Should there be a blanket ban on public smoking?

[Guest Disco Stu]

Also Glynton mate, didn't you say it was your friends that were smoking ?

Perhaps you need to hang around the gym a bit and get some new smoke-free mates :!: :wink:

[Guest morpheus2702]

What with that and this namby-pamby country's negative attitude towards the heartfelt love between a man and his sheep, I think I'll emigrate to somewhere more tolerant. Like France ;-)

France - where a virgin is a sister that can run faster than her brother...

[Guest beersoft]

Smoking is great, it makes you look cool and impresses the girls :lol:

if they banned smoking in one pub, i would just drink in another.

and i don't think the goverment is going to ban tobacco at any point because of the tax they would lose.

i have a simple rule in my car, say if you smoke before you get in, and depending on the jurney length i wont smoke (if its long, we will stop) or if you do its your crash ;) its simple and easy

and the normal stuff of not chainsmoking around babys and kiddies and stuff, easy peasy

later

Owen

"just one more before bed"

[Guest mike-oh]

Just dragging this one up again as it's very relevant right now.

I'm all for a blanket ban. But what's the thinking behind all this "Smoking is OK where they don't serve food"?!?! I just don't get it!

[Guest Pondrew]

Dunno how I missed this post first time round. Gotta say that I can really empathise with Encece. I felt exactly the same until I quit smoking about 8months ago. Best thing I ever did...

[Guest mike-oh]

Wooot! I'd sell any shares you have in Febreze as it seems it's going to be a blanket ban as of next summer!

And can somone fix the poll please, not even my 26" widescreen can fit the poll bars on :) I think they end over in Harrogate somewhere!

[Guest Paul [MVP]]

Fixed the poll :)

P

[Guest awarner [MVP]]

Smoke free gets my vote :)

[Guest Paul [MVP]]

Ditto, but as non smokers, we're biased :)

P

[Guest Pondrew]

I consider myself a smoker albeit one who's no longer smoking :) Didn't stop me voting for a blanket ban :exclaim:

[Guest JamieDow]

Have family that are smokers, a big thumbs up for the ban.

[Guest Looby]

As with many other things it's part of the for/against divide and rule policy of the Government. Works a treat. :)

[Guest peekie]

least one thing it will make it easy for your holidays in spain where smoking is not allowed in bars and clubs , thing is in spain the price of a packet of smokes dropped to just over 2 euros , cant see the uk dropping the price :|

[Guest drblow]

Does no one else think it's slightly dubious that current legislation is suggesting that we all give up smoking, a tax goldmine for the govt ... but at the same time we are being encouraged to drink 24 hours a day!!??

Current legislation in this country makes me laugh. Of course non-smokers will vote for a smoking ban. I wonder how many drivers would vote for a total ban on cars if they knew how harmful the average exhaust pipe was to the environment/your lungs?

So my opinion is, I'll stop smoking when you all throw away your car keys ... OK?

[Guest username132]

Yeah, I don't wanna breathe people's crap. They should make it illegal to smoke with kids in the vicinity too. My parents used to light-up in the CAR when I was a kid so my lungs must be half tar by now. Thanks mum!!

[Guest mike-oh]

I'll stop smoking when you all throw away your car keys ... OK?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I tend not to park my car and run the engine next to people in a confined room :)

And with regards the tax generated by cigarette sales. When you take into account the cost the NHS spends dealing with smoking related illness, days off work and all the other side effects of smoking. the money generated from tax is negligeable!

[Guest Samsonite]

I tend not to park my car and run the engine next to people in a confined room :)

And with regards the tax generated by cigarette sales. When you take into account the cost the NHS spends dealing with smoking related illness, days off work and all the other side effects of smoking. the money generated from tax is negligeable!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BBC figures say that tobacco tax revenue is £8b and smoking attributed costs to the NHS are approx £1.5b.

Not that that should give any economic reason to not bring in a ban - i agee with the new regulation. I agree with the earlier comment that many smokers are selfish. If someone is performing an act unpleasant to most people present, common courtesy should prevail and the minority should at least offer to stop. People are selfish by nature and i think regulation by an authority - whether thats a self imposing publican or a Managing Directors decision - is often required. If everyone were left to have absolute discretion over their acts that affect others, it would be anarchy.. well maybe not anarchy but you see what i mean!

i also agree with the principle that having a smoking section in a restaurant is as useful as a p!ssing section in a swimming pool...

[Guest pcdoc]

well as a pipe smoker and I only go to the pub very rarely, and then only for a meal so it won't bother me one bit.

However I see pubs and WM clubs having a tough time as it is , this ban won't help the businesses at all. Lots of pubs closing or up for let/sale. One thing has already been mentioned ie the duty on cigs and tobacco, this really does make me wonder where the chancellor would recoup the lost revenue, probably start on the motorist again and hike up car tax fuel duty. This country is getting worse by the day, and before anyone says leave, I would, its wifey that wont.

Oh and the irony is as a pipe smoker I get people asking me to light up because they love the smell of a pipe!!

I wont vote because I belleive in peoples freedom of choice, not being told what I can do or can't. There used to be freedom of speech/choice in this country , not anymore. Our freedom is constantly being erroded by new laws, this is just another New Labour "we have ways of making you do as you are TOLD" mentallity

[Guest username132]

I wont vote because I belleive in peoples freedom of choice, not being told what I can do or can't. There used to be freedom of speech/choice in this country , not anymore. Our freedom is constantly being erroded by new laws

I don't think people should have the freedom to adversely affect other people's health against their will. To put it another way, what about my freedom to punch some old lady in the face?

[Guest drblow]

I tend not to park my car and run the engine next to people in a confined room :)

And with regards the tax generated by cigarette sales. When you take into account the cost the NHS spends dealing with smoking related illness, days off work and all the other side effects of smoking. the money generated from tax is negligeable!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As shown by the statistic presented after your post, you don't tend to use 'facts' either when constructing an argument, do you? The 'fact' is that in very few situations nowadays are people put directly in contact with smokers in confined spaces without a choice of exits, so using that as an excuse for this ban is hardly relevant. Most people who do encounter second hand smoke do so by choosing to enter an establishment. I have no choice about breathing the lead pollution that comes from a car exhaust ... unless I actually 'choose' to stay at home. The fact is that the brown clouds of smog over London, LA, Sydney etc etc, is not cigarette smoke, but years of industrial/automotive poison. Does anyone suggest that cars should be banned? Or industry? But oh no, it's fine to suggest banning smoking on the basis that it is harmful to other people!!?? While Bush & Blair sit disregarding worldwide anti-pollution recommendations left, right & centre, plundering the planet for fossil fuels that cause irreperable damage to not only every human being, but the actual ecosystems!

The problem really is that too many 'sheep' simply swallow what they are told by the media (eg. that smokers are a burden on the NHS), and then start jumping up & down complaining that we are killing them. Grow up ... accept the fact that this is nothing more than a distraction tactic to keep you all from worrying about real issues.

Edited February 16, 2006 by drblow

[Guest Looby]

Is the next topic going to be whether we are for or against James Blunt? :)

[Guest roma0803]

OMG The Blair generation in effect  :evil:

When you've banned smoking who you gonna go after next ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Guns?

Long live the ignorant.

Smoked 27 years and decided to stop when my son was born. I hate the idea of me killing him with my stupid habit (and please don't say smoking doesn't kill, one can't be that stupid)

[Guest Rob.P]

I don't think it's that big a deal, there are more harmful things than cigs out there that need to be tackled.

And with regards the tax generated by cigarette sales. When you take into account the cost the NHS spends dealing with smoking related illness, days off work and all the other side effects of smoking. the money generated from tax is negligeable!

Latest stats say that obesity costs the NHS more money than smoking related illnesses, with Alcohol coming in 2nd. Yes we should ban smoking in all public eating areas and yes it would be nice to avoid smoking near kids, these and many more are all common sense. The reason for a blanket ban is because we all have to assume that public as a whole doesn't have any common sense anymore.

We have to tell people how to live their lives cause unfortunately society seems to becoming more and more retarded (especially anything relating to common sense) as time goes by. So yes go for the blanket ban, it won't do any good when I'm outside the pub or restaurant with all the other smokers causing a litter problem with cigs and people walking in having to pass through an intensified amount of smoke.

Just like copy protection always get cracked, smokers will always find a way to light up, just like an alcoholic will always find a drink somewhere and a heron addict will always find money for the next hit, life will carry on pretty much the same.

Rant over :)

Edited February 16, 2006 by Rob.P

[Guest JamieDow]

To follow on from drblow's statement; more drinking, more drink drivers and more fines, additionally more cars off of the road.

Scary thing is more people get hurt, whilst the extended hours make throwing out time easier for the police i'm sure in the long run it makes matters worse for accidents and fatalities.

Then again I used to smoke and gave up because of the cost, now I can't stand the smell, you'll never get my bike keys tho :)

[Guest mupwangle]

I'll add me tuppenceworth to this now. :-D

>>My parents used to light-up in the CAR when I was a kid so my lungs must be half tar by now. Thanks mum!

They reckon that the damage done by smoking is completely reversed within 10 years so I wouldn't worry.

The figures quoted by the BBC further up the thread are probably right. These figures have been quoted before - although with the last increases in duty I think that they are actually higher.

The whole "Smokers cost the NHS money" argument is something that really p**ses me off, especially when doctors called for the NHS not to treat smokers. Fine - but they should refund all the taxes to smokers. Smokers subsidise non-smokers - this has been the case for years and the figures are publicly available. Someone said earlier that obesity costs the NHS more money now. I know a lot of fat non-smokers who I'll be funding heart operations on one day.

Personally I disagree with a blanket ban. This isn't because I'm a smoker - I haven't smoked in the house for years and when I'm in a non-smoking area or with a group of non-smoking friends I am quite happy to go to a smoking area or go outside. I just don't believe that it is the government's place to legislate on these things. Already smokers are the most punitively taxed which hurts the people that can least afford it (which demographically is the highest number of smokers) and for those of you you don't smoke - it's bloody difficult to stop. If it was easy then there wouldn't be a multi-billion pound industry selling quitting aids - which out of interest cost more than continuing smoking.

This all comes down to rights - and there are several involved here.

The rights of the smoker - to use a legal product

The rights of the non-smoker - to not have to sit in a smoky environment

The rights of the employees - to not have to work in a smoky atmosphere

The rights of the landlord - to be able to make his own rules in his own pub.

The rights of the smoker have been completely ignored. The rights of the employees have been ignored (believe it or not - many people who work in pubs also smoke) and the rights of the landlord have been ignored.

Legislation is unneccessary. The landlord has always had the right to decide whether or not smoking is banned. If he/she believes that the majority of punters want a non-smoking environment then they have the legal right to enforce that. The fact that very few have gives little credence to the statistics shown by the government to support the ban.

Out of interest, the Scottish Executive had absolutely no remit to bring in the ban there - the shoehorned it into health and safety legislation - which is a bit crap.

Sorry, but I'm a bit annoyed having found out that the smoking ban does not apply to the House of Commons as it is a "royal palace" rather than a public place. B******s.

*rant over*