Smoking Ban

[jak]

Oh right, so you don't disagree with the ban just with the government. That being the case at the next general election if more people got off their    and vote things might change. Bleating about civil liberties on here won't. How many people who have moaned about the nanny state actually voted at the last general election

Well i didn't join the wscc out of politics, i did vote at the last election, however.

Do you have a point?

OK, point is getting back on topic - smoking in public places for or against

[Boomy]

Have to love all the tried and tested excuses that surface when topics such as this appear.

What has astounded me in the past are tales of smokers who will for example happily sit next to your new born child/dinner table etc and puff away, then get angry when you complain.

But, you are not allowed to smoke in their new car!.

Well, that is at least untill it is a year or so old, then you won't get into trouble because they too will be doing the same.

Let's face it, it stinks, it's not good for you and it doesn't mean suddenly everything will be banned.

If you are addicted, get help.

If you enjoy it, smoke in your own home or private club etc.Nobody has banned smoking have they?.

If you think drinking should be banned aswell due to the side effects you are not really comparing like for like.

Supping on a pint next to a non drinker is hardly comparable is it unless you keep spraying mouthfuls over them?.

I currently smoke, only roll ups mind as i can't stand the stink from normal fags and it helped me to cut right down.

Plus i will never smoke in somebody elses house even if they offer and i will only smoke in one room of my house, right next to an open window.

I have never for example got into a lift and subjected people to my habbit and i will always ask if someone else is a smoker and if it is ok to do so before i light up.

Many smokers are not like that though.They have no interest at all in what you have to say and find it almost offensive if you ask them not to smoke near you.

Pretty pathetic really, so i am glad this has finally happened, just as i was glad when they banned it from a local cienema when i was younger.In the end you couldn't see the film due to the fog.

There is nothing anyone can say sensibly to defend the actions of people who smoke with no concern for others.

Someone else posted this on another forum, i guess this sums it up for a lot of people.

"there's no right to smoke in the first place, the government not banning it up to now is a privelege and concession afforded to smokers rather than them taking away some right of theirs"

I am also convinced that most of the smokers who do not agree with this decision are angry purely because they will no longer be able to have a fag where they want and will miss it purely due to the addiction.

They are p******** at the government solely for making it more difficult to use something they crave and only drag up the civil liberty argument etc because they notice the excuses bandwaggon rolling past and hop aboard thinking "yeah..that's a good one".

[conibear]

don't know if anyone's interested but I can get tobacco at very competitive prices

[jak]

Thanks God for that Boomy, I thought it was only me that thought that.

John

[Darrell O'Neill]

As an ex non-smoker..... 'Ban it' I say.....

it worked for the hunting bill.........NOT

I'll get me coat.... (a fur one)    

[nlash]

I'm just curious but, how many of those on here banging on in favour of a full smoking ban will be back on here complaining of 'police state' or 'nanny state' when a law is introduced that you don't like?

A lot of people on here only give the government the thumbs up when it suits them...

and at other times, are quick to slag them off when it doesn't.

[Blatman]

Erosion of civil liberties? What's next? How about the test of history? Weren't all these things said of the seat belt law? One assumes that the WSCC smokers all wear their seat belts/harnesses when in their cars? Why? Because the potential risks and injuries that can occur when things go wrong have been adequately demonstrated. The same is true of smoking. You run the risk of contracting any number of serious and even fatal diseases and there is *no* dispute on the possible consequences if you choose to smoke, same as the possible injury or death that can occur if you stuff your car when not wearing a belt.

So do the smokers who advocate a "soft" stance on smoking also advocate a softening of the seat belt law?

[Bluerallye]

Oh right, so you don't disagree with the ban just with the government. That being the case at the next general election if more people got off their    and vote things might change. Bleating about civil liberties on here won't. How many people who have moaned about the nanny state actually voted at the last general election

Well i didn't join the wscc out of politics, i did vote at the last election, however.

Do you have a point?

OK, point is getting back on topic - smoking in public places for or against

OK, politics aside, personally it makes no difference to me whether someone smokes or not.  I feel that the current balance is right for everyone as most pubs i go into (Blackpool) have smoking and non-smoking areas, the majority have a bigger dedicated non smoking area for eating and are well ventilated in non-smoking areas.

So i would have to say no to a blanket ban as it is too extreme, and that is speaking as an ex (of 10 years) smoker.

As for Blatmans post, alcohol is as equal a killer as tobacco is but it's a vice that we indulge into as responsible adults, and as for the secondary effects of alcohol.....i never saw any smoker go and kick the s**t out of someone outside a club at 2am nor be too messed up to drive or pawn the kids toys to go and spend a weekend smoking himself into a stupor yet it's still an acceptable pastime with enough proven dangers and illnesses.

[oldman]

Ban the ban  

[Boomy]

Ban the ban  

I think Suzi Quatro sang that?  

[Bean]

I assume he means a total ban in public places.

In which case, I presume it wouldn't necessarily actively be policed, unless there's a complaint against either a person or an establishment.

Andy

Yes, I was trying to make the point that you don't generally breathe in exhaust fumes in the pub.

Smoking in restaurant/pub/cage whilst people are eating annoys me the most.

[steve_m]

I don't drink or smoke . . . they can't ban me    

[nlash]

As for Blatmans post, alcohol is as equal a killer as tobacco is but it's a vice that we indulge into as responsible adults, and as for the secondary effects of alcohol.....i never saw any smoker go and kick the s**t out of someone outside a club at 2am nor be too messed up to drive or pawn the kids toys to go and spend a weekend smoking himself into a stupor yet it's still an acceptable pastime with enough proven dangers and illnesses.

And this was my next point...

Alcohol is a killer too, as were the non wearing of seatbelts. Speed cameras in built up areas that nobody likes... if we all abided by speed restrictions, they wouldn't be there and so it goes on.

Think about this... Stella lovers. In 10 years time when whichever government is publicy forced to act on alcohol related crime and the rising cost to policing and medical care after such events. What would we all be saying when there is a restriction on alcohol level applied to the very brands we love to consume. Unthinkable you say? Well no, whoever thought that there would be restrictions on where you can smoke 10 years ago?

So when future governments apply a restriction on alcoholic drinks containing a percentage level much lower than what you get now, say 1.5% by volume, will we all be saying what a good move this is and how resposible of the government to act in this way? Err I don't think so.

It'll never happen you might say? Lets wait and see and have a similiar vote on its merits if it does

[nlash]

So do the smokers who advocate a "soft" stance on smoking also advocate a softening of the seat belt law?

Yes why not?

I can have the dangers of not wearing a seat belt demonstrated to me then make up my own mind whether to wear it or not.

That would be my choice

What next? Ban mountain climbing/deep sea diving/ parachuting etc etc because of the potential cost to the tax payer should an accident occur?

[StuartMackay]

Life, in general, is dangerous...when will that be banned?