Vote on smoking ban in public places

I'll elaborate on my previous post.

This is a serious step into the 21st century. People in the future will look back at our previous society's smoking in the same way as we look back on people who threw their plop and weewee out onto the streets from their windows - I can see clearly now the smoke has gone ;)
 
Chronos-X said:
I'll elaborate on my previous post.

This is a serious step into the 21st century. People in the future will look back at our previous society's smoking in the same way as we look back on people who threw their plop and weewee out onto the streets from their windows - I can see clearly now the smoke has gone ;)
Click to expand...

Indeed. :)
 
PeterNem said:
I'm quite dissapointed with this (and I'm a non-smoker). It should be up to the individual liscencee or chain of pubs to determin whether or not their particular pub wishes to ban smoking or otherwise in my opinion. That way people get to excercise their right to chose whether they want to smoke or not, and people who don't smoke can choose whether they wish to go to a smoking or non-smoking pub.

Another case of the government intervening in something and deciding centrally something that should be left up to the people to decide.
Click to expand...

At last, the voice of reason.

It has taken 89 posts for someone to actually consider that both smokers and non-smokers can be catered for in a reasonable and practical manner.

I am sorely disappointed...actually, I'm disgusted by the number of selfish people in this thread who welcome a total ban on smoking as this suits their needs even though it inconveniences smokers greatly.

Did it never occur to you people that separate facilities could be provided for people who wish to smoke whilst they are having a drink which would allow them to do so without inconveniencing non-smokers.

This **** you Jack, I'm all right atitude sickens me.

The point Cleanbluesky has been trying to make is that if you people had been so bothered about smoking in public places in the past, why the hell didn't you try to do something about it?

If you had organised yourselves and spoken to local pub landlords etc, you could well have forced them to make changes to accomodate both parties. I can assure you that if a few hundred people had threatened to withhold their custom until something had been done, the response would have been prompt and positive.

Instead you "suffered" in silence, secretly (or openly) despising smokers for causing you a problem which you couldn't be arsed to do anything about and waited for the Government to do it for you.

Now, in typically heavyhanded fashion, they have and smokers have been greatly inconvenienced - but that doesn't matter because you got what you wanted so **** the smokers.

I hope you enjoy watching smugly from your seat in the warm pub as I stand outside in the sleet and snow trying to satisfy my adiction :mad:

Stan :)
 
Bigstan said:
At last, the voice of reason.

It has taken 89 posts for someone to actually consider that both smokers and non-smokers can be catered for in a reasonable and practical manner.

I am sorely disappointed...actually, I'm disgusted by the number of selfish people in this thread who welcome a total ban on smoking as this suits their needs even though it inconveniences smokers greatly.

Did it never occur to you people that separate facilities could be provided for people who wish to smoke whilst they are having a drink which would allow them to do so without inconveniencing non-smokers.

This **** you Jack, I'm all right atitude sickens me.

The point Cleanbluesky has been trying to make is that if you people had been so bothered about smoking in public places in the past, why the hell didn't you try to do something about it?

If you had organised yourselves and spoken to local pub landlords etc, you could well have forced them to make changes to accomodate both parties. I can assure you that if a few hundred people had threatened to withhold their custom until something had been done, the response would have been prompt and positive.

Instead you "suffered" in silence, secretly (or openly) despising smokers for causing you a problem which you couldn't be arsed to do anything about and waited for the Government to do it for you.

Now, in typically heavyhanded fashion, they have and smokers have been greatly inconvenienced - but that doesn't matter because you got what you wanted so **** the smokers.

I hope you enjoy watching smugly from your seat in the warm pub as I stand outside in the sleet and snow trying to satisfy my adiction :mad:

Stan :)
Click to expand...

Is that actually a joke as it is so ludicrous?

Calling non smokers selfish, "**** you Jack attitude" etc.??

Got to be a joke, right......right?? ;)
 
UOcUK Poopscoop said:
Is that actually a joke as it is so ludicrous?

Calling non smokers selfish, "**** you Jack attitude" etc.??

Got to be a joke, right......right?? ;)
Click to expand...
Agree, not like the "i'm going to the pub, have a smoke and **** anyone who doesn't like it" attitude eh? Not saying this is how everyone is obviously. But it's not the non-smokers who are polluting the air others breathe is it (unless they've got some other problem :p).
 
Bigstan said:
I am sorely disappointed...actually, I'm disgusted by the selfish people in this thread who reject a ban on smoking as this suits their needs even though it inconveniences non-smokers greatly.
Click to expand...
Nice argument, works both ways though.

Did it never occur to you people that separate facilities could be provided for people who wish to smoke whilst they are having a drink which would allow them to do so without inconveniencing non-smokers.
Click to expand...
This is unworkable in many, many pubs. There are hundreds of pubs in London which are just one small room where it would be physically impossible to divide into sections.

This **** you Jack, I'm all right atitude sickens me.
Click to expand...
Irony++

If you had organised yourselves and spoken to local pub landlords etc, you could well have forced them to make changes to accomodate both parties. I can assure you that if a few hundred people had threatened to withhold their custom until something had been done, the response would have been prompt and positive.
Click to expand...
Well, now the boot is on the other foot - if smokers feel so strongly about it then presumably they will all boycott pubs and force the industry to lobby for a change and the law will be repealed. Wouldn't hold your breath though.

I hope you enjoy watching smugly from your seat in the warm pub as I stand outside in the sleet and snow trying to satisfy my adiction :mad:
Click to expand...
Which I think shows that this post is somewhat hypocritical, as presumably you have no intention to sacrifice going out...
 
UOcUK Poopscoop said:
Now smokers will have to put up with smoking outside in the wet and cold.
Click to expand...

I see no reason why either should suffer, I don't think you should be forced from pubs if people decide on your behalf that your presence or habits are noxious. If being in a pub is so important to you, I hope it is everything you were promised.
I don't believe legislation should be the way to go in any case.

With the greatest respect Clearbluesky if we all kept to your sort of understanding of the world we would still be using asbestos in buildings because "someone was silly enough to buy a house with it in it so tough luck on them."
Click to expand...

Apples, oranges.
 
UOcUK Poopscoop said:
Is that actually a joke as it is so ludicrous?

Calling non smokers selfish, "**** you Jack attitude" etc.??

Got to be a joke, right......right?? ;)
Click to expand...

Explain to me how being happy that someone being prevented from partaking in an activity they enjoy when it is not necessary to do so isn't selfish?

Stan :)
 
UOcUK Poopscoop said:
Do you disagree with the drink driving ban?

Just curious.
Click to expand...

Of course not.

The difference being someone hit by a drunk driver has no choice about it and could potentially come to a lot of harm.

However if pubs were encouraged but not forced to become non-smoking then both groups of people could be catered for. There's quite a difference between smoking and drink-driving.
 
Last edited:
Evil-Penguin said:
Since smokers around me are so inconsiderate, why should I give a damn if they're inconvinienced now?
Click to expand...

Define 'inconsiderate'... should smokers ask you if they wish to smoke? If you come along while someone is smoking, should they ask your permission?

Do you not have any habits that you wouldn't like legislated against?
 
cleanbluesky said:
I see no reason why either should suffer, I don't think you should be forced from pubs if people decide on your behalf that your presence or habits are noxious. If being in a pub is so important to you, I hope it is everything you were promised.
I don't believe legislation should be the way to go in any case.



Apples, oranges.
Click to expand...

Hey (sorry can't resist this).......


"If smokers want to go into pubs so much they will have to put up with the NON smoking, no one is forcing them to go in."


Irony indeed. :)
 
Chronos-X said:
I'll elaborate on my previous post.

This is a serious step into the 21st century. People in the future will look back at our previous society's smoking in the same way as we look back on people who threw their plop and weewee out onto the streets from their windows - I can see clearly now the smoke has gone ;)
Click to expand...

Or perhaps they will regret the car fumes and ID cards...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom