If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   UK government proposes ban on junk food ads before 9:00 pm. Remnants of personal responsibility surrender   (news.bbc.co.uk) divider line 77
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

1932 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Nov 2004 at 4:08 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



77 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-11-14 01:20:45 AM
Have you seen how stupid people generally are? I wouldn't trust them with a bicycle, let alone their own bodily health.

Plus, you have all the kids watching TV while dad is at work and mom is off at the neigbbour's having an affair, so the state has to babysit them, or they'll weigh 300lbs by the time they hit high school.
 
2004-11-14 01:33:57 AM
Why not just ban all TV before 9pm?

Wait -- better idea -- ban all ads.
 
2004-11-14 01:24:33 PM
Personal responsibility bit the dust years ago. I wouldn't trust the public with a collective plastic knife.
 
2004-11-14 02:25:05 PM
The land of the FCC and the 'War on Drugs' is going to lecture the Brits on personal responsibility?
 
2004-11-14 04:11:54 PM
We just don't want to end up fat like Americans.
 
2004-11-14 04:14:27 PM
The greater risk is ending up stupid like Americans. Get out from under Bush's thumb while you can, Britannia.

/American
 
2004-11-14 04:15:15 PM
Why not ban food that has so many calories? If they can control what you decide to watch at certain times then they can damn well decide what you eat as well!

/drives to McDonalds
 
2004-11-14 04:15:19 PM
They should just run toothpaste commercials continuously.
 
2004-11-14 04:15:21 PM
I think this should be called a "beating" tax. That is, some enterprising individuals should give a thorough beating to whoever proposes it, "For their own good."

There was an ancient senate that had the rule that if you proposed a law, you had to wear a noose around your neck. If the law didn't pass, you were immediately hung. They didn't get a new law for some 200 wonderful years.
 
2004-11-14 04:15:27 PM
Christ, we're all going to hell.
 
2004-11-14 04:15:48 PM
I think they should wait until 2100 UTC.
 
2004-11-14 04:15:58 PM
That too. Blair is under Bush's thumb, not many of us agree with him.
 
2004-11-14 04:17:21 PM
Well, They're already banning Public Smoking up here in Scotland, so I've had a few days already to practice my goose step. I'm sure I have a black jacket I can sow a swastika armband onto.

Godwin be damned, I'm seriously starting to hate this country.

/eins, zwei, drei, alle!
 
2004-11-14 04:17:54 PM
OMG Government control is AWESOME! I love not being able to think for myself.

Get me a cup to pee in!
 
2004-11-14 04:18:17 PM
I think a better solution would be to ban food, or to ban kids...
 
2004-11-14 04:20:16 PM
So the choice goes between a party whose leader will go to war for limited reasons and whose members want to ban/censor anything that moves. And the others... Charles Kennedy's pro enviromental, anti corporate socialist alliance of lobbyists/whackos and the generally dispossesed and Michael Howard's nasty policyless opposition.

And America thinks that it has problems with the 2 party system, we have another one as well that we don't want to elect!

/Well at least we're not communist
 
2004-11-14 04:20:39 PM
This is all about preventing children being targeted by these ads.

"Personal responsibility" restarts at 9pm when they go to bed.
 
2004-11-14 04:23:19 PM
jamspoon

This is all about preventing children being targeted by these ads.

"Personal responsibility" restarts at 9pm when they go to bed.


"personal responsibility" includes your children as well. It's not the government's responsibility to stop your children getting fat, it's yours.
 
2004-11-14 04:23:37 PM
TheOther

The land of the FCC and the 'War on Drugs' is going to lecture the Brits on personal responsibility?

Touche
 
2004-11-14 04:31:09 PM
Won't somebody think of banning the word "crisps"?
 
2004-11-14 04:31:56 PM
This is the same country that wants to criminalize parents spanking their own children.
 
2004-11-14 04:32:26 PM
With apologies to Martin Niemoeller:

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
But hey, at least I was last.
 
2004-11-14 04:32:57 PM
They're banning smoking in privately owned cafes too. Because it's just too damned difficult to vote with your wallet.

\british hippy against socialism
 
2004-11-14 04:35:12 PM
First they came for the pot-heads,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a pot-head.
Then they came for the alcoholics,
and I didn't speak up,
because I wasn't a alcoholics.
Then they came for the fat farks,
and I didn't speak up,
because I was a bony-ass punk.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
 
2004-11-14 04:36:07 PM
"Manufacturers and advertisers will be urged to agree a voluntary code of regulation, according to reports in two Sunday newspapers." (emphasis mine)

So what does that mean, exactly? If it's voluntary, it's not a ban. Unless they're planning on "urging" them extremely forcefully?
 
2004-11-14 04:36:23 PM
Sandelaphon: what a funny twist on such a great quote.
 
2004-11-14 04:47:46 PM
G12Farker is the winner.
 
2004-11-14 04:47:49 PM
This Here Giraffe

Best way to hit pubs badly.

I know a lot of people who'd probably just stay at home instead of going out for a pint if they couldn't smoke.

/ ex-smoker, whinges like crazy at anyone who smokes on buses etc, chooses pubs he smokes in which aren't too smoky, doesn't object to smoking in pubs.
 
2004-11-14 04:52:01 PM
I LOVE SOCIALISM!
SOCIALISM IS THE BOMB BABY!!!!
 
2004-11-14 04:55:09 PM
California's banned smoking inside of bars, restaurants, etc for awhile now. Of course, bars have great smoking patios, so you can go outside and chat instead of being deafened by a crummy DJ spinning cock-rap. Of course, we also have great weather, so it's not a big deal. Seriously, setting up a smoking patio is freaking awesome, it's the best social place in many bars.

But I admit I had a lot of fun in Reno, the trashiest place on Earth. Smoking, drinking, eating and gambling at 4:30 AM is a blast. But I didn't get laid, either, and the waitresses looked like their skin was made from an old biker's jacket. Yikes...
 
2004-11-14 04:58:04 PM
theFiFTY4effect

G12Farker is the winner.

G12Farker lives only a street or two away from me, if his name is anything to go by!
 
2004-11-14 05:09:55 PM
Wow, I thought the US was bad. Junk food? That's farked up right there. I don't care if it's a ban or voluntary, even the thought is ludicrous. Of course, you still have a Queen, so...
 
2004-11-14 05:12:02 PM
In this political climate, if this thread turns into a hissy fit about freedoms I swear I'll find you all.. every one.

Gotta stop reading this, my hope for humanity is a sickly puppy and fark is the cold unfeeling needle of animal control.
 
2004-11-14 05:14:08 PM
 
2004-11-14 05:17:30 PM
Can we just ban fat people instead? It would have a better effect...
 
2004-11-14 05:46:51 PM
That sounds like a perfectly modest proposal to swiftly deal with fattened young children, to me...
 
2004-11-14 05:58:56 PM
What exactly is the problem with people being fat?

Unlike drug (including legal drugs) users and addicts fat people are not really a danger to their fellow men. They consume more which helps the economy and are more liekely to die early of health problems thus saving a lot in pensions and medical costs. They should encourage people to eat themselves to death!
 
2004-11-14 06:11:46 PM
that's a good observation Loki.

Well, at least they're calling it Voluntary. As long as it's all Voluntary then there'll be no perceptions that it's an actual regulation.

/remembers Atlas Shrugged.
 
2004-11-14 06:14:54 PM
Funny how the loudest "Personal responsibility" spruikers never seem to think scum like the Advertising industry or other loathsome c-nts who make pots of money preying on peoples weaknesses by selling them unhealthy or even downright dangerous products need to take any responsibility for their actions.

Also interesting how the same asshats always find someone else (Democrats, Socialists, Feminists, Heathens, Homos, Greenies, Lawyers, Godamm Furriners, the UN etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah) to blame when it's their turn to take a bit of responsibility for their own actions or inactions.

Get a brain morans.
 
j0n
2004-11-14 06:18:56 PM
Unlike drug (including legal drugs) users and addicts fat people are not really a danger to their fellow men.

What if a fatty is driving a car and has a heart attack on the freeway and ends up crashing into a bus full of nuns, killing them all?
 
2004-11-14 06:20:37 PM
Fat people may die sooner, but that doesn't mean the state saves money on them. Before they kick the bucket they're more apt than people within their nominal weight range to have health problems. Sure, they might die of sudden heart failure at 42, but it's more likely they'll stick around until 58, requiring medical attention as their bodies start to wear down and get clogged up. Fat people are far more prone to a number of ailments, diabetes not being the least of these.
 
2004-11-14 06:23:41 PM
The law would be to protect their teeth from this:

 
2004-11-14 06:30:22 PM
Robot_Head

Funny how the loudest "Personal responsibility" spruikers never seem to think scum like the Advertising industry or other loathsome c-nts who make pots of money preying on peoples weaknesses by selling them unhealthy or even downright dangerous products need to take any responsibility for their actions.

What actions? You know it's unhealthy. If you don't want to get fat, don't buy it. If you don't want your kid to get fat, don't buy them it.

Also interesting how the same asshats always find someone else (Democrats, Socialists, Feminists, Heathens, Homos, Greenies, Lawyers, Godamm Furriners, the UN etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah) to blame when it's their turn to take a bit of responsibility for their own actions or inactions.

Get a brain morans.


As one of those "asshats", I can tell you that I have no problem with "Feminists" (of the equality variety, not the "women are superior" variety), "Heathens", "Homos", "Lawyers" or "Godamm Furriners". In fact, I support the full equality of women, complete freedom of religion, the abolishment of marriage as a state institution (so Gay Marriage will be as state sanctioned as regular marriage), and an open border policy with little more than a criminal background check. As to Democrats, I have no problem with their non-American definition (remember this thread is a UK issue), i.e. people favouring a Democratic system.

As to the American Democrats, as well as Socialists, they seek to take away our economic freedom, and so see nothing wrong with disliking them. Greenies, in my personal opinion, wish to go about encouraging environmental policy in entirely the wrong way, but in terms of wanting to protect the environment, there's nothing wrong with that. The UN I am not personally opposed to as a forum for discussion. I am opposed to them as an official body with governemntal powers, such as those of sanctions and so forth.
 
2004-11-14 06:38:48 PM
I'm just wondering what Farkers think should be done about the obesity epidemic. So many kids in elementery school today are fat, they see it as the norm. They don't try to ge thin because every one else is a fatass and they think they're normal. This might seem a little radical, but something has to be done or we'll all end up like a Somailian trophy wife.
 
2004-11-14 06:44:52 PM
Adblock
 
2004-11-14 06:57:27 PM
Seeing as though Obesity is fast becoming the number one preventable cause of death in the Western world I don't have a problem with it.

All it's doing is removing the ads not the food itself, I'm a smoker who hasn't seen an ad for smokes in over 20 years, I still smoke though.

Fatties will still gorge themselves, it's still their right to do so, but anything to lower the rates of childhood obesity or just fatties in general is a good thing.
 
2004-11-14 06:59:49 PM
First they came for the Bukakke girls,
Then, uh, never mind...
 
2004-11-14 07:02:22 PM
That's midnight.. Gremlin time.

 
2004-11-14 07:03:34 PM
Reveilled

Well then I'm sure you are a real champion of personal accountability (in others at least) give yourself a big pat on the back.

p.s. What makes you think I give a fat rats arse what you think?
 
2004-11-14 07:14:20 PM
DAMNIT AbsolutTBomb Your picture scared the fark hell out of me...
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report