• Destide@feddit.uk
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      No best in intact policies that give younger people less trust in the system and make them feel like they’re not part of society.

    • JoBo@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      The actual headline is “Retailers who break new smoking laws …”

      • thehatfox@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        The Guardian has changed the article’s headline since I posted it here.

        The “Youngsters” headline can still be seen via the Wayback Machine’s archive from earlier this morning.

        • JoBo@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah, sorry. I didn’t intend it to sound like an accusation.

          Poorly chosen headline, quickly corrected, I assume.

  • IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    Insane. Noone has fucking learned from 100 years of prohibition. Not a fucking thing.

  • Destide@feddit.uk
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    What happens if someone is young looking? Someone has to potentially attend a court date to prove it. Kids don’t really have ID, so just run away Council officers have no real power so just run away How have they got “extra powers” for shit like this, but actual socially progressive things get cut to the bone and local councils will have the time and funds for this?

    Banning smoking is kinda happening naturally but as usual going after individial citizens is more tempting than dealing with the ones with the money

  • Docus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    So are these council officers now getting police level authority? Will we be legally required to give our name and address to these council officers? What could possibly go wrong if we delegate authority to fine and prosecute to council staff?

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Powers to issue £100 on-the-spot fines are to be handed to council officers enforcing a landmark law banning future generations from smoking, which Rishi Sunak has hailed as a chance to “save thousands of lives and billions of pounds”.

    “That is why, alongside new measures to curb the alarming rise in youth vaping, we are delivering on our commitment to create a smoke-free generation and stop our kids from getting hooked on harmful cigarettes and other nicotine products.

    “This important change will save thousands of lives and billions of pounds for our NHS, freeing up new resources than can be spent to improve outcomes for patients right across the UK.”

    Greg Smith, a Tory backbencher, said the extra powers for councils to issue fines risked irking core Conservative voters such as small businesses.

    The number of people who smoke has dropped dramatically over the last 50 years as a result of concerted government action, rising awareness of the risks involved and the cost of tobacco.

    However, about 350 young adults aged 18-25 across the UK still start smoking regularly every day, according to an analysis for Ash by researchers at University College London published earlier this month.


    The original article contains 661 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 70%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!