New possibility of a total smoking ban in England

It dioesn't have to happen eventually at all. We are free to shape our future, or at least we should be.

Market forces should decide not the bloody nanny state.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:
It dioesn't have to happen eventually at all. We are free to shape our future, or at least we should be.

Market forces should decide not the bloody nanny state.

Exactly. Most of us want it banned and were unhappy with the partial ban. It's public opinion that is forcing Blair to back down now. And, YES, it IS most people that want it banned.

There is no need for the majority to ride roughshod over the minority on this or any other issue. Taking the stance that I don't partake in it therefore it should be banned is selfishness in the extreme.

Exemptions for private members' clubs was a fair and reasonable compromise.

The mealy-mouthed health fascists will get their way no doubt.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:

Exemptions for private members' clubs was a fair and reasonable compromise.

The mealy-mouthed health fascists will get their way no doubt.

We've had this debate here before. No worker should be exposed to dangerous chemicals at work. This applies if you work in education, research or industry. It should also apply to the entertainment industry. If passive smoking is harmful, and the evidence is good that it is, it needs to be banned in places where people work.

Imagine this scenario in the nuclear industry. 'We don't need to have lead shielding because you don't have to work here.

It's not about market forces or some spurious nanny state. It''s about giving these workers the same protection and right to work in a safe environment as the rest of us.

Regards

Stephen

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:
There is no need for the majority to ride roughshod over the minority on this or any other issue. Taking the stance that I don't partake in it therefore it should be banned is selfishness in the extreme.

Exemptions for private members' clubs was a fair and reasonable compromise.

The mealy-mouthed health fascists will get their way no doubt.

Personally I believe that the sooner smoking is banned EVERYWHERE the better.

I cannot see how in any way anyone can justify the needs for cigarettes for any purpose.

When you look at what damage is being done to the body in what smokers claim to be enjoyment is way beyond me and I cannot imagine why anyone with an ounce of intellegence would smoke.

Regards

PB

quote:

When you look at what damage is being done to the body in what smokers claim to be enjoyment is way beyond me and I cannot imagine why anyone with an ounce of intellegence would smoke.

Because they also have half an ounce of tobacco and some papers, and are addicted? There's another i and one less e in intelligence by the way.

Even more reason to ban the whole lot then no one has an excuse to smoke.

This debate will rumble on way longer than the debeate and vote in the house. I don't think the talk is of banning smoking in your home, but everywhere else.

I lst a close relative to cancer due to smoking, in 1982. Back then the knowledge on what smoking did was not good.

People take any drug because they like it. Sustained use and then stopping also generates withdrawl effects - which hooks folk to said drug. The tobacco industry benefit from this quite nicely if you think about it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Steve Toy:
Taking the stance that I don't partake in it therefore it should be banned is selfishness in the extreme.
__________________________________________________

And inflicting lung cancer on non-smokers isn't ??

quote:

The tobacco industry benefit from this quite nicely if you think about it.

And the Government does which is why they are reluctant to impose any ban.

My daughter's French GCSE tutor, a 40 a day lady, has just been diagnosed with terminal throat cancer. A ban may be too late for her, but hopefully not for others.

quote:

Originally posted by bob mccluckie:
My daughter's French GCSE tutor, a 40 a day lady, has just been diagnosed with terminal throat cancer. A ban may be too late for her, but hopefully not for others.

It wouldn't make any difference. If people want to smoke they'll smoke; no one does it to improve their health.

As for a total ban, including pubs, that is ridiculous. In offices and restaurants, yes, ok, I suppose so, but pubs are where people go in order to drink and smoke. I rarely smoke, but when the fancy takes me, I go to my local where I indulge in copious cigarettes or a fine cigar whilst filling myself full of ale.

All things in their proper place.

EW

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
As for a total ban, including pubs, that is ridiculous.
All things in their proper place.

EW

So you think the workers in those places should have less rights with regard to health and safety than, say, Engineers?



Stephen

quote:

As for a total ban, including pubs, that is ridiculous. In offices and restaurants, yes, ok, I suppose so, but pubs are where people go in order to drink and smoke. I rarely smoke, but when the fancy takes me, I go to my local where I indulge in copious cigarettes or a fine cigar whilst filling myself full of ale.

All things in their proper place.

Sorry but there is no place in society for smoking. I would like to see a complete ban in any public place.

Regards

PB

We had this debate in Ireland last year. It was to be the end of the world as we knew it. Emigration was to start again on a scale not seen since the famine of 1847.
Every harebrained plan possible was mooted to try and prevent the ban coming in.

Two years on and even most smokers agree the ban is a good thing. To go out to a pub and not have the smell of smoke clinging to your clothes when you come home! This really brought home how unhealthy it must have been. When I was in London October 12 months it felt like going back to the dark ages seeing people smokiong particularily in restaurants.

Honestly Total ban in the workplace, is the only way to go.

I guarantee you in 12 months your Naim system will sound even better after a night out in the pub.


If this is defeated by a free vote in the commons it will be due to big malignant business getting their way - nothing to so with civil liberties.

Mind you there is one strange downside that no one predicted. Rather a large amount of carbon dioxide is consumed with various beverages and alas there are only 2 ways for it it escape and the smoke sure did camoflage the araoma from the lower route of exit .

Time is running out for smokers. Ban the filthy disgusting habit once and for all and stop fannying around.

Ex Smoker

Spock

I'd like to see the US institute a total ban. I'm sick of going places and ending up a reeking mess.

Just the other day, my office door was opened and the people who were smoking outside let in a nice draft that was absorbed by the entire trailer. This is in a gov't (DOE) facility.

I won't even get into how fucking awful it is to go to public places in this fucking state. There has been several instances where I nearly came to blows with people who were smoking in my vicinity (line for a ride at a theme park in Cinncinati).

Seems like there is no problem and the smokers should be able to smoke where ever they want. Right Down with the whole industry I say!

Aric

i thought the oldest woman in the world smoked till she was eighty.
Anyway i think the biggest health scare to others all round the world are car drivers, and i bet these mps who dont smoke probably pollute the world worse in other ways with their top of the line gas guzzlers.
Funny thing is if you are a herion addict you can go and get perscriptions free from the doctor to feed the habit.

I can understand banning smoking for fire risks, but not for health reasons.
There is enough people in the wolrd as it is, why is everyone so obsessed in keep this over crowded world ... we could save so many lives bla bla... is beyond me.
Leave things as they are for christ sake,in any case if everyone gave up smoking taxes would go up 7% and their would be no nhs fullstop.

p.s. i can think of a bigger killer that these do gooders cause to everyone else than bloody smoking. stress and misery kills more people than bloody smoking.
IMO its just an excuse to turn this already biased world into becoming even more biased.

regards (yes im a smoker)

quote:

Originally posted by Stephen Bennett:

quote:

Originally posted by Earwicker:
As for a total ban, including pubs, that is ridiculous.
All things in their proper place.

EW

So you think the workers in those places should have less rights with regard to health and safety than, say, Engineers?



Stephen

It's not about rights, it's about reason. Many/most people who frequent pubs smoke; if you don't smoke and don't wish to be exposed to smoke, don't work in a pub.

EW

Well you don't work at a nuclear power plant with the attitude of "since I'm working at a nuke site, I guess I'll get large doses of radiation."

Instead there are safety measures in place. I see none in restaurants and bars.

quote:

Originally posted by Aric:
Well you don't work at a nuclear power plant with the attitude of "since I'm working at a nuke site, I guess I'll get large doses of radiation."

Instead there are safety measures in place. I see none in restaurants and bars.

I don't think occasionally being exposed to low levels of ambient cigarette smoke is really comparable to a large dose of ionising radiation...

I accept, however, that it is unpleasant for non-smokers, and I agree smoking in restaurants should be banned.

But not in pubs.

EW

quote:

Many/most people who frequent pubs smoke

That's just not so.

Anyway smokers just go outside for a cigarette in Ireland with no problems. Has even started a new pastime called "smirting" (smoking and flirting)

If I sat beside you in a pub farting you'd say f**k off and fart outside.

quote:

Originally posted by Sloop John B:
If I sat beside you in a pub farting you'd say f**k off and fart outside.

True, but pubs aren't for farting in, they're for drinking and smoking in.

EW

i think all this non smoking like no radios on site, soon it will be hair nets!, all this wet flannel stuff really has gone to far.
50 million people died in two years around the world in 1918 of spanish flu, i wonder how many smokers have died since then!


regards

quote:

50 million people died in two years around the world in 1918 of spanish flu, i wonder how many smokers have died since then!

and how many socks were lost in washing machines since 1958?