| Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites. |
| Reluctant Hero |
New smoking lawsThe laws in this country are ridiculous. Like one of the comments said, you can drive a car, have sex, join the army, even get married before you are 18, but now you can't smoke.Don't get me wrong, I don't smoke so would prefer it if no-one did, but how you can turn round to a 17 year old who has been somking legally until yesterday, that he can't smoke anymore is stupid. I am yet to be convinced that raising the age limit will have any effect especially since it was saying that 9% of 11 to 15 year olds smoke. Think it also raises a qusetion that has probably been around forever. When does a child become an adult? 16, 17, 18 or 21? Whichever it is, should the laws regarding sex, smoking etc not all be the same? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7021320.stm |
||||||
| agentmancuso |
I agree entirely. | ||||||
| The Lithgae Jambo |
Re: New smoking laws
It's not the first time that what was legal one day isn't the next and just because there's an age element in it, the principle is the same. Isn't the rationale behind the law just to make it easier for tobacconists to determine who is of smoking age ? |
||||||
| agentmancuso |
Re: New smoking laws
Making things easier for shopkeepers seems like a feeble reason to enact legislation. Why is it easier to prove someone is 18 then it is to prove they are 16? |
||||||
| The Lithgae Jambo |
Re: New smoking laws
it's not so much about proof and more about the assessment of who is legally entitled to buy fags. In general, a 14/15 year old won't look too much different from a 16 year old but will look substantially younger than an 18 year old. |
||||||
| agentmancuso |
That's an interesting idea, but it's a very subjective way of enforcing legislation. Surely it's better that the vendor ask for proof of age if there is any doubt? | ||||||
| Cymro |
It probably does make it easier. People who are 18 are morel likely to carry an ID when they are 18 than when they are 16 - I certainly was. | ||||||
| Aventinian |
Should we really be so concerned if a few youngsters get a hold of a cigarette or drink?
I took up smoking while I was at university, so that wasn't really relevant to me, but it would have been a funny, and terrifically less fun, last couple of years at school if we hadn't been able to get our hands on some illicit alcoholic contraband. I'm rather inclined towards the view that we worry far too much about children nowadays, at the expense of their happiness and all-round development. |
||||||
| SLG |
Yes, smoking is one of the biggest public health issues that affect the country.
I don't think that kind of drinking or smoking is the issue. Kids starting smoking heavily at a very early age where they are likely to pick up the habbit for life, is a serious issue. As is kids drinking heavily and regulary at an age where it can do them serious long term damage, as well has have very negative social consequences for communities.
Well, I can agree with that on some issues, but not on this. I think the "all-round development" of many kids is being stunted by excessive alcohol and drug use. |
||||||
| mairead |
Kids have to be 18 to be able to legally buy alcohol, but they still get their hands on it, and they will continue to lay their hands on cigarettes too. | ||||||
| Dave Coull |
Changing the legal limits on something does tend to have an effect. For instance, if the legal driving speed limit is 40, I may drive at 45 because I know that in practice I can get away with that, but if the legal driving speed limit is 30, then I may drive at 35 knowing that in practice I can get away with that. In both cases I would, strictly speaking, be breaking the law, by exceeding the speed limit by 5 miles per hour, and in both cases I would know I can get away with that, yet there would be a real difference of 10 miles per hour in my driving speed. This real effect on my driving speed is achieved by me not wanting to lose my license to drive. Reluctant Hero wrote "I am yet to be convinced that raising the age limit will have any effect" - as I understand it (and no doubt somebody will provide a correction if this is wrong) it isn't the act of smoking which has been made illegal, but the act of selling cigarettes. In other words, it is aimed at the drug dealers, not the addicts they supply. And yes, raising the age limit by two years will have an obvious effect on the dealers, because they won't want to lose their license to sell. They will probably still sell to some who are under age but instead of saying they thought a 15 year old looked 16 they will be saying a 17 year old looked 18. So the effect really will be to raise the age at which the drug dealers will sell cigarettes by 2 years. | ||||||
| mairead |
Hey Dave,
Don't drive at 5 miles over the limit in Manchester. My hubby got a ticket and automatic fine of £60, when he was flashed by a camera doing 34 in a 30 limit. I have to say he got no sympathy from me. However you look at it, he was over the speed limit and in breach of the law. Not only that, but as he was in Dubai by the time the fine came through, it was ME who had to pay the damn fine. |
||||||
| Dave Coull |
One of the dafter aspects of devolution is that speeds are a Westminster matter, but distances are a Holyrood matter. So, theoretically, the UK could go metric, and have "40 kmh" speedlimit signs, while we could still have "Edinburgh 43miles" road distance signs. On the other hand, Holyrood could decide to go metric, and we could have "Glasgow 62 kilometres" road distance signs, with speed limit signs still in miles per hour.
Mairead wrote "Hey Dave, Don't drive at 5 miles over the limit in Manchester. My hubby got a ticket and automatic fine of £60" Well, I've had fines, and I don't expect any sympathy, as I note your husband got none! Being on a low income I could ill afford them, but what is even worse is the topping up of points which leads to losing your licence. I think THAT has a very real effect on the behaviour of drivers, even the rich ones, who are not deterred by fines. "when he was flashed by a camera doing 34 in a 30 limit". I don't think that's a difference between Scotland and England, I think it's just a local variation in how strictly the law is applied. We all know that there are such local variations. Nevertheless, the same general principle applies, whether we are talking about speed limits or the age at which cigarettes can legally be sold. There is a certain amount of leeway about strictness of application, and there is local variation in this, but, nevertheless, the _general_ effect of a variation of 10mph in speed limits is that there really is a difference in how fast folk drive, because they are afraid of losing their licences; and the _general_ effect of a variation of 2 years in the age limit at which cigarettes can legally be sold is that there really is a change in the behaviour of the drug dealers, because they don't want to lose their license to sell these drugs. |
||||||