July 1st (moved from General)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
Mark G. 1st July

17 Jun 2007 08:51 AM

Who like me can`t wait for the smoking ban to be introduced on the 1st July 2007. Smoking has been a blight on on life since my son was born. He has Cardiac problems and we have never been able to take him to any place`s where smoking is permitted, not that I would have even before he was born.

Smoking is a disgusting habit and restaurants etc have not catered for none smokers at all. They say they have no smoking areas, a few signs on the adjacent tables with no ventilation.

Smokers are just Gloried Taxable Drug Addicts.

So I will be throwing a party.... "no smoking of course"

Mark.

Icemaker

17 Jun 2007 11:22 AM Absolutely Mark, we cant wait, it will be one of the best laws ever introduced as far as im concerned. most smokers regardles of how nice a person they are without the cigarette become extremely selfish and self centered when it comes to the time for a "fix" and restrictions should be in place to protect the innocent from this filth.

We have just returned from a large comercial site in wales for the weekend which has a club able to hold around 500, the club was full all night and not one smoker was seen within, but the best bit was in the morning when we woke up and none of our clothes or the van had that awfull discusting stench of smoke on them.

Another problem for me due to my job is when the passengers get off the train and have the cigarette ready to light just as theire first foot hits the platform and i have to endure clouds of noxious gas untill i leave the station. Well good news for all non smokers, Every single train operater in the country have got together and decided that the smoking ban will apply to ALL stations whether covered or not and a railway bi-law has been passed to enforce this by law. july 1st can't come soon enough for me.

TreborDee

17 Jun 2007 11:24 AM Hi Mark.

Sorry to hear that your son has Heart Problem.

I take it your son was born with Heart problems, and smoking was not the cause of his heart problem.

Plus by the sound of it your a very anti smoker person anyway, You say you can't take your son out any place where smoking is permitted, I find this hard to believe as a lot restaurants,pub,shops and a lot of other place's did not allow you to smoke on their premises for years well before the smoking in public place's ban comes in to force.

The next time you attend the Hospital with your son, Please ask the doctor about if car exhaust fumes can be more harmful to your son condition than second hand smoking, ( Remembering you do not allow anyone to smoke near him or you don't go any place where smoking is permitted ).

Please think about this the next time you are travelling in car,or your are going on holiday in your car with your caravan on the motorway and your are stuck in a traffic jam, think of the amount of carbon monoxide your son is berthing in, and how harmful this is to him.

So just don't blame the smokers.

I live in Scotland where the smoking ban has been enforced for over a year now, it seems to working fine here with people getting used to where you are aloud to smoke and where you are not.

But I don't think the smoking ban will work in England, the reason I say this is, if you look at all the country's that it is working in, I.E: Ireland,Scotland, these two country's have small population compared with the country's that it is not working in, with like's of Italy,France, Germany,Spain, where the populations is far greater.

Now being a smoker myself, the ban did not bother me as much as other people, in fact it has encourage me to try cut down and eventual give up smoking, I don't smoke in my car plus i won't let anyone smoke in my caravan, but then again that's my choice, and if i go some where, i don't mind having to smoking outside.

Robert.

Damian

17 Jun 2007 11:43 AM I am a smoker, albeit a light one, but also cannot wait for the ban to come into force, as when we go out, I hate to eat and have the smell of tobacco smoke spoiling the taste of the food which I am paying for.

I think the ban will not have any great effect in most places, as most smokers do not smoke inside buildings anyway, and those who feel they "have"to smoke, will just go outside, which in my area, a lot of the pubs and restaurants are already having covered patio areas set up to cater for the people who like to have a cigarette after a meal.

The big problem, as far as I can make out is actually one which will affect every tax payer.

If all the smokers gave up, and considering that they pay far much more tax than they "get back" with medical treatment, the revenue the Government collects will drop considerably, and they will have to get that shortfall from somewhere,,,,,,guess where!!, so whilst anti smokers will be rejoicing in the new law, and giving a big "Thumbs UP" to even more state intervention in peoples personal lives , I hope they , along with everyone else, dont mind paying extra for more things to make up the tax deficit.

Now,moving on,,,,what will be the next easiest thing to tax more,,and get from most people,how about Fuel? Booze (which is responsible for more misery than anyone smoking), and oh yes,lets think up a new tax on Caravans,they are much more popular now, and are a "blight" on the landscape and clog the roads, as we all know, so lets make them pay!!!

Think about it.

Alan Partridge

17 Jun 2007 12:05 PM I don't like smoking either, and wish smokers were more considerate - but frankly I'd rather all this persecution stopped. Would the government be doing this if a majority were smokers? It's a nice trick for a government wanting to stay popular to demonise successive minorities - (hunting, 4x4s anybody?) and bash them. Caravans are probably somewhere near the top of the list.

Live and let live was always a good motto.

Clive (Cardiff)

17 Jun 2007 05:19 PM I quite agree with the anti smoking sentiments. I was a heavy smoker until about 20 years ago (nothing worse than a former addict)

A couple of points that I have found in Wales since the ban came in.

1. Local club that used to be full on Saturday night is now almost empty. Is this because of the ban - who knows!

2. Most pubs now have an area outside for the punters to drink and smoke. It seems that the old system of not being allowed to take your drink outside to the pavement has gone by the board. I just wonder what will happen in the winter

3. Most Pubs are putting up gas patio heaters, what is this doing to the atmosphere? Perhaps us 4X4 owners should form a boycott group against this anti-social behaviour

Marc

17 Jun 2007 06:18 PM As a non smoker I will be Happy happy to see the ban brought in, however if this goverment was really interested in the health of the nation they should bring in a total ban on tobbacco. This of course will never happen as they gain far too much in both tax and duty to put your health first.

Marc

colin- yorkshire

17 Jun 2007 07:38 PM hi all

I am a smoker and have been for 40years and will not be giving up the weed because I like it.

I have no health problems at all apart from occasional haemorrhoids which are a pain in the bum, and have not seen a jp in 10 years and have not lost a days work through illnes since before tony came to the throne and thats depite being down the pit for 20 odd years earlier in my life.

I am fuming at the ban and think I will probably ignore it every opportunity I get, I now drive for a living and have been instructed that from 1st of july cannot smoke in the cab as it is a place of work, even though I am on my own, (as carrying passengers is not allowed) and are out on the road 8 hrs a day.

a smoking ban in clubs pubs and restraunts does not bother me as I am teetotal and dont go in them anyway and when visting cafes and restraunts usually sit outside anyway.

I do however hate drunks and people stupid and aggressive with drink (now theres a ban worth having) and will be clapping hands when it comes in (your next)go to any casualty dept on fri/sat night and see for yourself its full of smokers who have been fighting or falling over after cosumming too much nicotine?.

as the famous quote goes first they came for the jews but I as not a jew ect.ect.so learn and be warned!!!! as for me I will be breaking the law on the 1st, when I light up, in my cab, on me own, on the road,and sod em all!!!.

harry

17 Jun 2007 10:07 PM Nice one Colin !! ... good to hear someone sticking up for us , quite frankly i get totally p***ed of with these anti smoking brigade preaching the gospel ... they never thought of that years ago, only since the passive smoking lark was highlighted.

colin- yorkshire

17 Jun 2007 11:46 PM quite right harry

if people are so anti smoke why go where it is, stay away thats the short answer.

I read a article in my local paper on this very subject a couple of weeks ago and one person interviewed said they welcomed the ban as all the smoke had a detrimental effect on there chidrens health when visiting there local pub WHAT KIDS IN A PUB.

why take them there in the first place, and why is it that the anti smoking lobby talk about freedom of choice but only consider there freedom.

before I got my present job I worked in a large factory in the 200 seater canteen there was a very small smoke room off to one side with 4 tables and twenty chairs at break times the canteen was empty but the smoke room was crammed full like a tin of sardines, standing room only looked like a opium den from the outside and yet 50% of the staff in there did not smoke at all,?? they went in there because the company was better and did not mind the smoke at all.

when the canteen was decorated the smoke room was closed down and transfered to a shelter in the yard with no heating and open on two sides, but guess what the canteen was still empty and where was all the staff, yep in the shelter in coats in january.

geordie

18 Jun 2007 00:36 AM Well its been in operation up here for over a year now and in my town we've had two pubs and a bingo hall close so far because of lack of punters.

TreborDee

18 Jun 2007 01:48 AM Colin from Yorkshire.

As a smoker and I agree with some of the things you say.

But I don't think you will be lighting up in your cab when no ones there, ( Their is always someone watching you ) I don't know if your local council will agree with you or not, that's if they are the one's who issued you with your taxi licence, I know in Scotland that some local councils will take your taxi badge or licence off you if you get caught smoking in your cab, remembering your their to provide a service to the public and all it will take is a member of public or council official to see you and that's where the fun begin, you'll end up with a fine and the possibility of losing your cab licence, so think on, you have a lot more to lose, it's not worth it, ( Don't Give The Blue Rinse Anti Smoking Brigade The Satisfaction Of " I Told You So " ).

The Blue Rinse Anti Smoking Brigade will be out in force watching the smoker to see if they are smoking in places they should not be smoking under the new smoking in public places act, and you better believe they will be reporting people and even trying to get people sacked from their job's, or even trying to get some places closed down because their not adhering to the new smoking in public act, as this has happened in some places in Scotland, My local council have even started to give out £50 on the spot fines if you throw your cigarette end on the ground, pubs and clubs have to provide wall mountable ashtrays outside their premises or they to can be fined by the council.

Remember this, it is the Local Government Council Authorities that are in charge of enforcing this law, so watch out for the " smoking police " as they get called up in Scotland or Community wardens is the right name for them.

You'll get used to it.

Robert

steve in Leo

18 Jun 2007 06:18 AM Im a non-smoker who currently has to travel in a car with three smokers who should have chimnies on their heads. It's nothing for them to spark up every half hour simutainiously!!!

Then one of them has the audacity to complain if I have the window open!!

Forget the old "I hate people who smoke while I'm eating, how the Bloody hell can anyone say they enjoy a *** after a realy good meal?

I'd much rather savor the taste of a juicey steak than have my taste buds wrecked by a ***.

Another observation I have noted is that smokers always have to light up before they go into a meeting or conflictive situations. why? Looks to me like they need that "moral support".

I certainly don't need to show bravado, I can stand up for me quite well enough without the crutch of a ***.

Roll on July bring the ban on!!

colin- yorkshire

18 Jun 2007 10:38 AM hi TreborDee

I am not a taxi driver,?? would not want to be one as I could not face spending sunday mornings cleaning the sick up off the back seat and floor?,

no thanks. I do mulidrop deliveries to commercial customers in a 7.5ton lorry, I will smoke if I want to and the blue rinse brigade can go to hell.

as for dropping cig ends on the floor that has been in force for sometime locally and people have been fined for dropping any kid of litter on the pavment remember the case of the toddler and the crisps shown nationally.( funny how the streets are still full of chewing gum though??).

steve in leo

if it is not a a commertial vehicle you travel in they will still be able to smoke, also smokers have a cig before going into or comming out of some where so what,never had a quick drink yourself in a similar situation or had a couple of pints to help the curry go down??.of course not.

a mate of mine runs a pub and he is considering his situation after the ban he has been told by the council that he personaly cannot smoke in his own pub even after closing time and the monthly poker tournament he holds (outside pub hours) must be smoke free or held outside, but if he turned it into a private hotel the ban would not apply if using a then private room and not the bar.

also it is funny how the ban is going to be enforced because I have read the very people who brought it in ie: MPs wil still be able to smoke in the bar at westminster and the private gentlemans clubs are also going to be exempt funny that isn't it pass a law them make your self exempt. mmmm

bye for now

colin

colin (bridgend)

18 Jun 2007 12:16 PM Colin (Yorkshire) In Wales private gentlemen's clubs are not exempt from the smoking ban. I belong to one such club in Port Talbot and in the entrance porch, hall, bar, dining room, etc. there are signs posted banning the smoking in the building and the consequences if caught. Incidentally the notices in Wales must be in both English & Welsh which to me is a total waste of money as 99.999999% of the Welsh can speak and understand English.

Ian

18 Jun 2007 01:52 PM The ban doesn't bother me either way but what annoys me is people who throw their cigarettes butts on the ground. Don't they realise that they are basically tipping riubbish illegally and on this I am sure a few smokers will agree!

SPG

18 Jun 2007 01:55 PM The ban introduced in Scotland last year is about the only thing the Scottish Parliment has done of any use (Only my opinion and I suspect this is not going to change in the short term).

Although not a smoker many of my immediate family and friends are, and I am not against smoking in general - simply that I do not see why I should have to suffer due to their personal choice.

The comparison to alcohol abuse is unfair in that it is the minority that cause the problems detailed above. The vast majority who are responsible individuals can enjoy an alcoholic drink in the same vacinity as someone who is teetotal without any encroachment on their enjoyment - the same cannot be said if someone lights up a cigarette in the vacinity of a non-smoker.

I do agree with Colin (Yorkshire) that more needs to be done to tackle the minority of drunk and abusive individuals who create havoc on Friday and Saturday nights, particularly in large towns and cities throughout the UK.

Although, feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but Colin did you not agree in a recent forum discussion that the use of mobile phones whilst driving was unsafe and dangerous? Surely the same rationale applies to smoking as in lighting up and smoking you are not giving full concentration to the task in hand - particularly in a 7.5 ton truck.

colin (bridgend)

18 Jun 2007 01:59 PM SPG I think you will find it was I who agreed the use of mobile phones whilst driving was unsafe. I also commented on the use of satnav. with the screen version being a dangerous distraction. Sorry sir to correct you on this minor point.

SPG

18 Jun 2007 02:06 PM Thanks Colin - happy to stand corrected.

Icemaker

18 Jun 2007 05:00 PM Colin yorkshire, The ban includes All vehicles that belong to a company whether they be taxed as commercial or plg, this includes all vans and cars no exception.

the only vehicles where smoking is now allowed are privately owned ones and even these are included in the ban if they are being used on company buisness.

See http://www.smokefreeengland.co.uk/what-do-i-do/quick-guide.html

I wonder what your boss will think of your attitude to the law considering you are putting him in line for a large fine if you get caught smoking in the cab ?.

colin (bridgend)

18 Jun 2007 05:06 PM The smoking isn't too bad - its when they burst into flame it gets a bit worrying. Surely what one does within their own confines is up to the individual as long as they are not causing harm to others. On saying this I do not condone smoking and would be glad to see it totally banned as it is harmful to health and a total waste of money, but if someone is willing to put just their life at risk so be it.

benny

18 Jun 2007 05:43 PM acording to the guv web site you can smoke in youre cab as long as your the only person in there but if you carry a pasanger even if he smokes you are not alowed to smoke

Icemaker

18 Jun 2007 09:21 PM Benny,the government web site states vehicles that are "used" by more than one person, so unless the vehicle is absolutely never going to be used by anyone other than yourself then you can not smoke in it.

below is the basics copied from the gov site,

Key points are:

From 1 July 2007 it will be against the law to smoke in virtually all enclosed and substantially enclosed public places and workplaces. See below for definitions.

Public transport and work vehicles used by more than one person will also need to be smokefree.

No-smoking signs will have to be displayed in all smokefree premises and vehicles.

Staff smoking rooms and indoor smoking areas will no longer be allowed, so anyone who wants to smoke will have to go outside.

Managers of smokefree premises and vehicles will have legal responsibilities to prevent people from smoking.

If you are uncertain where you can or can't smoke, just look for the no-smoking signs or ask someone in charge.

Penalties and fines for breaking the smokefree law

If you don't comply with the new smokefree law, you will be committing a criminal offence. The fixed penalty notices and maximum fine for each offence are:

Smoking in smokefree premises or work vehicles: a fixed penalty notice of £50 (reduced to £30 if paid in 15 days) imposed on the person smoking. Or a maximum fine of £200 if prosecuted and convicted by a court.

Failure to display no-smoking signs: a fixed penalty notice of £200 (reduced to £150 if paid in 15 days) imposed on whoever manages or occupies the smokefree premises or vehicle. Or a maximum fine of £1000 if prosecuted and convicted by a court.

Failing to prevent smoking in a smokefree place: a maximum fine of £2500 imposed on whoever manages or controls the smokefree premises or vehicle if prosecuted and convicted by a court. There is no fixed penalty notice for this offence.

Local councils will be responsible for enforcing the new law in England.

giovanni

19 Jun 2007 09:13 PM

I do not smoke.

I also do not see how any agency is going to enforce this

on drivers.

really, what are they going to do? pull over 10,000 lorries

on the M1? on the off chance that the vehicle is shared?

The driver only has to say he is the only driver which is

normally true.

Also a police car asked u to pull in, unless they have photo

evidence of smoke how are they going to nick you if you denigh

it...

I already know of 20 hgv drivers who have bought those toy

fags that glow.. just incase.........

Hopefully non of those who have been critical of smokers,

belong to the mobile in hand brigade drivers..... or is that

not as bad!!!!!!!!

Lord Braykewynde

19 Jun 2007 11:51 PM I was following a young female 2 days ago who was dawdling along at 20mph. At some lights when they changed to green she just sat there. I said to my wife I'm sure she's reading a map because her head was bowed down. Going across a river bridge she almost drove onto the pavement. At the next set of lights I pulled alongside and my wife said to look at what she was doing. She had her phone either wedged between the spokes of her steering wheel or velcroed on and was sat there texting. I could have been a police car for all she knew, she never even took her eyes off the phone. The fines are a joke and until they hit the idiots with a £600 fine they will carry on breaking the law.

Anyway, back to the fags ......... :O)

I smoked until about 15 years ago and stopped because it was becoming anti-social and I cared about others and them breathing my smoke. Having seen numerous people through my job dying of lung cancer also had an effect when thinking of myself dying and leaving my wife and kids without a breadwinner. Lung cancer has to be one of the most awful deaths imagineable and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

After I stopped smoking did I feel healthier, no I didn't.

If Steve in Leo as never smoked he wouldn't know about having a smoke after a meal but that, and when having a drink, was truly the only times I enjoyed a drag. The rest of the time it was the craving why I smoked but I didn't really enjoy it.

Will I be happy to see a total ban in public places? Yes, I will. Simply because I believe it is selfish to expect others to breath second hand smoke that I have blown out of my lungs.

With regards to pubs closing I don't think we will see too much of that unfortunately. People who are hooked on nicotine aren't going to stay away from drink because mostly the two go hand in hand. The problem is alcohol causes more problems to society in general and more cost to the Health Service than tobacco ever will do. What the answer to that is I don't know without greater punishments for being drunk and more punitive measures against licensed premises for encouraging people to get drunk. Most people who work in town centres or go clubbing have seen it where they keep taking the punters money until they can't drink no more. The bouncers come along then and throw them out on the pavement before ringing 999 for the ambulance to come and clear them away from the clubs doorstep. As I type this I've a big smile on my face knowing that I haven't got that to do no more, dumping drunks in casualty, the only place we could take them while the staff there didn't want them. No more abuse from drink fuelled morons, having to sit there and take it because we would have the sack if we retalliated. No more going back to station to clean all the vomit off the kit which kept us off road for other genuine calls for about one hour.

No more Politically Correct managers who told us that drunks were ill people and were entitled to an emergency ambulance just as much as a person having a M.I.

Personally I'm glad I had to finish because I'm sure I would have been sacked and lost my pension by now. I came close to snapping just before I finished. After taking a load of abuse at the scene we then continued to the hospital. The drunks friend continued to abuse my colleague who was the attendant that night. On arrival at the hospital I opened the back doors and he started on me and thats when I snapped. I had him by the throat up against the casualty wall and then the red mist cleared and I calmed down. Later on he came back outside as we were trying to clear up to go back to station to wash everything and steralise the kit. He apologised for his behaviour and for the state of his friend. My colleague had more room to complain than I did though, the drunk projectile vomitted and soaked Steve who had to also shower and change before we could carry on our duty. If it was a case of me getting the sack I think I would eventually suffer a C.V.A. or some other related ailment because the stress after 30 years was finally getting to me.

I now thank God for everyday that I don't have to go out with sirens wailing and lights flashing just to pick up a drunk out of the gutter.

colin- yorkshire

20 Jun 2007 02:08 AM well lord B

I could not have put a better argument for a alchohol ban my self well done sir.

while all you non smokers rejoice in the smoking ban remember as I said in my post you drinkers will be next.

now back to smoking good idea.

pause while I light up?.

what gets me is that every one who is a favour of the ban has it from the wrong angle and has not thought it through properly.

I keep hearing and reading "smokers are selfish there poluting my air" but who are the selfish ones wanting to forcebly stop some one else from doing somthing they dont like.

it's easy keep away from places where people smoke it's as simple as that if you dont like the smoke in a pub sit outside?.

there you are no smoke, ah they say in one breath? why should I have to sit outside when I want to be inside? and in the other breath say that smokers should be outside so I can sit inside unless its warm then I want to sit outside as well so stop smoking alltogether best idea because I don't like it.

well thats rubbish if you dont like loud pop music you wouldn't go to a rock consert would you? or have them banned.

a total ban is not nessesary just better segrigation. it easy smoking pubs and non smoking pubs restaraunts you can smoke in others you can't its simple already there are significantly more places that are smoke free than are not. want a list ok

buses

trains

airoplanes

cinemas

most cafes and eateries

nearly all work places

hospitals

civic buildings

shops

and probably a dozen other places I can't think of,thirty years ago the anti smoking lobby may of had a point where smoking was permitted just about every where, but not today, but still there not satified and want a total ban why?

what the hell as it got to do with them if I want to smoke they dont have to occupy MY space do they??

light another cig??

what is being missed here is that smokers pay more in taxes than anyone else and tabacco revenue props up the nations finances just look how much effort customs and exises do to curb illegal imports of tabacco and how much revenue it costs the exchecker

and thats just the illegal stuff add that to the legal purchases

and it more than pays for the whole of the national health service.

if a total ban on smoking came in (and it never will)and every one in the land stopped (exept for me and david hockney) the shortfall in the nations financies would be catastropic and how the hell do you think the chancellor would recover the money???have a guess? yours is as good as mine??

fuel tax?

car tax?

vat?

income tax?

road tolls?

caravan tax?

water tax?

window tax?(its been tried once?)

clean air tax?

sunshine tax?(that will be expensive with global warming)

snow tax?(not so expensive)

then the blue rinse brigade will really have something to moan about won't they.

oh and before I go a update on smoking in the cab issue,

the managemnt have sent out letters asking drivers not to smoke in the cabs while at work as this will be illegal from 1st of july, however smoke breaks will be permitted through out the working day providing deliveries are not late? so there you are sorted. go like hell get in front stop get out have a ***? nice one. well happy.

colin

Mark & Sharon

20 Jun 2007 05:47 AM I too am glad that law as been passed.

I all so wondering were the grommet are going to get all that taxes what they are going to be losing.

Mark

Big Roy

20 Jun 2007 09:13 AM Colin, this may be of some interest to you and any other truckers who smoke

http://trucknetuk.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=23607
Roy (smoker)

Alan

20 Jun 2007 10:22 AM I have just read all the comments/debates re the anti smoking law and i must say i have never laughed so much for ages!!!It amazes me how the gov can bring out a law to combat some thing that does not exist.Techincally,there is no law to say i can/cannot smoke.It is a freedom of choice by the individual.It is their money there wasting,no one elses.Healthwise there is not one health issue that is TOTALLY responsible for ill health,it is a contributing factor like many other things in this world and as such a risk that you as the individual takes!!The full facts of smoking are not made clear only those that the lobbists WANT you to see.How many of you out there have seen the pro smoking side factual information on smoking??Its a world where everyone wants to blames some else except themselves and the gov are obliged to be seen to be doing something about it to keep the peace.We all have choices,If you dont smoke dont enter smoke permited places theres enough out there.I cant wait for a total ban on kids in pubs and especially planes(who ALWAYS seem to sit behind me!)that scream to get their own way!Now that would be sheer bliss!!Anybody out there willing to join my lobby??Is'nt it time we all learned to live n let live after all we are only on this earth once and we all die of short of breath anyway,so should we not enjoy ourselves while we're here??

Christine (Alans wife)

Read these comments

ME I will be the first? but only if.... posted 20 Jun 2007 11:15 AM by colin- yorkshire

Icemaker

20 Jun 2007 10:38 AM Christine, Most people will agree including myself that everybody has a right to do what they want, but you must understand that your rights must not infringe on the rights of others.

Ten years ago smokers probably made up the majority so in no way would a ban of smoking in public places have worked, however smokers are now very much the minority so they must understand that the majority have more rights to a smoke free atmosphere.

It does appear that a lot of people are saying this is a ban on smoking, its is only a ban on smoking in public places so your rights are not being infringed in any way, its just that you as the minority will now have to go outside whilst the majority either stay where they are or choose to join you if they so wish.

Nobody including smokers have been banned from public places only the cigarette, pipe, cigar, etc have.

I do have some sympathy though regarding the kicking kid in the seat behind on the plane, i too allways seem to get one including on a flight back from turkey when i had two brocken ribs, it was agony made unbearable by the little so and so but it was over in 5 hours so i did not suffer too much, hope i dont get one on my flight to the caribean next aprill though, 10 hours of bitting my lip just to keep the peace, lol.

Read these comments

No one has "a right" to do what they.... posted 20 Jun 2007 01:51 PM by Alan

Lord Braykewynde

20 Jun 2007 10:53 AM "The full facts of smoking are not made clear only those that the lobbists WANT you to see.How many of you out there have seen the pro smoking side factual information on smoking"??

I will put my hand up, I haven't seen it but somehow I cannot believe that it will say it is natural for humans to fill their lungs with smoke.

I don't know if you have children Christine but if you smoked during pregnancy so did that child although that child had no say in the matter.

I have seen lots of placentas in my past work and just by looking at one it tells if the mother is a smoker. Instead of a nice pink healthy placenta it is dark purple.

Icemaker has it right in a nutshell Christine ... "you must understand that your rights must not infringe on the rights of others". For you to think otherwise is very selfish.

Now your point about children in pubs, I agree with you 100%, they have enough time later in life to use them without making them apprentices for the future drinking culture by seeing how drunken adults act in public.

When my own children were small we would take them to a pub where they had a garden and we stayed with them, not leaving them to their own devices while we propped the bar up.

Read these comments

hi Lord B!I too have seen the the state.... posted 20 Jun 2007 01:42 PM by Alan

SPG

20 Jun 2007 11:21 AM Christine,

Applying your rationale " We all have choices,If you dont smoke dont enter smoke permited places" then surely the answer for you is not to go into pubs or on planes that do not allow smoking or children.

Before my daughter was born we used Aduly Only sites where available - now we don't. Similarly I would never even contemplate taking her into any premises be they pub or otherwise where she would be exposed to cigarette smoke. When she is old enough to make an informed choice she can decide for herself.

However the fact remains, as expressed on a number of occassions in this debate, that smokers cannot enjoy the freedom of their individual choice without impacting others. This applies to all smokers - not all drinkers or children for that matter, only the minority, encrouch on others by their actions.

Read these comments

Thanks for you comments.I dont enter.... posted 20 Jun 2007 02:06 PM by Alan

colin- yorkshire

20 Jun 2007 12:15 PM hi all.

if people are so anti smoke why go where it is, stay away thats the short answer.

"you must understand that your rights must not infringe on the rights of others". For you to think otherwise is very selfish.

its just that you as the minority will now have to go outside whilst the majority either stay where they are or choose to join you if they so wish.

just a couple of quotes from this thread and is strikes me that its the non smokers that are being selfish not the smokers after all you dont have to be where smokers are but have the right to join them and then complain about the smoke? ok I smoke I dont drink my choice so i dont go into pubs.

but if I did what is my choice go in the bar order a drink go outside into the tent and stand up to drink it because I can't get a seat because of all the none smokers in there? and in the bar loads of seats I can't use? now who's the selfish ones.

my freedoms as a smoker dont seem to matter and they should because it will be your freedoms that are next who will be the next minority that can be picked on and will anyone care probably not.

but when everyones tax burden rises due to the shortfall in tabacco revenues I suspect it will be too late to complain at all and the I told you approach will fall on deaf ears.

colin

Lord Braykewynde

20 Jun 2007 12:55 PM Some initial facts and figures

About 106,000 people in the UK die each year due to smoking. Smoking-related deaths are mainly due to cancers, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and heart disease.

About half of all smokers die from smoking-related diseases.

If you are a long-term smoker, on average your life expectancy is about 8-12 years less than a non-smoker. Put another way, in the UK about 8 in 10 non-smokers live past the age of 70, but only about half of long-term smokers live past 70.

The younger you are when you start smoking, the more likely you are to smoke for longer and to die early from smoking.

Many smoking-related deaths are not 'quick deaths'. For example, if you develop COPD you can expect several years of illness and distressing symptoms before you die.

Smoking increases the risk of developing a number of other diseases (listed below). Many of these may not be fatal, but they can cause years of unpleasant symptoms.

Which diseases are caused or made worse by smoking?

Lung cancer. About 30,000 people in the UK die from lung cancer each year. More than 8 in 10 cases are directly related to smoking.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD. About 25,000 people in the UK die each year from this serious lung disease. More than 8 in 10 of these deaths are directly linked to smoking. People who die of COPD are usually quite unwell for several years before they die.

Heart disease is the biggest killer illness in the UK. About 120,000 people in the UK die each year from heart disease. About 1 in 7 of these deaths are due to smoking.

Other cancers - of the mouth, nose, throat, larynx, gullet (oesophagus), pancreas, bladder, cervix, blood (leukaemia), and kidney are all more common in smokers.

Circulation. The chemicals in tobacco can damage the lining of the blood vessels and affect the level of lipids (fats) in the bloodstream. This increases the risk of atheroma forming (sometimes called 'hardening' of the arteries). Atheroma is the main cause of heart disease. It is also the main cause of strokes, peripheral vascular disease (poor circulation of the legs), and aneurysms (swollen arteries which can burst causing internal bleeding). All of these atheroma-related diseases are more common in smokers.

Sexual problems. Smokers are more likely than non-smokers to become impotent or have difficulty in maintaining an erection in middle life. This is thought to be due to smoking-related damage of the the blood vessels to the penis.

Ageing. Smokers tend to develop more 'lines' on their face at an earlier age than non-smokers. This often makes smokers look older than they really are.

Fertility is reduced in smokers (both male and female).

Menopause. On average, women who smoke have a menopause nearly two years earlier than non-smokers.

Other conditions where smoking often causes worse or more prolonged symptoms include: asthma, the common cold, flu, chest infections, tuberculosis, chronic rhinitis, diabetic retinopathy, hyperthyroidism, multiple sclerosis, optic neuritis, and Crohn's disease.

Smoking increases the risk of developing various other conditions including: optic neuropathy, cataract, macular degeneration, cryptogenic fibrosing alveolitis, psoriasis, gum disease, tooth loss, osteoporosis and Raynaud's phenomenon.

Smoking in pregnancy increases the risk of:

Miscarriage.

Complications of pregnancy, including bleeding during pregnancy, detachment of the placenta, premature birth, and ectopic pregnancy.

Low birth weight. Babies born to women who smoke are on average 200 grams (8 oz) lighter than babies born to comparable non-smoking mothers. Premature and low birth weight babies are more prone to illness and infections.

Congenital defects in the baby - such as cleft palate.

Stillbirth or death within the first week of life - the risk is increased by about one-third.

Poorer long-term growth, development, and health of the child. On average, compared to children born to non-smokers, children born to smokers are smaller, have lower achievements in reading and maths, and have an increased risk of developing asthma.

How does smoking affect other people?

Children and babies who live in a home where there is a smoker:

are more prone to asthma and ear, nose and chest infections. About 17,000 children under five years old in England and Wales are admitted to hospital each year due to illnesses caused by their parents smoking.

have an increased risk of dying from cot death (sudden infant death syndrome).

are more likely than average to become smokers themselves when older.

on average, do less well at reading and reasoning skills compared to children in smoke-free homes, even at low levels of smoke exposure.

are at increased risk of developing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and cancer as adults.

Passive smoking of adults. You have an increased risk of lung cancer and heart disease if you are exposed to other people smoking for long periods of time. Tobacco smoke is also an irritant, and can make asthma and other conditions worse.

Unborn babies. Described in pregnancy section above.

Other problems with smoking

Your breath, clothes, hair, skin, and home smell of stale tobacco. You do not notice the smell if you smoke, but to non-smokers the smell is usually obvious and unpleasant.

Your sense of taste and smell are dulled. Enjoyment of food and drink may be reduced.

Smoking is expensive.

Life insurance is more expensive.

Finding a job may be more difficult as employers know that smokers are more likely to have sick leave than non-smokers. More than 34 million working days (1% of total) are lost each year because of smoking-related sick leave.

Potential friendships and romances may be at risk. (Smoking is not the attractive thing that cigarette advertisers portray.)

SPG

20 Jun 2007 01:02 PM Colin (Yorks) - your freedoms as a smoker do matter. I have not read anywhere in this thread anyone stating that this should be removed - only that this freedom should not be allowed to adversly impact others, particularly in a public place. For similar reasons Local councils have already banned the consumption of alcohol in public places such as parks and the Caravan Club only allow ball games in designated areas.

I do not have issue with smoking in areas that are not open to the general public, as suggested I would simply choose no go there. However to say smokers or any other user group should be given dispensation in a public place would be unacceptable and therefore the rules must cover the majority or all users.

If you and I are were in the same room and I was drinking alcohol - this would have no direct impact on you. If you light up this would directly impact me and potentially my health. This is the fundemental difference.

In terms of the impact of a reduction in tobacco revenues I would also like to hear the otherside of the argument i.e. how much would the NHS save if not having to treat smoking related illnesses or the affects of smoking on other medical conditions.

Read these comments

and how many non smokers would have.... posted 20 Jun 2007 07:57 PM by giovanni

colin- yorkshire

21 Jun 2007 00:41 AM

hi all

I see lord B as been on the ash web site reading the propaganda and massarged statistics, sorry brother it bulls***t the figures you quote are not realistic but projections made on the assumption that all deseases and ailment where someone has smoked or been in contact with some one who has smoked is automaticly grouped together with other deseases that could be caused by other means and therefore assumed to be smoke related.

for example a child develops asthma and goes to the doctors question one does anyone in the house smoke if the answer is yes then it's smoke related.

if the answer is no does the child visit anyone who smokes answer yes then it's smoke related also if the answer is no then has the child been anywhere in contact with smoke ect.ect.

anyone who has been to the doctors will have had the same line of questioning do you smoke? does anyone in your house smoke? did your parent's smoke? ah well thats what caused it then?

er yes doctor but I worked down the pit for 30 years and suck exhaust pipes in my spare time?? no it wont be that it's a smoking related illness.

LB> seeing as your so good at gathering information try this deduct from the figures all deseases and ilnesses that could be caused by any other substances ie: diet lifestyle co2 immisions ect and also deduct all the figures where a relation has suffered the same illness and therefore remove the possibility of genetic intervention.

I await the results??

also did you know that the biggest killer of great apes wild or in captivity is cancer and heart desease. and that we share 99% of our DNA with chimps and I have not seen many gorillas smoking

have you.

and on the subject of statistics can you tell us how much revenue is raised each year through the sale of tabacco.

SPG I quote: your freedoms as a smoker do matter. I have not read anywhere in this thread anyone stating that this should be removed - only that this freedom should not be allowed to adversly impact others, particularly in a public place.

what do you call a public place? ie: any where you want to go and can go, by the very nature of this statment it consigns me to only the places you cannot go where I still can and thats a restriction of my freedoms by its very nature.

there is in these days no need to go where smoking is permitted as most places are non smoking anyway just a few odd places where smokers can go and now these are going to be banned.

and still no one who is anti smoking has offered a explanation of why non smokers insist on going into smoking areas and then complain about it.

Read these comments

well done colin!! I could not agree.... posted 21 Jun 2007 10:51 AM by Alan

Icemaker

21 Jun 2007 08:46 AM You obviousley have not read the thread then have you colin ?, i for one have said that people will still go in to the area's designated as smoking "if they so choose".

It is all about protecting non smokers from the the proven health problems related to smoke, you have said it yourself the government makes a substantial income from smoking taxes allthough it is about 80% less than ten years ago so do you really believe the government would put this income at risk without absolute proof that smoking kills ?.

Yes we can try to bring other factors in to the argument like car exhaust fumes, diet, aircraft fumes etc etc but these are things that the majority consider acceptable, unfortunately for you and other smokers the majority now find smoking un- acceptable so you must accept the wishes of the majority, it may not sound fair to you but its the way democracy works, i did not vote labour this year but i have to accept that the majority did no matter how ill informed i think the voters where.

You will still be able to smoke, you will still be able to go out and enjoy a drink, you will still be able to do everything you have allways done except force me and the majority to suffer from your habit so stop moaning stop trying to justify why i should suffer for you and just accept that for once this government has done the right thing.

Smoking kills, i want to live!!.

Lord Braykewynde

21 Jun 2007 09:39 AM Wrong colin, it wasn't the ASH website but a medical one. If you don't believe me go to the ASH website and check cos I can't be assed ;O)

Don't forget colin, I smoked for 30 years and I, like you, had my head in the sand and was in denial, defending smoking to the hilt and coming out with all kinds of bullchit to justify my lack of willpower.

Forget all the other diseases smoking causes, just take lung cancer. Have you ever seen anyone die from it? Have you ever been in their lives, watching them trying to breath while racked with pain? When I was 16 I lived with my grandparents and watched my grandfather suffer for months, even having a lung removed. Watching him retch trying to cough up sputum that was blocking his airways. When he finally passed away he was just skin and bone and I could pick him up with one hand.

What you do with your own body colin, and any other smokers for that matter, is up to you and nobody wishes to impede on your freedoms but please don't be selfish by wishing to impede on others freedoms who choose not to breathe in secondhand smoke.

Don't forget, reformed smokers are the worse. Why? Because we have seen the light and the stupidity of killing ourselves and others who breathed our smoke.

gio, your comment above doesn't make sense....

"and how many non smokers would have passed away already if not

for the advances made in treatments, from tax money from smokers"!

are you trying to say that the tax from tobacco funds all the research into medical problems and because of that smokers should be thanked?

SPG

21 Jun 2007 10:32 AM Colin,

By only quoting part of a statement made in the various responses and ignoring the full comments suggests you are struggling to put forward a valid argument to justify your position.

You still have access to public places as a smoker - simply that just like everyone else who enters these places you must abide by the rules set protect the general interests of all users. Which unfortunately for individuals who smoke means no smoking.

From memory there was a chap who posted on this site recently seeking information on naturist caravan sites. I wonder if he feels his rights of access to public places are being infinged? I assume you would be quite happy to be sitting at a table next to him in a restaurant?, albeit he would be in his birthday suite!

The only difference here is that his nudity would not impact anyones health - other than he may catch cold or raise someones blood pressure!

colin- yorkshire

21 Jun 2007 01:12 PM hi all

not getting my point across am I, because your not listening are you??.

1.why do non smokers go into smoking areas and then complain about the smoke -- no answer?

the fact of the matter is there is no need for any non smoker to go where smoking is permitted as 90% of places are non smoking anyway a non smoker can aviod smoke easily by not going into smoking areas. so why do they want our 10% as well.

2 how much revenue is raised by smokers -- no answer??

I will try and find out if no one eles will,, I'll let you know?

3 smoking is bad for you?

agreed it does not do much good in promoting a healthy life style but then what does? over eating? lack of exersise? car fumes? food additives? ect. doctors agree dont smoke and then light up in the car on the way home? my local practice has 8 doctors 3 smoke (about the national average 25-30% of the population)one of these actualy one told me once to lose weight because of the health risk its worse than smoking he said? and hes about 20 stone?.

4 smokers have no will power or they would stop?

not true I cant speak for all smokers but only for myself, I smoke because I like it and will continue to do so allbeit in less and less places despite the ban and the blue rinse brigade can go to hell.

got to go to work now for my 10hrs of stress filled driving, we will continue later.

ttfn colin

Lord Braykewynde

21 Jun 2007 01:32 PM What is a fact is that as I typed above, after stopping smoking I didn't feel any healthier. I still got breathless but that was because the damage to my airways, especially my lungs, was already damaged. What is also a fact is that your sense of taste returns. I now enjoy eating instead of eating so I could enjoy a *** afterwards. Another sense that comes back is smell. I couldn't believe that I smelled like an ashtray when I smoked because smokers simply live with the stink. It permeates the hair, clothes and breathe. Quite simply it stinks. When my son lived at home the hallway where he hung his coat and his bedroom stank of stale tobacco smoke. Nails, fingers and teeth get nicotine stained as well. Is it true that ladies who smoke heavy have a soot fall once a month? hehheh!

colin (bridgend)

21 Jun 2007 02:57 PM There are always exceptions to the rule - regarding dieing from smoking or smoke related disease my wife's grandfather was a heavy smoker of the non filter type of cigarette and his brother was a heavy pipe smoker - they both lived into their late 80s. However my grandfather smoked 60 Craven Full Strength a day and he died when he was 54. So is there a connection between smoking and death - medics say yes but examples of elderly say otherwise - who can prove one way or the other. I used to smoke a cigar occassionally but have now given that up and feel no difference at all. I told my doctor about this and she said that a pack of six cigars over two weeks was nothing to worry about. A cigar and a whisky and orange in the evening went down a treat, especially if I had a classic car or a caravan magazine to read.

jo-anne

21 Jun 2007 04:16 PM i am an ex smoker. i cant wait for the ban hooray. if the goverment ban the use of mobile phones then why cant they ban smoking whilst driving totally.

its vile when you see a mother in the car with her kids puffing away then flicking it out of the window. i can smell it from inside my car with the windows shut.

then when we go away all the smokers will be in the services puffing away and the roads and motorways will be much quieter.

jo-anne

Read these comments

ill rephrase it from an ex smoker to.... posted 22 Jun 2007 00:52 AM by jo-anne

colin (bridgend)

21 Jun 2007 04:29 PM Don't get me wrong I am not having a go at any individual but it always seems that it is the ex smoker who complains the most about those who still smoke. My ex line manager used to smoke a pipe and cigarettes but when he gave it up he did nothing but have a moan and complain about those who smoked in the college whether it was staff or students. I don't understand why they should want to complain so much. I suppose the next will be smoke free caravan sites as we already have children free sites. then it will be TVand computer free sites and then only caravans which have solar energy. What a bunch of moaning gits we are all turning out to be.

colin- yorkshire

22 Jun 2007 01:04 AM hi all

im back what a day 6 drops in 7 hrs still got 2 left for tomorrow 2 cities and 3 major towns in one day think my average speed was 11mph jamb after jamb all f************g day it's a pity I dont drink feel like getting p****d, sorry just having a good moan??.

where was I before work intervened oh yes smoking that was it? well lord B smoking spoils your taste for food does it? mmmm

good job I smoke then, considering all the greasy spoons I eat in. he.he.he.

stress, enviroment, and occupation I believe are a bigger killer than smoke bourn out by that old nutshell statistics it's a fact according to studies done that urban dwellers are less healthy than country dwellers because of urban polution and that people in stressfull occupations are more likley to suffer from high blood pressure and heart attacks.

theres no getting away from it modern life kills people and if you go by all the recent food scares it's supprising we are not all on bread and water.( no added salt and purified water of course).

the question is does smoking kill people well that depends on which set of statistics you believe in (and how massarged they are to prove a point) one early study (this is for lord B) conclusively proved it does by (dont let the kiddies read this)

forcing rabbits to smoke 20 cigarettes a day 80% of the rabbits developed lung cancer within 3 months thus proving cigaretts cause death. yeh, right course it does, the very fact that a rabbits lifespan is small anyway and the size of a rabbit in relation to a human would mean smoking about 200 a day for about 30years to give the same volume of smoke inhalation, but hey what the hell experements pay the rent so go with it, ita better than working for a living isn't it.

for me what it boils down to is this, do I regret smoking for 40 years, er nope.

do I feel my health is worse because of smoking considering I spent 23years down the pit, er nope

do I miss all the money I have spent on the weed, ah well? probably but seeing as I have not had a drink (of alcohol) in 20 years I probably would break even on that.

however on second thoughts if I still had all the money I could probably afford a new van??.

ah well never mind if I had never bought a lottery ticket either I probably could afford a new car to tow it with?.

there I go dreaming again must be tired, time for bed.

see you all later

colin.

colin- yorkshire

22 Jun 2007 10:51 AM hi all

this is from the anti smoking lobby A.S.H :-

It is true that NHS costs are lower than tobacco tax revenues. Tobacco taxation amounts to £10.5 billion per year whereas a figure for NHS spending on tobacco related disease is £1.7 billion. But so what?.

I

said I would find out

colin

Read these comments

Put that *cough* *** out, there's no.... posted 22 Jun 2007 11:06 AM by Lord Braykewynde
 
May 21, 2008
2,463
0
0
Visit site
We are all waiting on July 1st for the smoking ban, but this is only aimed at public places.

I have heard of at least one council asking it's tennants to refrain from smoking for an hour before a council agent attends an appointmet.

But what if like me you have a neighbour who smokes? My next door neighbour smokes and does so at her patio door which happens to be within 2 metres of the boundry fence. It doesn't take a scientist to work out that her second hand smoke wafts over the fence and into our house.

So I wonder what if any, laws cover that case.

Steve L.
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
Mike P

24 Jun 2007 10:01 AM Slightly away from the point but still relevant.

I have done a bit of employment-based door knocking in my time - sometimes I would be in a home for about 30 minutes, or in an office for up to a day. On a few occasions I asked people not to smoke in front of me - I don't want to be forced to "passive smoke", and I don't like going home with smelly clothes. Whilst people have the right to slowly kill themselves if they so desire, I don't feel that they have the right to inflict it on me.

My trick in offices was the following: unpack briefcase - file, calculator, pen, pencil, asthma inhaler. Then appear short of breath. Worked every time.
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
Mike P

24 Jun 2007 10:01 AM Slightly away from the point but still relevant.

I have done a bit of employment-based door knocking in my time - sometimes I would be in a home for about 30 minutes, or in an office for up to a day. On a few occasions I asked people not to smoke in front of me - I don't want to be forced to "passive smoke", and I don't like going home with smelly clothes. Whilst people have the right to slowly kill themselves if they so desire, I don't feel that they have the right to inflict it on me.

My trick in offices was the following: unpack briefcase - file, calculator, pen, pencil, asthma inhaler. Then appear short of breath. Worked every time.
Re-posted for MikeP
 
Mar 16, 2005
650
0
0
Visit site
Lord/B.

Now back to smoking and the smell on your clothes, whilst i too

do not like the smell of tabacco on my clothes, i also do not

like the smell of MANY persons breath, due either to bad

hygene or a condition or simply the food they have eaten.

Should it now also be made law that people do not go out with

smelley breath as it too is offensive, and anyone who wants to

eat cuissine that leaves your breath smelling should only do

so at home?

So we could now have public houses that are free from smoke and

the smell of on food that once eaten leaves that person with any

offensive smell of breath?

Maybe we should also have wardens in pubs, to check on the type

of foods served in pubs or resturants to make sure that

individuals do not eat to much harmfull fats and that they have

not eaten more than that days calorie intake? afterall our

national heath service seems to be over stretched, and it seems

we cannot blame only smokers or overwieght people as high blood

pressure seems to be something that effects those that think they

are "heatlhy" [not smokers or overweight]more and more these

days which makes a mockery of all that old b...sh.t chucked

down our throats for the last 3 decades......

Just live and let live.......
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
gio, read the post again and you will see that I re-posted the message for MikeP. He had posted it under General where Mod3 had said he intended to delete the threads because they had nothing to do with caravanning. Not having worked in an office I wouldn't know any other regarding smoking rules.

As for the rest of your post gio it doesn't hold water. The smell of food, someones breath or body odour doesn't impact on anyones health. The comment about tobacco smell on clothes made no reference to harming others health, it's just one of the many nasties that go with smoking.
 
Mar 16, 2005
650
0
0
Visit site
It seems roy castle has alot to answer for with all this over

hyped rubbish about passive smoking, but enough people believe

so the bandwagon gets rolling along and real basic facts are

left in the back ground.

Being as you are so well informed on this subject maybe you

could come up with a basic ratio to explain smokers and

passive smokers and those that are niether?

And by ratio i mean percentages and strength of doses of smoke

that these groups are taking in, and a ratio to how much their

life expectancy has suffered?

You could also explain how somebody like yourself has smoked for

how many years? are alive and roy castle a passive smoker is

not, should there not be a formula to work out the amount of

smoke and its intensaty that is needed to kill you?

We know how much arsenic is needed, and other known poissons,

so how come, there is no known report on smoking?

We also know that benzine is a carcigen agent and one that is

not only found on our doorsteps as it sips out of petrol driven

vehicles, but also escapes when a car is being filled up on a

warm day, straight into the fillers, and nearby people lungs.

So why are you not screaming about the ilks of benzine? is that

a risk you are prepared to take? and you do not care about

others?

So far no research has been done to found out how many lung

cancer victims there are from this, and other cancers as, if

someone already smokes the assumption is it is smoked related.

Infact it is easy to blame most forms of cancers on smokers,

i say most because they would blame almost all if it was not

for the fact that some have been found inpossible to link it

to, no matter how hard they have tried.

I really wish everbody would stop smoking know, but only because

given a decade or 3, people can ask how come cancers have not

gone down dramatically?

i question anything that says this is the latist consensor, and

i know how good the human lungs are at their job and how

evolution works............
 
Mar 14, 2005
755
0
0
Visit site
Thanks for reposting my message your Lordship. Whilst most offices have been non-smoking for quite a while now, small firms with perhaps 2 or 3 smokers working there tend to allow smoking - not surprisingly. The little garages that MOTs my cars has a smoky office, and I doubt that the new law will change anything there.

To quote Giovanni: "We know how much arsenic is needed, and other known poissons ..."

I didn't know that there was also a risk with eating fish. Do we need to start a new thread?
 
Mar 14, 2005
755
0
0
Visit site
Thanks for reposting my message your Lordship. Whilst most offices have been non-smoking for quite a while now, small firms with perhaps 2 or 3 smokers working there tend to allow smoking - not surprisingly. The little garages that MOTs my cars has a smoky office, and I doubt that the new law will change anything there.

To quote Giovanni: "We know how much arsenic is needed, and other known poissons ..."

I didn't know that there was also a risk with eating fish. Do we need to start a new thread?
Typo garage, not garages.
 
May 4, 2005
2,622
0
0
Visit site
Garages are affected as we have had to buy no smoking signs for all the entrance doors,or face a fine, even though we have been non smoking for years.

Fish can be a killer as,I'm told, a relative of mine died when he trod on a skate that I left at the top of the stairs when I was very young.

Brian
 
Mar 14, 2005
755
0
0
Visit site
This could lead to a run of fish jokes. I suspect we will have to start on a small SCALE.

Here's one in context:

1st Kipper: "Do you still smoke, I've heard it's bad for you".

2nd Kipper: "I don't smoke any more, I've been cured".
 
Mar 13, 2007
1,750
0
0
Visit site
hi all

have you missed me(of course you haven't)I have just been off for a couple of days in the boat? sorry caravan can I pick a good weekend or what? glad the cars a diesel? what,what.

finaly found this thread running, after following more red herrings than a agatha christie novel(another fish joke).

anyway back to smoking or lack of it? depends on which way you look at it I must say though that I am a bit supprised at the lenths some will go to just to comlain about smoke like jo-anne

quote:

its vile when you see a mother in the car with her kids puffing away then flicking it out of the window. i can smell it from inside my car with the windows shut.

what from inside my car with the windows shut in traffic on the move my god what a nose?? I wish I had one that good would not have any trouble finding a take away then would I:O

and steve in leo I wonder what your neibour thinks when you light up the barbeque on your patio and wafts into her house?

or the "git" sorry gentleman next door to me that starts up his petrol mower at 8:30 sunday morning and spends 3 hours cutting 20 sq ft of grass when I,m on nights?.

It is called torerance and I am afraid thats what is sadly lacking in todays society the ban has not started yet but already the topic has moved on to the smell of smoke not the smoke itself and people now complain about the after smell of it

well im not a pub type of person but I supect the pubs and clubs will smell of smoke a long time after the ban untill they are all re-decorated and I suspect that will be quite a long time because of reduced profits.

the bet quote I have heard was a woman on the telly interviwed on the subject of the ban and she said quote:- "I have never smoked in my life but I am disgused at banning people from doing something they like I have a good mind to start smoking in protest"

bye for now

colin
 
Mar 16, 2005
650
0
0
Visit site
I have a problem understanding the difference between smokers

and passive smoke.

You see everytime i see a programme with some sort of

doctor preaching for people to stop smoking, they always

go on about the benefits you will gain almost immediately

by stopping.

less co in your blood, your lungs will start clearing up

and your life expectancy will start to improve, to the

piont that you get back ALL of your lost years.

So where does passive smoking fit into this equation.

Do you see what i am saying.

Does this mean smokers who give up smoking are better off

then those who do not smoke? because afterall those that

have given up are now ALSO passive smokers.......
 
Mar 14, 2005
201
0
0
Visit site
I see your point gio, and a good one at that, but since I'm a smoker, and as such, not worthy of an opinion as to rights etc etc I.ll let the experts of the non-smoking variety dis-sect your query and no doubt give you a totally unbiased view! ! !. I said in an earlier post the ban has been in force up here for over a year now and with pubs closing down I'll let you come to your own conclusion as to the reason why.
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
Hmmmmm let me see, smoking is almost finished socially. That, according to geordie, is having an impact on the pubs, forcing them to close. Just think of the money saved from treating smoking related illnesses and even more money from drink related illnesses/incidents. No drunks will mean no children being born from one night stands. Most womens refuges will close because there will be no drunken husbands to beat the chit out of them.

The country will be awash with money :O)

Use some of this to help with drug rehabilitation and we will be getting there. We could even help poorer countries by investing in rubber plantations so that car bodies could be made of rubber, think of the lives saved from having rubber cars. Ahhhhh Utopia. May I take this opportunity to thank all the smokers for refraining from smoking in public, good on ya. I'm sure theres someone up there who will be watching you and reward you with a fluffy cloud at St Peters gate :O)

I'd like to be there to welcome you all but I'm afraid I will be downstairs, among all that *^%"!
 
Jun 25, 2007
1
0
0
Visit site
I have read most of the post for and against ( I dont smoke and never have) but what gives you the right to say that if you dont like it move out of your space? I promise I won.t come near you!

Did you not know all you smokers that whether you have just had a *** 2 minutes ago or half an hour agou you SMELL of stale tobacco and nicotine!

When I am in the same room as you and you haven't had a *** for an hour I CAN smell you, does hat make you feel good. Non smokers don't generally have a problem with you we just avoid you like the plague so carry on smoking.
 
Jan 12, 2007
107
0
0
Visit site
Giovanni - your raise a very good point - not sure I agree with your statemement, however is does make a good case for a smoking ban.

You state that all individuals who stop smoking will in time regain the years lost by smoking!!!! Even if this is true, not all individuals will stop and therefore continue to expose others to the risks of passive smoking. I read an article recently by ASH which claims that around 2000 - 3000 adults and 18000 - 20000 children are admitted to hospital each year with illnesses related to passive smoke. (Sure the exact figures will be on the net if anyone cares to look).

Therefore by banning smoking in public places some of these individuals will not be exposed and will regain the lost years.

Unfortunatly this will not impact the number of kids admitted as this is the result of irresponsible parents allowing their kids to be exposed to this risk, and is a completely seperate issue not covered by the legislation from 1/07/07.
 
Mar 14, 2005
201
0
0
Visit site
Oh dear, it seems you want some kind of perfect world LB.I maybe wrong, but is it a case of facts for one side of the debate and nonsense for the other. Your comments regards spending money on the drug issue has double standards written all over it, considering your rants on this topic. We hear all this nonsense about people who are now going to suddenly have a social life because the pubs are smoke free, yet I comment on here about closures and you suddenly decide to ridicule those FACTS.
 
Mar 16, 2005
650
0
0
Visit site
SPG.

I agree smoking cannot be good for you, but where i am

more open minded than some is in the fact that,the evidence

of how bad it is for you is weighted.

You mention the fact of all those people admited to hopital

with passive smoke related illnesses.

Now i am sure that some would indeed be down to just this fact,

but the study by ASH is a study by a anti smoking brigade, what

else would they find?and how does one prove or disprove these

biased type of findings?

These same people could easily be suffering from illnesses

brought on by poor air quality.

Poor air quality can bring on 100s of cases of asma, but poor air

quality has nothing to do with people smoking, infact it would

need the entire country to be puffing outside 20 fags an hour

to have a comparrison with those days when air quality is poor.

It could be argued that poor air quality is a bigger killer than

smoking. Do you see much being done about that? ban wise?

This is the piont i am trying to make badly,CO emmisions cause

far worse cases of poor air quality derived illnesses than

fags will ever do, but do they get grouped togeather on purpose?

under passive, or smoker derived illnesses?

Don't believe me? go done to your local nhs, ask for data on

poor quality air derived illnesses.... I don't think you will

find that catogory and yet so many breathing type illnesss peak

when there are those type of conditions......
 
Mar 16, 2005
650
0
0
Visit site
Hmmmmm let me see, smoking is almost finished socially. That, according to geordie, is having an impact on the pubs, forcing them to close. Just think of the money saved from treating smoking related illnesses and even more money from drink related illnesses/incidents. No drunks will mean no children being born from one night stands. Most womens refuges will close because there will be no drunken husbands to beat the chit out of them.

The country will be awash with money :O)

Use some of this to help with drug rehabilitation and we will be getting there. We could even help poorer countries by investing in rubber plantations so that car bodies could be made of rubber, think of the lives saved from having rubber cars. Ahhhhh Utopia. May I take this opportunity to thank all the smokers for refraining from smoking in public, good on ya. I'm sure theres someone up there who will be watching you and reward you with a fluffy cloud at St Peters gate :O)

I'd like to be there to welcome you all but I'm afraid I will be downstairs, among all that *^%"!
 
Jan 12, 2007
107
0
0
Visit site
Giovanni,

Your response re air quality is whole different debate and would take this discussion from views on the merits of a smoking ban to global warming. Something that is also being discussed, and was at the recent G8 meeting in Germany. Similarly there is still a great deal of debate on the contributing factors depending on who you listen to.

What is not in doubt is that smoking kills directly and indirectly through passive smoking and is one small area in improving overall health and air quality that individual counties can tackle without global agreement.

You say ASH is run by the anti-smoking brigade is shortsighted -they are more concerned with publicising the affects of smoking to ensure the publics are fully aware of the risks.

However I am sure you will agree the World Health Organisation is not run by the anti-smoking brigade and has no axe to grind in any particular country or influence over income generated from tobacco products. However they adopt a similar stance in trying to publicise the health risks created by smoking.

http://www.who.int/tobacco/statistics/tobacco_atlas/en/
 
Mar 13, 2007
1,750
0
0
Visit site
geordie and giovanni

nice try boys, but the deaf cannot hear and the blind cannot see and anti smokers will not give one inch.

all the points you raise have been argued by myself earlier in this thread and not one has been answered? just ignored.

dont believe me read the entire tread I have answered all their challenges and counterd all thier claims and the responce.

silence.

save your typing fingers and dont bother as you will get more sense out of a brick wall.

just do the same as me carry on smoking and wait for their turn to be marginalised and sit back with a knowlegeable smile on your face and say I told you so???.

As for me next sunday will come and go and I will be just the same smoking when and where I want to.

regards colin
 
Jan 19, 2008
9,103
0
0
Visit site
Oh dear, it seems you want some kind of perfect world LB.I maybe wrong, but is it a case of facts for one side of the debate and nonsense for the other. Your comments regards spending money on the drug issue has double standards written all over it, considering your rants on this topic. We hear all this nonsense about people who are now going to suddenly have a social life because the pubs are smoke free, yet I comment on here about closures and you suddenly decide to ridicule those FACTS.
I would have thought to most that with the mentioning of rubber cars I extracting the urine geordie but it seems to have missed the point with you ;O)

Stop being so serious man, once the withdrawal pangs go you will cheer up again I'm sure.

Ohhhhhh I'm H-A-P-P-Y, yes I'm H-A-P-P-Y :O)

Is it July 1st yet?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts