New Zealand set to ban smoking

a reply to: shooterbrody

The masks ban smiling. I had a pretty girl at the bank serve me to today, I think she was pretty as most of her face was covered in a mask. I asked her for a bank cheque, she said that they did not do them anymore, I said I would take the cash, she said they did not have that amount of cash on hand.I wondered what the # she was getting paid for. As now I will have to go through the long rigmarole of a telephone transfer.. As I don't trust computer banking. You see where all this is heading. Third parties with their own agendas are trying to control our lives, now we have third-party risk, legislated into our lives. In fact we seem to be manipulated more and more by a funless cult.

Or as many scholars have pointed out in the past Vax during pandemic will make it worse. They leak and are only a vax by the new definition that was changed less than 3 years ago.
Give it a rest.
The only person who appears to be enjoying authoritarianism currently running rampart in our world.

a reply to: chr0naut

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut

I thought that we were supposed to be leftist here?

Yeah so did Mussolini.

What will your government outlaw next?
Smiling?
Sending mail?

So, you approve of getting children addicted to cigarette smoking?

I mean, look at the few extra dollars to be made for every human life!

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut

I thought that we were supposed to be leftist here?

Yeah so did Mussolini.

What will your government outlaw next?
Smiling?
Sending mail?

So, you approve of getting children addicted to cigarette smoking?

I mean, look at the few extra dollars to be made for every human life!

Lol children?
Can children legally purchase tobacco in hobbiton today?
Why would you attempt to make this about children?
This appears to be aimed at adults, more specifically attempting to remove their liberty starting at a random date.
You lot are real life logans run prequel.

Next they will make the color blue illegal.

originally posted by: thebtheb
While smoking would not be called a health prescription by anyone, it can also be said that banning it is none of anyone's business. Just as suspected, the current world climate and measures will continue to limit whatever they damn well please, and eventually they will link it to the vax-pass.

So you don't smoke? Good for you! What about drinking? What will happen there? Or smoking weed or anything else the powers that be deem unfit for you to do as a citizen of Prison Planet Earth?

LINK

I am not a smoker and cannot stand being around smokers...BLECH.
However, prohibition never has worked and I believe everyone has a right to smoke if they want. This wont work.

a reply to: anonentity
Ain't that the stinkin truth.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Why would you attempt to make this about children?

Simple. End of the argument.


"It's for the children!" is the oldest form of pressure used to push some sort of authoritarian agenda.

Can we ban government bootlickers? I find them to be rather disgusting, quite frankly.
It seems those who have little control in their own lives have an inherent need to control the lives of others. Its a sociopathic trait. And maybe those are the people who should be kept from society?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: chr0naut
Please NEVER again atrempt to convince me you understand or respect individual freedom in any way.

You and your chosen fascist nation are a pox on the ass of the planet.

I thought that we were supposed to be leftist here?

Now you are saying that they are far right-wing?

Fascism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*sigh* Wikipedia. People still use this as a source? When I was in school getting my degrees, if I had used this as a source, my papers would have been failed.

Do you not understand that far right wing is actually left wing? The further right one goes, they are actually left. And most here on this thread that you attribute to being far right wing are not far right wing at all. In fact, it is you on the left who invented the term far right wing which is hilarious because its just a shoot of of YOUR side. And your side are the actual fascists.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: chr0naut

So, everyone should have a right to do, or say, whatever they damn well like to you? That's liberty?

How does that jibe with your 'security of person' bit?

So you don't understand liberty. Fair enough.

Seems like the further you abstract this "liberty" definition, the worse you come off?

Again, your failure to understand what liberty is, is not my problem. I gave you the literal definition, nothing abstract about it.

You gave a definition of liberty. But once not too long ago, someone who had liberty was someone who was not imprisoned or in forced servitude.

The USA, which has the highest number of incarcerated citizens, both in absolute numbers and per capita, of any country in the world, must have the least liberty (in an actual and measurable sense) of any country in the world.

Anyone who is forced to follow a political line, or social convention, and cannot be allowed to have a dissenting opinion is not at liberty. I.e: following a party line, and decrying those that don't, is not liberty.

A few points here.
Yes, our criminal justice system here needs a MAJOR overhaul. Most on both sides would agree to this. But not agree to how it should be done. People who do bad things to other people should be incarcerated and a lot of that is happening from the elite to the nobodies.

And yes, there are a lot of people locked up that probably should not be. There are also a LOT who are not locked up that should be. It goes both ways.

But lets get something corrected.......nobody has been FORCED to follow a party line until recently.

Until recently, people were NOT being incarcerated for political reasons. It was only on Jan 6th that people were locked up for political reasons. There is a ware on conservatives right now. People were not being locked up because they were Obama or Hillary supporters.

Until recently, there were not American political prisoners on US soil.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Just so I am not talking through my ass, check out some research data and ask yourself in whose interest is anti-smoking being pushed? www.sott.net...

There was a thread a couple of weeks ago titled China bars celebrities from showing off wealth and 'extravagant pleasure' on social media. I'll quote what I posted in that thread here because it's extremely relevant to this discussion. It's ultimately about liberty vs authoritarianism but so many people can't see that because they allow emotions to control them.

originally posted by: ChaoticOrder

Hiding wealth inequality doesn't make it stop existing. It doesn't make their economy any more socialist, it simply hides how heavily they still rely on capitalism and global trade. Sure, many of the stupid laws China enforces may help with "social stability", but those laws also suck all the fun and freedom out of living. This is the exact same reason I've always been against things like "sugar taxes" when they are pushed under the guise of "improving public health". People should be able to eat unhealthy foods if they wish, or play video games all day long, even if those choices destroy their quality of life. They always use phrases such as protecting the "public order" and the "greater good". It's easy to claim only a psycho would argue in support of obesity, because our kids must be healthy and get a good job so they can contribute to society.

However, I would even argue against high taxes on drugs such as alcohol and cigarettes, because the people who are often most addicted to those drugs are in the lowest wealth brackets, and they are unlikely to give up their addiction even if it requires them to spend all their money on it. I know this for a fact because I've seen in happen in Australia, where we now have the highest cigarette taxes in the world. If I want to sit down to enjoy a glass of whisky, a cigar, and a greasy burger, I should have that liberty. I shouldn't have a nanny state government limiting my decisions and deciding what is best for me. In principle it seems ethical, it seems like a nanny state government is for the "greater good", but few would willingly choose to live in an authoritarian place like NK or China because they destroy the human spirit by trying to enforce their utopia.

Black Mirror conveyed that point exceptionally well in their episode about social credit systems. Consider this; the USA is often criticized by tourists because the food packaging and serving sizes are so much bigger than most other places in the world. One has to ask the question, what allows Americans to afford that sort of living standard, why is the price of food and other commodities often much cheaper in the USA compared to other places in the world? A prosperous society will become fat and lazy, but a society which is too fat and lazy will become its own undoing, reversing that prosperity and teaching them an important lesson. It's an important lesson about life in general, but it doesn't validate nanny statism. China is at the opposite extreme, where they are overly obsessed about upholding the social order, which will be their undoing.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Didn’t the kiwi’s just have a referendum on legalising weed, which completely failed, a year or so back?

Kind of an odd failure, tbh. Considering every kiwi I know is a major bong head!

There's also a massive weed culture in Australia, but our government still refuses to legalize it beyond medical usage, and even then it's very expensive. And at the same time we grow and export a tonne of weed to the rest of the world. We claim to uphold the ideals of freedom and liberty but the laws in Australia and NZ tell a different story. We are rapidly transforming into full blown nanny states.

Don’t even bother moving to Australia either, like you all seem to love to do, just because the wages a better... however bad you got it over there with government over reach, I guarantee over here is worse!

Nah, it's pretty clear that NZ has always been one notch above Australia on the nanny state scale. NZ has taken an even more ridiculous approach to this pandemic than Australia, except for maybe Victoria. NZ will be going down this road so long as Jacinda Ardern is in control. She's next level psycho, she even gives old Danny boy a run for his money.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Yes but they seem to pass laws, that if you don't give stuff you can just ignore them. Out in the country, no one really gives a # anyway. I know a few people that had the jab, then decided it wasn't for them. There was a leak from the statistics department, which said 56% of the NZ population were fully vaxed. The boosters are not very popular now and the number is climbing. They have given the Maori leaders details of who hasn't had the jab , that was not a sensible thing to do, as I have passed Maori settlements with big signs saying No forced vaccinations. If they try it they will be shot at for target practice, the Government knows this so are very careful. They have to please the NWO but also have to personally survive. It is a small country and everyone knows they are BS-ing the vax death figures. Numbers at protests are massive, in the thousands, with the shill media playing them down. The Government is on very shaky ground.

Also, let us consider why is it that the same people who support heavy handed lockdowns are also the same people who support these sort of nanny state laws. It's because some people like trading their freedom for safety, or even just the illusion of safety. People are clearly too stupid to make their own choices, so the government should enforce healthy living standards. In China that already includes things such as time limits on playing video games.

And who could oppose that, clearly we don't want children wasting their lives on video games. Then we have the sugar tax and fat tax, the meat tax, the carbon footprint tax, and any other tax they can think of to ensure you live healthily and frugally. Eventually they'll decide our entire careers from birth, to ensure we don't have a shortage of doctors or any other critical job. Imagine how many thousands of lives that could save, who could oppose it.

All we need to do is let them choose our reason for being born and script our entire life path. In our desperate attempt to create a utopia we will pave the path directly to hell. I have no doubts it will eventually happen, because humanity is transforming more and more into a communal hive mind motivated primarily by emotions (emotions often founded on hyperbolic SJW propaganda), and we are slowly but surely losing our respect for individual freedom.

a reply to: anonentity

I'm pretty sure you have to be 18 to buy cigarettes in NZ, the same as Australia. The way this law seems to work is, someone who is 14 years old now wont be able to buy smokes when they are 18 years old, but someone who is 15 years old now will. So it seems like an ageist law to start with. But people wont be able to ignore this type of ban on smoking because they already ask for ID to prove age. It's such a stupid law... imagine in the future there will be a 30 year old who can't buy smokes so he has to ask his 31 year old friend. It takes nanny state logic to come up with such stupid laws.

originally posted by: Nyiah
I personally indulge in pipe tobacco myself, though not every day (or even every week).

Dammit, Kim! I knew you were a Hobbit!

It's a parliament kinda funny that word has a French root Parle as in "Speak" if no one's talking why hold it? If the people aren't shaking the gates and screaming at Parliament to "ban" it why do so?

Politic's in Europe and outlying "territories" all are called "Unions" not "Parities" like US politics. Unfortunately the creep has messed things up... Union party is sill going strong in America... but no one speaks of it.

Nazi party politics in New Zealand and Australia seem to be a slap in the face seeing how French is the founders of "Parliament" as a form of government under rule of a crown or throne. The defunct Nazi party was who were trying to ban smoking... only due to knowing it would save a soldiers live by plugging a bullet wound.

So let us think this through... officer down, sir do you have any cigarettes? no sir you idiots banned them

originally posted by: Crowfoot
It's a parliament...

Parliaments are also a lovely ass-flavored menthol cigarette.

They have thought this playbook out. For the safety of the children. This all sounds so familiar. Let me take a freedom away from you for your safety but hey I'm going to force you to take this drug youngling. Plus take these five booster shots every year for the rest of your life. What are the side effects? I don't know. We're going to classify all of the results for 75 years. Sneaky way to get more people covid since reports show smoking inhibits the attachment of covid.