Smoking ban - something I didn't consider!

[Yorkie]

It is not compulsory to smoke, drink or use intravenous drugs but many people do, for those who indulge to excess it will more than likely shorten their lives and may even kill them way before they reach their normal life expectency...I don't have any problem with that whatsoever, it is their choice, as long as they do not cause me to go to an early grave.

I'm not picking on you but this is exactly what I am talking about. People are automatically assuming that all smokers go to an early grave.
It is a risk, yes, but not automatic or guaranteed.

 

[NMH]

My friends band was playing at the Ship in Newhaven last night, and I was going to go along to watch (especially now I'd almost smell the same coming home as going out!) but dinner dragged on, the kids played up etc so I didn't go.
But apparently last night, the pubs were still as full as ever (despite scaremongers saying they wouldnt' be!) but the smokers were going outside every ten minutes or so.
Opposite the Ship, is the Bridge pub - and apparently the patrons of the two venues are not best of chums as the fight in the street between the two puffing groups proved last night! They wouldn't have met before, staying in their own choice of public houses! lol!

It's not a ban against brawling, so that sounds alright.

An effect of the ban is, that if you see a scorching lass pop out for a smoke, you can join her in a nice tete a tete using the smoking as an excuse (anyone dumb enough to mention that you would have to be a smoker - I'd give up on your chances with her as you'd be too dim). You can easily break the ice by asking her what she thinks of the ban, what a lovely moon, healthy night for a good shag under that nice romantic willow, and would she like to smoke your banger for some healthy protein.

 

[Cian]

I don't disagree. I think quite a lot of people will think differently when the weather turns bad.
And when the government starts on the next Nanny legislation.

The weather IS bad, and the government here hasn't brought in any further "Nanny legislation" since the smoking ban. You're scaremongering because you don't like the law, but you're going to have just face the fact that its there and there is nothing, at all, that you can do about it.

 

[clapham_gull]

I don't disagree. I think quite a lot of people will think differently when the weather turns bad.
And when the government starts on the next Nanny legislation.

Very easy to use the phrase "Nanny legislation".

Personally I think that's what governments are there to do and that's why we vote them in.

If you don't like the government vote for the party that will remove the legislation - I think you'll be waiting a very long time.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

I don't see how this is 'nanny legislation' when there are people subjected to smoke every night in their work place. Don't work in a pub or restaurant, I hear you say? It is not that easy.

It is a good law and I can see why it is a total ban as opposed to allowing a patron to have a smoking venue. A line needs to be drawn and it has been.

 

[Yorkie]

The weather IS bad, and the government here hasn't brought in any further "Nanny legislation" since the smoking ban. You're scaremongering because you don't like the law, but you're going to have just face the fact that its there and there is nothing, at all, that you can do about it.

Scaremongering? The law doesn't affect me in the slightest as I don't smoke and neither does my husband. We don't go to the pub that often.

What I don't understand is how attitudes can change so radically over the last 15 years.

 

[Gully]

Yorkie, I know that my post might have been a generalisation...three of my grandparents smoked, one grandfather died at the age of 71 from a heart attack, the other at 70 from cancer and the grandmother who smoked died from emphysema, although she did make it to a ripe old age of 84...all of them had faltering health in their latter years, I am convinced that smoking contributed to their poor health and ultimately their death. The grandmother who didn't smoke lived to the age of 88 and was active until a couple of weeks before she died, from a virus that her body couldn't fight. I know that there are a lot of factors that decide who will get different diseases, many of them genetic, I reckon that if my grandparents (from whom I inherited my genes, via my parents) are anything to go by then my chances of a long and healthy life are better served by me not being a smoker.

 

[Cian]

Scaremongering? The law doesn't affect me in the slightest as I don't smoke and neither does my husband. We don't go to the pub that often.

What I don't understand is how attitudes can change so radically over the last 15 years.

If it doesn't affect you in the slightest, why do you care about it?

15 years ago smoking was being banned on public transport - attitudes have not changed, the law has just got stricter.

 

[clapham_gull]

Scaremongering? The law doesn't affect me in the slightest as I don't smoke and neither does my husband. We don't go to the pub that often.

What I don't understand is how attitudes can change so radically over the last 15 years.

In a way yes, by using the term Nanny Legislation - as if it's something that the government has inforced in a "we know you don't like it but we know best..."

Well, I'll reiterate it's VERY POPULAR LEGISLATION

Attitudes do change radically fortunately, including mine on a number of issues.

 

[Yorkie]

Yorkie, I know that my post might have been a generalisation...three of my grandparents smoked, one grandfather died at the age of 71 from a heart attack, the other at 70 from cancer and the grandmother who smoked died from emphysema, although she did make it to a ripe old age of 84...all of them had faltering health in their latter years, I am convinced that smoking contributed to their poor health and ultimately their death. The grandmother who didn't smoke lived to the age of 88 and was active until a couple of weeks before she died, from a virus that her body couldn't fight. I know that there are a lot of factors that decide who will get different diseases, many of them genetic, I reckon that if my grandparents (from whom I inherited my genes, via my parents) are anything to go by then my chances of a long and healthy life are better served by me not being a smoker.

I agree with what you say but I wouldn't call dying in your 70's a premature death. That's around average. My Dad was 78 when he died of lung cancer. He spent 33 years at sea.

Ned's Dad gave up smoking many years ago but died of lung cancer at 65. He also worked in the steel industry.

 

[Yorkie]

In a way yes, by using the term Nanny Legislation - as if it's something that the government has inforced in a "we know you don't like it but we know best..."

Well, I'll reiterate it's VERY POPULAR LEGISLATION

Attitudes do change radically fortunately, including mine on a number of issues.

That is the difference. Not that any major breakthroughs have been made in medical knowledge but that it is less socially acceptable.

 

[H block]

Have just got back from my local where we did the quiz and I smell wonderful.

Mind you I have never known so many arguements with the quizmaster as there was tonight.

Its going to be ok. Mind you I gave up 5 years ago after 28 years on it so............................................... f*** em I`m with the puritans now.

 

[H block]

Scaremongering? The law doesn't affect me in the slightest as I don't smoke and neither does my husband. We don't go to the pub that often.

What I don't understand is how attitudes can change so radically over the last 15 years.

When I smoked I couldn`t give a fig what others thought. If it was allowed I did it and if others around me did not like it ..well.. that was their problem. When you stop you often become the biggest moaners around smokers firstly because of a sense of jealousy ( you really want a fag and you are missing it ) and then because you really start to genuinely hate the smell of it. My wife is goint to have her last ciggie in a few minutes and then try and give up........ I may not be able to post on here for a few weeks because I think I might have t go into B and B for a little while.


PMT and giving up fags................... whoa

 

[mona]

It's not a ban against brawling, so that sounds alright.

An effect of the ban is, that if you see a scorching lass pop out for a smoke, you can join her in a nice tete a tete using the smoking as an excuse (anyone dumb enough to mention that you would have to be a smoker - I'd give up on your chances with her as you'd be too dim). You can easily break the ice by asking her what she thinks of the ban, what a lovely moon, healthy night for a good shag under that nice romantic willow, and would she like to smoke your banger for some healthy protein.

This is surely the correct answer.
Guess what? I was undecided but I'm now in favour of the ban as Uncle Spielberg and Yorkie are against it.

 

[clapham_gull]

That is the difference. Not that any major breakthroughs have been made in medical knowledge but that it is less socially acceptable.

When I smoked, I can remember non smokers having a problem with it - but feeling it wasn't their place to say anything.

And that IS THE DIFFERENCE. The people having a problem with it have finally decided enough is enough, I think Yorkie the majority have spoken.

It's called Democracy.

The only social attitude that has changed in the last few years is that non smokers have changed their attitude towards complaining about it.

I'm sure they have been a number of scientific breakthroughs in the last 15 years, particularly in the area of cancer prevention.

Personally I'm of the mind that as long we find a cure for something, the next thing comes along. AIDS is a particular example. MRSA another...

But I havent got a problem with legislation being introduced because of "social attitudes". That is actually the complete opposite of something being referred to as a "Nanny State"

We'll never agree on this - but to be honest I would have banned smoking in football grounds a lot sooner than I would have in pubs.

 

[H block]

This is surely the correct answer.
Guess what? I was undecided but I'm now in favour of the ban as Uncle Spielberg and Yorkie are against it.

As long as they dont put that silly mesh on the cills in the cubicles in the toilets or spray the sisterns with WD40 everythings ok.

 

[tedebear]

When I smoked, I can remember non smokers having a problem with it - but feeling it wasn't their place to say anything.

And that IS THE DIFFERENCE. The people having a problem with it have finally decided enough is enough, I think Yorkie the majority have spoken.

It's called Democracy.

I don't remember voting on this issue?

 

[tedebear]

This is what I posted somewhere other before, and even after posting the same type of thing on this thread, no one seems able to refute me? I speak only about pubs/clubs just incase you were wondering....

Very sad day to be honest, whether you're a smoker or not....to have a government dictate when and where people can do things is the beginning of the road to the creation of a nanny state.

I believe it should be up to the owner/landlord to make his own decision as to the smoke free state of his own domain. You have the choice as an employee or attendee whether or not you wish to enter such premises! I think there would be a good few pubs who would go smoke free - and people who don't like the smoke they could go there....There would also be pubs where the landlord would, for his own reasons, allow smoking - if you don't like the smoke or don't wish to work in a smokey environment then don't go there or take a job there.

Those people who have campaigned to create this bill, and given the politicians the momentum to pass it, have set us on a path to having our own choices curtailed....next will be alcohol...

 

[Cian]

You have the choice as an employee

So, would it be OK to say that you have "the choice" to work in an enviroment with racist, homophobic or sexist colleagues? You could "chose" to leave, and all.

No, it wouldn't. Similarly, there is no wiggle room for exclusions from this ban, simple as.

As goes voting on the issue - were you entitled to vote in the 2005 election? If so, you did effectively vote for or against it.

 

[ditchy]

On a lesser note , has anyone noticed the number of new awnings that have gone up at pubs to cater for smokers