Gambling is not evil, and a Restore Britain Government will reduce taxes on the industry. Adults should be free to make their own choices about how they spend their own money - a wild thing for a political party to say, I know. Britain has a successful gambling industry that supports local economies all over the country. In my constituency alone we have horse racing, a greyhound stadium, plenty of arcades and more. We should be encouraging responsible operators to thrive, not taxing them into dust. Problem gambling is an issue and should be properly addressed. But punishing an entire industry, costing thousands of jobs, for the actions of a very small number is not the answer. Restore Britain will back British gambling.

Much to unpack here: 1. All laws are based on morality. It just depends on what your moral code is. Abandoning our centuries long Christian ethical code for "Liberal values" has not produced good outcome in my view. 2. The laws you are complaining of are part of an agenda. The "moral" aspect is mere dressing. The "protect kids from the internet" is taking a justifiable parental/societal concern & abusing it to implement Digital ID - a genuinely Authoritarian development. We know it's fake moralising because the technology to limit kids phones access is already out there. 3. But as you have essentially conceded elsewhere, there are times when regulation of providers is necessary to avoid predatory/exploitation. The gambling issue is not a "faux-moral" argument - there are real harms, real predators, real victims. The broad consensus appears to be online betting (slots, fixed odds etc) are a blight & need shutting down, whereas sports betting is broadly OK (and meets the needs of those who like a little flutter as you put it). 4. There is another category that needs careful consideration. Where a choice puts you or others or society/civilisation as a whole at serious risk. Driunk driving is the obvious slam dunk (alrhough I recall in the 70's ppl then railing against the legislation as an infringement on liberty). But Covid for example saw this being used to enforce all sorts of measures to "protect others/granny". I rejected all that because I knew the "science" was a blatant lie. But the philosophical argument of individual liberty vs wider responsibility is not so easy to define - and Libertarians faile to make the case, simply referring to any restriction as "authoritarian". That won't win in the long run.

This seems fine to me. All it is is the police helping households say via a poster they don't want trick-or-treaters knocking on their door. No-one's saying trick-or-treating should be discouraged. Around me households opt *in* - so you're only to trick-or-treat if homes indicate

Guising isn't trick or treating, there are fundmental differences, not least the different names! Guising is Celtic/ Scottish; trick or treating originated in America.

Good

You can't be serious.

This was a "tradition" imported from America in the 80s and didn't exist when I was a kid. However, we did have Mischief Night on the 4th November, which was fun!

It is not "socialism" driving these attacks on individual independence, rather it is Global Capital / Technocracy who effectively own & direct all our governments. The food/diet restrictions, destruction of farming, all serves an agenda of transferring assets upwards to a small elite & making the masses dependent on Bill Gates' antburgers or some other mega-corporate industrial slop just to avoid starving. Similarly, relentless pushing of EV's, banning woodburners/gas appliances etc are all intended to make us dependent on "the Grid" - which has been largely sold off by Starmer's supposedly "socialist" government to Blackrock et al. In fact your romantic notion of the motor car as the peak example of Libertarian individual choice/consumer capitalism is a fantasy. It depended entirely on the state provision of a roads network & the Beeching cuts to the rail network & subsequent subsidising of cars/roads was explicitly a decision to support car production & sales. Gliobal Industrial capital directing state power to fashion the market & consumers to its own ends.

You have also confused who is the target in these examples of legislation. You assume all legislation is aimed at curbing individual liberty, whereas good legislation in these things aims to curb the ability of the powerful (e.g. predatory capitalists) from preying upon human frailty, while leaving the individual alone (and protected to some extent from larger, darker predatory forces) subject to the wider confines of law & order. By contrast, the various laws you mention on driving, wood burners (also diet especially meat) are all aimed at making individuals more dependent - not on the state but on global capital & mega-corporates who in effect own & control the state. Farms are being destroyed & diet restricted so we are dependent on Bill Gates ant burgers or some other mega-corporate industrial slop - and this is nothing more than an extension of where our food industry has been heading for most of the last century.

Online gambling benefits no one but the investors. I would ban it tomorrow. All it does is create isolation, debt and addiction. It’s not the same as an occasional flutter on a horse or dog race. It’s not a social experience. I don’t really care about the snowflakes saying “oh that’s fascist” Yeah bitch I am. I would ban immigration too. Now what.

Yes me and everyone else who wants a better society. I don’t really care if you don’t like it 🤣

If I want to use class-A drugs, why can’t I? If I want to consume the most extreme porn, why can’t I? If I don’t care if my kids consume such stuff, why should the state interfere? You are completely unable to articulate a coherent argument for individual liberty beyond crass consumerism. Thus what limited concept of Liberty you have will be lost to those who hold your naive, limited, misguided Liberal idealism in contempt.

Ban everything? No mate just the things that don’t benefit society.

Patrick Stewart disliked James Corden as much as the rest of us.🔥

My biggest concern is that if there is a clean sweep by Democrats of the House, Senate and Presidency in 2028, they will: 1. Make DC and Puerto Rico states to gain a strong majority in the Senate. 2. Open the borders and legalize everyone living in America illegally to cement a permanent majority. 3. Increase the size of the Supreme Court to gain an immediate majority. This would result in America becoming a permanent one-party state and the end of democracy in any meaningful sense of the word. All that is needed to ensure this doesn’t happen is 51 Republican senators in 2029. That is why you should vote for Republican senators this election. Other reasons are irrelevant compared to this one.

It would be game over for America

Anyone refusing to fly abroad because of a fingerprint machine? The new EU border system. Scan your face. Press your fingers on the glass. Hand over your biometrics like a good little citizen. People are panicking. "I'm not going abroad anymore." "It's the start of digital ID." "They're tracking us." I went through last week. It isn’t compulsory and most of the machines didn't work. So everyone just did it the normal way. Passport. Stamp. Off you go. Billions spent on a system that doesn’t work. Very on brand for governments, to be fair. Am I a fan of handing my fingerprints to anyone? Absolutely not. But I'm even less of a fan of letting fear keep me stuck at home. Because what's the alternative? Another grey winter with no sun on your skin? Vitamin D in the gutter Sleep, mood and metabolism all going downhill And a GP offering you antidepressants for it. That's the real control. Not the machine at the border. The fear that keeps you indoors, pale and medicated. They want you scared, stressed and staying put. Scared people don't live. They just comply. I'm not wasting the years I've got hiding from a scanner that doesn't even switch on. The sun is still free. For now. Would a fingerprint machine stop you travelling?

Are people really refusing to travel to Europe because of this? It’s a new level of hassle - took ages to check in for the Eurostar at Amsterdam recently - when travelling, but not really worth worrying about.