The law is an ass.

And some ppl are just too damned nosy imo.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1216220/Mothers-banned-looking-children.html

Where's the harm in it is what i say.

well common sense is rapidly becoming a thing of the past micky

nothing a big gun and a veeeeeeeeeery long wall couln't fix though

Joshua wrote:well common sense is rapidly becoming a thing of the past micky

nothing a big gun and a veeeeeeeeeery long wall couln't fix though

Norty Josh lol, but true.

WHAT......Women have always come to these sorts of arrangments. I did it with a friend and neighbour.

Why would the law make it harder for a mother to earn a bit of money, so they can self support. Its crazy.

Also, is,nt it a shame that there are such nosy interfering people around. Someone reported them in the first place.

These unqualified people in suits telling us we cant do this that or the other ...they are the equivelent of our Taliban me thinks.

jack wrote:These unqualified people in suits telling us we cant do this that or the other ...they are the equivelent of our Taliban me thinks.

the penalty for disobedience isn't quite so harsh as the taliban's though

Joshua wrote:

jack wrote:These unqualified people in suits telling us we cant do this that or the other ...they are the equivelent of our Taliban me thinks.

the penalty for disobedience isn't quite so harsh as the taliban's though

Yeah our penalty is living under Tory or Neo Tory rule

Joshua wrote:

jack wrote:These unqualified people in suits telling us we cant do this that or the other ...they are the equivelent of our Taliban me thinks.

the penalty for disobedience isn't quite so harsh as the taliban's though

Thats debatable Josh with some things.
I'm not very well today and just need to relax and chill.
I'm having a couple glasses of whiskey ...acceptable ...and smoking flowers ...imprisonable offence.
I'm sat in the privacy of my own home talking to you on the web and could be thrown in a cockroach infested lunatic assylum for whats in my ashtray.
I call that pretty harsh and totally imoral.

Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

Syl wrote:Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

Nanny state is a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Opponents of such policies use the term in their advocacy against what they consider as uninvited and damaging state meddling.

Shame the 'nanny state' saves so many lives each year, isn't it?

Old_Punk wrote:

[img]http://thespa2.forumotion.net/users/53/45/07/smiles/513194.gif[/img] wrote:Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

Nanny state is a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Opponents of such policies use the term in their advocacy against what they consider as uninvited and damaging state meddling.

Shame the 'nanny state' saves so many lives each year, isn't it?

Are you speaking English?

I am using the term "nanny state" as it is more commonly used. ie...to dictate to the man in the street, errr you and me, how to live our lives.
But I think you knew that, OP.

The attempt is to protect children.

Syl wrote:Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

i'M LUCKY TO BE LIVING IN nORTH wALES WHERE THE POLICE ARE VERY ENLIGHTENED REGARDING PERSONAL USE. OoPs cApS lOcK.
Theres even a cannabis cafe in Rhyl though the general public wouldn't know it.
It has operated for a number of years now with the blessing of the local health authority and police.
Medicinal supplies only with a doctores letter.
Grown localy.

jack wrote:

[img]http://thespa2.forumotion.net/users/53/45/07/smiles/513194.gif[/img] wrote:Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

i'M LUCKY TO BE LIVING IN nORTH wALES WHERE THE POLICE ARE VERY ENLIGHTENED REGARDING PERSONAL USE. OoPs cApS lOcK.
Theres even a cannabis cafe in Rhyl though the general public wouldn't know it.
It has operated for a number of years now with the blessing of the local health authority and police.
Medicinal supplies only with a doctores letter.
Grown localy.

I did,nt know that Jack. It has the "blessing" of the police?, but it cant be legal, can it?

Whatever, it sounds like a very enlightening place to go, if pot helps with pain.

how many children die in car accidents every year?

surely the safety of children is paramount - so why don't we ban cars altogether or at least have a 15mph national speed limit?

answers on a postcard please

Syl wrote:

jack wrote:.

I did,nt know that Jack. It has the "blessing" of the police?, but it cant be legal, can it?

.

The police know of its existence and have done for years.
They also know that people can only get cannabis there with a doctors letter so have said nothing and made no attempt to arrest the man who grows it ...out here in the hills and he has been very open about it.
So the police have kind of turned a blind eye to it.

Joshua wrote:how many children die in car accidents every year?

surely the safety of children is paramount - so why don't we ban cars altogether or at least have a 15mph national speed limit?

answers on a postcard please

Outside towns the speed limit could be a little higher.

Vilipend wrote:

Joshua wrote:how many children die in car accidents every year?

surely the safety of children is paramount - so why don't we ban cars altogether or at least have a 15mph national speed limit?

answers on a postcard please

Outside towns the speed limit could be a little higher.

wreckless vili

Syl wrote:

Old_Punk wrote:

[img]http://thespa2.forumotion.net/users/53/45/07/smiles/513194.gif[/img] wrote:Lets hope there is'nt some interfering sado peeping through your window then Jack. Its these little hitlers, that enable this nanny state to keep dictating to the man in the street, how to best run/ruin their lives.

Nanny state is a term that refers to state protectionism, economic interventionism, or regulatory policies (of economic, social or other nature), and the perception that these policies are becoming institutionalized as common practice. Opponents of such policies use the term in their advocacy against what they consider as uninvited and damaging state meddling.

Shame the 'nanny state' saves so many lives each year, isn't it?

Are you speaking English?

I am using the term "nanny state" as it is more commonly used. ie...to dictate to the man in the street, errr you and me, how to live our lives.
But I think you knew that, OP.

Nanny state was first used in the USA by right wing lobby groups like CCF (Centre for Consumer Freedom) to belittle the state's attempt to reduce death by smoking, drinking, etc. The term then was picked up by right wing media outlets to pour disdain over certain policies, which would also saves lives, reduce injuries etc.

If you dont want the state to save people's lives then vote for the only two political parties that hates it and actively would ban any nanny state policies.

To reckon we have a nanny state is incredibly ridiculous when our state allows smoking, which kills many hundreds of thousands and drinking which kills more.

We will have to agree to disagree then here, OP.
I think its getting more and more obvious, that this Country IS being turned into a "nanny state"
Some councils employ people to check your rubbish, FGS. Posters are stuck on bill boards, encouraging people to ring this number, to report their neighbours if they are doing this that or the other.

What happened to knocking on someones door, to tell them face to face?

Re this story, what was wrong with the arrangment these two women had? Why dont they have the right to sort out their own arrangments, in a responsible way? Why does the Government think it knows whats best for other people children? Why dont they concentrate on running the country. Why dont they just basically mind their own bleedin business?

It is preferable imo., to have rules for the common good. I suppose it's about balance in the end.
I don't see why some people needn't recycle?
I don't see what's bad about having checks on carers of children when it's regular and out of the family home, or in it for that matter. Often S yl, leaving child rearing entirely to the parents, with no control of law, would lead to all sorts! and as it is when something goes wrong the 'authorities' are blamed.
Some countries don't have government interference, or any worthwhile democratic government to speak of, the people in 'power' don't care, or give a damn about their populace as far as I can see; I'd detest that way of life.
We are our brothers keeper.

This state has rules, which could be seen as nanny state ones but these are very few in the context of national legislation.

If you are denying that right wing lobby groups dont exist or call rules/laws, which reduce the amount of their toxic products to be consumed then you have a very poor understanding of the way the economy works. Here are some links which prove I am corect.

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=SourceWatch

SW is a massive database of 'nanny state' stories trotted out by the right to help them sell more alcohol, tobacco, guns etc.

SourceWatch is a collaborative project of the Center for Media and Democracy to produce a directory of the people, organizations and issues shaping the public agenda. A primary purpose of SourceWatch is documenting the PR and propaganda activities of public relations firms and public relations professionals engaged in managing and manipulating public perception, opinion and policy.

http://www.prwatch.org/

focuses on the lies PR companies put out, which are reported as fact by the media, which people then believe as true because they believe newspaper articles/comment as fact.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Portal:Tobacco

TobaccoWiki has many documents from tobacco companies etc and their lies about nanny state policies - policies which would save millions of people, which the tobacco industry doesn't want to be adopted. So they try to shoot the messenger. Like the Smoking Ban they went ballistic but no matter how much they lied and lied they couldn't overcome the medical truth. Still the media reported their lies as fact and people still believe these lying facts.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Propaganda_techniques

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Public_relations_firms

Have a read. It will defo change your perceptions of nanny state, that is unless you still believe the lies that the media has spread.

In which case there is no hope for you

Tytonidae wrote:It is preferable imo., to have rules for the common good. I suppose it's about balance in the end.
I don't see why some people needn't recycle?
I don't see what's bad about having checks on carers of children when it's regular and out of the family home, or in it for that matter. Often S yl, leaving child rearing entirely to the parents, with no control of law, would lead to all sorts! and as it is when something goes wrong the 'authorities' are blamed.
Some countries don't have government interference, or any worthwhile democratic government to speak of, the people in 'power' don't care, or give a damn about their populace as far as I can see; I'd detest that way of life.
We are our brothers keeper.

Exactly, but the Right always see as it is there prorogative to do anything they want, whatever the consequences. If you are against fucking the planet, or killing people en masse big time you are for a nanny state. Simples.

I agree Old_Punk.

Nanny State Cracks Down on Baby-Sitters

You might expect that the union-run, moonbat-infested state of Michigan with its 15% unemployment rate and a $1.6 Billion deficit would have better things to do than harass people for babysitting other people's children. You would be wrong.

A West Michigan woman says the state is threatening her with fines and possibly jail time for babysitting her neighbors' children.
Lisa Snyder of Middleville says her neighborhood school bus stop is right in front of her home. It arrives after her neighbors need to be at work, so she watches three of their children for 15-40 minutes until the bus comes.
The Department of Human Services received a complaint that Snyder was operating an illegal child care home. DHS contacted Snyder and told her to get licensed, stop watching her neighbors' kids, or face the consequences.
This is not an aberration, this is exactly how a fully functioning welfare state functions. To the socialist nanny state, there is no human activity that is "none of the state's business." The entire operating theory behind the welfare state is that personal judgment is irrelevant, and only busybody bureaucrats are capable of deciding such things as who can watch over your children.