Thanks, nanny

It isn’t necessarily bad that “6,000 pubs have closed since 2006” because of banning smoking (Perspective, 22 December).

It could be a “good” unintended consequence of the intended action of enforcing legislation on smoking.

Perhaps the reduction in the drink-driving alcohol limit will also lead to even more closures.

Can it be gainsaid that there is a considerable public benefit from government enforcing moral 
behaviour?

Should city, town or even 
village centres be “no-go areas” because of alcohol-fuelled “bad” behaviour?

It is debatable whether drinking should be allowed at football matches, on trains, buses and planes. Recognising of course such a view is repugnant to liberals who call it the “nanny state.”

Arguably, upholding by the criminal law public ethical standards is necessary for maintaining the social order.

Ellis Thorpe

Old Chapel Walk

Inverurie