Is this freedom?

[Curval]

Originally posted by Airhead
Curval, don't let the British Home Office hear that or they'll force you to keep your cricket bats at supervised cricket clubs where it's necessary to call for an appointment three days ahead of time before you can go there and use your bat. Of course technically that wouldn't be a ban tho.......

LOL...well said Sir...the last sentance in particular.

[Wlfgng]

lol

can you put spikes on your 'cricket' bat ?  

er... I mean....   uh...    ball 'grippers'

[Kieran]

Well now... if I have to choose between a nanny at the federal level and one at the city level, I'll take the city level.

What you are not owning up to is the comparison between cigarettes and guns isn't apples and apples- hell, it isn't even fruit and fruit.

It's actually backward for you... you can own your gun in one particular place in the UK; in the US, there are only particular places you cannot have your guns.

In the US, there are only particular places you can't have your cigarettes.

The UK seems to take a sweeping approach to eliminating anything, whereas the US tends (heavy emphasis on "tends") to make it more case or situationally dependent. So... which place treats you more like an adult?

[Toad]

Nah, Curval.

"Nanny" is when they take something away from YOU because it isn't good for YOU. That's the difference.

You can smoke tobacco all you like. The laws don't deal with your right to smoke.

The Brits and Aussies lost their freedom to own guns because government decided it was "too dangerous" for civilians to own guns. Oh, some few guns are allowed but many are completely banned or heavily restricted.

No US government at Federal, State or Local level has said ANYTHING like that about tobacco. Tobacco isn't banned at all.