Smoking Ban

[Mighty Mouse]

What do you think pollutes most, a 747 flying to Thailand from Us or the 50 smokers inside, get real and relax there are plenty other issues you can wage a holy crusade against that would have a greater impact on the enviroment or saving lifes.

You are quite right, there are more life threatening issues other than smoking, but this thread is only about smoking, so why try and divert the readers attention to other things?

The smoking ban on International flights to and from Australia was introduced in July 1996 by the Australian Government as a health measure, not by the airline companies trying to save money.

It was also introduced for all public transport and at the end of this month (June '07), the ban will include all enclosed areas, such as casinos, hotels, pubs, clubs etc. where previously it was partially allowed.

On top of that, the bans also extend to include many outdoor areas.

All of this is for health reasons, no other reason.

It's obvious that you wish to divert attention away from tobacco in an attempt to justify your bad smoking habit. It won't work.

You may enjoy it or secretly you may really want to quit but can't, either way...I don't really care, just contain your second hand smoke and you'll get no argument from me.

[larvidchr]

contain your second hand smoke and you'll get no argument from me.

Sure Mighty Mouse, indoors always , outdoors no way, argument or not .

Kind regards

[boxingbeauty]

The need to introduce legislation to curb any bad, unhealthy habits/practices, is made necessary by the actions of irresponsible and arrogant people....such as smokers, the majority of whom couldn't care less about the comforts/needs of others around them.

It's not just the smoke that makes life miserable for others, it's also the holes in clothing that occur when a drunken smoker brushes the tip of his/her cigarette against another person.

I've had a very expensive wool sweater ruined by burn hole caused by a smoker who walked through a crowded room not being mindful of the lit cigarette in his hand.

Smoking indoors will soon be banned in Australia as well. It can't come soon enough as far as I'm concerned.

Many of our beaches also have a smoking ban. Again, necessary from irresponsible smokers stubbing out and leaving their butts in the sand.

Smokers were dumb enough to take up the habit in the first place and are still too dumb to realize what damage to the environment can be caused by discarded cigarette butts entering storm water facilities that flow into the sea.

Smokers claiming to enjoy a cigarette are usually the ones who are too weak to kick the habit.

Feed your cravings inside your own homes if you must but not in public places....and don't make your own young children victims of your toxic fumes within their home environment.

Smoking in public places, especially enclosed places, is the same as drink driving and so should be banned.

Both of these activities can harm others.

There should, however, be places where smokers can enjoy their habit without it affecting other people.

I have nothing against smokers only secondhand smoke.

While polution is very harmful I have never been in a position where a car was expelling fumes in a enclosed area such as a restaraunt where I was eating.

OOOOOh. This thread is only about the horrors of second-hand or cigarette smoking, Garro. Might Mouse said. Puff, phew. Mighty Mouse noted that he drives a car. Oh, that car expels exhaust emissions into the atmosphere, no?, but, let me exhale a puff, phew. Oh, a smoker! More harmful than car exhaust? 5555 Why does MM drive a car? Too lazy or special or high class or incapacitated to walk or bicycle to work or market? Sorry, when car drivers and other polluters stand on the soap box as totally clean air users then they can slambast smokers; else, they are hypocrites espouting their own petty demands because they want their own way. Never heard about smokers affecting overall emissions that affect global warming, etc.

As Tuky noted, I got alot done, too, in the smoking room at work. Lots of laughs. My non-smoking (except for cigars, and aren't they the cool thing) big boss came down to the smoking stairwell often and I got more biz fixed there without the pansy whiners around. I guess that's the big issue here for me: lot's of stuff happens around you that you cannot control, but just get on with your lives! And be nice to other people! I just got lost in a big shopping mall, went for A&W and got into a laughing debate with three black kids over who sang"Great Balls of Fire." Bet non-smokers could never chill and laugh like that. Oh, and I was not smoking or blowing smoke at children.

So, back to the topic at hand, the issue we are discussing here is smoking and dragging another contentious issue into the debate in order to justify the morality of forcing others to breathe your second-hand smoke is entirely superfluous. When I sit in a restaurant enjoying my food, I have every right to insist that my enjoyment is not spoiled by the actions of some selfish individual who puts his/her cravings for nicotine before my health, well being and personal comfort. While I'm sitting on walking street having a foot massage, I have every right to object when the character next to me chooses to pollute my personal space with carcinogenic fumes. In those situations, I am not given the option to NOT breathe that smoke, when I'm riding my bicycle about town, I can choose to wear an anti pollution mask to minimise my exposure to vehicle fumes. The issue here is of one of the infringment of personal rights and unfortunately the vast majority of smokers are oblivious to the rights of non-smokers.

I agree with MM. Smoking, including passive smoking, is a danger to health. Of course there are many other dangers, but passive smoking is preventable. We all like to go out and have fun, and making these places non-smoking is better for the health of everyone ... the non-smokers, the workers, and the smokers. When I went to Dublin, my friends that smoked said they smoked less, as they didn't feel like going outside. For this, they felt better. Better for their health and their wallets! I've also worked in bars (during my uni days) and it is very unpleasant for the worker.

There's also the fact that I can go home and my hair and clothes won't stink of smoke!

Venue owners will not have to refurbish so often, what with the current smoke trapped curtains, carpets, and stained ceilings and walls!

And cigarette burns! I got one on my elbow back in April (club in London), and it got nasty and infected. Now I have a scar there. Not to mention clothes that have been ruined. I did demand money off a guy once that put a burn on a brand new skirt ... he paid.

As for dating a smoker ... nah, I don't want to kiss an ashtray!

Jet: You seem to be making the mistake of noting that non-smokers cannot chill and have fun ... adding to the misconception that smoking is cool. That shows your age ...

[sukanyacondo]

I can rememeber my grandmother ( god rest her dear old soul) had a saying .. which she was fond off.

" if you don't like the smell in the kitchen get out "

i use that as a kinda mantra if i get stressed at something as u usually have a choice ..

After you, pls open the door yourself at 30000 feet!!!!!

[sukanyacondo]

You are not only "responsible for yourself", you are also responsible for those around you. This is what most smokers fail to accept.

Very interesting how you try to play off the philosophy that you believe to be correct as the one that is infact correct.

If you are responsible for those around you, where do you draw the line? If you truly believe this should you not dedicate your every waking minute to ensuring those around you are doing "the right thing" as you are responsible for them.

P.S i take you travel ever where by bike or walking?

"Where do you draw the line?" An interesting question.

Personally, I draw the line by being mindful of the comforts and safety of those around me. Whether I'm driving my car amongst other vehicles or pedestrians, whether I'm discarding dangerous items or chemicals etc.

In days gone by, there were limited laws regarding such things. These days, more stringent laws are in place. Discarding and handling asbestos is a pertinent point.

Common sense isn't controlled by any law. You either have it or you don't. If you have it, you should exercise it. If you don't, then governments may need to introduce legislation to protect the innocent victims of the fools whose actions cause suffering.

Many smokers (maybe the vast majority) fall into the 'fool' category.

It's because of the 'fools' that an increased number of "no smoking" bans are being introduced.

Before lighting up, do smokers inquire whether others in the near vicinity are asthmatic? Not likely.

How would you feel if your second hand smoke caused an asthmatic attack and the victim died as a result ?

In Australia smoking is permitted in your own motor vehicle. Maybe this will soon be outlawed also, because the 'fools' smoke with their children in the car or they throw the butts out the window whilst driving through our country areas.

Many major bushfires have been started that way. Hundreds of innocent victims of these 'fools' have lost their homes as a result. Wild life in various areas has been devastated as a result.

Precious drinking water has been wasted on extinguishing these fires. Millions of $ s lost because of one cigarette butt.

Smoking in bed can cause fires. Those fires have the potential to kill and to cause personal property loss.

With these things in mind, I repeat what I wrote in an earlier post, you are responsible for those around you. Maybe not legally in all cases, but certainly morally.

If you dropped a cigarette in your lap whilst driving you could spark a bush fire !

When riding on my motorbike once someone threw a ciagrette out of a car window and it went straight down my jacket burning me, now thats inconsiderate!!!!!

[sukanyacondo]

You are not only "responsible for yourself", you are also responsible for those around you. This is what most smokers fail to accept.

Very interesting how you try to play off the philosophy that you believe to be correct as the one that is infact correct.

If you are responsible for those around you, where do you draw the line? If you truly believe this should you not dedicate your every waking minute to ensuring those around you are doing "the right thing" as you are responsible for them.

P.S i take you travel ever where by bike or walking?

"Where do you draw the line?" An interesting question.

Personally, I draw the line by being mindful of the comforts and safety of those around me. Whether I'm driving my car amongst other vehicles or pedestrians, whether I'm discarding dangerous items or chemicals etc.

In days gone by, there were limited laws regarding such things. These days, more stringent laws are in place. Discarding and handling asbestos is a pertinent point.

Common sense isn't controlled by any law. You either have it or you don't. If you have it, you should exercise it. If you don't, then governments may need to introduce legislation to protect the innocent victims of the fools whose actions cause suffering.

Many smokers (maybe the vast majority) fall into the 'fool' category.

It's because of the 'fools' that an increased number of "no smoking" bans are being introduced.

Before lighting up, do smokers inquire whether others in the near vicinity are asthmatic? Not likely.

How would you feel if your second hand smoke caused an asthmatic attack and the victim died as a result ?

In Australia smoking is permitted in your own motor vehicle. Maybe this will soon be outlawed also, because the 'fools' smoke with their children in the car or they throw the butts out the window whilst driving through our country areas.

Many major bushfires have been started that way. Hundreds of innocent victims of these 'fools' have lost their homes as a result. Wild life in various areas has been devastated as a result.

Precious drinking water has been wasted on extinguishing these fires. Millions of $ s lost because of one cigarette butt.

Smoking in bed can cause fires. Those fires have the potential to kill and to cause personal property loss.

With these things in mind, I repeat what I wrote in an earlier post, you are responsible for those around you. Maybe not legally in all cases, but certainly morally.

If you dropped a cigarette in your lap whilst driving you could spark a bush fire !

When riding on my motorbike once someone threw a ciagrette out of a car window and it went straight down my jacket burning me, now thats inconsiderate!!!!!

PS no smoking in our condos thanks, but if you want to its ok you just have to pay us 30000 baht and leave the same day, you choose???

[Rinrada]

20 Days to Go

and the FAGS will hopefully be gone for ever............

.....bit of info for any happy smooko holidaymakers... on their way over for a jolli.....

The smoking ban in England

Like it or not, England is following the rest of the UK with a smoking ban.

Smoking will be banned in all public indoor spaces on 1 July, 2007.

The England smoking ban follows similar decisions made in several parts of Europe, the USA and Scotland, Wales and Ireland. If you're a smoker in protest over the English ban, count your lucky stars you don't live in the Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, where the sale and use of tobacco is completely outlawed.

Where will smoking be banned?

Smoking in all indoor public places will be banned. Many places - such as cinemas and public transport - have rarely permitted smoking in recent years, so it will be places like pubs, restaurants, cafes, nightclubs and private members' clubs that feel the biggest impact of the ban.

Where will you be able to smoke?

You'll still be allowed to light up outdoors, in the home or places considered to be 'homes', such as prisons, care homes and hotels.

Smoking could still be banned at certain outdoor locations that are 'substantially enclosed', such as football grounds and railway platforms. No decision has yet been made on smoking inside cars carrying passengers.

What will happen if I'm caught fag-in-hand?

If you're caught smoking in a banned area you could be fined £50.

But who's really going to care if I light up a sneaky one?

Those in charge of the premises would be fools to let you get away with it, especially considering that they could face a £2,500 fine if they fail to stop you.

They could also be charged on-the-spot fines of £200 if they fail to display no-smoking signs, with the penalty increasing to £1,000 if the issue goes to court.

[Mighty Mouse]

]

Sure Mighty Mouse, indoors always , outdoors no way, argument or not .

Outdoors well away from other people standing around, such as bus stops, arcade entrances, crowds watching street parades etc.

Demonstrate some consideration for others who may well also like the outdoors but not appreciate having your second hand smoke wafting all over themselves and their children.

Smoking in the outdoors may well be your bad habit but it's not mine. I don't wish to share the joys that you may derive from smoking. Keep it to yourself and we'll all be happy.

[Aujuba]

If you want to smoke, go far away from people and don't throw your butts on the ground. It's amazing with so few smokers nowadays there are still cigarette butts on the ground. You'll even find them in urinals at the bus station. I guess the smokers feel its the cleaning lady's job to stick their hand in the urinal to get their cigarette butt out. Smokers start fires all over the globe as well with their careless tossing of cigarette butts out of car windows etc. The truth is all this shows that many smokers are just selfish people or people with so much anger that they just don't give a crap about anything or anyone. Smokers are often great people but when they smoke they just seem to forget about the rest of the world. It's like a drunk guy who endangers people when he's drunk. He's a great guy but if he has too much he doesn't think or doesn't give a crap.

[steves_the_1]

so if im standing at a bus stop enjoying my cig and all you non-smokers came alone you expect me to move far away.

if people dont like me smoking then they can go and stand far away for me i have no time for preachers

[Aujuba]

Growing up I lived in a smoky environment as my mom smoked. Everything in the house smelled like smoke including the cats. I must have smelled like smoke to friends whose parents didn't smoke. My mom eventually died of lung cancer attributable only to cigarettes. When she lost all her hair while she was getting Chemotherapy. Even though she was a wreak from chemo and all the other drugs she took in the hope of saving her own life, she would still sneak to her window and puff on little cigarettes she had hidden from the rest of the family. She wanted to live but really could do nothing but die. So I say F-off the the tobacco companies. maybe they make their money from stupid and stubborn fools but in my heart I really think all the executives of Tobacco companies should be strung up. I would be happy if any relative of a smoker took violent revenge against them and their property. They are just corrupt dictators ruling over their own mass of fools. Don't a be fool. You will die for their Carribbean vacations and luxury villas. If you smoke, no matter what you think you are really just a sucker and buyer of a product morally equal to blood diamonds. I know you just don't care.

[Furbie]

But nobody has answered the question of CHOICE.

Why should a person who invests all their time, money and effort in a business not have a CHOICE in the policies of that business? They put a sign outside their pub/bar/restaurant "Smoking is/is not permitted inside these premises" then the potential customers have the CHOICE whether to enter or go someplace else. The person who runs the business is the one who succeeds or fails according to their personal CHOICE and that of their customers. Why are we so keen to let the government take away personal CHOICE?

Would you all be so keen if the government introduced an anti meat products law whereby it was illegal to eat meat or animal products in a public place? After all that fat produces cholesterol which is a mighty big killer and a drain on the health service and it causes obesity which makes it unpleasant to sit next to those fat b@st@rds on the plane.

Sure, while we are at it, let's get rid of those pesky hygiene regulations, let people eat naked in restaurants, bring in farm animals and in general do whatever they want – it's your right to do these thing - NONSENSE.

Society has the right to ban individual freedoms when they affect the freedoms of others – though I must point out to you smokers that I am unaware of any right to smoke. Smokers affect the freedom of those around them, maybe not everyone, but certainly enough of them. Smoking is bad for your health, it reeks, and makes food taste bad. By all means, do this around those trying to enjoy a meal.

It makes perfect sense to limit where people can smoke. Just as it makes perfect sense to require people to use a restroom to go to the bathroom.

[Mighty Mouse]

so if im standing at a bus stop enjoying my cig and all you non-smokers came alone you expect me to move far away.

if people dont like me smoking then they can go and stand far away for me i have no time for preachers

In Thailand many of the 'bus stops' are actually bus stations where dozens of people can be expected to congregate. Your attitude is 'if I'm there first, I can smoke as much as I want to and to h*ll with everybody else.'

If the breeze is blowing your second hand smoke all over others waiting for a bus, would it be too much trouble for you to move down wind, or if there is no breeze is it too difficult for you to ensure others aren't adversely affected by the chemicals that you exhale?

If non-smokers started spraying capsicum spray into your face whilst waiting for a bus how would your react?

There is not much difference in either assault.

[PhilHarries]

But nobody has answered the question of CHOICE.

Why should a person who invests all their time, money and effort in a business not have a CHOICE in the policies of that business? They put a sign outside their pub/bar/restaurant "Smoking is/is not permitted inside these premises" then the potential customers have the CHOICE whether to enter or go someplace else. The person who runs the business is the one who succeeds or fails according to their personal CHOICE and that of their customers. Why are we so keen to let the government take away personal CHOICE?

Would you all be so keen if the government introduced an anti meat products law whereby it was illegal to eat meat or animal products in a public place? After all that fat produces cholesterol which is a mighty big killer and a drain on the health service and it causes obesity which makes it unpleasant to sit next to those fat b@st@rds on the plane.

Sure, while we are at it, let's get rid of those pesky hygiene regulations, let people eat naked in restaurants, bring in farm animals and in general do whatever they want – it's your right to do these thing - NONSENSE.

Society has the right to ban individual freedoms when they affect the freedoms of others – though I must point out to you smokers that I am unaware of any right to smoke. Smokers affect the freedom of those around them, maybe not everyone, but certainly enough of them. Smoking is bad for your health, it reeks, and makes food taste bad. By all means, do this around those trying to enjoy a meal.

It makes perfect sense to limit where people can smoke. Just as it makes perfect sense to require people to use a restroom to go to the bathroom.

Sure, why not? I am talking about personal choice so if a restauranteur wants to ignore hygene regulations, allow people to sit naked at the tables and urinate in the corner why should the government regulate against it. Provided he advises all potential customers, via prominently positioned signage, of the conditions within his establishment then he leaves the choice of patronage where it belongs. That choice is with the paying customer and if enough paying customers decide to avoid the place and dine elsewhere he has a stark choice, change the conditions or go bust.

It only makes perfect sense to limit the freedoms of others to those control freaks who cannot allow people freedom of choice and enlist governments to support their predujices. This is the same banal mentality that forces people to sit up all night to watch some film or TV play billed as raunchy only to write in to the papers next day as Disgusted of Nakon Nowhere. It's also the same mentality that requires warning notices on bags of peanuts "Warning this product contains nuts".

[Sir Burr]

^

Good post.

[larvidchr]

]

Sure Mighty Mouse, indoors always , outdoors no way, argument or not .

Outdoors well away from other people standing around, such as bus stops, arcade entrances, crowds watching street parades etc.

Demonstrate some consideration for others who may well also like the outdoors but not appreciate having your second hand smoke wafting all over themselves and their children.

Smoking in the outdoors may well be your bad habit but it's not mine. I don't wish to share the joys that you may derive from smoking. Keep it to yourself and we'll all be happy.

No MM, in open air there are ample opportunity for a non smoker too, not choose to stand next to me, there are certain hasards in life and you have to behave accordingly, you dont go out to sit on the middle off the freeway it can kill you aso. in open air you can take a step one yard in the right direction and it will be enough for any second hand smoke not to bother you, and as any polluting car driver wich kills a lot more people than second hand smoke in open air, I have as much right to the airspace as you, as long as there is no law saying otherwise, if there is something I dont like in the great outdoors I am free to move away from it, and so are you.

I think it was you ( not sure ) mentioning smokefree beaches because of C.buds and maby second hand smoke, it has got to be one of the single dummest things I have ever heard , when will it be forbidden to drink there because of cans and plastic bottels, C.buds dissaper in a week or so, plastic takes years, second hand smoke on a beach with a sea breese, you must be jooking , things can be taken to such extremes that they do more bad than good as regards respect for lawmakers and laws, some here wants banning smoking in private cars because a few fools have started fires by throwing out a cigarette, let me assure you that more cars on their own starts fires sending sparks in to the brush, or people parking on dry grass with hot exhaust pipes, not to mention people in cars stopping to make campfires, what the heck lets ban it all , lets ban mothers talking to their toddlers strapped in child seats bending over to hand them the lost dummie while driving, people changing cd while driving aso. lets ban every human activity that can by accident kill or hurt somebody, directly or indirectly .

Unless things is kept within logical reason it ends up just being nuts, and then people stop caring, and you cant within reason just single one thing out for a ban if comparable things even worse is being left alone.

"Ohhh there is a smoker in my garden and a buffalo wrecking it to, I will run out and hoose down the smoker and forget about the buffalo", that just about sums up your attitude, and that is not a very brave one, translate it to lets percecute smokers on all levels and leave the much more serious stuff, because that might not be that easy.

I am sure that if I examine your lifestyle , I will find that you engage in akctivity that are more enviromentaly damaging to peoples health than outdoors smoking ever will be.

Kind regards

Edited June 12, 2007 by larvidchr

[Ping]

Wow, just waded through 8 pages of smoking pros and cons... I need a cigarette!

[Sir Burr]

I love these anti-smoking threads. It brings out all the PC storm-troopers who then proceed to make complete idiots of themselves

[Pink Mist]

Is it PC to expect to enter a building without running the gauntlet of 20 gaspers and breathe their second hand smoke?

Is it PC to expect to enjoy a meal without inhaling second hand smoke?

Is it PC to expect to enjoy a beer without some ahole blowing a carcinogenic substance into your space?

The list goes on

[Aujuba]

Should students be allowed to smoke in school? Do you believe hospitals should allow people to smoke inthem as they did in the past? Should pilots be allowed to drink alcohol while in the cockpit-they did in the past? Of course, all smokers believe that parents should be able to brainwash their children into pure hate too as its the right of every parent to do as they please with their own kids.

Smoke if you want but why do you have to smoke in public places? It's because you have no self control. You don't. You can call it 'your right' or whatever you want but in reality if you smoke in a public place you are just an addict. I have sympathy for this reality but you really need to get control of yourself. Someday you will realize where you are.

Here's a link for the sad story of addiction. You'll need a decent speed to watch the clip. Are you living in denial?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7eb7f0b891

[Sir Burr]

^ & ^^

I rest my case.......

[Pink Mist]

you are flaming cur burr

[Sir Burr]

No I'm not Bonko.

[Pink Mist]

excellent response cur burr, follow it up with some facts

[Aujuba]

In the wee hours last night, Sir Burr's wife woke up after a sweet dream, rolled over the wrong way said "I love you", kissed the ashtray, then went back to sleep.

[Phil Conners]

I love these anti-smoking threads. It brings out all the PC storm-troopers who then proceed to make complete idiots of themselves

When you're on life support with 1/4 lung left after you got lung cancer following your glorious smoking career we'll see who's making an idiot of himself.

[quiksilva]

I am a smoker, who has stopped for four weeks and counting, because of a personal choice which was certainly not influenced by the anti-smoking fascists.

I have always shown consideration to the non-smokers in my company and even strangers nearby and funnily enough I also happen to be respectful and considerate during my day to day life (well as much as possible anyway).

I believe that most people have the same core values, after all how many smokers have you seen blatantly smoking in non-smoking zones, ok sure, no doubt occasionally but I would hazard a guess and say that these cases were the exception rather then rule.

So it is fair to say, that most smokers restrict their indulgences to only the places where smoking is permitted, and many will take that a step further and ask others before lighting up or choosing not to smoke whilst others are eating, even if they are in an area where smoking is permitted. There are limits to consideration to others though, as has been evidenced by the pollution arguments earlier.

So don't be surprised if you get less than an enthusiastic response to your presumptuous request to a smoker to move away or cease their indulgence whilst you are both outside or in an area where smoking is permitted. It is rude in the extreme, and as others have pointed out you can choose to take action by moving away yourself.

Now that rant and catarrh is off my chest, I saw that the UK smoking ban also affects Cigar Clubs, how many non-smokers will that affect I wonder?

[Furbie]

But nobody has answered the question of CHOICE.

Why should a person who invests all their time, money and effort in a business not have a CHOICE in the policies of that business? They put a sign outside their pub/bar/restaurant "Smoking is/is not permitted inside these premises" then the potential customers have the CHOICE whether to enter or go someplace else. The person who runs the business is the one who succeeds or fails according to their personal CHOICE and that of their customers. Why are we so keen to let the government take away personal CHOICE?

Would you all be so keen if the government introduced an anti meat products law whereby it was illegal to eat meat or animal products in a public place? After all that fat produces cholesterol which is a mighty big killer and a drain on the health service and it causes obesity which makes it unpleasant to sit next to those fat b@st@rds on the plane.

Sure, while we are at it, let's get rid of those pesky hygiene regulations, let people eat naked in restaurants, bring in farm animals and in general do whatever they want – it's your right to do these thing - NONSENSE.

Society has the right to ban individual freedoms when they affect the freedoms of others – though I must point out to you smokers that I am unaware of any right to smoke. Smokers affect the freedom of those around them, maybe not everyone, but certainly enough of them. Smoking is bad for your health, it reeks, and makes food taste bad. By all means, do this around those trying to enjoy a meal.

It makes perfect sense to limit where people can smoke. Just as it makes perfect sense to require people to use a restroom to go to the bathroom.

Sure, why not? I am talking about personal choice so if a restauranteur wants to ignore hygene regulations, allow people to sit naked at the tables and urinate in the corner why should the government regulate against it. Provided he advises all potential customers, via prominently positioned signage, of the conditions within his establishment then he leaves the choice of patronage where it belongs. That choice is with the paying customer and if enough paying customers decide to avoid the place and dine elsewhere he has a stark choice, change the conditions or go bust.

It only makes perfect sense to limit the freedoms of others to those control freaks who cannot allow people freedom of choice and enlist governments to support their predujices. This is the same banal mentality that forces people to sit up all night to watch some film or TV play billed as raunchy only to write in to the papers next day as Disgusted of Nakon Nowhere. It's also the same mentality that requires warning notices on bags of peanuts "Warning this product contains nuts".

Sorry, your argument is weak. A restaurateur has to abide by health and safety regulations – as do numerous other types of businesses. If we left these areas to the free market in all circumstances there would be total chaos. We live in a world where certain standards are applied – regulations exist and people are not free to do anything they want – even if you own a business. Cars have safety standards because of regulations, factories have pollution standards because of regulations. The list goes on and on. Some are good; some are foolish, some are critical. However, in this case, the link between your nasty habit and the danger posed to those around you is being recognized by more and more governments. What that means is that more and more places will ban smoking.

I repeat, smoking is not a right, and by choosing to smoke, you endanger the health of others around you. I realize you don't care, but thankfully more and more governments do.

[PhilHarries]

But nobody has answered the question of CHOICE.

Why should a person who invests all their time, money and effort in a business not have a CHOICE in the policies of that business? They put a sign outside their pub/bar/restaurant "Smoking is/is not permitted inside these premises" then the potential customers have the CHOICE whether to enter or go someplace else. The person who runs the business is the one who succeeds or fails according to their personal CHOICE and that of their customers. Why are we so keen to let the government take away personal CHOICE?

Would you all be so keen if the government introduced an anti meat products law whereby it was illegal to eat meat or animal products in a public place? After all that fat produces cholesterol which is a mighty big killer and a drain on the health service and it causes obesity which makes it unpleasant to sit next to those fat b@st@rds on the plane.

Sure, while we are at it, let's get rid of those pesky hygiene regulations, let people eat naked in restaurants, bring in farm animals and in general do whatever they want – it's your right to do these thing - NONSENSE.

Society has the right to ban individual freedoms when they affect the freedoms of others – though I must point out to you smokers that I am unaware of any right to smoke. Smokers affect the freedom of those around them, maybe not everyone, but certainly enough of them. Smoking is bad for your health, it reeks, and makes food taste bad. By all means, do this around those trying to enjoy a meal.

It makes perfect sense to limit where people can smoke. Just as it makes perfect sense to require people to use a restroom to go to the bathroom.

Sure, why not? I am talking about personal choice so if a restauranteur wants to ignore hygene regulations, allow people to sit naked at the tables and urinate in the corner why should the government regulate against it. Provided he advises all potential customers, via prominently positioned signage, of the conditions within his establishment then he leaves the choice of patronage where it belongs. That choice is with the paying customer and if enough paying customers decide to avoid the place and dine elsewhere he has a stark choice, change the conditions or go bust.

It only makes perfect sense to limit the freedoms of others to those control freaks who cannot allow people freedom of choice and enlist governments to support their predujices. This is the same banal mentality that forces people to sit up all night to watch some film or TV play billed as raunchy only to write in to the papers next day as Disgusted of Nakon Nowhere. It's also the same mentality that requires warning notices on bags of peanuts "Warning this product contains nuts".

Sorry, your argument is weak. A restaurateur has to abide by health and safety regulations – as do numerous other types of businesses. If we left these areas to the free market in all circumstances there would be total chaos. We live in a world where certain standards are applied – regulations exist and people are not free to do anything they want – even if you own a business. Cars have safety standards because of regulations, factories have pollution standards because of regulations. The list goes on and on. Some are good; some are foolish, some are critical. However, in this case, the link between your nasty habit and the danger posed to those around you is being recognized by more and more governments. What that means is that more and more places will ban smoking.

I repeat, smoking is not a right, and by choosing to smoke, you endanger the health of others around you. I realize you don't care, but thankfully more and more governments do.

You are missing the point completely, I said provided he advises all potential customers......... The hygene regulations were brought in because there were no standards to be judged against. I am not arguing for nor against non-smoking bars and restaurants but merely for the principle that the owner makes the initial decision and the customers have the final choice. What is so difficult for people to decide that a particular establishment is not for them and to move on?

btw if you had read my first post on this thread you'd realise your comment about "your (my) nasty habit" is incorrect. Go back and read the words not what your predujice would like you to read.

[Sir Burr]

I love these anti-smoking threads. It brings out all the PC storm-troopers who then proceed to make complete idiots of themselves

When you're on life support with 1/4 lung left after you got lung cancer following your glorious smoking career we'll see who's making an idiot of himself.

Actually, I'm now a non-smoker. Why did you think I was a smoker? Funny how the PC storm-troopers make assumptions about people who don't agree with their position.

You're kinda proving my point.

Edited June 12, 2007 by Sir Burr