Body & Soul1 min ago
Latest on the smoking situation
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.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Loosehead. 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.
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.
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.
-- answer removed --
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?
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?
-- answer removed --
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.
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!!
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!
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 .....
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.
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.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.