ChatterBank0 min ago
Come July 1st
62 Answers
Hysteria has already started to take hold of some of the less informed members of the anti smoking brigade. I refer of course to the smoking ban in enclosed premises that comes into force on July 1st .
I was recently talking to my local newsagent who was outside his shop having a smoking break. A resident passed by and remarked that he would not be able to do that after July 1st. Hearing this I remarked to the newsagent, how totally wrong this rather rude person was. The newsagent said this was not an isolated case, it was becoming more and more common for people to make similar remarks as this. He told me one person once passed him and remarked that cigarettes would do him no good, he said to me what if he was to go into a MacDonalds and on seeing a person munching on a Big Mac, to remark ' that will do you no good ' what do you think that person would say?
The Holier Than Thou non-smokers, think they can just treat smokers as some form of low life, to be treated with contempt, and believe me this situatation will become much worse come July 1st. Incidently I am one of the more tolerant non-smokers.
I was recently talking to my local newsagent who was outside his shop having a smoking break. A resident passed by and remarked that he would not be able to do that after July 1st. Hearing this I remarked to the newsagent, how totally wrong this rather rude person was. The newsagent said this was not an isolated case, it was becoming more and more common for people to make similar remarks as this. He told me one person once passed him and remarked that cigarettes would do him no good, he said to me what if he was to go into a MacDonalds and on seeing a person munching on a Big Mac, to remark ' that will do you no good ' what do you think that person would say?
The Holier Than Thou non-smokers, think they can just treat smokers as some form of low life, to be treated with contempt, and believe me this situatation will become much worse come July 1st. Incidently I am one of the more tolerant non-smokers.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
you have missed the point marvelman... read again my first line - I AGREE! - and so would everyone else!
my point was it doesn't compare to this issue because it is not facing a ban, is not done inside public places, is not done deliberately, and is not the result of a pointless pursuit
cars have a a purpose, a use, smoking doesn't.
it is pointless bringing it into the debate as it adds nothing - mentioning one type of pollution does not mean every other type has to be brought up too -every single time!
whats the point? why bring it up? are you suggesting smoking is fine because there are worse types of pollution around?
this is about the SMOKING ban, not every type of pollution.
i would also like you to get real and tell me what we can do right now about car pollution, today, that we are not already doing?
things will undoubtedly change in the future, but right now, what can we do?
my point was it doesn't compare to this issue because it is not facing a ban, is not done inside public places, is not done deliberately, and is not the result of a pointless pursuit
cars have a a purpose, a use, smoking doesn't.
it is pointless bringing it into the debate as it adds nothing - mentioning one type of pollution does not mean every other type has to be brought up too -every single time!
whats the point? why bring it up? are you suggesting smoking is fine because there are worse types of pollution around?
this is about the SMOKING ban, not every type of pollution.
i would also like you to get real and tell me what we can do right now about car pollution, today, that we are not already doing?
things will undoubtedly change in the future, but right now, what can we do?
In defence of Marvelman, Joko, I think a comparison with other pollutants is relevant. After all pollution is the reason behind the smoking ban, so why should he not voice concerns about vehicles. Consider these three facts regarding children
1. Smoking has decreased in the last 20 years.
2. In that time the number of vehicles has increased
3. During the same period the number of children suffering from asthma has greatly increased.
No, I know it does not prove that vehicles have caused the increase but it is an arguement as valid as all those blaming passive smoking for all the respiratory problems.
1. Smoking has decreased in the last 20 years.
2. In that time the number of vehicles has increased
3. During the same period the number of children suffering from asthma has greatly increased.
No, I know it does not prove that vehicles have caused the increase but it is an arguement as valid as all those blaming passive smoking for all the respiratory problems.
Most smokers fall prey to this horrible addiction when they are impressionable teenagers who typically are not thinking of cost and death: they are immortal, all they are thinking about is being cool or whatever the in word is. Then by the time they have gown up they are addicted and despite knowing they are killing themselves and others giving up is incredibly difficult. I think non smokers have the rights to being anti smoking for the reasons of health etc but does that give us the right to be offensive to others? Personally I think not.
chompu, i will say it again -I AGREE with marvelman!!!
the pollution of cars is terrible - NO-ONE is disputing that!
however, everytime someone mentions the smoking ban, someone says -
''well, what about cars? they cause much more pollution'' - well, what about them?
yes they cause more harm than cigarettes but this post is about the smoking ban!
you cannot say one thing should be allowed and is ok simply because there are things that are worse.
like i said, there is no way cars will be banned - at least not any time soon.
the pollution of cars is terrible - NO-ONE is disputing that!
however, everytime someone mentions the smoking ban, someone says -
''well, what about cars? they cause much more pollution'' - well, what about them?
yes they cause more harm than cigarettes but this post is about the smoking ban!
you cannot say one thing should be allowed and is ok simply because there are things that are worse.
like i said, there is no way cars will be banned - at least not any time soon.
whereas trains are officially smoke-free, smoking does take place in the toilets on some routes; the train conductors are told to tolerate this because risk assessment says there is a real chance of assault if they intervene.
come july 1st, this attitude is going to start attracting fines if train companies do not enforce the ban. will a few lots of �2000 alter the risk assessment? I wonder how much the train companies believe their staff safety is worth?
come july 1st, this attitude is going to start attracting fines if train companies do not enforce the ban. will a few lots of �2000 alter the risk assessment? I wonder how much the train companies believe their staff safety is worth?
-- answer removed --
Reverandfunk, you can't justify someone's wish to smoke just because there are drug addicts fer christ's sake!!
That's like saying it's OK to break into your house and steal your telly because it's not as bas as murder. And there's tons of murders taking place.
Smokers know it's dangerous and it poses a danger to others' health. I don't see grounds for the debate at all. If I walked around skooshing CS gas in my own and others' faces that'd bring outrage pretty quickly.
That's like saying it's OK to break into your house and steal your telly because it's not as bas as murder. And there's tons of murders taking place.
Smokers know it's dangerous and it poses a danger to others' health. I don't see grounds for the debate at all. If I walked around skooshing CS gas in my own and others' faces that'd bring outrage pretty quickly.
How many of the people who have posted agreement with the ban on smoking in public places do not drive a car and pollute the air, drink to excess on occasion and adversely affect the lives of others, eat pungent foods such as garlic and breathe on people making them feel sick, have noisy parties late at night disturbing neighbours.
Is it just I agree because it suits me - no-one else matters?
The arguments have varied and include 'some smokers hold their cigarettes near the ground, by pushchair carrying babies, how close to the ground is a car exhaust? Others say don't raise the issue of cars as it isn't the subject of the post but don't say 'why raise the issue of smokers in public places', because it doesn't support their argument. Is it a case of 'I won't think about what I say, I'll just jump on the bandwagon'?
Is it just I agree because it suits me - no-one else matters?
The arguments have varied and include 'some smokers hold their cigarettes near the ground, by pushchair carrying babies, how close to the ground is a car exhaust? Others say don't raise the issue of cars as it isn't the subject of the post but don't say 'why raise the issue of smokers in public places', because it doesn't support their argument. Is it a case of 'I won't think about what I say, I'll just jump on the bandwagon'?
why not raise the issue of smoking in public places?
why would me saying this not support my argument?
i dont actually have an argument here - as i have stated about 3 times now on this thread.
i just think that, other than that they are both forms of pollution, the arguments for and against smoking and car fumes are not the same and should not be joined together at every mention of the smoking ban.
i understand that infundibulum, but it is ALWAYS mentioned, and there is never any solution to it - cars polute too...and...??
i realise some would like cars banned, but only a relative few, and it will never even be considered to be banned.
car manufacturers are looking at ways to make less pollution, but we will just have to wait until someone comes up with something.
campaign to promote greener cars as much as you like, but why does it only happen on the smoking ban threads?
cars do indeed pollute much more than ciggies - so that makes ciggies not that bad, does it?
just because something is worse?
using this analogy to defend smoking is just ridiculous.
i just don't see the point of injecting this into every smoking ban debate.
why not just celebrate this step in the fight against pollution instead of just saying ''well what about cars, eh?''...
why would me saying this not support my argument?
i dont actually have an argument here - as i have stated about 3 times now on this thread.
i just think that, other than that they are both forms of pollution, the arguments for and against smoking and car fumes are not the same and should not be joined together at every mention of the smoking ban.
i understand that infundibulum, but it is ALWAYS mentioned, and there is never any solution to it - cars polute too...and...??
i realise some would like cars banned, but only a relative few, and it will never even be considered to be banned.
car manufacturers are looking at ways to make less pollution, but we will just have to wait until someone comes up with something.
campaign to promote greener cars as much as you like, but why does it only happen on the smoking ban threads?
cars do indeed pollute much more than ciggies - so that makes ciggies not that bad, does it?
just because something is worse?
using this analogy to defend smoking is just ridiculous.
i just don't see the point of injecting this into every smoking ban debate.
why not just celebrate this step in the fight against pollution instead of just saying ''well what about cars, eh?''...
you smokers have had your way for 100's of years, its now our turn, ha ha ha! I cant wait, breathing in your bad habit and smelling like an old chimney should not be my problem.come 1st jly you can all go off to island somewhere and smoke yourself to a horrible death, you didn't heed the warnings you saddo's!! get a life and give it up.
ruby27, if the smoke gets in my eyes and lungs and irritates me while making me nauseous, then yes, I would probably tell the smoker off. I wouldn't think, oh wait, this poor smoker got addicted while young and it's not his/her fault. No need for me to put up with their problem, free country and all that................
joko, so lets wait a while and see the results of the smoking ban, if what you say is right, then the people contacting cancer should be greatly reduced, i think it will have the same result as the gun law had, none whatsoever, only time will tell . i have never said that there should be a ban on cars, that would be stupid, just that there is more lung cancer caused by fumes by traffic than passive smoking, and that we are just kidding ourselves that a ban on passive smoking will solve anything.
well, given that most people with lung cancer are smokers, i would assume that that is more to blame for cancer than cars!
of course the problem won't go away, but you can't expect instant and drastic change over night - one step at a time - right now its smoking, at some point cars will be the target.
at least car fumes are not trapped in rooms where people sit.
smoking has no function whatsover - it is a pointless action, that pollutes and kills, so i'm afraid you will have to come up with a better argument than ''car fumes are worse'' if you want the ban lifted
of course the problem won't go away, but you can't expect instant and drastic change over night - one step at a time - right now its smoking, at some point cars will be the target.
at least car fumes are not trapped in rooms where people sit.
smoking has no function whatsover - it is a pointless action, that pollutes and kills, so i'm afraid you will have to come up with a better argument than ''car fumes are worse'' if you want the ban lifted
Everyone is talking about the no smoking. going on about it, critising smokers and loving every minute of it. It is such a big thing...I agree it is bad and disgusting but for heavens sake look at yourselves first...look how most of the young people of today bring up their children, how they talk to them, and how little respect their is from both sides...and the language the parents use in front of their children,mobile phones being used whilst driving, drunken driving, young kids having sex at a early age.....but nobody seems to worry about that. And I wont be surprised if the people pointing the fingers to these unfortunate people who are hooked on smoking are the parents or the culprits of no respect in the community or in their own homestyles
gromit-or is it vomit.
i am no scroat,tattooed,or light up between meals.
i do smoke and keep fit,gym 4 times a week,i just wish you moaning sods would shut up.
roll on 1/7/07,and we might get a bit of peace and quiet from you lot whingeing.
i bet the majority of you boo hoos on here drive.
whats that i can here....mine is environmentally friendly..whatever......... your petrol/diesel still pollutes the air that i breathe.
****deal with it****
i am no scroat,tattooed,or light up between meals.
i do smoke and keep fit,gym 4 times a week,i just wish you moaning sods would shut up.
roll on 1/7/07,and we might get a bit of peace and quiet from you lot whingeing.
i bet the majority of you boo hoos on here drive.
whats that i can here....mine is environmentally friendly..whatever......... your petrol/diesel still pollutes the air that i breathe.
****deal with it****
sotelme - yes youyare correct - no-one else worries about anything else except smoking - YOU are the only person in the world who cares about other things, we are all just obsessed with smoking....
you cannot, on one single thread, include every single problem with the world, and then claim that no-one cares because they don't turn every thread into a rant abiout everything!!
northboy - who cares about your lungs!
you would soon have something to say if i lit a POINTLESS bonfire outside your house every day!!
you'd be annoyed at the uselessness of it.
there is no need for smoking... it is pointless.
you cannot, on one single thread, include every single problem with the world, and then claim that no-one cares because they don't turn every thread into a rant abiout everything!!
northboy - who cares about your lungs!
you would soon have something to say if i lit a POINTLESS bonfire outside your house every day!!
you'd be annoyed at the uselessness of it.
there is no need for smoking... it is pointless.
Having read through all the posts, one thing seems apparent and that is the fact that mention the amount of poisoned gasses the motor car belches out, and the anti-smoking brigade seem to get a little aggravated. Could it be that it then affects them personally? Seeing that most drive a motor car. Or could it be that when they are sat in front of their TVs or reading their newspapers and magazines, they are absorbing into their brains (like a sponge absorbs water) only the good images of the motor car?
No it seems that anti-smoking is in vogue at the moment, what next? I have an idea it will be supermarket plastic bags. Already I have listened to a woman being interviewed on the radio, and she was saying that the plastic is killing animals, they are eating the plastic and birds are feeding plastic scraps to their young. I doubt this very much as animals are intelligent enough to know what is edible and what is not. But then it all goes to build up the hysteria, soon people will be shunned on the street for carring a plastic bag.
No it seems that anti-smoking is in vogue at the moment, what next? I have an idea it will be supermarket plastic bags. Already I have listened to a woman being interviewed on the radio, and she was saying that the plastic is killing animals, they are eating the plastic and birds are feeding plastic scraps to their young. I doubt this very much as animals are intelligent enough to know what is edible and what is not. But then it all goes to build up the hysteria, soon people will be shunned on the street for carring a plastic bag.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles19 mins ago
Crosswords20 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles48 mins ago
