:11 PM
hi Why does the government have to put a law on everything people want to do. Its garbage and pretty soon everybody is going to be zombies and can't do want they might enjoy.
I know it won't change.... haha
Posted by: Andy at February 17, 2008 8:19 PM
Fuck you President Bush your a complete asshole
Why should you have to ban something that is legal for centries. I could careless if anybody smokes in there vechicle. Besides its not harming anybody look at the polution from all the other stuff and crimes out there. Take a fucking Pill and go back and look at what has already happend. People are going to still smoke and why the hell should you have to register a fucking cigarette. Bull SHIT!
Posted by: Andy at February 17, 2008 8:24 PM
So why is Andy railing at Bush as if he were a Liberal Socialist Democrat bureauweenie who wants to state-run everything?
I could care less if a person wants to destroy their health. But they have NO right to destroy MINE. These smokers stand outside of buildings, puffing away on their cancer sticks while the rest of us have to breathe it in as we walk by.
Apparently, someone hasn't stood outside at rush hour anytime in the past 50 years.
Posted by: BUUUUURRRRNING HOT at February 17, 2008 11:51 PM
Kristy, learn English. I believe that you meant to type "I could NOT care less."
Posted by: Jim Bowie at The Alamo at February 20, 2008 3:31 PM

