The bully state in action
Wednesday, December 2, 2009 Earlier today I gave a short interview to BBC Radio London in response to a new initiative by the City of London Corporation to crack down on cigarette litter. Full story HERE.
As ever I made the point that while Forest doesn't condone littering, we don't understand why smokers should be singled out for fines and possible prosecution. Litter comes in many forms and includes chewing gum, sweet wrappers, newspapers, promotional literature etc etc.
If local authorities really want to reduce cigarette litter they ought to lobby government to amend the smoking ban to allow people to smoke indoors in designated rooms.
Anyway, I was walking back to my office in Soho (where smokers seems to outnumber non-smokers) when I passed a pub that had a number of cigarette bins on the wall.
Closer inspection revealed them to be property of Adbins, "a new unique and innovative product designed to benefit business owners throughout the UK since the introduction of the smoking ban".
Apparently there are 14,000 Adbins across 6,500 locations in Greater London and the number is growing daily (but not in the City of London, I'd hazard a guess).
It's a good idea but the problem is this: a lot of local authorities are reluctant to give planning permission for cigarette bins (nor will they pay for them to be erected on lamp posts or elsewhere) because they fear cigarette bins would "normalise" smoking - and we all know that it is official government policy to denormalise smoking.
Instead, they prefer to hire a small army of "street environment officers" with a view to fining smokers and prosecuting local businesses.
A prime example, I think you will agree, of the bully state in action.
Reader Comments (38)
As I've said before, given the choice between a street cleaner and an enforcer, the authorities will go with the enforcer every time. It is indeed a bully state.
The thing about Adbins is that the advertising demographic is limited to 'smokers'. And the only people who want to advertise purely to smokers are anti-smoking groups, hence:
http://www.ibelieveinadv.com/2008/05/quit-anti-smoking-charity-x-ray-lungs/
Snowdon, I cannot see why you should think that the advertising demographic of these bins is limited to 'smokers' ? After all, we see advertising at bus stops, which we all take some sort of notice of, whether we use busses or not. We see it on taxis, on aircraft, in newspapers, magazines and TV. No one has to use any of these forms of media to be aware and informed by these ads.
I would like to suggest Forest taking out advertising space on a number of these bins, advertising the Forest website, and "Amend the Smoking Ban.com" This would be perfectly legal, as no tobacco products would be advertised, just an information service.
How about it Simon, what do you think?
....and now for the good news. At ConservativeHome those national treasures the Tax Payers Alliance have just called for all government monies to be withdrawn from ASH. I'll drink to that, albeit a small one.
"Twenty-five taxpayer-funded groups that should lose their welfare cheques.
By Matt Sinclair of The TaxPayers' Alliance.
Campaigns for health policy and lifestyle changes
•Alcohol Concern - £515,000
•Sustain - £380,508
•National Heart Forum - £315,000
•Action on Smoking and Health - £191,000
•Living Streets - £150,000
•Family Planning Association (fpa) - £130,000
•Alliance House Foundation and the Institute for Alcohol Studies - £76,236
•Consensus Action on Salt and Health - £23,500"
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/leftwatch/2009/12/twentyfive-taxpayerfunded-groups-that-should-lose-their-welfare-cheques.html
As a follow up to my idea about Forest advertising on these cigarette butt bins.
I would like to see a much narrower transparent section in the middle (than what Quit are using) so you can see a single line of discarded cigarette ends inside the bin. A graph beside the transparent section, would show you how much the Government is grabbing from the smoker for each cigarette that is smoked.
An excellent idea, Peter IMO. What delicious irony: HMG denied their denormalisation and, of course, their fines by provision of bins that publicise resistance.
How much clout does the TPA have, Dave? How wonderful if enough to cut off ASH's blood supply (unless they can persuade Pharma to cough up).
Don't worry. There's already a "scientific study" done by the San Francisco, CA, USA government that "proves" cig-ends represent 25% to 50% of all street litter by volume, regardless of the fact the sheer logic of placing a crumpled paper cup, tin can or sheet of newspaper next to a cig-end would require thousands of cig-ends to equal the volume of just one crushed large piece of paper, let alone other massive quantities of litter items strewn into the streets.
And from this "scientific study" the one thing not concluded was that public ashtrays be placed in convenient locations. Instead came the conclusion that outdoor smoking must be banned even more so than it was already and a 35-cent per pack of cigs "fee" be collected by local government to help pay for the enormous clean-up costs cig-ends "cause".
(Ironically and what isn't made visible to public perception is the fact the city has instead ramped up recycling requirements at the home level by enforcement by garbage police and by way of $1,000 fines for homeowner negligence - and as a result, added a third category of recyclable, that of table-scraps and food bits. And for that the city added a third fleet and third garbage truck run weekly, thus increasing the cost of garbage collection for the additional day of wages and gasoline required to run that third fleet. On Thanksgiving, a double-time payday for city workers, the city had a fleet of garbage trucks out to pick up green food recyclables, recently added after the 35-cent tobacco "fee" went into effect, and that was to pick up nearly empty green containers - thus what the 35-cent "fee" is really funding, overtime wages and gasoline costs, instead of cig-end sweeping off the streets by street sweepers that ran regularly before the fee and outdoor smoking bans went into effect.)
First you ban it indoors based on false science. Then you go after outdoor smokers encouraging physical violence be taken against them. Then you rig another false study to proclaim cig-ends the source of all trash. Then you ban outdoor smoking. Then you add on another tax but call it a "fee" to remain legal (since local cig-taxes are illegal in the US).
If anyone dares rise above the submissive heads lowered down in obeyance to the dictatorial government, then you first ignore them, then you call them vile names and finally you pull out this "work of science" and wave it around in the air and make a big hot-air speech for the complacent propaganda machine to deliver as the official and final "truth" on the subject - and move on to banning other liberties next.
When that doesn't result in everyone conforming to anti-smoking dictates, in the case of SF emanating out of UCSF from the office of Stanton Glantz and his office-mate Mitch Katz, who is SF Medical Director to the Mayor's Office, then you make tobacco retailing illegal in drug stores - and when that doesn't work you make tobacco retailing require a special business license and then limit the number of licenses to a mere few hundred - until eventually there is no tobacco to be sold in the entire city and county.
I'm certain this is all a prelude to either outdoor smoking bans or else an additional "fee" increase and "too many cig-ends" will be the excuse. It has the flavor of more bans and taxes written all over it.
No, they don't understand the concept of putting out ashtrays in public places. That is not a solution for them. Banning and prohibition is the only thing they will put into law and waste money zealously to defend. Ideology and state power first. Individual, business owner and private property holder freedom of choice and liberty - they do not care about - at all - period.
Even more offensive is the notion that all those non-cig-end heaps of trash blowing around are all items for which trash receptacles abound in plenitude yet the litter was thrown into the street by uncaring people regardless. Yet, for the cig-ends they will not even provide public ashtrays conveniently located indoors and outdoors where people can have access to and use them - in which case the smokers probably would more often use them where-as the litterers of paper, plastic and tin are not currently using the receptacles provided for them.
The government leaders, all "liberal progressive" ideologists and "rubber-stampers" in SF, are aristrocrats after all - pompous, know-it-all's, better than thee's. Smoking must be denormalized, everyone made to conform with the handful at the top who dictate power, because in the case of SF, Mitch Katz and Stanton Glantz simply "say so".
(Mitch Katz is on public record with saying that asbestos flung in the air all over Bayview Hunter's Point, a predominantly poor and black minority neighborhood, from the Hunter Point Naval Shipyard cleanup, for which Katz and Pelosi jimmy-rigged the clean-up contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars to a corporation they were beholding to for political favors, was perfectly harmless, that a little asbestos never hurt anyone - yet SHS is killing everyone and outdoor smoking must be banned.)
It's a disappointment to see the general public react too late and after the intial fact to every draconian ban, rule and liberty taking that affected the large majority, when in fact the whole thing could have been avoided in the first place simply by everyone standing up against bullyism by standing up for the smokers and refusing to accept a smoking ban. Instead, the line between what is private versus what is public has been blurred and private property, business and personal decision making has been taken away by the government.
There are lines in the sand and places where the dictatorial nature of the state rubs up against the concept of free people engaging freely in association with one another however each one sees fit.
That little puff of smoke here and there was actually a symbol of unrepressed freedom - not just for "the smokers" - but for all people.
It goes to that saying about may not like what one has to say, but one certainly will defend that right to say so. Only in this case, smoking was and still is very much a political act and that bit of smoke clouding the air was actually the insurance for everyone else that their rights, freedoms and liberties were secured.
No risks, no freedoms. Until the tipping point of society comes to realize that fact, things will only get worse before if they ever get better.
Anyone who is fighting against the AGW Fraud but fails to see the same pattern of deception inherent in the SHS Fraud is a fool. And anyone claiming to be pro-liberty and anti-fascist/statist but who cannot stand solidly against the smoking bans is a hypocrite.
And fools and hypocrites do not their own battles win.
Blooming heck, David. You certainly know your stuff!
I can feel that 'R' word coming on again, Ann, if you're reading! :)
David -
Thanks for that.
Re:
"Anyone who is fighting against the AGW Fraud but fails to see the same pattern of deception inherent in the SHS Fraud is a fool."
Amen !
Amen !
Amen !
Now, all we have to do is wait for the penny to drop with the other 75% of the population - on BOTH sides of the Pond.
BTW, does ANYONE now seriously believe the comforting National Myth that 'if-the-Germans-had-invaded' etc etc WE would have put up any better resistance than Johnny Foreigner (inc the French) ?
Yeah - I USED to believe it, too.
But I was brought up on Eling Films.............
Jenny, blank spot here, what's the R word.
All that comes to mind after reading David's blog is W for Wankers i.e. Mitch Katz and Stanton Glantz (jesus, glad I dont have to pronounce those names, hard enough to write them) who in my opinion should be transported to Afganistan with the extra 30,000 troops that Obama is shipping out, after promising to withdraw all troops at his election.
Handy for his masters that there's a war in progress so they wont have to start a new one to fill the coffers during this particular recession.
Keep stubbing the butts underfoot is what I say.
Dont get mad get even!!
P.S. Senior moment there Jenney.
Yeah, roll on the Revolution.
How could I forget.
Its the only answer for the nazis in our midsts.
I will be going to the Palace Theatre in Manchester during the next few weeks. Two and a half thousand in the audience, (always full). Are they all non smokers? Well you would think so. There is not even a bin outside the Palace, not even within 100 yards. If you don't take a portable ashtray with you, you are doomed.
Out of curiosity,I googled "Living "Streets". Good to know that the £150,000 of our money goes towards the like of "mince pie calculators" (I have a feeling that this is the mob which addressed the 'problem' of pedestrians injuring themselves because they were too busy texting to look where they were going by suggesting that lamp-posts be bubble-wrapped).
Are these enforcers also going to fine people who drop paper bags, used tissues, newspapers, a kid that accidently drop a sweet or a bag of crisp and a person who drop a chip on the ground? If not for peace sake these enforcers better stay a mile from me as i hate a bully that discriminates, personally with real criminals out there i see this as a waste of time and money.
Just a thought (while the Black Shirts still allow it):
Suppose we persuade the Tobacco Companies to recruit DEBORAH ARNOTT to become THEIR spokesman - at (say) double her current salary ?
What's the betting that - within a very short period - Public, Politicians, and Various Healthcare professionals would suddenly discover that:
a) Medical and social ADVANTAGES to Tobacco-use (though more research needs to be done) have NOT been sufficiently considered.
b) Much of the 'science' supporting the Ban is, in fact, DEEPLY FLAWED, whilst much of the science undermining it has been suppressed (various e-mails suddenly coming to light).
c) Good Health is in any case but ONE measure of a Civilised Society ?
I reckon £250K should do it.
It'd be cheap at the price, too.
Must dash: ROGER HARRABIN is just doing a piece on R4 about Population Growth, Carbon Emissions, and Contraception - and I wouldn't want to miss THAT.....................
Happy Days !
I thought this thread was supposed to be about fag-bins? One person (Peter T) spoke about them and came up with a great idea and what happens? Sod-all.
One minute Simon Clarke is saying you mustn't change the subject and you mustn't write great big posts and then this happens. We have one post that is as long as the Gettysberg Address, and all the rest babbling on about worthless trivia.
OK so I am new on here and you can all shout me down if you want, but I think we should ALL stick to the rules and start shouting for positive action like Peter T suggests. If we dont we might as well all go home and climb back into bed now!
I support wholeheartedly what Peter Thurgood suggests - this is an excellent idea.
Ataloss - don't be so dismissive of what other people write about. The point I was making (cf. the 'R' word) was that if people are generally bullied continually and their lives are made increasingly miserable, eventually the worm will turn. I'll climb back into bed now, as obviously nothing will happen today! :)
Instead of x-ray lung cigarette bins, how about x-ray anti-smokers head doggie poo bins?...
Ataloss -
"Co-existence on this tightly-knit Earth should be viewed as an existence not only without wars....but also without (the Government) telling us how to LIVE, what to SAY, what to THINK, what to KNOW, and what NOT TO KNOW."
(Alexandr Solzhenitsyn - September 11th 1973)
If more people read (or remembered) Solzhenitsyn, we wouldn't NEED a thread on MOST of the topics on this site - including Privatised Fag-Bin Denormalisation Methodology, as I imagine we must come to call it.....................
Martin, I dont make the rules on here. I only obey them.
"Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men."
(Douglas Bader - pipe-smoker)
I'm sure YOU are no fool, Ataloss...............
You're right Ataloss. Anyway, about the match last night ...
Ataloss,
Yes, keep to the point, but the point of the 'adbins' thing is not only the adbins themselves but also the wider connotations. While we talk about these things, we can also have some fun, can't we? Surely, while we are fulminating about the ban, we can have some fun? Isn't that, and will it not always be (Nanny State permitting), the epitome of our English (well - Northern English) humour?
I won't post anymore. Sorry the issue of smoking litter in other areas and what it resulted in, namely outdoor smoking bans and additional cig taxes came to mind just then and I blurted it out as a warning of what's possibly being planned in the future or as knee-jerk reaction of it making my blood boil knowing they are starting it up somewhere else now. It's just that we've already had that phase of it blow through and I was trying to relay what resulted, what their intentions seemed to be. Anti-smoking does have a lot of money at their disposal and they do work internationally with full support of every fake charity on every continent and support of the UN. So I thought it may have been relevant, but perhaps not. Good luck and hope there are no outdoor smoking bans being planned using cig-ends as their excuse this time, as they have over here.
David,
What are you upset about? Is it Ataloss's statement that we should stick to the point, or, possibly, his mention of 'one post that is as long as the Gettysburg address'?
Please don't be so thin-skinned'! Your comments from across the pond are valued.
Sure, we smokers have more to put up with before this thing is done. But, eventually, the law of diminishing returns will kick in and someone with sense in government will say, "Why are we wasting millions and millions of pounds on 'environmental officers' when all we need is a few, small bins here and there?" The zealots will have no answer to that since it is a clear and simple matter of fact and has nothing to do with 'perceptions'.
But it will take time as will the repeal of the smoking ban and all the other 'nanny state/bully state' bans.
Keep on posting. The more that we cross-fertilise the better.
Planning permission? For aa astray? That says it all really. Interfering, overbearing and bullying, a picture of the State and it's overpaid, over empowered enforcers and other hangers on. The trouble is that nothing will change should Cameron win the next election. It'll probably get worse as the Tories involve themselves in an orgy of lawmaking, banning and fining to compensate for the last 12 years. I suppose the best we can hope for is a hung parliament which might be the only way to curb the corrupt, thieving zealots for a while.
Sticking to the point is often boring.
Simon Thomas said, " I suppose the best we can hope for is a hung parliament....." - spot on -string'em up and hang the lot of them - preferably as baubles on some huge Christmas Trees (but elf n'safety wouldn't permit it!)
David's spot on re: outdoor bans and like parking enforcement officers etc. smokers outside will make easy targets for fines. Councils are pretty skint and need easy ways of making money, so what David has written to me makes sense.
As for fag bins - what they really want to do is put all tobacco smokers into a huge landfill site (an enormous fag bin) and then bury us.
I still think Peter Thurgood's original idea is exceptionally good :)
Junican, I wasn't personally having a go at David about his "Gettysburg address" post. And it isn't my idea that we should all stick to the point and not post over-long posts, it is Simon's.
As I said before I have only been using this site for a short while but I have seen Simon complaining on several occasions that he will remove any post that is too long or strays off-line.
IF this is the rule then lets all stick to it, but it only seems to be the rule SOMETIMES, when Simon fancies it being so. I wish he would clear it up once and for all, so we all know what to do?
David -
Please do NOT go !
We ALL need each other (and I ain't bein' sentimental).
BTW, the Gettysburg Address - with its promise of "a NEW BIRTH of FREEDOM" - would fit in nicely on this site.
Especially since it's only 278 words long............
Hope it wasnt me that offended David with my rant about Obama.
But if we dont keep things light at times, with regard to the further serious encroachment suggested by worse bully/demons than ours in America like David pointed out, I would be afraid we might all go mad.
As america was the first to bring in the smoking ban I'm afraid they can only get worse, I even heard that some states are considering going smoke free, if not already!
Thats why I hope there will be a hung parliament in the next election.
Absolute bloody chaos couldnt be much worse than what we'e putting up with now.
At least it might give the stasis in govt something to occupy their empty minds instead of cigarette butts!
"Dont get mad get even!!"
Or a GUN, Ann.
We might just be getting to THAT stage sooner than one would wish.
And I'm only HALF-joking......................
(Do you READ me, Cheltenham ?)
Martin, I dont make the rules on here. I only obey them.
Rules are there to be broken. And I've poked fun at this 'rule' before.
David's post was the only truly memorable one on this thread, as far as I'm concerned. If Simon Clark hadn't liked it, he'd have snipped it. But he didn't. Simon makes up rules, and he enforces them as he sees fit. I'll leave him to do whatever he likes.
To be quite honest, I don't know why Simon wants people to limit the length of anyone's comments. Can't be bothered to read them all? But if he really does want this, why doesn't he physically limit the number of characters permitted in a comment box to 500 or whatever it was? Or is it that squarespace doesn't include such an option, and so he has to appeal to commenters to restrain themselves instead?
Anyway, Ataloss is clearly a horrid little jobsworth who can't even conceive of bending any rules let alone breaking them.
I thought the 'Gettysberg Address' crack was very funny though.
No offence David.
Thanks for your vote of confidence Idlex. If you was half as clever as you seem to think you are, you would have seen my follow up to my original post, and you would have also seen that I was objecting to Simon's policing of this site and making up rules as he goes along for whoever he does or does not like that particular day.
Instead of knocking me why don't you come up with something worthwhile which will help people on here?
My advice to people on here is: carry on smoking.
Good enough?
It's a good question, though, isn't it? Why are we on this site, after all we're all united against the ban. Do we just want a moan every time Simon confirms that the antis want more?
I think that the reason I'm here is displacement from the life I once had! It's the virtual equivalent of standing outside the pub. For that reason I don't mind going off-topic - it's a more natural 'conversation'.
Of course it's. a more natural conversation.
And I somehow doubt that Simon Clark wishes us all to stand facing him, as if in church, uttering perfunctory amens to his every word, with no talking in the pews.
Or perhaps he would? Ataloss certainly seems to think that's how it should be, and he seems to know better than everyone else, somehow or other.