smoking and the pub - Page 23

orangebird · 27-10-2005, 16:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris T

It's not nearly as bad as you think. Thanks to catalytic converters, car exhaust is basically nitrogen and carbon dioxide. Quite useful for the suicidal but not directly harmful to the passing pedestrian (except for CO2 being a greenhouse gas of course).

Trying to make a direct comparison between tobacco smoke and car exhaust is yet another red herring.

When you're pushing a stroller and the child is at the a
same low height constantly, there's a big difference to the average pedestrian. That's why I mentioned children in strollers specifically the first place.

Kliro · 27-10-2005, 16:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangebird

How do you know that? Or is that another wild assumption like what a pub is really for and what the publican has to provide to the public?

Stop trying to get one over on someone by nitpicking, everyone knows what she meant and so do you.

Everyone knows that smoke within a confined space is more harmful than in an open place as the ratio of air to smoke is much higher, its common sense.

If you put as much effort into quitting as you have into defending the 'right' of the smoker, I'm sure you'd be able to survive without cigarettes.

orangebird · 27-10-2005, 16:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kliro

Stop trying to get one over on someone by nitpicking, everyone knows what she meant and so do you.

Everyone knows that smoke within a confined space is more harmful than in an open place as the ratio of air to smoke is much higher, its common sense.

If you put as much effort into quitting as you have into defending the 'right' of the smoker, I'm sure you'd be able to survive without cigarettes.

How the hell would you know?

Nitpicking????? I'm asking someone to quantify their point, because as it stands it's unsubstantiated. What's your issue? Think that your non-smoking comrade won't be able to either?

**Chris** · 27-10-2005, 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangebird

When you're pushing a stroller and the child is at the a
same low height constantly, there's a big difference to the average pedestrian. That's why I mentioned children in strollers specifically the first place.

That is a good point (and one I can identify with). Personally I don't drive the family into the city centre, I'd rather park and ride on the train, it's far better for everyone concerned (my family and other pedestrians) (even if the lifts at Glasgow Central low-level platform are normally broken and we have to get a ticket inspector to help lug the pram up the stairs

).

But though it may be unpleasant, car exhaust, once catalysed, does not contain anything like the carcinogens you get in tobacco smoke, and the fumes are not drawn so deeply into the lungs as they are when you smoke.

Kliro · 27-10-2005, 17:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by orangebird

How the hell would you know?

Nitpicking????? I'm asking someone to quantify their point, because as it stands it's unsubstantiated. What's your issue? Think that your non-smoking comrade won't be able to either?

Heh, one moment your accusing other people of thinking that they are better than you because they are stronger willed, and then the next your trying to insuinuate that you are more clever than others, because we have differing views...

ian@huth · 27-10-2005, 17:24

There is one question that I would like to ask of those who want a complete ban on smoking in ALL public enclosed spaces.

Why do you object to a pub owner wanting to allow smoking in his establishment if he displays a prominent notice signifying that it is a smoking area at all entrances to the pub?

Angua · 27-10-2005, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris T

That is a good point (and one I can identify with). Personally I don't drive the family into the city centre, I'd rather park and ride on the train, it's far better for everyone concerned (my family and other pedestrians) (even if the lifts at Glasgow Central low-level platform are normally broken and we have to get a ticket inspector to help lug the pram up the stairs

).

But though it may be unpleasant, car exhaust, once catalysed, does not contain anything like the carcinogens you get in tobacco smoke, and the fumes are not drawn so deeply into the lungs as they are when you smoke.

AFAIK the driver gets more fumes than any pedestrains!

Lew · 27-10-2005, 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris T

Trying to make a direct comparison between tobacco smoke and car exhaust is yet another red herring.

And making out that smokers are "trying to murder" non-smokers is a pathetic argument.

ian@huth · 27-10-2005, 18:43

I am just watching the news on ITV1 and they have been asking pub landlords in Burton on Trent how the proposed smoking ban would affect them. A large number said that they will stop serving food as they will lose less profit that way than keeping the food and banning smoking.

27-10-2005, 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by ian@huth

There is one question that I would like to ask of those who want a complete ban on smoking in ALL public enclosed spaces.

Why do you object to a pub owner wanting to allow smoking in his establishment if he displays a prominent notice signifying that it is a smoking area at all entrances to the pub?

Staff

**Chris** · 27-10-2005, 19:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lew

And making out that smokers are "trying to murder" non-smokers is a pathetic argument.

Agreed.

fireman328 · 27-10-2005, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Staff

Employ only staff who smoke

Paul K · 27-10-2005, 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireman328

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Staff

Employ only staff who smoke

Wouldn't that be discrimination against non-smokers who wish to remain working at that pub?

Gareth · 27-10-2005, 19:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris T

It's not nearly as bad as you think. Thanks to catalytic converters, car exhaust is basically nitrogen and carbon dioxide. Quite useful for the suicidal but not directly harmful to the passing pedestrian (except for CO2 being a greenhouse gas of course).

Trying to make a direct comparison between tobacco smoke and car exhaust is yet another red herring.

Just to add something to this discussion, I thought I'd mention some of the lovely stuff you're breathing-in every time a diesel-powered car drives past you.

Diesel exhaust contains 20-100 times more particles than petrol exhaust. These particles carry cancer-causing substances known as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Gases in diesel exhaust, such as nitrous oxide, nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde, benzene, sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide, carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide can also create health problems. (source: www.amicustheunion.org - the UK's largest manufacturing, technical & skilled persons' union.)

Incidentally, a lot of those chemicals are also found in cigarette smoke, so there actually is a direct correlation between tobacco smoke and car exhaust fumes.

SlackDad · 27-10-2005, 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nugget

See, this is the sort of attitude that gets me - why do you think that people are trying 'to murder you'?

I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of smokers do actually take non-smokers into account, and don't purposely blow smoke in their direction. While it's fair to say that you don'y like smokers / smoking, this is the sort of comment that is just far too extreme and is almost guaranteed to wind people (particularly smokers) up. Just IMO, of course

Of course smokers take non-smokers into account. For a start they don't charge for all that free nicotine they're blowing into the air for everyone to consume.