Smoking ban at public beaches in Thailand aims to protect visitors' health

[utalkin2me]

1 hour ago, chrisinth said:

Excellent, brilliant place to start, freeing the public from cigarette smoke in an outdoor environment.

 

Wouldn't want the pollutants from vehicle exhausts to get in the way of BS reports like this would we? Self contained oxygen breathing systems for pedestrians would be fully endorsed by me if they were in anyway serious about these claims.

We need cars to do things like eat, move, work... to survive. To compare transportation with cigarettes is rather absurd. 

[ChouDoufu]

protect visitors' health?  i don't think so.....a smoking ban is an easy law to pass, requires no skills or intelligence to enforce, and is guaranteed to guarantee a constant stream of guaranteed income.

 

worried about tourist safety?  what about unregulated jet-ski rentals, no license or insurance required for motorcycle rental (but fines for no helmet...another easy guaranteed money maker), overloaded boats run by untrained crew, red-bull driven sardine cans tailgating at 160 km/h.......?  there is an endless list of things contributing to deaths, injuries, and mutilations of tourists.....but those are hard to solve....and don't come with the same "guarantees."

 

how many chinese are cancelling their thailand trips because smoking IS allowed on the beach?

[transam]

5 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

We need cars to do things like eat, move, work... to survive. To compare transportation with cigarettes is rather absurd. 

BUT, they are doing you more harm on a daily basis than a bloke with a ciggy.. 

[utalkin2me]

I do not think anybody cares about health either. In fact I do not think there is a government entity in the world who does. 

 

Let's just forget the carcinogenic smoke that can be released around kids and others on the beach for a moment. The trash aspect of it alone is enough for the ban! Smokers can't seem to take reaponsibility for their own habit. Instead they flick the butts away, probably because "they are so small it is no big deal"? Whatever the reason, it is a good enough reason in itself to ban them. What tourist wants to come to a beach loaded with trash?

[bluesofa]

4 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

protect visitors' health?  i don't think so.....a smoking ban is an easy law to pass, requires no skills or intelligence to enforce, and is guaranteed to guarantee a constant stream of guaranteed income.

{snipped}

how many chinese are cancelling their thailand trips because smoking IS allowed on the beach?

If you believe anything from TAT: Both of them.

 

[utalkin2me]

5 minutes ago, transam said:

BUT, they are doing you more harm on a daily basis than a bloke with a ciggy.. 

This is not that complicated. Ban cars and transport tomorrow and see what happens (the workd comes to a hault, you would not even be able to get a bottle of water). Ban cigarettes on Thai beaches and see what happens (only good). 

[essox essox]

4 hours ago, wotsdermatter said:

However, he forgot to add, all of the plastic, sewage, and other contaminants do nothing to damage the water or sea animals, which includes fish, shellfish, crustaceans, etc.

 

'nuf sed

and what about all the air polluting vehicles on the road blasting fumes out everyday and all day??

[worgeordie]

I thought the real reason was just to collect hefty fines

from tourists,but is that just been cynical .

regards worgeordie

[transam]

6 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

This is not that complicated. Ban cars and transport tomorrow and see what happens (the workd comes to a hault, you would not even be able to get a bottle of water). Ban cigarettes on Thai beaches and see what happens (only good). 

You are being selective for your own reasons chum, I come from an era where horses were used for deliveries....?

[transam]

12 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

I do not think anybody cares about health either. In fact I do not think there is a government entity in the world who does. 

 

Let's just forget the carcinogenic smoke that can be released around kids and others on the beach for a moment. The trash aspect of it alone is enough for the ban! Smokers can't seem to take reaponsibility for their own habit. Instead they flick the butts away, probably because "they are so small it is no big deal"? Whatever the reason, it is a good enough reason in itself to ban them. What tourist wants to come to a beach loaded with trash?

So you NEVER have a barbecue....?

[utalkin2me]

6 minutes ago, transam said:

So you NEVER have a barbecue....?

Can i light up a bbq all the places a person can smoke? No, almost none of them. And there are reasons for that. Thanks for pointing that out and bolstering my argument. 

[utalkin2me]

15 minutes ago, transam said:

You are being selective for your own reasons chum, I come from an era where horses were used for deliveries....?

I am not being selective at all. You said if we ban cigs, why not cars. I am telling you why. If we ban cars, the world ends. If we ban cigs, the streets get cleaned up, kids and babies don't have to breathe second hand smoke, tourism flourishes. I hope you can see the difference. 

[transam]

5 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

Can i light up a bbq all the places a person can smoke? No, almost none of them. And there are reasons for that. Thanks for pointing that out and bolstering my argument. 

You have more or less quoted that stuff that is not good to breath in is OK if it suits you. ?

[utalkin2me]

I have been saying this for decades: people should not be allowed to smoke in public. Go to your car and roll up the windows, go to your home, go to a certified smoke room. 

 

There are cities who have now banned smoking in public completely, so there is a good chance this is coming to a theater near you, so brace yourselves. 

 

Why don't you guys answer a question. Why should you be allowed to smoke in public? "Because people can drive cars and have bbqs" does not really count. Do yourself a favor and think about it. There are no reasons I can think of. 

[utalkin2me]

11 minutes ago, transam said:

You have more or less quoted that stuff that is not good to breath in is OK if it suits you. ?

It is not me, it is everyone. Who else has fun and enjoys it when another person smokes? For example, if we vote on banning bbqs, what happens? And why does it happen that way? Because people love it.

 

Also, you aren't being honest with yourself and admitting that bbqs actually are not allowed hardly anywhere, which speaks volumes, doesn't it? It makes perfect sense bbqs should be relegated to certain, very specific areas for both saftey and refuse concerns. Same with smoking... should be in only certain, very specific places. 

 

Smoking is unique, you can't compare it to anything else i can think of. It harms others, and only a single person gets benefit, if you can even call it benefitting. This is why it needs much stricter regulations.

[transam]

4 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

It is not me, it is everyone. Who else has fun and enjoys it when another person smokes? For example, if we vote on banning bbqs, what happens? And why does it happen that way? Because people love it.

What a daft reply...You like barbies that do more harm to folk than a guy smoking but it is OK cos you like it...Good grief man...?

[mommysboy]

41 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

I do not think anybody cares about health either. In fact I do not think there is a government entity in the world who does. 

 

Let's just forget the carcinogenic smoke that can be released around kids and others on the beach for a moment. The trash aspect of it alone is enough for the ban! Smokers can't seem to take reaponsibility for their own habit. Instead they flick the butts away, probably because "they are so small it is no big deal"? Whatever the reason, it is a good enough reason in itself to ban them. What tourist wants to come to a beach loaded with trash?

I don't think it is carcinogenic to passive smokers, certainly not in the amounts at the beach, and possibly not at all.  It is smelly to some, and an irritant to others.

[utalkin2me]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

What a daft reply...You like barbies that do more harm to folk than a guy smoking but it is OK cos you like it...Good grief man...?

It is not "me", it is everyone. 

 

You aren't honest with yourself, I can't help that. Cig butts are the number one trash item worldwide. And what does more harm again? 

[utalkin2me]

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

I don't think it is carcinogenic to passive smokers, certainly not in the amounts at the beach, and possibly not at all.  It is smelly to some, and an irritant to others.

So why should people be allowed to smell up and irritate others? That is assuming your own argument is correct: you said smoking is not a carcinogen, which is ridiculous. Even using your own argument you are still wrong. Just answer why to the above question. 

[mommysboy]

17 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

I am not being selective at all. You said if we ban cigs, why not cars. I am telling you why. If we ban cars, the world ends. If we ban cigs, the streets get cleaned up, kids and babies don't have to breathe second hand smoke, tourism flourishes. I hope you can see the difference. 

But overwhelmingly cars do much more damage to the environment. 

 

'If we ban cars, the world ends.'-  Really?  Stop spinning?

 

On the other hand global warming appears to be a very real existential threat.

[utalkin2me]

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

But overwhelmingly cars do much more damage to the environment. 

 

'If we ban cars, the world ends.'-  Really?  Stop spinning?

 

On the other hand global warming appears to be a very real existential threat.

I know it is hard to follow these threads, but like i said above, let's just stipulate the carcinogenic smoke is not an issue for a moment, even though it is.

 

Even then, the litter aspect alone is worth the ban. We are talking about the number one trash item in the world here! This is a huge no brainer. Even if i give you half of your own arguments, you are still wrong and there are still very valid reasons to ban them from public. That seriously ought to tell you something. 

[mommysboy]

1 minute ago, utalkin2me said:

So why should people be allowed to smell up and irritate others? That is assuming your own argument is correct: you said smoking is not a carcinogen, which is ridiculous. Even using your own argument you are still wrong. Just answer why to the above question. 

Answer :I shouldn't and don't, because it is an irritant and also creates litter.

 

I am saying I don't think passive smoking at the beach is carcinogenic and possibly not at all.  Drop that part of your argument and the rest stands.  Check out the latest research- if you can find it that is!

 

I do think vapers should be able to indulge at the beach, though not in confined spaces such as the cinema.

[transam]

1 minute ago, utalkin2me said:

It is not "me", it is everyone. 

 

You aren't honest with yourself, I can't help that. Cig butts are the number one trash item worldwide. And what does more harm again? 

So now you are posting for everyone....?

 

I smoke and you will not see a cig butt of mine anywhere, plus cig butts have no effect on any ones health...

 

I am an incredibly honest person chummy, so forget that stuff...This thread is about smoking on a beach and hazards to folks health, I have said barbies are more hazardous to health, they have more concentrated stuff, but  you disagree because you like them...?

[mommysboy]

6 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

I know it is hard to follow these threads, but like i said above, let's just stipulate the carcinogenic smoke is not an issue for a moment, even though it is.

 

Even then, the litter aspect alone is worth the ban. We are talking about the number one trash item in the world here! This is a huge no brainer. Even if i give you half of your own arguments, you are still wrong and there are still very valid reasons to ban them from public. That seriously ought to tell you something. 

From the off, I stated that in my opinion smoking should be banned from beaches.

 

Like many, I think it's time you and others also addressed comparable issues of air pollution which are actually much more damaging.  Why should smokers be the whipping boy?

 

It's the hypocrisy that gets me. 

[utalkin2me]

As usual on this topic, nobody wants to answer why cigs should be allowed in public. 

 

For example, why should yoga be allowed in public. Easy to answer. People enjoy it and it hurts nobody. 

 

Why should cigs be allowed in public? They are the number one litter item worldwide. The secondhand smoke emitted from them is a known cacinogen. I find it very difficult to come up with a single reason why, especially since smokers seem to be some of the least responsible people on earth when it comes to their trash. Look at litter stats. Cigs usually double food wrappers. Everyone eats food! Only about what, 10% of people smoke. Think about this stuff, really. Do yourselves a favor and think how obnoxious and selfish  your avergae smokers must be as a whole to have doubled the food wrappers in the litter department. 

[utalkin2me]

2 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

From the off, I stated that in my opinion smoking should be banned from beaches.

 

Like many, I think it's time you and others also addressed comparable issues of air pollution which are actually much more damaging.  Why should smokers be the whipping boy?

 

It's the hypocrisy that gets me. 

As i said, bbqs got brought up and they are banned from almost everywhere i can think of. People broight this stuff up as their arguments, not me. You can't light up a bbq outside of a restaurant, can you? 

 

Like i said, smoking is unique. It is fine by me if we regulate polution better, but it is tenuous at best to compare it to say an energy plant that actually helps society run. Who or what is smoking benefitting? 

[Vacuum]

58 minutes ago, transam said:

BUT, they are doing you more harm on a daily basis than a bloke with a ciggy.. 

No, ciggys contribute to 50 000 deaths per annum, compared to traffic deaths at 25 000/year.

[utalkin2me]

13 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Answer :I shouldn't and don't, because it is an irritant and also creates litter.

 

I am saying I don't think passive smoking at the beach is carcinogenic and possibly not at all.  Drop that part of your argument and the rest stands.  Check out the latest research- if you can find it that is!

 

I do think vapers should be able to indulge at the beach, though not in confined spaces such as the cinema.

Thank you. I tend to agree with most of what you said. 

[mommysboy]

5 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

As i said, bbqs got brought up and they are banned from almost everywhere i can think of. People broight this stuff up as their arguments, not me. You can't light up a bbq outside of a restaurant, can you? 

 

Like i said, smoking is unique. It is fine by me if we regulate polution better, but it is tenuous at best to compare it to say an energy plant that actually helps society run. Who or what is smoking benefitting? 

The tobacco industry is very large and smokers pay a high amount of tax. So there is benefit here. Your economic benefit argument doesn't really hold water.

 

Also, heavy industry is causing immense damage.  The  costs are largely externalised.

 

The amount of smoke wafting around the beach is quite small really.

 

Is this really anything other than you detesting smoking ?  Would you allow people to vape for instance?

[utalkin2me]

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

The tobacco industry is very large and smokers pay a high amount of tax. So there is benefit here. Your economic benefit argument doesn't really hold water.

 

Also, heavy industry is causing immense damage.  The  costs are largely externalised.

 

The amount of smoke wafting around the beach is quite small really.

 

Is this really anything other than you detesting smoking ?  Would you allow people to vape for instance?

Is vaping a carcinogen? Does it smell people's hair and clothes to the point where they have to launder it to be rid of it? Do vapors throw their vape things everywhere and create the number one trash item world wide? If no to all that, i probably don't have too much of a problem with it. although i would respect the fact that others find it distasteful and irritating.