Rooftops and smoke

There were a couple of interesting items in today’s news which reflects a number of themes I have expounded on at various points in this blog. I thought I would draw your attention to them:

Item One:

A man being chased by police in a stolen car somehow finds himself on the roof of a house in Gloucestershire whereupon he proceeds to rain bricks and roof tiles down on to the people below, damaging a number of cars unfortunately parked in throwing distance.

And the police response? They send him up a bargain bucket of KFC, a coke and some fags! “Even though he is on the roof, making a nuisance, we still have to look after his well-being and human rights,” said a spokesman, presumably with a straight face.

What about the well-being and human rights of the people who live in the house whose roof was slowly being dismantled, and the drivers who will return to their cars to see brick-shaped dents all over them!

He was up there for 10 hours. Wouldn’t it have just been easier to get fire brigade to aim their jet hoses at him until he either jumped or was washed away!

Item Two:

A report by the increasingly rebellious – and sane – House of Lords states that the dangers of passive smoking were exaggerated by the Government to push through a blanket ban on smoking in public places.

As I have said before, I will be personally delighted when I can sit in my local and breathe fresh air rather than noxious cigaretter and cigar fumes. But my libertarian instincts rail against such a ban because I regard it as the thin end of the wedge. What I call the ‘what next?’ factor.

The report states that the Public Health Minister Caroline Flint, no less, admitted that 95 per cent of smoking-related deaths are linked to lighting up in the home – rather than the workplace. It goes on: “Given the evidence about the impact of passive smoking, we are concerned that the decision to ban smoking in public places may represent a disproportionate response to a relatively minor health concern."

Lord Wakeham added: “We are concerned that the Government does not pay enough attention to the cumulative impact of legislation on personal freedom and choice.”

Ah, the voice of reason at last!