Smokers unite before it is too late.

[Madhatter]

What was all that load of tosh!!! Notice you aint saying that people who like a good p*ss up should be refused & banned, so you must like a bevvy then.

I couldn't care less if I never had another alcoholic drink in my life.

Actually Madhatter, you could not be more wrong....... You may remember a scientific breakthrough which hit the news 2 or 3 years ago. Addictions are genetically inherited conditions..

Scientists identified a gene which explains why some people develop addictions, whether that be to tobacco, alcohol, drugs, sex, gambling, shopping, caffeine or chocolate, the gene is part of an addictive personality and is inherited from parents.... It is therefore an illness in itself and cannot be helped..

how can an adiction be an illness? it doesn't need a cure, it needs determination. Are you saying that if a smack head gives birth to a baby with an addiction it's classed as an illness.

alcholics get classed as disabled , probably coz their too drunk to walk

they also get a very lot more money than say somone witha genuine disability in a wheelchair

the govenments answer to helping an alcholic is to give them more money to buy more alchol

how about giving them sod all money so that they cant afford to drink and if they steal to feed their habbit lock them up where there is no alchol

same could go for drug addicts but i would rather they were given one huge overdose as their farewell ride to the stars

drug addicts dont pay tax on their drugs and in nearly all cases dont contribute to national insurance or tax because they are too high to work so they shouldnt be treated

That I agree with.

I love the smell of the cherry or caramel pipe tobaco, why can't you all smoke stuff like that, would maybe even allow it in the flat then, it would save on air freshener.

[Madhatter]

Originally Posted by thindle

Hear Hear. I quite agree with you. And I am an ex smoker! This earth, such as it is, belongs to us all, we are not here very long. We should enjoy it in whatever way we choose, and not be dictated to by anyone. :engsmil:

So if I choose to go to a pub and enjoy a pint in clean air, I should be able to do so, that is the way I choose to enjoy it, and shouldn't be dictated to by smokers insisting on filling the pub with smoke.

Back to the air conditioning thing. It's the only way that two sets of people who want to do opposite things can both enjoy doing them in the same environment

[thindle]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Smoking should be banned altogether.
As a country we have the largest rate of children & teenagers developing asthma due to the ignorant gases of Tony Blair's new plane, all your fuel guzzeling 4x4's which are not necessary, and of course not forgetting those nice little cancer sticks.
How ignorant do you have to be to smoke in public when there could be pregnant womens lungs being bombarded with your tar & crap from the inside of your 5 minute nicotine fix.
What could you possibly be gaining?
A sense of power or rebellion?
Why would you attack your own health, never mind the health of every passer by?!
Smoking is utterly senseless. Fact.

Hey Hey! don't just blame Tony Blair and his government. It was the Tories a long time ago that first started this. Smoking isn't as utterly senseless as drinking. Smokers don't go off their heads and kill people fighting and the like. and stagger and fall down senseless. Do they???:engsmil:

[lettie]

Originally Posted by Madhatter

how can an adiction be an illness? it doesn't need a cure, it needs determination. Are you saying that if a smack head gives birth to a baby with an addiction it's classed as an illness.

.

Addiction is classified as a mental illness and there are many treatments available for addiction depending on one's poison..

If a smack head gives birth to a baby, chances are that the baby will be admitted to NICU and have to go through withdrawal. This is treated with various medications and can take weeks, sometimes months.... These babies shake, sweat, sneeze a lot and have a very high pitched scream (if you heard one you wouldn't forget it). They are irritable to handle, don't feed well or sleep well for that matter.............Now you tell me, is that baby ill???

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Madhatter

So if I choose to go to a pub and enjoy a pint in clean air, I should be able to do so, that is the way I choose to enjoy it, and shouldn't be dictated to by smokers insisting on filling the pub with smoke.

Back to the air conditioning thing. It's the only way that two sets of people who want to do opposite things can both enjoy doing them in the same environment

I agree with you Madhatter. You should be able to go into a pub and not have to breathe in second hand smoke. What you cannot do is go into a pub that allows smoking and demand that everyone stops doing so just because you object.

Please explain where is this pub with clean air. Half way up Mount Everest perhaps or maybe at the north and south pole?

[Madhatter]

no it's avictim of abuse by a parent who should be stopped from having any more. But instead the parent gets treated like they themselves are ill, when it's an addiction that they got in to, they chose to take the ****e, they knew the consequenses, and when they knew they were pregnant, they could have got help. They deserve what they get and certainly don't desserve to be able to look after lids.
I know someone very well that does take drugs, They also had their kids took off them for a while and she's been in the sex industry to pay for her drugs. She'll never be off it, because she's stuck in a place where she can't get away from the kids dad who is the one who persuades her to take the stuff again every time she starts to ween herself off it. Another down side to city life, the drug culture. It's far worse than a town. in a few months she'll no doubt be pregnant yet again bythe smackhead, and I'll have to pay for it with my taxes, she's already got four I'm helping to pay for.

[Madhatter]

Originally Posted by thindle

Hey Hey! don't just blame Tony Blair and his government. It was the Tories a long time ago that first started this. Smoking isn't as utterly senseless as drinking. Smokers don't go off their heads and kill people fighting and the like. and stagger and fall down senseless. Do they???:engsmil:

lol no you kill yourselves, and others. why do you smoke?
what is the sense in smoking? the sense in drinking is that it's a drink, it tastes nice, and in moderation it makes people happy and lifts peoples spirits. Drinking is far more sensible than smoking, getting drunk and damaging property and people has nothing to do with sensible drinking, thats abusing drink. I believe there's a difference between enjoying a drink and drinking to get drunk. people who drink to get drunk will drink any old rubbish, white lighting was my neighbours favourite.

[jambutty]

Sadly Madhatter many women in the sex industry were either conned or forced into becoming substance dependant just so that their pimp can profit by it.

However the topic of this thread was and should be why it is OK to ban smoking even in the open air yet allow motor vehicles to cause more pollution than tobacco ever did.

I haven’t read one single argument from you or from anyone else that justifies this action other than to say that cars etc are necessary whereas smoking is not, which is no argument. But then that seems to be a standard tactic. If a coherent argument to counter the posed query cannot be formulated then drag the thread off topic and get it lost in a morass of not really relevant points.

So tell me again why anyone should accept the total smoking ban when those advocating the ban, with I might add a great deal of glee, do the very thing that they are complaining of with a different means.

[Madhatter]

I gave my opinion, while the goverment continues to take tax and to treat smoking related ilnesses without question, there is no argument for it to be banned, to do so would make them hypocrites. As far as I can see, there is very few people who honestly support a ban in open public places. They may support a total ban, but what is the point in just banning it from open public places now that it's been banned from enclosed public places.
It has no logic.

[SPUGGIE J]

If people want to smoke then they are entitled to in this country as it is a "free country" or so they say. There is enough gunf from the govenment telling us how to live our lives without them taking potshots at people that smoke. A car produces pollution to a greater level and greater than that is industry. I live next to a refinery and the polution from there, though denied is very high especially with the burners fired up at night in the hope that its polution is not seen.

People smoke, drink, take drugs etc etc etc and it is by choice not something that is forced on them. Take away the right to choose how to abuse themselves then we might as well go back to the middle ages.

If smoking is causing the gov concern over health care then what about all those who end up in hospital due to over doing it at the gym are they to be banned, threatened, forced to stop through legislation because of cost to the NHS?

There are many ways to abuse our bodies "our" being the word that says its mine not yours so I do with it as we please. Fancy a ciggie then have one its not the polititions place to tell us not to, nor force the issue with punitive laws.

[Madhatter]

Yes but the problem with your statement is that the smoke from smoking doesn't just affect 'your' body, it goes into the air and swirls around 'others' body. In a lot of ways driving a car can be compared in more than just the fumes, the car itself can be a danger to other people.
We do quite a lot to prevent that happenenig, but have only took the easy cheap way out of curing the dangers of others being affected by smoke. They banned it from public places.
I can't help thinking that banning it in open public places is only being done to back up the first ban, because people are asking why they can't have seperate smoking rooms or total smoking pubs.

[joaner3]

Its the same here in Montreal, the Law went into effect on May 31st. No more smoking in bars and restaurants and 9 metres away from public buildings, hopitals and clinics. It's getting ridiculous, they'll be saying next you can't smoke in your own home. The cigar bars are O.K though. They should start on about the drinking too, that can kill you as well, if you drink enough of it. I'm really p*******ed.

[DeShark]

Sigh...

@ Jambutty: How can you moan about people dragging the thread off topic and then proceed to involve the whole alcohol topic. I appreciate you getting back to the topic at hand, namely "Why should we ban cigarettes outdoors and then still permit cars and lorries to pump out noxious gasses into the environment?"

I thought it would be obvious why a motorbike is less poluting than a car. I thought it'd be obvious that one bus is better than 20 cars (I know very few people who car share). I don't believe for one second that smoking is being banned for environmental reasons. I think it's to do with the health problems caused by passive smoking. You've said that cars produce more health problems for people than passive smoking. I'll take your word for that. Now then, what possible short term (over the next 5 years) solution can you give to stop cars from polluting? Should we all ride the bike to work? What about those who live 100 miles away from work? Should they have to change jobs? What about lorries, essential for keeping food in our supermarkets (and fags in our newsagents)? How else can we transport huge amounts of goods? It's not impossible, however, for you to stop smoking over the next 5 years. I don't mind you smoking, regardless of what I may have said thus far in the thread, *as long as it does not directly affect my health/smell of my clothes/burn holes in my jacket*. The environmental debate is, in my mind, nothing but a detraction from the real reasons that this government might want to ban smoking outside.

Originally Posted by chav1

if you were that against smoking in pubs and found teh smell so disgusting you wouldnt go into the pubs in the first place but the pleasure of rotting your liver with alchol makes it ok to stand in a smoke filled pub

I find that completely heartless. I might like building traps in bus shelters. If you find my practise of trap-building so disgusting and dangerous, perhaps you should refrain from catching a bus. I'm sure that sounds as rational to you as your argument sounds to me. As for "rotting my liver"... I *rarely* drink to excess. I believe that a pint or two/a glass of wine/a whisky helps to calm my nerves. It probably reduces the likelihood of me having a mental breakdown. My liver is not going to keel over and die.

Perhaps it is possible to have a smoke once a month or so. But the only people I knew who used to do that are now turning into "only when I go out" and I'm sure they will soon become "only when I go out/am in a stressful situation". It spirals on, but they're going to become full time smokers. It's called addiction.

Drugs are illegal, some say that they too can be safe in moderation, but thats not true, many a people have died taking them for the first time. Weed is the same as cigarettes, it stinks and it ages you and kills brain cells. People who smoke weed Continuously look thin, pale and gaunt, far older than they are. They look ill

I like the way you classify all illegal drugs under one roof. Some drugs can and will kill you first time. But some drugs are fine in moderation. I hate weed. I can't stand it. I've seen what it can do to people. But will it kill them first time round? Not unless they choke on their blunt. It's not as addictive as smoking tobacco. So it can be used in moderation. I know a couple of people who will have a rare smoke once every two months or so. Are they stoners who can't hold down a job? Not at all.

It's not a free country at all. Anyone who tries to tell you that has his/her head in the clouds. There are restrictions for a reason. We aren't allowed to do anything we please. There are laws in place to help us to get on with each other. This smoking in pubs ban does exactly that. It goes in favour of the majority. Most people do not smoke. Why should the majority have to put up with the minority? It's ludicrous. They can take 10 minutes, have a smoke outside and then come back to the conversation. It's not some major crackdown on your human rights to abuse your body.

Which is another point. It may be *your* body, but since we have the NHS, it's the rest of society which will look after it. I'm alright doing that as long as you'll look after my body if it goes by the wayside. I'm a healthy human being, I don't do drugs, I've never even tried smoking, I don't do xtreme sports. If we had no NHS, my health insurance would be the lowest of the low (were it not for my families history of cancer). If the NHS stop treating smokers, how many of us are going to own up to being smokers? If I smoked, I sure as hell wouldn't tell the NHS.

My main point however, is that I should be able to enjoy my pint in the pub, without leaving smelling of cigarrettes and ash.

[shakermaker]

As far as I'm concerned, tobacco should be outlawed. However as that is not entirely feesable because of the severe lack of balls in the government; an idea that could be put forward would be for the ones stupid enough to want to smoke to be allocated smoking rooms aside from the public, dotted around town centres & perhaps placed next to bus stops - enclosed of course!
I think the Lancashire County Council's act a couple of years ago to move out smoking rooms in schools, librarys etc was a wrong move; I think smoking rooms are the only way to keep both sides of this happy.

[Madhatter]

Sorry, It's the way I've put it. I don't consider weed to be a drug. drugs are drugs and weed is weed. I know people on here manage do use it in moderation and don't look ill. Notice that I said continously. Therfore I agree with your comments.