Re: Smoking Ban?
Originally posted by Filth
Last night I was very pissed of to find that the uk is banning smoking in just about any public place, this includes in the pub. I think this is wrong once again we are denyed free will, where will this madness end? and what will be band next?
Your free will? What about the will of others who want to breathe easily?
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
They just want to be able to endulge in their rights and have a cigarette without being barraded by people for doing so. you make smokers out to look like villians of society.
Smokers contribute to the deaths of thousands each year from passive smoking. All smokers are potential killers.
As for rights, so they smoke themselves half to death, get lung cancer then think it's their RIGHT to have the tax payer pay for the chemotherapy to save their lives? Hahaha, rights my arse.
Finally the government had the balls to go through with an all over ban in England. 😊 It will be so good to go out to a resturant and not smell of smoke. Plus there's the added bonus of not having an asthma attack every time I go out 😄
((slight exaggeration there 😛 but it makes it a hell of a lot worse.))
Re: Re: Smoking Ban?
Originally posted by Makedde
Your free will? What about the will of others who want to breathe easily?
well then they made a choice to go to a place of smokers................see they made a choice...................if you ban smoking you are taking away freedoms of choice and it will bite you later down the road.
Re: Re: Re: Smoking Ban?
Originally posted by soleran30
well then they made a choice to go to a place of smokers................see they made a choice...................if you ban smoking you are taking away freedoms of choice and it will bite you later down the road.
I don't chose to go where smokers are. They are everywhere, the only way to get away from smokers is to lock yourself in your house and not venture outside.
That's a bullshit argument. It's not an unjust restriction of freedom banning smoking in places where the smoke bothers, and causes health problems to, other people.
No-one is saying you can't smoke, just don't blow that disgusting foul breath-laced smoke over every available surface in places where people aren't keen on inhaling the remnants of someone else's tar-infested lungs.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
That's a bullshit argument. It's not an unjust restriction of freedom banning smoking in places where the smoke bothers, and causes health problems to, other people.No-one is saying you can't smoke, just don't blow that disgusting foul breath-laced smoke over every available surface in places where people aren't keen on inhaling the remnants of someone else's tar-infested lungs.
*applauds laudly*
Hmm yeah think so.................like banning smoking from sidewalks? How about if establishments place smoking signs on all facilities so you know non-smokers beware. At least in the USA it is identified if an establishment has smoking and you can shoose to go there or not.
Whats next no verbal abuse establishments because it hurts your ears?
Originally posted by soleran30
Hmm yeah think so.................like banning smoking from sidewalks? How about if establishments place smoking signs on all facilities so you know non-smokers beware. At least in the USA it is identified if an establishment has smoking and you can shoose to go there or not.
That would also be fair enough, but there are public health policy reasons behind the move, as well as reducing some of the burden on the health service of treating smoke-related illness.
Banning smoking outdoors is silly, I agree.
Originally posted by soleran30
Whats next no verbal abuse establishments because it hurts your ears?
It's not quite the same level, as well you know...
Not really and this really really bothers me.
The Govt placing ban like this shoots itself in the foot! First off now there are more rules for business owners to follow. If you want a smoke free establishment petition the owner and make it happen. If your business means enough they will change. The Govt issueing this means we have now opened up a HUGE can of worms on what they can say is right and wrong.
Believe me when I say smoking today what red meat, bad language and anything thing else in the future.
Please also educate me in the publis health issues involved in public smoking.................................ESPECIALLY when a consumer makes a choice to go to a smoking establishment.
Originally posted by soleran30
Hmm yeah think so.................like banning smoking from sidewalks? How about if establishments place smoking signs on all facilities so you know non-smokers beware. At least in the USA it is identified if an establishment has smoking and you can shoose to go there or not.Whats next no verbal abuse establishments because it hurts your ears?
People want to smoke fine. But people want to breathe fresh air, and not smoke. So whose rights are more important? The rights of those to kill themselves and pollute the air, or the rights of those to stay healthy and breath easily?
Originally posted by soleran30
Not really and this really really bothers me.The Govt placing ban like this shoots itself in the foot! First off now there are more rules for business owners to follow. If you want a smoke free establishment petition the owner and make it happen. If your business means enough they will change. The Govt issueing this means we have now opened up a HUGE can of worms on what they can say is right and wrong.
Believe me when I say smoking today what red meat, bad language and anything thing else in the future.
Perhaps. Going this far is a good step though. Any further will be dealt with when it comes.
Originally posted by soleran30
Please also educate me in the publis health issues involved in public smoking.................................ESPECIALLY when a consumer makes a choice to go to a smoking establishment.
Quite simple, less smoking leads to less smoking-related illness (both logically, and factually shown by study). This reduces the amount spent in hospitals upon these illnesses. Regardless of whether the people deliberately put themselves in harm's way, their treatment is still potentially tax-funded, and therein lies the crux of the matter.
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Quite simple, less smoking leads to less smoking-related illness (both logically, and factually shown by study). This reduces the amount spent in hospitals upon these illnesses. Regardless of whether the people deliberately put themselves in harm's way, their treatment is still potentially tax-funded, and therein lies the crux of the matter.
No smoking means more chemo for people who deserve it, and no shortage of hospital beds, less asthma attacks etc...
Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
Perhaps. Going this far is a good step though. Any further will be dealt with when it comes.Quite simple, less smoking leads to less smoking-related illness (both logically, and factually shown by study). This reduces the amount spent in hospitals upon these illnesses. Regardless of whether the people deliberately put themselves in harm's way, their treatment is still potentially tax-funded, and therein lies the crux of the matter.
Yeah now logically persuade all the smokers that its bad and costs us money then send me the results🙂
Issuing a smoking ban is a HUGE mistake. We should in-cent the healthy and nonsmokers and not punish smokers. We have all seen what resentment does to programs, govt, business you name. Good intentions bad implementation.
Originally posted by soleran30
Yeah now logically persuade all the smokers that its bad and costs us money then send me the results🙂
Originally posted by soleran30
Issuing a smoking ban is a HUGE mistake. We should in-cent the healthy and nonsmokers and not punish smokers. We have all seen what resentment does to programs, govt, business you name. Good intentions bad implementation.
It's been very successful in most cases thus far, bar the odd smoker moaning about having to go out in the cold to smoke. Boo hoo.
Originally posted by soleran30
Yup but the biggest issue is when does the govt address individual rights and take preference over others...........There are a TON of solutions over banning yet this is where it falls which is very weak and suck ass so many people will just accept it without thinking of further repercussions.
Ok, but this all remains to be seen. If some manner of Orwellian dystopia is the net product of this smoking ban, I will return to this thread with a pac-man to eat my electronic words.
Until then, I say this.
Hahahaha. Cold out?
I am not sure what Cold out means.
When has the govt taken rights then given them back? I am sure it has happened however not the majority and if health is the biggest concern brother that s kind of a, wash whats next you drink no help for you sorry aspirin after 50 years causes cancer now if you take it sorry for you.
There are alot bigger things here then the simple cough and hack of a second hand smoker. By the way what are the proven side affects of second hand smoke?
Originally posted by soleran30
I am not sure what Cold out means.When has the govt taken rights then given them back? I am sure it has happened however not the majority and if health is the biggest concern brother that s kind of a, wash whats next you drink no help for you sorry aspirin after 50 years causes cancer now if you take it sorry for you.
There are alot bigger things here then the simple cough and hack of a second hand smoker. By the way what are the proven side affects of second hand smoke?
To be honest I'm not that interested in debating it beyond the simple fact that I hate smoking, and I laugh in the faces of those who blow smoke in the faces of others.
That's good enough for me.