Donate SIGN UP

Smoking ban.

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 11:30 Wed 13th Oct 2010 | News
149 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/32vcryt

Could this common sense approach be the answer to what must be one of the biggest infringements of a person's civil liberties?

I am not a smoker, may I add?.
Gravatar

Answers

61 to 80 of 149rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 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.
I'm not particularly ;anti-smokers' (though I think if you're not anti-smoking you need your head examined) and I'm certainly not one of these people who complains all the time to people that do it - generally if someone lights up (in a private context) I'll move away or leave the room. But I kinda like being able to hang around in pubs now. I have a very weak chest, so being in the same room where large quantities of people are smoking for extended periods of time really isn't an option.

I'd also like to say that if I were a smoker, I'd consider it a common courtesy not to smoke indoors (or at least not around people that didn't) in the same way I wouldn't smoke around babies. I think it's a bit sad we've had to use legislation to force it.
my sentiments exactly kromovaracun
-- answer removed --
Mine too. As an inveterate smoker I would never dream of smoking in someone else's house unless specifically invited to, and then only if one of the residents was also smoking.
''I'd consider it a common courtesy not to smoke indoors (or at least not around people that didn't) in the same way I wouldn't smoke around babies. I think it's a bit sad we've had to use legislation to force it.''

100% agree. (I'm a smoker).
Damn those drink driving laws....

With regards to smoking yes it would be sensible to have smoking rooms within a pub for those who want to smoke.
Question Author
sherminator

No, until something different is introduced the Lorry and Bus are essential forms of transport.

It is the hypocritical non-smoker who outlaws the smoker for daring to pollute the air that they breath, yet at the same time most likely owns and drives a vehicle that churns out much more pollution, than a smoker could ever achieve.

If you don't believe me just look over any city, that is not cigarette smoke you see.

So may I suggest if you feel so strongly about air quality, get rid of your motor, and walk or use public transport.

NOW! Is that not the most stupidest things you will ever read on this site?.
AOG has made a good point.

Exhaust fumes are PROBABLY carcinogenic (cancer producing).
Cigarette smoke constituents are DEFINITELY carcinogenic.

At the moment it is easier to isolate the smoker rather than vehicles, but it will come.
-- answer removed --
well i live in a very clean city! do less than 4000 miles a year in my car! its never used to go to work so is not ever sitting in heavy traffic congestion. and is a luxury that I can afford as it helps to visit my family back in Scotland where trains dont go!

Smoking is bad for health of everyone, technically illegal to smoke around workers so should have been banned years ago and has made pubs a much more pleasant experience for everyone! Also there are so many arguments against smoking that air quality hardly comes into it (except indoors!) I work in an office and apparently you used to be able to smoke in offices!!!!? cannot think of anything more disgusting I'm so glad I get to work in a smoke free environment as are many others! Tell me why a Bar worker should suffer a fate that I wouldnt suffer myself!?
Question Author
sherminator

/// Tell me why a Bar worker should suffer a fate that I wouldn't suffer myself!?///

Its called choice,

A Bar Worker has a choice to work in that environment or not.

A Soldier has a choice to face bullets or not.

A Miner has a choice to go down a mine or not.

A Smoker has a choice to smoke or not.

A Non-Smoker has a choice to enter into a smoky atmosphere or not.
In this current climate I'm sure many are doing jobs that would not be their choice. I suppose they could always claim benefits but I don't think you'd prefer that.
-- answer removed --
of course the ban in pubs should also extend to the consumption of alcohol

hands up who has been threatened or actually smacked by a drinker (who probably has a shot liver)?

i have yet to be assaulted by someone as a sole consequence of their nicotine intake
Now you're being really silly kinell...
so you agree then AOG that smokers should be able to smoke in offices and such like?

because I have a choice to work in an office? so shouldn't smoking office workers be treated the same as at pubs?
Question Author
No best to turn them over to the fire-service.
The brain donors are out in force today!!
Whatever became of that MP, from Luton I think, who was in the pocket of the tobacco lobby?
To appease the whingeing smokers couldn't each town have a smokers pub? There are pubs and bars especially for queers so why not smokers?

Perhaps they could call the pub 'The Black Lungs'

61 to 80 of 149rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Smoking ban.

Answer Question >>