Is it a case of 'one law for one, another law for another'?

I have just read in the paper that Charles Kennedy was chain smoking on a train, he was asked repeatedly to refrain, but refused, needless to say he did'nt pay a fine. Earlier this week on my local news, a man had lit up in a pub, and refused to put it out, because he had been drinking the police were called and he was given an on the spot fine. The regulars in the pub had a whip round for him. Something not quite fair here, don't you think?
Of course it is. Are you only realising that now??
Always the same one rule for one and one rule for another, very hypocritical society we live in.
What did you expect? All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. Why am I quoting Orwell who hated Communists? Because we're more sovietised in this country than the Eastern Bloc folks ever were in theirs.

Try this: If you, as an individual, take money for a service from someone else and then fail to deliver, that is deception which is a criminal offence and the police will prosecute you. If, on the other hand, a COMPANY or the GOVERNMENT takes money from you for a service and then fails to deliver the police will not act on your behalf and will tell you that it is 'a civil matter'.

The fact is that those who are high members of any organisation, or who are protected by that type of organisation are entitled to police protection. You, as an individual who PAYS for the police, are not.

210FM had a news item a couple of years ago that the Metropolitan Police in London had stated that anyone who reported their mobile phone stolen would be arrested! What is this nation coming to? Theft is a crime, isn't it, and the police have a remit to deal with crime. Maybe if your moby was made of plutonium...

Kennedy should, under the law, have been charged with behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace. We should all be writing to our MPs demanding to know why he has not been so charged.
I think it was Mark Twain, the noted American humourist, who once said 'In a democracy everyone is equal, only some are MORE equal than the others !'
:-))
You sound suprised if your a police offier you less than a 5% chance of being prosecuted by a speed camera but more than 85% as a member of the public. Its nanny state britain do as i say not as i do!

Cant wait to leave

Simon
Charles Kennedy should be sacked who doe's he think he is?
Some would be politician
Chain smoking or train smoking? What a little tinker.
It is indeed. Not only was our drunken Scottish friend an MP but he was also a Liberal Democrat who, as any ful kno, are very holy people whose actions are always above the law.


Answer:
If it was me or you we would have been restrained until the next stop and arrested by the heavy handed transport police. The whole policy has gone up in smoke. How will they justify prosecuting anyone now!?.

PS: How has the happy murcial built up so many points in just 3 months!?...
Laws are equal, but the influential people circumvent it. This is happening in all countries.
yep, i dont expect tony blair to end up being questioned anymore over the cash for honours either
As parliament told us there is a no smoking ban in every enclosed public space (except in the commons bar), then we as the English public should demand that smoking in the Westminster is forbidden.

Parliament does not own public space, but we as tax payers own Westminster.

Charles Kennedy - hypocrite, did you read that he backed the ban? What excuse has he got, smoking on public transport has been banned for years. Should have thrown the full weight of law at him, but what would £80 mean to someone like him.

See Cherie Blair is now fighting for the smoking ban to be lifted under Human Rights act, hired by a stripclub owner!! Boy!! did she see this coming!
Typical politician thinking he is above the law. Here is a link to his web site, where you can send him a message expressing how you feel about his actions.
http://www.charleskennedy.org.uk/html/co...
Well it beats me as to why he voted for the smoking ban in the first place- i guess he was drunk and didn't know what he was doing when he voted for that!
Agree with you on that one.
And is it true that they haven't banned smoking in the houses of Parliament?
They should practise what they preach.