Smoking in public places to be banned
 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews...name_page.html

And good on him I say, I just hope this doesn't go the same way as his pledge to ban hunting with dogs, which he promised us back in 1997....

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

It should just be banned full stop.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Oh no, I don't agree with a total ban because it brings in such high revenue for the government plus the addiction is apparently hard to give up. Plus, like drugs, you'll never ban it completely.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

oi , packit in , i mean pack it in banning smoking :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

same as always controversial issues appear, only to not get brought in at the last hurdles.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

ain't that the truth :rolleyes:

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Trust me it is very hard, I gave them up 13 weeks ago and i am still getting the cravings now. However i dont agree with an all out ban.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I quite a week ago,
However If they ban smoking in public places I'll carry on to flout the ludicrous law. After all its illegal to be drunk in public, its illegal to be smacked out your head on drugs yet you still see it happen.

It'll never work and it WILL get him voted out.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Yes, but someone getting drunk in public isn't polluting my and my daughter's lungs.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

good point :tu:

i can't decide where i stand on this one... at the moment i smoke but have had several attempts to give up but failed (i blame ntl ;) ). I am not sure whether smoking in public should be banned.

I think smoking in pubs should be allowed; i like to have a smoke and a drink together, and i think a lot of the "regulars" would agree with me. Many pubs are becoming much more adaptable now with family areas and non smoking areas and the like. I don't think they need to go as far as a complete ban.

In public there is lots of fresh air, so there is less risk of getting someone elses smoke in your face. I have a feeling that banning smoking in public will just force people to smoke inside (in the car/ at home etc) and although this will stop them from affecting others with their smoke, it does not help their families. I feel sorry for the children of smokers who have to inhale it- i was one (pipe smoke though- smells so nice) and i am sure it didn't do me any good. I would give up for certain when i have children.

How about just banning smoking in certain places, ie busy market places/ city centres etc- like the alcohol ban that some places have at the moment?

MB

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I think it is fair and reasonable to have a ban in place where a separate area for smokers cannot be provided.

Having said that, if there was a sign on the door of the pub or restaurant saying " Smoking Allowed In Here " then non-smokers could choose not to go in there. :)

Or is it that because they don't like it they are trying to stop anyone else?

:rolleyes: Ask a group of people about any minority activity and they will give you the answer you want.

BTW I am not anti restrictions, I just feel people should have a choice provided it doesn't affect others. :)

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I enjoy going to the pub - but I don't want the produce of someone else's lungs all over my clothes. Perhaps more non-smoking bars and restaurants over a complete ban would be a better idea? Possibly but unlikely to happen.

Eradicating it from public areas might be the healthy option but unlikely to be the most sensible - it will only cause resentment. Then again it would mean either a large number of current pubs banning it or having a load more being built which will be costly. A quick search on yell.com shows that there is are currently 60 pubs in Swansea but there is only one dedicated non-smoking establishment. Are us non-smokers all expected to congregate in there?

Looking at the logistics (and economics) of it all, a total ban is far more likely to be introduced than new bars being built or current ones changing their rules.

And as for no-smoking areas in pubs and restaurants.... show me smoke which obeys the signs and I'll convert to Islam :spin:

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I really get hacked off at people smoking in the kids swing parks :mad:

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

The ban is aimed at pubs, clubs and restaurants, the same kind of ban they have in Southern Ireland, people (stupid people) who get all uppity and choose the smoke in said pub, club or restaurant will end up getting the landlord/owner fined, generally you'll be asked to stop smoking, if you refuse, you'll end up getting banned from the premises, so, good luck with that.

edit: I tried to give up smoking a while back, it didn't work, I'm quite happy for this law to be introduced, it might discourage me from smoking again, or at the least, save me a bit of money on fags if I have to go outside to smoke.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

surely trying to stop people from smoking isn't a good thing from the governments point of view.... think of all the money they would then not earn from the hideous tax on cigarettes :Yikes: they would have to find a new way to con it out of us....

**goes off to contribute to the petrol prices thread**

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

And believe me they will, from a medical point of view I agree with it (despite me being a heavy smoker) but countries that have introduced a ban like this are already taxing the knackers off people in other ways.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I'm a non-smoker, and being borderline asmatic, it makes me cough, but instead of the government pushing everyone around, i'd prefer to let free markets do its thing. If you want to smoke, sit in a smoking area, if you don't, sit in the non smoking area. If non-smoking truely has the support of the british people then surely plenty of pubs and restaurants will open up as entirely non-smoking.

The point is, you should have the choice. At the moment, I have the choice of being in a non-smoking area, or with my mates in a smoking area. Which is what it should all be about - choice. Nobody is forced to breath in cigarette smoke. If you have to force anything, then maybe a certain standard for air-conditioning ventilation, would be nice.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

excellent post :tu:

agree with you 100%

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Yes, so we can watch the smoke slowly drift over to our section.

And where's the money going to come from to be able to build enough pubs to cater for the non-smokers? Remember Swansea's statistic - 1 N/S pub out of 60.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I'm shocked. You don't agree with a total ban because it has a financial benefit but you accept that inhaling nicotine, tar etc causes an addiction which is incredibly difficult to stop without relapse. I'm sure that you would also accept that inhaling these products whether man-made or naturally occuring has a detrimental effect on our health, in fact possibly/probably resulting in death (as illustrated by your not wanting your daughter to be in a smoke polluted environment). But you're willing to allow this to continue....... as long as those that don't chose to smoke aren't affected?
It sounds like you're saying that it's alright for people to damage themselves..... commit suicide if you take the argument to the extreme... as long as there is a financial benefit for the government which will inevitably get diffused to benefit the rest of the country? There's no moral highground to stand on when you're giving something to someone with one hand and then slapping them with the other for taking it :erm:

Let me step forward and say......... my name's kink....... and i'm a smoker.
Started when i was 16..... gave up for 7/8 years and started again about 2 years ago. Do i beat myself up over it? No. I'll stop again...... hard as it might be right now..... but i will when it's right for me but at this moment in time i don't want to. Pointless to try.
However..... i'd relish a total ban....... just to see if those who DO attempt to take the moral highground ie the govt are prepared to give up their addiction to blood money. Its the same for pubs, clubs etc who are anxious about losing the revenue that they would lose from not having smokers in their premises....... it will be interesting to see if money talks for them also. I always ask those around me if i can smoke and sometimes they say no and sometimes yes..... either way i'm more than happy to go outside and smoke there... it's my addiction, my pleasure and i deal with it. I live with 3 other people in my house.... i'm the only smoker..... i only smoke in my room even though i haven't been told that i cannot do so anywhere else. It's a case of respecting the lives of other people..... ruining mine is my choice :)

Apologies to russ if that wasn't the way he intended to be interpreted..... but that's what i read and responded to :kiss:

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Flippin' 'eck Kink, you're on the ball today!

No, what I meant is what I believe will be more likely to occur. Of course health benefits outweigh the financial but look at it from the government's point of view - when it comes to looking after our health and taking our money, which have they chosen to do since time began?

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Exactly! Thats the problem....we are often exposed to the smoke when we are nowhere near it's source......like in a playground ffs!

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Don't go there then.

If it is what people want, people will go there. The popularity would mean people would have to convert to stay competitive. You don't have to build a non smoking pub, you just have order people to stop smoking, in a perviously smoking pub.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

I don't - I'm just pointing out how n/s areas will mean little or nothing.

Yes, that's what you'd think but we've been trying that for years and all we have to show for it is 1 pub in 60.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Personally I would like to see smoking banned completeley, wether people are addicted or not.
However the realist in me can never see that happening, I would settle for a ban on smoking while driving, since I started riding my bike just over a year ago I have nearly been blinded by hot ash beeing flicked out of a window twice (this can also cause a fire in a car if it goes through your window and lands on your back seat), I had somebody nearly hit me at a red light and started beepng at me like I shouldnt have stopped (like red doesnt mean stop or something), had one nearly take me out when they tried to turn right at a junction while I was coming the opposite direction, had one slam on the breaks on a 40mph zone slowing down quicly to about 10mph so they can light up I nearly went right into the back of them (If I had been in a car I would have, luckily bikes stopping distances can be as little as half that of a car).

And all of the above where smokers. :mad: :mad: :mad:

I would also like to see a ban on smoking in public places like town centers, all to often I have come home with cigarette burns on my clothing because I have brushed past a smoker.

Pubs I really dont have a problem with at the moment though I think pubs should have a smoking area with the majority of the pub beeing for non-smokers, rather than the whole pub be a smoking area with a little corner for non-smokers.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

As a non-smoker, I would have to be in favour of these moves. I'm all for people having choice, but when their choices affect others (which occurs regardless of having a few non-smoking areas) then it's time for something to be done about it. I've never known a single nightclub which has an effective non-smoking area, and you always leave stinking of cigarette smoke, not accounting for the potential detriment to your health.

As for the loss of tax revenue for the government - how about the money saved in the NHS through not having to pick up the pieces?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

yep smoking should be banned from all public buildings I dont disagree with that.
Also cigarettes should be where they belong as they are DRUGS, in the hands of pharmacies only, not in almost any shop who will sell to children regardless of the law.
Also as most now believe in passive afflictions they must also accept that passive addiction can also exist, especially where a child is or was subjected to a very high smokey enviroments. these people need more help than a few patches, as some of them were passivley addicted from a very early age and may even have started full blown smoking before 10 years old they require the best help in the best rehab centers courtesy of the NHS. after all it would be cheeper to provide rehab even 2 or 3 times than to pay to try to cure them of cancer etc how ever many times they get it. This is why theirs tax on cigarrettes so the government say, not to pay the government but to pay the cost of the extra health.
So when they put their money where their mouth is do as a bove or better then we will know they are for real

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

People make me sick if you don't want to inhale other peoples smoke then don't go to places that allow smoking. If you didn't want to say play bingo then you wouldn't go to a bingo hall would you so what the hell is the difference. The trouble is that the majority of people don't smoke but can't be arsed to complain so they want the government to do it for them.
Ps I am a non smoker.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

And theres probably a lot of people who would like to perhaps not breathe their own smoke but as government action is as poxy as usual many will never give up, even if they try the patches and once aweek counsel sessions.

There is one thing though about banning smoking in public places. it for sure is discrimination and that is illegal. afaic a smoker has a disability of a kind and current trend is to be disabled friendly. So where does the line get drawn for discrimination, others poisening others, if the law was to be followed a smoker could not be banned but could be screwed for damages it was found he/she caused a condition that resulted in serious illhealth to a non smoker.
Popcorn should be banned aswell imho as it causes me serious ill health.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Oh more of the NANNY state again.Treating us like children,ban this,ban that.The trouble is where does it eventually stop.When will we be able to behave like adults IF every form of choice is removed? :shrug:

Oh and I'm a non smoker who lives with a smoker.We have an adult relationship about his smoking.WE compromise and reach adult agreements.WE do not need any government intervention to do this. :rolleyes:

I feel a little more understanding and acceptance of other people's position is a far better way to deal with the realities of life than through legislation.Legislation should be a last resort,education should be the first resort.

Incog. :)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

So by your argument, pharmacies should be the only shops that are allowed to sell alcohol as well?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Wouldnt bother me if it was however there are big difference between alcohol and tobacco products.
1. nicotine even in passive mode is considered now to cause potential ill health
2. tobacco products are becoming a socially unaccpetable product
3. No licence is required to sell it
4. It is herbal and a form of self medication
5. Many unsrupulous shops give no s**t about underage health and only care for as much profit as possible
Alcohol
1. in small quantities can be considered good for you
2. Alcohol is still a socially acceptable pasttime, despite the mass of unsociable behavior at boot ot time
3. Apart from illegal imports a licence is required to retail it, still again we do have shops that care more for profit than for undreage health and possible vandelism resulting from over drink at a young age
4. Contrary to popular belief alcohol is not addictive nor is it actually a drug. (yes you can become mentally dependant). You can drop alcohol by clicking your fingers. Still its not really a form of medication but a consumable item that in excess can cause sickness.
5. There is no passive effects, except of course puke on the streets and the antisocial behaviour from having had too much.
The main 2 things that are similar is that a long term excess in either product can and probably will cause ill health of serious consequence

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

So what you are saying is that because we do not want to inhale smoke, we should not go to the pub or any public places, just because other people are to be allowed to smoke there? :confused:

You are forgetting that its them that are the ones that are causing harm, to themselves & others who they smoke around.

We non smokers also have as much of a right & yearning to "go to the pub" so why should our enjoyment of this always have to be spoilt by others smoking?

Public places are not the sole domain of the smoker, they are the domain of the people, the public yet many are being forced to stay away from them because they cannot stand the stench or the problems that they suffer because others smoke.

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: to smokers !

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

If I have time to dig around later, I'll find the figures, but believe me, the revenue from cigarettes FAR OUTWEIGHS the cost of treating smoking related illnesses.....

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

My local pub would go out of business if a ban was forced. Most of the regulars smoke, and like me, they wouldn't go into a pub if they couldn't have a smoke with their drink....

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I agree, if you don't want to inhale smoke go to a non-smoking pub or restaurant or whatever.

There is a a big pub near us that caters for families, they do lovely food but I can't go there becuase my meal is ruined by screaming kids running riot all over the place. Why should my enjoyment be ruined by others???

But no that I know that this place is kids playground, I don't go there. I go to a quieter pub a further away where I can enjoy my meal in piece and have a conversation without haveing to shout over the screams of under fives.

It should all be about choice and nothing should be forced upon anyone. If you don't like smoke stick to the no smoking zones. It's not difficult.

Oh, and by the way I'm not a smoker but a believer in peoples freedoms

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I have already stated my oninions on another thread - so I'll just re-post this...

I will add that smoking in the open (parks etc) is probably (IMHO) less harmfull to others than standing near a road - or walking anywhere in london....

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No what I am saying is that it is about time non smokers started standing up for themselves, if 75% of the population are non smokers and they stopped going to Pubs and places that allow smoking and made their feelings known that this is why they are doing this then things would change, but all I seem to hear is non smokers winging but still putting up with it. So if you go somewhere where they allow smoking then don't just get up and walk out but also make it known to the person in charge that that is the reason why you are leaving and he or she is losing your custom because of it.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Ok- my opinion...

If you don't smoke - go to a pub that is non smoking (there are plenty around) or vote with your feet, telling the pub owner that is why you are not coming to that pub.

Insist that the location has decent ventilation/extraction... I was at an airport recently that had a smoking area in the middle of the lounge - the ventilation was good, and you could stand next to the area without smoke getting near you.

Don't start telling people what they can/cant do - to take this further - lets stop people drinking in pubs - because drunks cause fights and harm people around them...
How far are you willing to go before you see this as an infringement of a persons freedom ?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

LOL...........................

Lets all sit around and watch the government goose-step down Whitehall, and take away even more of our personal freedoms.

Ok, I'm a smoker, and at the moment I have no intention of giving up. If I'm in a public area and smoking is allowed, I'll bloody well smoke. On the other hand if I'm in a confined or private area, and there is a non-smoker about I'll ask if I can smoke (even in my own car). When I'm at home, or in someone elses home I dont smoke inside. My usual haunt if I'm having a smoke is the garage, but anywhere outside is good. But it's my choice to smoke, and yes I am well aware of the health issues, so I dont need a lecture about it. When I'm ready to stop I will.

It's fummy to see all the complaints about the health issues of smoking, and how these will be sorted by banning smoking in public. Will they b0ll0ck$, how much time each week do you non-smokers sit in a bar full of smokers? Now compare that to the amount of time you spend in any urban area with vehicular traffic. What do you think will do you more harm, the passive smoke in the bar, or the tons of fumes pumped out by all those internal combustion engines every day. Just as an example, there is a pollutant blown out of the exhausts of every desiel engine called a p10, its one of the most carcinogenic substances ever discovered, so enjoy you're ride to work tomorrow enduring all those p10's. :)

I vaguely remember the report that was produced about 5 years ago, that gave a comparison asto the amount of tax from cigarette duty. I turned out that the duty paid was the equivilent to 25% of the NHS budget, we are talkin BILLIONS and prolly TENS of BILLIONS in tax. So forget a ban, the only way the government could get that money back would be a tax rise of about 4% for everyone. LOL

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

There are? Care to provide a list of them because I can't find anywhere that details pubs that have a complete "no smoking" policy.

Yes, this is would be a good thing. Unfortunately too many places don't have such systems.

This is a ridiculous comparison. People who drink alcohol don't generally start spraying it around everywhere and covering those who don't drink with it (except for racing car drivers etc!)

And what about *my* freedom to not breathe their smoke and have it stink up my clothes? I have no objection to people doing things that don't impinge on me or anyone else, but your freedom to swing your fists around ends at *my* nose.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

That's an interesting viewpoint you have there... :rolleyes:

Well, curiously enough, I don't seem to have seen many comments from people actually *saying* that "these will be sorted by banning smoking in public". So perhaps the testes you are referring to are from people who exaggerate what is being said when actually what the suggestion is is that it will help *reduce* these health issues.

So you're saying that because *something else* does more damage (although smoking is actually reckoned to be responsible for around 90% of lung cancer deaths), we shouldn't at least make a *start* somewhere?

Oh, BTW, does smoking get you to work? Does smoking carry your shopping? If you gave up smoking would you *lose* money? If you didn't smoke would you have trouble getting a job? No...?

Yes, it would be a good idea if we didn't have so much pollution chucked out by cars and lorries etc, but until there's a better alternative (improved public transport, non-polluting vehicles etc) it's a bit ridiculous to compare the two situations because it's much easier to try to stop smoking.

Ah, so now we have the "it's going to cost *you* money if *we* give up smoking, so we're actually *helping* you" argument... :rolleyes:

Except, of course, that "4% tax rise for everyone" figure you claim there is *completely* misleading because there will be less working hours lost through tobacco related illnesses such as asthma, mouth, tongue, throat and lung cancer and coronary heart disease, less lives lost through those illnesses, so people will live longer (and, hence pay more tax over a longer period) and less cost to the NHS, less lives lost through fires caused by careless smokers, so less cost to the Fire Brigade etc etc etc.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Is smoking as bad for you as some people make out?

Are there any beneficial advantages of smoking?

Smoking is something that we only ever appear to hear the negative aspects of but rarely the positive aspects. Are those that are against smoking fully aware of both sides of the argument?

Can those that are against smoking honestly say that they are in full possession of all the facts that enable them to come to their conclusion that smoking should be banned alltogether?

Have a thorough look at http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/therap.htm and the whole site that this is from.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No most pubs don't have a "complete" No Smoking policy, but very many have no smoking areas.

Personal choice and personal freedom, it should be up to the landord of the establishment to decide who he wants to cater for. If you don't like it don't go. I refer you to my earlier Children in pubs anology.


Well maybe the government should be pushing for these systems to be installed rather that considering a blanket ban.

This is a poor comparison but then again such a comparison is not required.

Your freedoms should be upheld, and so should those of smokers. You have no right to enforce your will onto them as they have no right to enforce theirs onto you.

Choice must be available to all, personal preference and common sense should prevail.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Yes and how often is this area filled with smoke coming in from the smoking side?? Answers on a postcard :)
I am also curious why the non-smokers are segregated to a small section of the pub while smokers have the run of about 75% of the pub (Including the Bar itself) a non-smoker cant even get to the bar to get a drink without beeing saturated so dont give me this no smoking area BS.

and to some of the other posts wich I cant be bothered quoting at the moment....
The old vote with your feet arguement (or the bend over arguement as I prefer to call it) how often does this work? to answer that look at the situation were in now, that'l show you how well bending over, I mean walking away has done over the years.
To make my point slightly clearer, I dont have a big problem with smoking (well I do actually but its not my right to try and stop it completeley), I have a problem with smokers shortening my life & My families.

Now a good reason for banning smoking......
as we all know Smoking can kill over a prolonged period of time even in small doses (Larger doses expanentially decrease the time taken to do damage), people are fully aware of this, and as such the tobacco companies are accessories to assisted suicide (euthanasia) wich, last time I checked, is very very illegal.
since passive smoking causes far more damage than direct smoking does and smokers know this, People smoking in public places are also accessories to Murder, Or indirect manslaughter (or what would be a more appropriate term?) wich is also illegal.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I'm a smoker, and I didn't know (and tbh don't believe) that passive somking causes more damage than direct smoking.... Do you have anything to back that up?

So are those who drive cars (pollution adding to problems such as athsma which can be fatal), and those who sell alcohol and don't warn you that excess consumption can lead to alcohol poisoning, liver failure and ultimately death too - want to brand them all as accesories to murder too? :rolleyes:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Not as yet but I have read it before and if you will allow time for me to goto work I will have a google when I get back.

If someone parks thier car in the pub then yes they are. About alcohol, some brands do inform you of these very things in a similar fashion to how tobacco companies now have to, also I would like to point out that as someone said earlier in this thread alcohol can actually be good for you in the correct dose, its alcohol abuse that can lead to Liver failure or death, abuse of butter can also lead to death but that doesnt make butter a killer, smoking is fatal over a period of time (depending on the dose and the individual) so it is a very different matter alltogether and I'd come up with a better arguement if I was you.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

My argument is fine. Smoking does not kill every person who does it. Which pretty much measures up to the basis of your arguments about butter and alcohol. :rolleyes:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Smoking Kills - It's just a matter of time
Butter and Alcohol - Only kill if abused

See where im going with this??

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

This subject always invokes big differences of opinion amongst many every time it is raised here.

Perhaps its best just to leave the subject alone & concentrate on something else to talk about.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Yep. Round in circles. Come back to me in ten years when you have a qualified and substantiated comment or opinion... :)

or when you can prove to me that smoking is the reason that every smoker died?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

what difference is 10 years gonna make?? is your oppinion qualified becuase your a smoker?? or is it becuase your older?? pull the other one.

Smokers die from heart disease, liver disease, cancer, getting run over by a bus (The list goes on and on) just like everybody else, the point is that eventually if nothing else kills them first smoking will.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I might aswel be doing that now to be honest. Think I might back out now while im ahead. :)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Errrr, what? As a smoker, I find that quite a trite statement - why exactly do you think I have a disability? I agree with Incog - I smoke but my girlfriend doesn't, so we arrange it amongst the two of us (even if it's just opening the window or whatever.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Because in ten years, you may have found the info you need to back up your previous posts - I reckon it'll take that long. However, your conviction is admirable :)

No **** sherlock... :idea: They could also die of alcohol or butter abuse too... :angel:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

.

:confused: :confused: :confused:
Well of course smoking will kill me first if nothing else does. However, if I give up smoking, I'm still going to die at some point - AFAIK, non-smokers aren't eternal.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Do you also wonder why things are always in the last place you look? :rolleyes:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

:LOL: :clap:

But ZrByte is still ahead in his argument.... :D

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Only because he's apparently never going to die ;)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

evidently all your years on me has degraded your ability to understand english, never did I imply what you have said.

My sentances arnt the best, but it was clear enough what I meant so FU the lot of ya, im off to work.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Aww, come on. There really is absolutely no excuse for hurling foul-mouthed abuse. If OB was implying that you still have some growing up to do, then I think you pretty much just proved her point.

I think you should get back here and apologise.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I think you should stay out of this, I dont appreciate beeing talked down to like they did, they also just showed thier own immaturtity by talking down to me like that (I believe they call it the playground mentality).

and one last thing to the smokers on this thread defending smoking.
if the day comes that your Dr tells you that the next couple of years of your life are going to be spent slouched in a chair incapacitated & attatched to an Iron lung because your lungs can't supply enough oxygen for your body to function properly, and that you are going to spend every day until you die coughing up blood and talking like steven hawking through a hole in your throaght with a little black box, think back to why you did it.

if your Child/Grandchild dies through passsive smoking, think back to why you did it.

I wont be happy if/when this does happen but I certainly wont shed a tear for you (the people you affected are a different story). And I really hope none of the above ever happens to you with every fiber of my beeing, but if it does, think back to why you did it.

Now Im leaving this thread, I may read to see your responses but im not going to reply, I dont come to these boards to get angry and thats clearly whats happened here so I think I'll back out of this one while Im still very much ahead.

Oh and I'll take up smoking before I appologise for what I said.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No-one is DEFENDING smoking ZrByte. I'm a smoker and I certaily wouldn't recommend it. I just wanted you to substantiated what you had posted. And I wasn't 'talking down' to you. Well, not before your last two posts anyway. Grow up and learn a little about life before you preach. :)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I can't talk for anybody else, but I didn't intend to talk down to you and I apologise if you think I was. I was merely trying to point out that, in an inflammatory topic like this, it pays to be careful of the way you put things as, in this instance, I'm afraid that I thought it was quite a strange thing to say.

Unfortunately, I think that you will have to accept that we live in a country that allows freedom of choice - I choose to smoke and accept that there may be either short or long term effects on my health. However, I also accept that other people may not have this attitude and, as a result, I try as much as I can to prevent other people from being affected by my smoking.

Unfortunately, I think that this, and basically telling towny to mind his own business, could be attributed to the 'playground mentality' that you so dislike?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Nobody who is a member of Cable Forum needs to 'stay out' of any discussion that takes place in a public thread. If you want people not to take a view on what you say, then say it in a PM. That said, I'm not concerning myself with people's points of view or how they expressed them. Just the very narrow (but quite serious IMO) issue of why you felt it necessary to say 'f*** you' to other members of the forum.

Abusing people is not just antisocial, it breaches the forum rules. I'm saddened that you have allowed yourself to get so mad that you have lost sight of that and that you won't even retract it.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

One strange problem to have come out of this in Dublin is the need for a lot of bars to be refurbished. Basically the smell of smoke did a great job masking the damp, the vomit smelling carpet etc, now that smoke is gone, the smell makes some bars a lot less welcoming, bit like drinking in a car park lift / stairwell. :beer: :sick:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

now that is an interesting observation , i reckon the builders will be happy though :rofl:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Whilst I'm interested in both sides of the story, I have to say I'm more than a little sceptical about that site and the "evidence" it portrays.

Also comments such as 'Isnâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢t the function of public health to tell the citizens about ALL the effects on health of a substance? Obviously not. "Public health," today, is nothing more than a deceiving propaganda machine paid by pharmaceutical and public money to promote frauds, fears, and puritanical rhetoric dressed up in white coats.' rather suggest that the people who produce this site have their own agenda to push and it's not necessarily about health...!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

And, has already been pointed out, all that means is that the smoke drifts over from the smoker's area.

Oh, and IME usually the "no smoking" area is a small section stuck in a corner or practically separated off from the main area of the pub.

But if you actually look at the number of people smoking in the main part of the pub, it's only a fairly small proportion. So why not re-arrange things so the "drug addicts" can go into a small room, get their fix, then come out and join the rest of us when they've finished instead of the whole pub being polluted by their smoke?

Except the analogy fails when you look at the fact that many pubs only allow children in the "family garden" or similar area and, of those that permit them in the main part of the pub, they tend to request that you keep your children quiet and well behaved.

If the children start to behave in a way that affects other pub users, the landlord may well ask the parents to leave.

Now let's put that back in the context of smoking. The smokers can do it, provided it's in the garden or similar set-aside area and if they do it in the main part of the pub it's going to affect other pub users, so it is *THEY* who should leave if they don't like it!!

Why is it a poor comparison? If you drink alcohol it doesn't affect *me*! There's no such thing as "passive drinking"!

With freedoms come *responsibilities*. As I've said before, your freedom to swing your fists ends at my nose. Someone's freedom to smoke should end when *I* am forced to breathe their smoke or have it stink up my clothes.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

And discussions of whether something is abusive or not should be taken to PM or reported to moderators.

I would suggest that any further posts about this be removed.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

However you choose to look at it, the local pub is full of people getting their "fixes".
No matter how you try and force people to think it, smoking is never going to be unacceptable.
**** happens get on with it, if smokers smoke thye know they are practically committing suicide, so what, its their freaking choice.

Yes Granted passive smoking is a problem, I dont know of a solution, banning smoking will kill the pub industry and the do gooders will have more victims on their hands.

As for previous comments by others, referring to smokers as little more than **** that are polluting the atmosphere, when they stop travelling in motorised vehicles I'll listen to what they have to say about pollution.
Whens the gov gonna ban diesel engines, petrol engines and for good measure lets ban 2 stroke engines, after all they burn th emost oil I think. Then we can all stop getting electricity provided from anything that causes pollution. And yes if you chose to you can be pedantic like me and say that wind farms are a form of pollution, they arent natural and they spoil the landscape.

Wheres it gonna stop?

As A recently (2 weeks ago) ex smoker its something I feel strongly about, to the point that if some oppinionated **** came into m,y face and complained about me smoking I'd blow the ****ing smoke in their face and tell them to **** off.

But thats me.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No, it's not "full of them". There's a number of them, yes, but next time you go in, take a look at just how many are smoking at one time. Unless they're dedicate chain smokers, I will lay odds that actually most *aren't*.

I'm not trying to "force" anyone to think anything. It is a matter of trying to *educate* them that what they are doing affects *others* as well as them.

If you want to commit suicide by playing Russian Roulette, that's your business and your choice. If you want to do it by using a hand-grenade in a crowded room, that is *not* simply "your business"!

Do you have any *proof* of this? Or is it just an opinion??

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I was referring to an alcohol fix, still its a very potent and powerfull drug that wrecks lives of those around it.


Never thought of using a handgrenade as a comparison to a cigarette, i'd imagine the odds of sustaining a fatal injury from, a few pound of explosive contained in a steel shell designed to fragment would be considerably higher than passive smoking.
Still as I admitted passive smoking is a problem and I dont have the answers on how to prevent it.

Based on what happened at my local, something as little as stopping smoking at the bar, seemed to empty the place I'd guestimate that little rule drove people to the other pubs around that allowed smoking at the bar, to about 30% of the locals in the pub.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

However alcohol is not generally addictive. The difference is important.

You were the one who said (I quote) "if smokers smoke thye know they are practically committing suicide", so please don't criticise *me* for exaggerating.

But if by "banning smoking" you were referring to a situation like that in Ireland, then there's no point in people moving to another pub because the rules will be the same there.

On that subject, http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=124221 says that "Irish Smoking Ban Hurts Business, Say Irish Publicans", however it's interesting to note the statement right at the bottom of the page which says "Distributed by PR Newswire on behalf of Tobacco Manufacturers' Association" which suggests this might not be *entirely* impartial...!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Due to the events of the last few days and the lack of report post e-mails I have only just seen this, I'm not sure anyone else in the team has either.

This outburst is completely OTT and that sort of language & abuse will not be tolerated on the site. If it happens again, action will be taken.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

That is the best post I have ever seen you write. Well put :tu:

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Why not have the pub equally split???

Why make it law? why not let, as I suggested earlier, let the management of the establishment decide who they wouldlike to cater for?

All I am asking for is freedom of choice - do you not believe in that?

Thats fine, that is what I was alluding to. If I went to a "none kids" pub and kids were running riot I would expect them to leave. If I was in anon-smoking pub and people were smoking again I would expect them to be booted out.

There is such thing as passive abuse, passive drunken assault, passive knocked down and killed, passive home wrecking, passive wife beating.

I agree that you should not be "forced" to breathe other peoples smoke. "properly" segregated (air tight if necessary) areas should be allocated for smokers and non-smokers.

I just believe a blanket ban is necessary or fair. Smokers should be allowed to go out and smoke and enjoy themselves and so should non-smokers.

Surely its possible for both sides to do this??

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

How many people are actually smoking in a pub at any one time? Maybe 20%? So why should a minority get a majority or even an equal share?

From a purely economic point of view, if *only* you ban it from your establishment, you will probably lose custom to the place that doesn't, so you're less likely to ban it because of that, Catch 22.

You know damn well that I do believe in freedom of choice. But I am *NOT* free to enjoy a pub where some people are smoking and I am not protected from their smoke.

But that's not what I'm talking about.

I said "Now let's put that back in the context of smoking. The smokers can do it, provided it's in the garden or similar set-aside area and if they do it in the main part of the pub it's going to affect other pub users, so it is *THEY* who should leave if they don't like it!!"

I'm talking about a pub where smoking or children *are* allowed, but in a designated, set aside area. Provided that doesn't affect others, I have no problems with it.

You're getting desperate now. None of these equate to my getting drunk because of what you're drinking, neither do they equate to my inhaling someone else's smoke.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

There may only be 20% smoking at any one time but the chances are that the ones that are smoking are in the company of others who are not and that the total number of customers who are in groups which include a smoker is a majority of the customers present. Would you expect a group of half a dozen customers to all nip outside if one of them wanted a fag?



I would imagine that pub landlords, being businessmen trying to maximise their profits, have weighed up the consequences of being a non-smoking pub, a zoned smoking pub or a fully smoking pub. The answer being that the pub becomes what its customers want it to be. If the majority of people prefer a non smoking pub and only frequent such pubs then you would find that most pubs will become non smoking. The fact that they don't must tell you something.



But you are free to enjoy pubs that do not allow smoking whereas smokers are not free to enjoy them. Smokers can use these non smoking pubs but may not enjoy the experience as much as they would in a smoking pub.

Be honest, how much of your life is spent in pubs and how much of that time is spoiled by smokers being present. Many non smokers complain about smoking when they see a cigarette even though they cannot smell it or there is none of the smoke entering their lungs. I have had people ask me to refrain from smoking because the smoke is affecting them when all I have had is an unlit cigarette in my hand with no intention of lighting it.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No, I'd expect the one who is engaged in the smelly, anti-social, unhealthy habit to step outside until they'd got their fix and then come back again after. Why should I have to put up with it?

Yes, it tells me that you haven't thought the model through. If you were going out with five friends and the other four didn't smoke so wanted to go to a non-smoking pub or to sit in a non-smoking area but you did want to smoke, would you expect the four to submit to your wishes? What if they told you "we're going to a non-smoking pub, deal with it"?

But if, as Ireland has done, smoking was banned, you wouldn't *have* to be forced into that position. You could still go, you would just have to step outside when you needed your fags.

The landlord wouldn't have to risk losing business to cater for a minority who exercise undue power over the majority and the pub *will* be what the *majority* would most likely prefer it to be.

Rubbish. As I've already pointed out, they can step outside and smoke. It simply means that the rest of us don't have to breathe it too.

That's irrelevant. I don't want to have to be put into a position where I *need* to complain about smokers. I don't want to come back with my clothes and hair stinking of smoke, nor, if I'm coming back with a non-smoking girlfriend do I want *her* to stink of smoke either. *That* is what spoils it.

And how are *they* going to know that you've got "no intention of lighting it"? If I see someone with an unlit fag in their hand it's a reasonable conclusion that they're going to do something with it!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Graham, you are looking at this issue with the presumption that all people who do not smoke object to being in places where people do smoke. You are manipulating the argument on this false premise. I have been out with friends, none of which smoke, and gone to a non smoking area only to have one of them say that we would be better going to the smoking area so that I could have a fag when I wanted one. Asking the question of several non smoking friends today they have all said the same thing. When they are out having a good time at the pub they are not bothered about the smokers lighting up. The consensus was that they didn't really notice whether anyone was smoking or not.

I can just picture your idea of a good night out in the pub, sitting there moaning about smokers whilst the guy next to you is hoping that you would find another seat as he can't stand the smell of your aftershave. ;)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Look at it from another point of view

Why should smokers have to put up with a whinging moaning rude person?

At the end of the day the choice is still yours, if you go into a pub and someones smoking if its THAT much of a problem for you, go elsewhere.

As I previously stated I recently quite smoking, and I couldnt give two flying ****s if someone was smoking near me.

To respond to other comments and aimed at no on in particular.

Children should never be allowed in pubs, its no place for them to be, there is little for them to do and they get bored. When bored they play up.
I exercise my right to choice, if I walk into a pub and its full of screaming brats (yes Brats because these days little "tarquin" is a little sod and needs a bloody good hiding) I will and do go elsewhere. If I walked into a pub and it was full of smack heads (and this has happened to me once or twice) I dont start lecturing them on the evils of drug abuse.
We live in an age where peoples views seemingly force them to interfere with others, and as much as I wont condone violence it is clear from some peoples attitudes why there are still assaults in the street etc.

I am pretty damn sure that if someone walked into the pub I am a regular at and asked me to not smoke in front of them, my response would be one of barely controllable anger. I could see it from some parties that said objectionist would be forcibly removed from the premises for their own safety.

Smokers do not force non smokers to sit and suffer. Most pubs now have VERY powerfull extractor fans to remove the smoke, and ANY landlord would be in trouble if they refused to put these on.
Yes as a smoker I was concerned about non smokers breathing my smoke. Yes I did smoke with a few manners other people seem to have forgotten, I wouldnt smoke in front of children (fortunate really that children are not allowed in my local after 5pm) and I would not smoke when people with me and immediatly around me were eating.

But if someone approached me and was rude and anti social to me I'd be their worst enemy, stuff my manners, I'd go all out to annoy them.
There are family pubs these days, there are pubs that have seperate lounges used mainly for food during the day that dont allow smoking at all. What else do the anti smoking brigade want?
Might as well ban sale of tobacco and watch them all cry as tax levels rise to 50 and 60% (figure clutched from thin air) as ALL tobacco revenue is lost, yet funnily enough non smokers will still get cancer. (or rather not funnily after watching a 21 one year old non smoker die of it)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No, I'm looking at it from the point of view that there are people who do not smoke would like to have the option to not *be* in places where people do smoke.

I'm looking at it from the point of view that the non-smoking *majority* should not be shoe-horned into a non-smoking area, when they should really be given preference over the smoking *minority*.

Or perhaps it's that they've got so used to putting up with it that they don't think about it any more.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

You make a very good point. Unfortunately it's *my* point!!

Why should someone have to put up with anti-social behavior from somone else which impinges on their enjoyment?

Answer: They shouldn't of course!

If someone's behaving in a way that is unacceptable, *THEY* should be required to leave. So if someone's stinking up the atmosphere and making others engage in passive smoking, *WHY* should non-smokers be forced to put up with it or be told "if you don't like it, go somewhere else"?

If you're going to try to make an argument, back it up with facts, not made up figures and try to realise that nobody's talking about "banning tobacco" just preventing others from having to breath smoker's pollution.

Yes, of course people will still get *some* forms of cancer, but do you think *more* people will get cancer or *less*?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I'm prepared to fit in around my smoking friends because I value them.In fact ALL my smoking friends actually go out of their way when in a social situation not to offend and to take their habit away from non smokers.I prefer to offer help to those who want to give up and to offer condolances to those who can't.I refuse to give up a friend because they smoke or to belittle or demonise them because they are smokers.

In fact I used to go and sit in the smokers staffroom(before Hampshire County Council banned all smoking on county premises) because frankly there were a damn site more interesting conversations taking place.Not suffering any problems yet with my health.

Incog. :)

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I would take your own advice there.

Just because overall smokers are in a minority does not mean that they are in a minority in a particular place. For all you know when you walk in a pub you could be the only non smoker in there.

You are assuming that all non smokers have the same ideas about smoking as you do, where are your facts to back this up?

Do we take the same stance on pollution from cars and ban them from town centres? Why should the millions of non driving public have to breath the pollution from them?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

This argu errrr...discussion is becoming circular.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Indeed it is.

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

Approximately 80% of NHS expenditure is staff wages, Doctors, Nurses, Domestics etc. so the only way the NHS could save money, if smoking were banned, would be to make staff redundant, who wants to be the person who sacks the first consultant ?
Incidentally the NHS employs more people than the entire Red army had at disposal during the "cold war" days. :)

Re: Smoking to be banned
 

If the consultant is sitting about unoccupied, then I would quite happily be the one to sack them. Are you suggesting that people should be on the payroll for the sake of it even if their services are not required?!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

You miss the point.

Go into a pub, count the number of people there, then count the number *actively smoking* at any time.

Unless they're dedicated chain smokers on 60 a day, even those who smoke will only be doing it for a few minutes each hour.

So what's so hard about them popping out for a drag every now and again?

Err, have you *heard* of "Park and Ride" schemes? What about pedestrianisng major shopping areas? Not only do they reduce congestion, they also reduce pollution!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

So the majority should be given rule over the minority - in this particular instance.

might is right?

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No, the *views* of the majority, *when* what the minority is doing is having an effect on them, should definitely be taken into account.

There's a big difference.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

So effectively you are saying that there is not much smoke about. If it's the smell you are complaining about then are you going to ban perfume and aftershave too. I have been put off more by those smells than I ever have by cigarette smoke and that was when I didn't smoke. Those smells are also very hazardous to your health when the wife smells them on you and thinks you have been misbehaving. ;)



I have also heard of "no smoking" areas and no smoking pubs, try and find one and you may be happy. :)

I don't think that this exchange can ever result in any agreement as each have their own ideas and won't be moved. Lets leave it that we should have freedom of choice in what we do and where we go. A publican should also have free choice in what he allows on his property.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

No, I'm saying nothing of the sort and I cannot see how you got to that conclusion from what I said!

Smoke from cigarettes, unlike perfume and aftershave, is being *renewed* constantly by smokers. If someone was sitting there putting on perfume every few minutes and sitting in a cloud of the stuff, you'd probably object too!

And so we're back to the "if you don't like other people's anti-social behaviour, go somewhere else" argument :rolleyes:

Have you ever *looked* at the laws that restrict what publicans can or cannot allow on their premises?!

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Graham dont go on about peoples right of choice then say its OK to deny smokers their choice.

If YOU dont like it YOU go elsewhere. simple fact really and probably the most pleasing all round.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I normally see plenty of people smoking, pretty much constantly.

Drinking and smoking generally go hand in hand, you'll find that a lot of people will get through double the amount of fags they'd smoke during an average day

Go to a busy nightclub (or even some of the more popular pubs round here), if you "pop out for a drag" you won't get back in.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

I have never heard of any possibilities of someone getting Cancer etc through sniffing perfume or deoderant on someone else.

Now passive smoking, thats something that I have heard is harmful to others.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Yes, but if it wasn't for successive governments making it an issue that they want everyone to stop smoking, you'd never hear about passive smoking either - ignoring the contribution that smokers make to the exchequer (and I am aware that this in an involuntary tax), no government can afford for everybody to stop smoking.

More to the point, how do people know that sniffing perfume or deodorant etc isn't harmful to others - I'm sure that it isn't but I couldn't give a definitive answer. The issue there is simply that those make you smell nice (for a while anyway), whereas smoking doesn't.

Re: Smoking in public places to be banned
 

Does anybody know what the total tax take from tobacco duty is, and the estimated NHS expenditure on treating smoking-related illness? Banning it altogether might not prove to be such a large net loss to the exchequer as some people claim.

This isn't a rhetorical question - I really don't know the answer to this, but if anyone does, I'd be very interested. :)