Donate SIGN UP

Passive smoking

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 17:20 Fri 30th Mar 2007 | News
24 Answers
I am not a smoker myself, but thinking about the impending ban on smoking in public, due to the risks of passive smoking, I wondered why all the fuss when a car pumps out much more dangerous gasses without anyone batting an eye.

The proof-:
Lock yourself in a garage with 50 people smoking away and after 20 minutes you will come out alive. Lock yourself in a garage with one car smoking away and in less time you will be dead.

Just a thought don't take it too serious.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 24rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hi anotheoldgit,
I agree with you 100%.
I was involved in a thread a few weeks ago on the topic of a smoking ban and pointed this out.
Fumes from cars are far more dangerous than passive smoking, but one aber thought fit to say I was twisting things to suit myself and that I was missing the point about breathing fresh air.
Anyway, glad to see that someone else is aware that smoking is not the only thing that polutes the air and causes illnesses. I have no strong views, one way or another on this as Scotland has had the ban in force for over a year now.
Both give out dangerous fumes but I think the problem with smoking is that it is in confined spaces like pubs and clubs whereas the fumes from cars are out in the open so you are not in as close contact to them.
I think everyone agrees that there are too many pollutants as we go about our everyday lives. Some of these can be reduced much quicker and more effectively than others. I hope vehicle manufacturers are constantly working on this problem. Many times I am driving behind lorries, buses, etc.,, that are belching out dreadful fumes and I sometimes think they more to blame than cars.
if cigarette smoke contained carbon monoxide [which cars belch out] the life expectency of smokers would be about 2 days.as a non smoker the no smoking ban cant come soon enough for me.why shouldd i and thousands others be subject to the second hand smoke which could eventually kill us?if the idiots who want to contract heart disease.cancer and whatever other diseases smoking causes let them do it in their own space.
The human race is living longer and we have too many people already, we should all be made to smoke.
I dont see why I should be made to inhale the many noxious and cancer causing chemicals so that someone can sustain this disgusting habit. It makes me so angry when I cant even walk down the street without some idiot puffing smoke near my face. There have been many tests to prove that some of the chemicals in cigarettes are far more dangerous than car gas. I should have the right to walk in public without inhaling this filth, i pay enough f#*!?^/ tax why the hell shouldn't I have the right to!!
-- answer removed --
It will not be illegal to smoke outside, so your comparison is invalid for that very reason.
10Clarion why would you 'hate' people for having a different opinion to yourself?? And as a matter of interest, do you regularly see death certificates???
I suppose we all benefit from cars or traffic to some degree, but not from smoking.
I know there are many different pollutants, but you can't weigh one against the other. Getting rid of at least one of them is still better than doing nothing and waiting for the world to fog over.
I have chronic asthma and bronchitis. If I am in a smoky atmosphere for an hour or so, my tonsils swell up alarmingly and I cannot breathe easily. I do not go to pubs, social clubs or anywhere that may be smoky. Roll on the smoking ban!

Cars, vans, buses and lorries do pollute - but it does not affect me the way cigarette smoke does.

Smokers ignore that traffic benefits us all - it delivers goods and people. Pollution is a by product. Cigarettes benefit nobody, and affects many - and the pollution is the aim of smoking.

Incidentally, I can be amongst traffic for hours. My clothes don' t reek of traffic fumes afterwards like they do if I have been around a smoker.

But please smokers - carry on. Smoke more! The government needs the extra taxes you are paying now, and would love not to pay your pension because you die an early death.

It's not fair to subject people to stinking smoke. If you want to smoke just pish off out the back for one or whatever. I know it is addictive and some people desperately need cigarettes to get themselves through the day but I do not feel that desperation for the drug which they must inhale and exhale is any excuse to possibly give standers by cancer
-- answer removed --
10clarionst, you have an extremley narrow minded view! There is irrevertable proof that cigarettes cause cancer and other smoking related diseases. Benzene (petrol additive), formaldehyde(embalming fluid), ammonia (toilet cleaner), arsenic(rat poison) are all chemicals that are in tabacco! There are atleast 43 carsinogens which are proven to cause cancer in humans. Ethel clearly said that when she is in a SMOKEY pub for longer than an hour that her tonsels swell. IT'S A DISGUSTING HABIT, BUT I AM NOT A SANCTAMONIOUS GIT!
I would be interested to hear Clarion's opinions on whether the Earth is flat or spherical. Yes, I know you are entitled to your opinion but it really is spherical.
-- answer removed --
It appears to me 10clarionst doesn't have any other words in his/her vocabulary!! I along with many others am hardly being self-riteous, merely stating a fact! I obtained my information from various sources, 1 being a reputable website. Can't get onto your link. It's unimportant anyway, we shall agree to disagree! Tell me clarionst do you get on the defensive and insult people whenever someone disagrees with your opinions?
I DO NOT Smoke, but I am fed up with NON SMOKERS who constantly go on and on and on. OK smoking is one of the BAD THINGS, but I know peaople who got hooked in the 60s when it was very fashionable. There is more sympathy for heroin, cocaine etc than people who have an addiction (which is the most addictive drug ie nicotine). If all the taxes from cigs was used for the NHS and not brushed under the carpet, governments never tell us where this tax goes, then the NHS might not be so cash strapped.
2 things:
1. the ban is not in public places, the ban is in places where someone works.
2. I don't give a rats ar5e if passive smoking is bad for us, I just don't want to breath the filth and smell it, I don't want it in my clothes and hair, I don't want the place polluted by the digusting smoking residue.

cue, chage of subject to booze from 10cs!

1 to 20 of 24rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Passive smoking

Answer Question >>