Next it will be 4x4s,protest marches,fishingand any one that is not "PC". Long live free speach and personal choice,treat the people of GB as adults and do not patronise them.
2007-01-16 08:25:44 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think the word regulate should be changed to control because of the way it is used in Britian
2007-01-16 08:47:20 · update #1
they are trying to do the same here in the U.S., using Great Britain,Australia and Canada as models for turning law abiding citizens into sheeple.the sad fact is,when you start to surrender your rights,there usually is no stopping the domino effect.
I am against it at all costs! instead of effecting new bans "for our own good",the laws which are already on the books should be more strictly enforced.
2007-01-16 08:33:23 · answer #1 · answered by slabsidebass 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well, I don't know if I can cheer you up, but the answer is that you are the government. Government is nothing more than the will of all the people for the common good - at least in a democracy it is. If you are voting responsibly, staying informed and doing your best to give civic input when possible or necessary, you are perpetuating good government. Yes, we pay a ton of taxes. I've been through your experience twice in the last couple of years and I can't say it made me very happy either. But in the end, if we want a prosperous nation, with good infrastructure, sound military and homeland security, disaster preparedness, low crime rates, no one homeless or without healthcare and education for our kids and care for our elderly, taxes are necessary. The utility rates are another story. Those folks are just greedy. I'm ready to try solar and geothermal. It may cost a lot, but at least my family won't be so vunerable to the whims of the moguls at the power company.
2016-05-25 03:05:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not an American, I'm a Brit and I certainly would ban all smoking guns.
Fishing and marshes? Yeah, drain them and turn them into housing tracts.
And as for 4x4s, do you mean those 'post-it' notes? Cos I sure would like to get rid of them too. Damn yellow things. I should have the right to forget if I want to! Yeah!
.
2007-01-16 23:51:57 · answer #3 · answered by Nobody 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The US has been banning smoking in public areas for years. The can't make it illegal to smoke but they can sure tax the devil out of it. They won't stop the hunting here nor would be be foolish enough to infringe on our 2ND amendment rights to the constitution. We are a large country of 300 million, so reining us in will not be so easy.
2007-01-16 08:34:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't smoke, so my opinion on the smoking issue is going to be biased. I don't enjoy breathing in smoke. I think that people who want to smoke, have that right, they just shouldn't make me breath it in.
Hunting is a sport. Again, it is one that I don't indulge in. I have nothing against hunting. The idea that hunting should be banned strikes me as arbitrary. Suppose we banned motorcycles, or golf or digital cameras? What would be the benefit? A lot of people will be negatively affected.
When it comes to hand guns, now you have my attention. In the US, our politicians are public servants. Occasionally, they need that fact brought to their attention. I think if they ever tried to ban hand guns here, they would have a problem on their hands. Who would enforce it?
A lot of Americans dislike politicians in general. We know that they lie. We know that most of them are criminals. So you can imagine how gun owners would see an attempt by these people to disarm us.
There is a difference between Americans and Europeans. We are not in awe of government. We tolerate it, because it is a necessary evil. But we are not about to allow it to rule us.
2007-01-16 08:36:56 · answer #5 · answered by iraqisax 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Now you know what happens when people don`t vote or be politically active. I am a Liberal non-smoker and I disagree with smoking bands. I think they should leave it up to the restaurant or bar owners and put air restrictions inside the buildings if they allow smoking instead.
2007-01-16 08:39:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I think we should ban ALL cars, don't you? I mean, they use gas - which is a problem; create smog - another problem; cause car accidents - sometimes fatal; you have to pave roads - more taxes and waste . . . really, think of all the problems it would solve.
By the way, I'm being TOTALLY SARCASTIC - I love my car and live an hour's drive from where I work!!! :-)
The US is heading towards MORE regulation - THAT'S a problem!
Best of luck!
2007-01-16 08:36:43 · answer #7 · answered by tigglys 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
If you are Canadian, you should know that smoking has not been banned in Canada, and probably never will be. Laws have been made to protect those who choose not to smoke, and would rather not die of emphysema from other people's second hand smoke. So you can not smoke in public indoor places.
If people were allowed to smoke in public indoor places, that would be like banning the breathing of clean air, and I would object to that curtailment of my freedom.
EDIT:
It should at least be as difficult to own a gun as it is to own a car and a drivers' license.
2007-01-16 08:35:49 · answer #8 · answered by Mr Ed 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I'm for the banning of all smoking in public places. However, if you want to smoke privately or outside, then go for it! It isn't the government's right ton control what you do to your body. Same goes for pot and alcohol (ironically, pot is less harmful than alcohol, yet it's illegal).
2007-01-16 09:13:23 · answer #9 · answered by Michael V 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
In the US you MUST wear a seat belt when you drive. I kinda thought that was my choice.
Anyway, the issue isn't what is banned or regulated, but why do we, the citizens, let it happen?
2007-01-16 08:31:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋