Latest on the smoking situation

[Loosehead]

Just seen the news. Pubs that sell food: no smoking; pubs that don't/private clubs: up to them and even that will take years. I just think they've missed an opportunity to follow suit with Ireland here. In poll after poll 70%+ of the public agreed with a total ban so what's the governement afraid of? I just dispair at this dithering, ban this disgusting habit in public places now! Thoughts please.

[january_bug]

Harri2000 - sorry to hear of the injury to your child. What do you mean by "total and blanket ban"? Do you think smoking tobacco should be totally illegal and that cigarettes shouldn't be sold in the shops? The consequences of that would be DIRE for the country - I could go into detail if required, but I'll presume that you understand the point I'm making.

Secondly, I think your comments about self-harm were trite and unthinking. There is more to self-harming than "a couple of scars", and such flippant remarks could be very upsetting to some people. I know you were trying to find a comparator to smoking, but I think you might have chosen a less sensitive onew. Also, by your logic on that point, rather than worrying about the potential scar on your child's face, you should be more worried about trying to "save" the smokers from themselves. I suspect, like any other parent in the country, you are more worried about your own child.

[donegal]

i think all of the uk should follow ireland!!! The ban has worked very well over here!!!!!

[LeMarchand]

Whilst what happened with Harri2000's child is a terrible thing, many people are injured and killed by violent drunks and bad drivers. Why not ban alcohol and private transport? As for the girl "smoking herself to death", whilst it is probable that her habit may well cost her her life, it's not a certainty.

[MrPahoehoe]

It should be left up to the proprietor (I can understand a ban on serving food and smoking, to a certain extent). The simple fact is: if you don't like smokey places, don't go to a pub where smoking is allowed and that stands for people getting jobs in bars.

Incidentally, are any of you who are calling for a complete ban in any danger of loosing a large part of your income if the ban takes effect?

[Harri2000]

"Incidentally, are any of you who are calling for a complete ban in any danger of loosing a large part of your income if the ban takes effect?"

A minority might well lose out, but just think of all the extra cash the reformed smokers will have.

[MrPahoehoe]

ridiculous. the reformed smokers should get off their a**e and use their will-power. Pubs are a buisness and as such the decision should be that of the proprietor. The government should not have force people to change their ways.

[no2apathy]

Smelling the smoke is a direct indicator that you're breathing it in. Smokers pay for the privalage of smoking those cigarettes. Ok smoke them alone or in smoking only areas. Many factories and offices have worked towards erradicating the risk of passive smoking by giving smokers a smoking room or an area outside. Society members who choose not to smoke must decide if they wish to passive smoke or maintain the right to clean air at the moment. The Government is apathetic, pussyfooting around the issue. Is it about money and tax revenue gained from smokers by keeping them happy, social inclusion maintains their regular contributions to the treasury, social exclusion by an outright ban may force more to use their brains and quit.

On air pollution Where can we find clean air these days, not in the majority of large towns and cities with vehicle polution increasing. We will always protect the car and the negative aspects it has, because we are in love with it, we need it, it's one of our affluance indicators. Ok thats another issue as is drinking, the suject of smoking is or should be simple. If you want to smoke do it for you and do not involve other people in your addiction. This includes at home, children around the country suffer the risk of passive smoking related illnesses from parents who have little or no regard for their childs health if they maintain an attitude of ignorance and bliss. The rights of the child are being ignored if they allow smoking at home with children in breathing distance of cigarette smoke. The rights of the child should be maintained and protected from smokers, if they are parents, they need to reflect on the facts and evidence available re: passive smoking.

[Buddy]

Reformed smokers get off their a**e and use their willpower?.I thought reformed smokers had got off their a*** and used their willpower.It is a pity that it takes the Government to force people to have a social conscience.

[madein1978]

What has happened to choice? If you don't smoke then why should you be forced to breathe other peoples smoke? especially when you are trying to eat. Smokers and other people with addictive habits are known to be selfish people by their very nature, but this does not take away from the fact that the smoker has the right to smoke, but I believe it should be in a separate area, completely detached from any non smoking area and have everyone strictly adhere to this. Don't get me wrong, I don't smoke personally, but I don't wear a halo round my head, infact the sight of a pretty woman smoking fair turns me on!!

[GruntFuttock]

How many of you lot drive around inflicting all those disgusting and dangerous exhaust fumes at us non drivers?

[madein1978]

GrantFuttock is quite clearly a green leftie, what are you on about, what do you actually know about exhaust emissions of vehicles? Cars have been legally obliged to have catalytic converters fitted to them since 1993, and the only emissions from a catalysed car is H20 (water) and C02 (Carbon Dioxide, which makes drinks fizzy), so dangerous my a**e. The dangerous bit (debatable) was tetraethyl lead in petrol, something that was tackled 1988 when unleaded petrol came on sale in britain, and lead was outlawed in 2000. The only vehicle that could be remotely considered dangerous is the greenies friend, the bus! Diesels have been shown to contain carciogenic components in their exhaust emissions but this is only trace elements so poses no real risk and Euro 4 legislation demands that all diesel powered vehicles have a closed loop catalyst fitted that removes the dodgy bits. A pre 1993 car is a fairly rare sight on the roads nowadays, in scotland at least, and the ones that are left are in general well maintained classics, the bangers that emit lots of fumes are generally put off the road by the MOT or the Police, because anyone who runs such a car will invariably have no legal documentation, you hardly see them anymore. You want pollution, try looking to the skys, that jumbo taking you to majorca pumps out more muck into the air in one hour than 10 cars could in a year!

[GruntFuttock]

OK then -here's a challenge.

I'll sit chain smoking with ten other people in a locked garage for 24 hours.

You sit for the same period in a locked garage with your low- emissions car engine running.

[madein1978]

No problem, I won't get gassed, cos thats impossible with a catalysed car, nothing would happen. You sitting smoking for 24 hours however might be a different kettle of fish.

[madein1978]

See, you would be breathing in a load of carbon monoxide with your stinky fags which is poisonous, I would not with the car! Your argument falls flat on its face there!

[searchme]

You're wrong-I'd be coughing,but you'd be in a coffin.

[Typhoid]

The food rule does apply to food prepared on the prems, they could sell pre-packaged sarnies over the bar, anything that can be sold as it has been bought in really ...

I'm an ex-smoker and an asthmatic (I know I know but I was just a kid when I started and it bought my asthma back - it had been gone for 10 years before I started smoking) and I don't mind smoking in pubs, it is part of pub life and I choose to go to the pub so it is up to me, if I am feeling bad asthma wise I don't go out, fairly simple really!! my local thinks that a ban is inevitable though and I think the plan is to put a marquee type tent outside for the smokers! lmao, we'll see but I think there is a way to go before a ban is enforced .....

[davver]

I am not a smoker and I find the smell of cigarette smoke very distasteful indeed. I also dislike cigar smoke, although I quite enjoy catching a whiff of pipe smoke. In all the pubs I enjoy going to, there are a number of smokers, and inevitably I will smell their smoke at some point, how much depending on what time I go. However, this unpleasantness is a small price to pay for the pleasure I get from going to the pub and havig a few drinks and socialising with friends, locals and bar staff. I sincerely doubt that the amount of second-hand smoke I inhale will adversely affect my health - there are many other things I do such as drink, sunbathe, play sport, run when crossing a road, drive, go to clubs with loud music playing etc that are much more likely to injure me before the (possible) effects of passive smoking become significant. If my local pub did become excessively smoky to the extent that it was spoiling the whole place for me, I would take my custom elsewhere.
This Government (and, indeed, today's society) has become obsessed with banning things that are unpleasant or potentially dangerous, rather than accepting that these kinds of things are part of life. I know it is a clich�, but we really do live in an increasingly nanny state, which is actually doing us more harm than good. I am 100% against this ban.

[GruntFuttock]

(cough) hear hear!