Nosmo King

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by katex

Are you sure this information is correct Jambutty, and not confusing with Mental Health Units which will change on 1st July ?

Only repeating what they stated on the news. It could have been wrong.

Er! Do why still have mental health units?

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

In addition, as of July 1st, police and ambulance services will not be required to enter any premises in response to a 999 call if they believe tobacco smoking has taken place within the previous hour.

If it will include police and paramedics surely the fire service should be included as well?

Memo to burglars. Have a fag whilst you are plying your trade. The police won’t touch you for at least an hour.

Imagine the scene – a guy is doing a bit of DIY, slips and gashes his wrist. Blood is pumping out and a paramedic pokes his head round the door and smells the fag that wife gave him to calm him down a bit. “Sorry guv I can’t come in and treat you. You will have to bleed to death.”

I think that the word CRACKPOT is a suitable description.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Bonnyboy

The Council don’t want you to smoke in your own home now. They want the house to be smoke free for an hour before any Council visitor attends your home.

They can get stuffed, I'll smoke just before they come just to be awkward and bloody minded even though I gave up 30 years ago

[garinda]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Er! Do why still have mental health units?

There are mental health units at both Blackburn, and Burnley hospitals.

By the way, one of the early signs is getting your words muddled.

[blazey]

Originally Posted by jambutty

I read yesterday that as from 1st July 2008 residents in care homes will no longer be allowed to smoke on the premises.

Prisoners will, of course, be allowed to continue puffing away to their heart’s content.

The “eradication of civil liberties” noose grows tighter and tighter.

Maybe thats because nobody cares whether prisoners die of lung cancer, where as generally we want our elderly to live a bit longer.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by blazey

Maybe thats because nobody cares whether prisoners die of lung cancer, where as generally we want our elderly to live a bit longer.

What about the 4% of the UK prison population who are pensioners?

[blazey]

Originally Posted by garinda

What about the 4% of the UK prison population who are pensioners?

Pensioners or not, they are still criminals. It's not like age makes a difference in crime anyway. I'm sure I recall many people calling for thomson and venebles to be given the death penalty, yet they were only 10yrs old? Did anyone care about age then?

Personally I'd let the elderly smoke themselves to death, it's their lives and they might as well live out their days as they wish as long as it isnt harming anyone else.

[Bonnyboy]

Would just add that not everyone in a care home is elderly.

It’s just the erosion of everyone’s rights picking up momentum.

The elderly and/or infirm are hardly going to kick up a fuss

[slinky]

I can't believe they would do this. You are allowed to smoke in your own home....and a care home IS there own home......hmmmmm I don't see the difference.

When the smoking ban came in, our residents were allowed to smoke in the SMOKERS lounge..... even family were allowed to, because its classed as THERE OWN HOME and family are guests.

Relatives that didn't have a smoking Resident, were not allowed to smoke In the home.

[blazey]

Originally Posted by slinky

I can't believe they would do this. You are allowed to smoke in your own home....and a care home IS there own home......hmmmmm I don't see the difference.

When the smoking ban came in, our residents were allowed to smoke in the SMOKERS lounge..... even family were allowed to, because its classed as THERE OWN HOME and family are guests.

Relatives that didn't have a smoking Resident, were not allowed to smoke In the home.

The care home isn't their own INDIVIDUAL home though, its one shared by others. Non-smokers often have rules about not smoking in their homes, so why should they not be able to have the same rules they would have in their normal lives?

Smokers can go into their own rooms if need be, or outside. Its just like at university where all the accomodation is non-smoking, and whilst there is smoking accomodation, you still have to smoke within your own room and not out in the corridors. I dont think anything particularly unjust is being done to smokers by enforcing these kind of rules.

[Doug]

None of this doesn’t change the fact that this government as lost it direction or as it? If the balance of the population shifts in favour of the non smoker than an ever encroaching ban will “in their minds” increase their share of the non smoking vote.

What I don’t like is the fact that there is very little choice in terms of an alternative government. In respect of the Health and Safety aspects it’s the responsibility of the employer/employee combination to reduce risk not hide behind this non entry bull****.

But what really gets me is that the Human Rights Acts protects terrorist, criminals, offenders, illegal immigrants and other non tax paying scrounging bastards from being named yet someone who may have fought for there country or worked all their lives can’t have a fag in peace.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Er! Do why still have mental health units?

Originally Posted by garinda

There are mental health units at both Blackburn, and Burnley hospitals.

By the way, one of the early signs is getting your words muddled.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! You walked right into that one.

I just KNEW that you wouldn’t be able to resist having a poke at me in your inimitable childish way.

It would have been obvious to an amoeba that it couldn’t have been a typo so it had to be deliberate. But you being so full of crap and your own self importance you just had to have a dig and made a complete and utter fool of yourself, leaving people in no doubt who the obnoxious prat is on this forum.

I think that your post signature is quite appropriate in this instance.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Doug

None of this doesn’t change the fact that this government as lost it direction or as it? If the balance of the population shifts in favour of the non smoker than an ever encroaching ban will “in their minds” increase their share of the non smoking vote.

What I don’t like is the fact that there is very little choice in terms of an alternative government. In respect of the Health and Safety aspects it’s the responsibility of the employer/employee combination to reduce risk not hide behind this non entry bull****.

But what really gets me is that the Human Rights Acts protects terrorist, criminals, offenders, illegal immigrants and other non tax paying scrounging bastards from being named yet someone who may have fought for there country or worked all their lives can’t have a fag in peace.

well said doug, its a pity the "intelligent ones cant see it.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by Tealeaf

In addition, as of July 1st, police and ambulance services will not be required to enter any premises in response to a 999 call if they believe tobacco smoking has taken place within the previous hour.

Please tell me this is just a sick joke.


Meanwhile we cannot deny prisoners their illegal drugs because that is against their human rights!

[WalkOnBRFC]

Originally Posted by jambutty

I read yesterday that as from 1st July 2008 residents in care homes will no longer be allowed to smoke on the premises.

Prisoners will, of course, be allowed to continue puffing away to their heart’s content.

The “eradication of civil liberties” noose grows tighter and tighter.