Smoking ban what do you think?

[dave]

It's been very cleverly done - through spin and manipulation of the media many sectors of our society are becoming *demonised* - this of course means that when the time comes to erode more rights, people have already been brainwashed into following meekly along - much like 1930's Germany - it's not an overreaction.

 

15 years ago, 4x4 drivers were just that - people who excercised their right to buy whichever car they wanted or could afford to. Today they are the spawn of satan who polute our air and make global warming (which I personally do not believe humans have had very much to do with) worse, clog up the roads and are pretty much single handedly creating our congestion *problem*. Of course, when the time comes to take away your right to choose which car you want to buy because of the few that *abuse their right* and choose a 4x4, the Sun readers will all go "Yay! At last the Govt have done something about it." not realising of course that they, again have lost yet another civil liberty.

 

Now, 15 years ago, smoking was acceptable by the vast majority - yes, we all knew it's harmful etc... but there is was. You would expect to see it - in films, on tv, in pubs, on posters etc... now, of course, smokers are the single reason why the NHS is failing, why any worker in the public sector gets ill etc... so let's ban it!! "Yay", the *Sun and Mail readers cry - the Govt. have done something about those nasty smokers.

 

Well, let's see. Drinking. I know, let's make it so expensive, because let's face it - the whole of the population aged 15-35 is a *binge-drinker*. That way we're making Britain a safer place. "Yay" go the Sun readers - they've made beer too expensive for anyone to afford - but, hey, at least we're safe again! Not realising of course, that the only people they come into contact with these days are fellow workers (or proles as they are known to the govt.) - no clubs, sports or otherwise, as the govt. cut the grants to the councils - and no pubs, cos no-one goes in them. This is of course, a nice society for the govt. as this way most people who are upset by all of this never actually get to see each other and plot to do anything about putting it right.

 

So people are drinking more at home apparently, so the answer (to what question you may well ask?) is......yep, let's price it out of existence in the supermarkets too. It's for your own health you understand. We've tackled the binge-drinkers, so now the ones that stay at home and harm themselves have to be punished too.

 

"Yay" shout the Mail* readers, those Lager drinking louts should never be allowed near the stuff again.

 

Do I need to go on?

 

Yes, I think so - there's a lot of social hypnotism to undo.

 

...however, I will stop ranting for the moment.

 

"yay, I hear you ALL cry"

 

 

PS. No offence to Mail or Sun readers.

[Bookworm]

We're not inflicting rules, we're merely excercising a right - one which will be taken away soon.

 

Your counter argument will no doubt be, "what about non-smokers rights?" - well the answer is simple.

 

There are pubs that will not allow smoking already - therefore, there is a choice. Non-smokers already have the choice - smokers will not have the choice.

 

I think history will judge governments harshly (or at least it should) who have consistently removed rights from their people.

 

History judged the Nazis did it not?

 

So your choice is apartheid? Is that any better?

 

(PS: Since when do YOU apologise to Mail readers? Getting soft in your old age?)

[dave]

It's not apartheid if both *sides* have the choice of frequenting each others *places* or *sectors*.

 

Black people could not refrain from being black - smokers can refrain from smoking, and non-smokers can refrain from moaning about smoke if they frequent a place that they KNOW will have smoking in there.

[Spiceskull]

Let's continue...because the papers and other media ARE complicit in the erosion of choice and liberties...

 

Take Kate Moss & Pete Docherty...celebrity aside they are pretty much like any other 20/30 somethings insofar as they like to party, booze, smoke, take drugs...you know the stuff, everything that a parent rails against. Okay, I wasn't as glam as Kate, I demonstrated far more sense and respect than Pete, but in the main I was much like anyone else in doing these things...it is a part of growing up.

 

The media take these people, they elevate them to Godlike status, and encourage everyone to be the same "because they can, and because this is a FREE society..."

 

Next they bring them down, and all of the sheep who have been following the shepherd are now left with serious self-esteem issues, they are pariahs in society and suddenly they have no friends left. Then they turn in on themselves with self loathing, and drink/smoke/drug to an ever greater extent than they did previously...and now they are criminalised for it.

 

Unlike Kate & Pete they cannot be resurrected to sell more newspapers, becaue they are "Chavs/ASBO/****" so they only have one shot at the bandwagon. The rest of society moves onward, their lives are in ruin and all their teenage aspirations have died a death. They have been manipulated since they were old enough to read, and now the only place in society where they can fit in is as a number within the social services system...spongers to the media, but precisely where THIS Government wants them.

 

Now it is the turn of smokers - apart from a few posters here and there, and stupidly priced nicotine replacement therapy available in the chemist, what is this Government doing to help people quit. Yes, help is available, but you have to really go searching for it, rather than having it thrust in your face like treatment for so many other addictions.

 

This Government is creating a whole new class of social lepers, aided by the Evil Murdoch empire, with no salvation in sight. Margaret Thatcher once famously said "there is no such thing as society..." - Bliar and his cronies are doing everything in their power to make this an absolute certainty...the universe was once deemed to be centred around the Earth, and by extension, man. Is it long before Copernicus is once again branded a heretic?

[Spiceskull]

Oooohhh...perhaps the Government will consider banning red top tabloids as they are deemed to be injurious to mental health...now that is an erosion of choice I would certainly vote for...

[Bookworm]

Yes, but Dave, let's take our meeting on Saturday: it will be in a pub, before the smoking ban comes in place. Now, I know you're a gentleman (most of the time anyway ), and if I am asking you nicely, I am sure you will not blow your fag smoke in my face.

 

But let's imagine for a moment Bad Dave, he who doesn't respect other people's feelings or health. If you decide to smoke regardless while it is still allowed, my choice is to breathe it in or leave the meeting altogether. If smoking is not allowed, your choice is to call for a -ironically enough- breather so you can pop out and have your ciggie. I can't go out to cleanse my lungs outside and dive back in the smoking atmosphere without breathing it back in, whether I want to or not.

 

Black people had a choice of frequenting the white parts of apartheid Sth Africa.... It just would not have proved very good for their health... If a non-smoker feels he can't frequent certain places for fear of his health, is it really that different? The more I think of it, the more I think not. Breathing, like your skin colour, is something you can not refrain from. (well, not without even shorter term impairment to one's health anyway. )

[dave]

Let's not forget the "I have a problem, I'll get a grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me." quote.

 

With ever growing nannystatism, i.e. you mustn't take more than one child swimming if you are a lone adult, you must wear a seatbelt, you must wear a crash helmet, you must not play football in a cul-de-sac etc... the government has bought this about. They like it this way - everyone goes to the govt. for help - they now know where they are, and also what can be done to keep everyone in their pocket and out of sight.

 

The social lepers are this govts dream.

 

 

Incidently, whilst I do agree with seatbelts and crash helmets - I do not agree with compulsion.

[Spiceskull]

Breathing, like your skin colour, is something you can not refrain from.

I sense a new thread coming along...a sweepstakes on how long Bookie can hold her breath for...always up for a challenge...so I will start the ball rolling with 6 days, 7 hours, 14 minutes and 22 seconds...

 

Remember...no breathing usually equates to no talking, an added bonus to die for...

[dave]

What you say is true, BW. However, as you stated, if you would prefer people not to smoke, then I'm sure people wouldn't smoke around you. I don't smoke around my kids, as they haven't go the choice.

 

You have the choice of mixing with people who will respect your wishes - it should not be a matter for state intervention.

[HSBCrusher]

Where I come from, there are NO pubs that do not have smoking.

I have athsma, I can't go into those pubs.

Now I can.

Without stinking of smoke, or coming out sounding like darth vader.

To be honest, personally, this has given me choice. Smoke all you like everybody... I don't want to.

 

EDIT flippin 'ell, 4 posts added while I was typing... you would have thought I would be faster at it by now....

[dave]

...and, "It is a question of human nature and for those children it is difficult to say:"You are responsible for your behaviour!" because they just have not had a chance and so I think that is one of the biggest problems and I think it is the greatest sin."

 

I have actually found something said by Thatcher that I agree with.

 

Effectivly saying you are responsible for your own behaviour.

 

Well, not any more...

[angry cat]

So, the government will ban smoking in pubs because smoking is bad for our health.

Pubs are not health spas, they are places were people go to have a drink, smoke a ciggy, pipe or cigar whilst chatting to their mates, or drowning their sorrows!

 

Whatever next?

Maybe, the next step will be to ban the beer, wine or whisky as it could be argued that liquor is also bad for our health!

 

AC

[dave]

Where I come from, there are NO pubs that do not have smoking.

I have athsma, I can't go into those pubs.

Now I can.

Without stinking of smoke, or coming out sounding like darth vader.

To be honest, personally, this has given me choice. Smoke all you like everybody... I don't want to.

 

But this is more about the health issues than the subject of the ban.

 

If it were encouraged that pubs, say with 2 bars, had one that was smoking and one that wasn't - then you would most likely have had that choice.

 

A ban is not the right way to go about doing this, nor is it a way to treat adults in a supposedly civilised country.

[Spiceskull]

i.e. you mustn't take more than one child swimming if you are a lone adult

At my local swimming baths:

 

RULES:

• A single adult cannot be responsible for more than two children under three years old in the pool
  
• A single adult cannot be responsible for more than three children under eight years old in the pool

I would like to turn up with three two year old children...thus complying EXACTLY with the second rule...and see them argue the toss on this...so I asked about it...they got very flustered.

 

The rules are still there...

I do not agree with compulsion.

But it is mandatory...you MUST agree with it!

[dave]

I would like to turn up with three two year old children

Must be early in the week, but I don't follow you?

 

EDIT: Got it, sorry for being slow!

[Bookworm]

What you say is true, BW. However, as you stated, if you would prefer people not to smoke, then I'm sure people wouldn't smoke around you. I don't smoke around my kids, as they haven't go the choice.

 

You have the choice of mixing with people who will respect your wishes - it should not be a matter for state intervention.

 

Only cos they're afraid I'll nut them if they don't, honey.

[Bookworm]

Pubs are not health spas, they are places were people go to have a drink, or drowning their sorrows!

 

AC

 

And believe it or not, some of us do like doing that without sinking in a stinking fog of toxic smoke. Some of us actually PREFER their drinks to taste of whatever flavour it is supposed to be and not tobacco flavoured. Some of us prefer our clothes to smell of washing powder or perfume, rather than eau-de-nicotine. And that's before I get started on the inebriated morons who wave their lit fag around, at the risk of catching clothing, hair or skin of other people. I still have a scar on my arm where it happened, well over 20 yrs ago.

[jansus]

Now, there's a contradiction if ever I saw one ;-)

 

(don't hit me, I'm just joking!)

 

well i was typing fast in my lunch 1/2 hour!!!

 

What I meant was of course legislate on the most dangerous threats to health - I dont think anybody can deny that compulsory seat- belt wearing is not a good thing - but after that encourage us all to think of our health - from an early age - and then let us armed with factual information make our own choices. ( except I will again contradict my own argument as I am anti most drugs- personal opinion I know) Jansus:oops:

[Spiceskull]

Time for a re-visit to this one, partly prompted by the news last night. George Galloway, after his performance outside Parliament/Commons, was driven off in what looked like an official (and therefore work) car, smoking a great big fat cigar...will he get prosecuted I wonder...

 

But that is not my gripe. We have now seen the "No Smoking" signs plastered all over the place, and inconvenient though this may seem, I dare anyone to make a serious grumble. However, the condescending tone of the notices is what really gets my goat:

 

"No Smoking: It is against the law to smoke on these premises."

 

We all know what "No Smoking" means, and we take our chances/make our choices when deciding to obey/disobey the signs. Why the "It is against the law to smoke on these premises" bit?

 

Why not:

 

"It is against the law to murder people on these premises" ?

"It is against the law to steal on these premises" ?

"It is against the law to rape on these premises" ?

 

Honestly...I really do know what "No Smoking" means...

[Bookworm]

Well, considering another thread where someone asked "I was told not to smoke here, are they right?", I think that it is for the sole purpose of catering to the usual morons who on being told they can't smoke in there, will systematically say: "Why not?"

[dave]

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but the three pubs in my village are now, for the most part, completely empty.

 

All the staff have had their hours cut down because of it.

 

I lit one up in there the other Friday, and there was no-one in there to bat an eyelid.

 

Pub's only patrons will be the 'smoke-police' soon.

[Bookworm]

Only because it's the summer, Dave. Or what passes for it.

 

I was in 2 pubs on Tuesday, both at lunchtime and evening, and let me tell you that it was wonderful not to go home with the smell of smoke in my clothes and hair.

 

Pub's only patrons will be the 'smoke-police' soon.

 

Or the people who actually used to stay away from pubs because of the smoking.

[Spiceskull]

Well, I don't know about anyone else, but the three pubs in my village are now, for the most part, completely empty.

I have noticed similar...although round here we have the luxury of beer gardens...which are now more crowded than ever...

[dave]

Only because it's the summer, Dave. Or what passes for it.

 

I was in 2 pubs on Tuesday, both at lunchtime and evening, and let me tell you that it was wonderful not to go home with the smell of smoke in my clothes and hair.

 

 

 

Or the people who actually used to stay away from pubs because of the smoking.

 

Last summer, the pubs were packed. In fact they are every summer in Dymchurch. Just not since the start of this month.

 

I was in 2 pubs on Tuesday, both at lunchtime and evening, and let me tell you that it was wonderful not to go home with the smell of smoke in my clothes and hair.

 

....or to talk to anyone presumably?

[Bookworm]

My alcoholism hasn't reached the levels where I go to pubs alone, dear. I usually already have people to talk to when I get there.

 

(And I'll tell Crusher that you said he doesn't qualify as "anyone"! )