Crackdown On Smoking At Pubs, Enteratinment Venues

[Mighty Mouse]

so yet another non smoker who once again acknowledges the addictive nature of smoking, but would rather consider smokers to be weak, selfish, disgusting or criminal. ?

Nobody forced you to take up smoking in the first place. You did it for your own particular reason knowing full well that you were embarking on a practice that could become addictive....and you were right. You now have a habit that you can't toss. It could be that the reason for your addiction is inside you, rather than in the drug.

Do you expect me to feel sorry for you?

Perhaps somewhere down the track you may need to pull an oxygen bottle behind you with tubes going into your nostrils....or maybe you'll be speaking to people with a little buzzer held to your throat. Would you expect me to feel sorry for you then?

You have to face the consequences of your addictive behaviour. Addictions are a medical problem. Many forms of treatment are available.

Rather than chastise me for supporting 'no smoking' laws, you should accept that smokers are now in the minority. Governments around the world are conducting on-going campaigns to deter young people from taking up the habit and to encourage those addicted with the habit to seek assistance in quitting.

Places where you can legally smoke are disappearing fast. You don't need too much intelligence to know that you are fighting a losing battle in holding out against such stiff opposition to your filthy and unhealthy habit.

If you want to quit but can't face the short period of pain that you need to endure, that makes you "weak."

If you expect others to be silent whilst you break the law and smoke where you are not allowed, then YOU are the "selfish" one.

Smoking is "disgusting." Most smokers will agree.

If you smoke contrary to the 'no smoking' laws, then you are an offender of the law. I wouldn't go so far as to regard you as a "criminal," but I'd be quite happy to see you pay some type of monetary penalty to the authorities.

Rather than fight the majority of the population and expect to win the argument (as some of you smokers are attempting to do in this thread), it would be far easier to clean up your act and quit the habit.

Edited January 31, 2008 by Mighty Mouse

[John K]

so yet another non smoker who once again acknowledges the addictive nature of smoking, but would rather consider smokers to be weak, selfish, disgusting or criminal. ?

Nobody forced you to take up smoking in the first place. You did it for your own particular reason knowing full well that you were embarking on a practice that could become addictive....and you were right. You now have a habit that you can't toss. It could be that the reason for your addiction is inside you, rather than in the drug.

Do you expect me to feel sorry for you?

Perhaps somewhere down the track you may need to pull an oxygen bottle behind you with tubes going into your nostrils....or maybe you'll be speaking to people with a little buzzer held to your throat. Would you expect me to feel sorry for you then?

You have to face the consequences of your addictive behaviour. Addictions are a medical problem. Many forms of treatment are available.

Rather than chastise me for supporting 'no smoking' laws, you should accept that smokers are now in the minority. Governments around the world are conducting on-going campaigns to deter young people from taking up the habit and to encourage those addicted with the habit to seek assistance in quitting.

Places where you can legally smoke are disappearing fast. You don't need too much intelligence to know that you are fighting a losing battle in holding out against such stiff opposition to your filthy and unhealthy habit.

If you want to quit but can't face the short period of pain that you need to endure, that makes you "weak."

If you expect others to be silent whilst you break the law and smoke where you are not allowed, then YOU are the "selfish" one.

Smoking is "disgusting." Most smokers will agree.

If you smoke contrary to the 'no smoking' laws, then you are an offender of the law. I wouldn't go so far as to regard you as a "criminal," but I'd be quite happy to see you pay some type of monetary penalty to the authorities.

Rather than fight the majority of the population and expect to win the argument (as some of you smokers are attempting to do in this thread), it would be far easier to clean up your act and quit the habit.

A lot of what you are saying about pain and weakness is true with some methods of quitting. However with hypnosis it is not the case.

Once the mental addiction is gone, and the physical addiction is temporarily blocked, ‘giving up smoking is as easy ad deciding not to eat stinking rotting food.’ That by the way was a quote from one of my clients as they express how easy it was after years of trying. The only requirement is you have to want to stop and that is a decision that is hard to come by as the mental addiction clouds a smokers judgment. Part of that clouding is making the smokers think their life is about to end if they can’t smoke with their beer. Well of you expect that to happen then it will, however if you expect something else then that will happen. See my signature line for that one.

[kiakaha]

and also will be able NOT to smell our clothes' stink after returning home from those pubs and bars !

it really nastily lingers for a long time !

and beer, whiskey & sweat don't smell ?

I was taught how to use the figure of speech, known as the "analogy", correctly in primary school. Here are some suggested corrections for you.

1 - When you sit down at a pub does the guy next to you pour his beer, whiskey and sweat all over you ? Because thats what smokers do with their smoke.

2 - Should I urinate(the waste product of my drinking) on you after drinking my beer ? Because thats what smokers do with their 2nd hand smoke(the waste product of their smoking).

Then I would suggest a return to primary school.

Analogy my arse, not even close.

Next please.

Actually, by definition, it is a perfect use of analogy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

A Smoker smokes , by-product of this action is second hand smoke.

A Drinker drinks , by-product of this action is urine.

Drinkers are usually polite enough to deposit their waste in a urinal.

Smokers however don't care that their waste is deposited all over the other patrons in the establishment.

It's rather dramatic, the analogy is not good in my view.

thats a rather empty rebuttal.

why ?

not at all, simply stating that it is rather dramatic. Smoke is smoke you know, most people would not compare it to bodily waste and wouldn't perceive it in these terms. I mean, don't let me stop you, try an experiment this evening by having a sprinkle in the middle of the dance floor.

so you think second hand smoke is not bodily waste ?

lets see, you suck it in to your lungs, it gets processed and then the parts not processed are excreted(by medical definition, respiration is one of several forms of excretory behavior)

hmmm........

my analogy stands.

I'm not going to urinate on the dancefloor, because I'm considerate. Unfortunately the same can't be said for some smokers.

[moldy]

so yet another non smoker who once again acknowledges the addictive nature of smoking, but would rather consider smokers to be weak, selfish, disgusting or criminal. ?

Nobody forced you to take up smoking in the first place. You did it for your own particular reason knowing full well that you were embarking on a practice that could become addictive....and you were right. You now have a habit that you can't toss. It could be that the reason for your addiction is inside you, rather than in the drug.

Do you expect me to feel sorry for you?

Perhaps somewhere down the track you may need to pull an oxygen bottle behind you with tubes going into your nostrils....or maybe you'll be speaking to people with a little buzzer held to your throat. Would you expect me to feel sorry for you then?

You have to face the consequences of your addictive behaviour. Addictions are a medical problem. Many forms of treatment are available.

Rather than chastise me for supporting 'no smoking' laws, you should accept that smokers are now in the minority. Governments around the world are conducting on-going campaigns to deter young people from taking up the habit and to encourage those addicted with the habit to seek assistance in quitting.

Places where you can legally smoke are disappearing fast. You don't need too much intelligence to know that you are fighting a losing battle in holding out against such stiff opposition to your filthy and unhealthy habit.

If you want to quit but can't face the short period of pain that you need to endure, that makes you "weak."

If you expect others to be silent whilst you break the law and smoke where you are not allowed, then YOU are the "selfish" one.

Smoking is "disgusting." Most smokers will agree.

If you smoke contrary to the 'no smoking' laws, then you are an offender of the law. I wouldn't go so far as to regard you as a "criminal," but I'd be quite happy to see you pay some type of monetary penalty to the authorities.

Rather than fight the majority of the population and expect to win the argument (as some of you smokers are attempting to do in this thread), it would be far easier to clean up your act and quit the habit.

I feel truly sorry for you.

As a 10 year old I don't believe I took up smoking as a free will choice.

So in the end we go back to a simple statement:

Non smokers acknowledge it is an addiction, but would rather consider smokers to be weak, selfish, disgusting, or criminal.

Getr a life will you. Quite pathetic

[moldy]

and also will be able NOT to smell our clothes' stink after returning home from those pubs and bars !

it really nastily lingers for a long time !

and beer, whiskey & sweat don't smell ?

I was taught how to use the figure of speech, known as the "analogy", correctly in primary school. Here are some suggested corrections for you.

1 - When you sit down at a pub does the guy next to you pour his beer, whiskey and sweat all over you ? Because thats what smokers do with their smoke.

2 - Should I urinate(the waste product of my drinking) on you after drinking my beer ? Because thats what smokers do with their 2nd hand smoke(the waste product of their smoking).

Then I would suggest a return to primary school.

Analogy my arse, not even close.

Next please.

Actually, by definition, it is a perfect use of analogy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy

A Smoker smokes , by-product of this action is second hand smoke.

A Drinker drinks , by-product of this action is urine.

Drinkers are usually polite enough to deposit their waste in a urinal.

Smokers however don't care that their waste is deposited all over the other patrons in the establishment.

It's rather dramatic, the analogy is not good in my view.

thats a rather empty rebuttal.

why ?

not at all, simply stating that it is rather dramatic. Smoke is smoke you know, most people would not compare it to bodily waste and wouldn't perceive it in these terms. I mean, don't let me stop you, try an experiment this evening by having a sprinkle in the middle of the dance floor.

so you think second hand smoke is not bodily waste ?

lets see, you suck it in to your lungs, it gets processed and then the parts not processed are excreted(by medical definition, respiration is one of several forms of excretory behavior)

hmmm........

my analogy stands.

I'm not going to urinate on the dancefloor, because I'm considerate. Unfortunately the same can't be said for some smokers.

All I said was in my opinion it is a poor analogy - and to be sure it's over dramatic. Really I don't care a toss.

[Jai Dee]

Settle down please people... enough of the personal attacks and insults.

[tso310]

Are these forums smoking or non smoking and if one is responding to a thread while smoking does one have to take the computer outside in order to post.

[mrbojangles]

Are these forums smoking or non smoking and if one is responding to a thread while smoking does one have to take the computer outside in order to post.

Seeing as second hand "virtual" smoke is non hazardous to others, i think you'll be ok

[TAWP]

Second hand flaming can be hazardous to a profiles health.

[mrbojangles]

Second hand flaming can be hazardous to a profiles health.

I concur

[moldy]

Second hand flaming can be hazardous to a profiles health.

I concur

It's a bit quiet !!!!, think I'll pop down town and smoke a 100 cigs.

[CTM]

Actually I am generally quite considerate towards non smokers, however when they jump on their pedantic high horse, then I tend to try to annoy them as much as possible.

I am sure you have many habits to which I object, but fortunately for you I am far less pedantic than yourself and will not bring those up in a public forum.

Yes I am all right Jack, and to hel_l with all you arrogant tambourine bashers,who have nothing better to do with your lives than complain about everyone and everything.

I bet you are all the same during Sonkran.......excuse me sonny but there is no need to inflict your good fun on evreyon........'SPLASH'

Actually they are. Just wait til April approaches and they flood the board with bitching about that holiday.

Edited February 2, 2008 by CTM

[CTM]

I have enjoyed the debate...but it has been somewhat hijacked by diversionary tactics.

Bottom line is that I don't like cigarette smoke and don't see why a person should make me suffer because of their addiction. Drug addicts will always defend their addiction of choice.

The "personal choice" argument is old and tired.

The "you have the choice not to go in that bar" is weak.

The "vehicle diversion and global pollution" attempt deserves it's own thread, and I will support that effort.

The "reports suggest smoking is not bad for you" is just ignorant.

Smokers will always say they are considerate, but it only takes one smoker to pollute a room.

I work with a bunch of smokers who will disappear 5-8 times a day for 10-15 minutes to smoke. The time suck is painful enough, but they really don't appreciate how bad they smell. I now hire only non smokers.

It's a matter of respecting other people, and any rationalization that smokers can come up with to justify making other people breathe their smoke is just disrespecting other people. Simple as that.

Very good post, I am forced to work with smokers and it is disgusting their lack of regard for the health of others, their weekness that results in their habit will be the downfall of them but they should not inflict that on others in the workplace or in pubs and bars. Bring on the ban.

As a smoker (probably looking to stop) I'd worked in that people deserved not to be subject to my habit, I hadn't realised how strongly people felt when not subject to the habit in any meaningful way. I'm a little puzzled by this. I mean does the smell of smoke make you want to puke for instance? Is this how all non smokers feel?

Moldy, I can only speak for myself, but yes the smell of smoke on heavy smokers clothes and breathe is really quite sickening to me. This really only holds true for me in the office environment where one cant help but be subjected to it. Some of the guys do try to mask the smell with mints, but it's certainly not pleasant. I guess they can smell themselves.

The time suck is also very annoying and just leads to complaints from others that the smoking staff get more breaks than they do. That discussion with smokers, some who are senior, does not go down well at all, and often ends in quite heated arguments, where inevitably the smokers win with sheer disregard for the rules. Hence, I will never hire a smoker again, regardless of how good they are. It's just not worth the pain.

And if anyone has tried to tell a smoker that they smell or that they are wasting at least an hour a day having smoke breaks...its not a pleasant discussion, so it never gets mentioned.

Maybe it's just me. Growing up with a Mother who smoked and insisted on keeping all the windows closed in the winter probably makes my dislike of smoking more intense...and yes, my Mother now realizes how bad her decision was, and how bad it must have been for us and thankfully she stopped. But she used the "at least I'll die happy" or the "I'm not hurting anyone" responses when we asked her to stop. It's only now she realizes how stupid he rationale was...that and losing 2 friends to emphacima(sp?)

Holy smokes! Who with any other options would want to work for you? A 5 minute break every couple of hours and your bitching. Most countries have outlawed slavery and employees are allowed breaks. In fact if you treated people with a bit more dignity you might find them to be more productive. dam_n you must be hated at work. Also, I hate to break it to you but people often talk shop on a smoke break and it is a chance to get to know people from other departments and improve interdepartmental working relationships. You wouldn't know that because your too busy wasting more time than you accuse the smokers of being bitter and angry.

[CTM]

Actually I am generally quite considerate towards non smokers, however when they jump on their pedantic high horse, then I tend to try to annoy them as much as possible.

I am sure you have many habits to which I object, but fortunately for you I am far less pedantic than yourself and will not bring those up in a public forum.

Yes I am all right Jack, and to hel_l with all you arrogant tambourine bashers,who have nothing better to do with your lives than complain about everyone and everything.

I bet you are all the same during Sonkran.......excuse me sonny but there is no need to inflict your good fun on evreyon........'SPLASH'

So Sweetchariot, when are you going to weigh in with your opinion. So far nicotine has been doing all the talking for you and doing a very good job at making you look like an arrogant ass.

An arrogant ass?? I have not posted more than 3 times (OK now 4) on this thread, I would say that someone posting upwards of 20 times is the arrogant ass, as you are soooooo brainwashed you can't accept that somebody else may have a valid opinion.

Stop picking on John K. He is just trying to make a not so thinly veiled sales pitch for all his new age hocus pocus cures. Question is does he have a proper B visa and workpermit?

[Prakanong]

Actually I am generally quite considerate towards non smokers, however when they jump on their pedantic high horse, then I tend to try to annoy them as much as possible.

I am sure you have many habits to which I object, but fortunately for you I am far less pedantic than yourself and will not bring those up in a public forum.

Yes I am all right Jack, and to hel_l with all you arrogant tambourine bashers,who have nothing better to do with your lives than complain about everyone and everything.

I bet you are all the same during Sonkran.......excuse me sonny but there is no need to inflict your good fun on evreyon........'SPLASH'

So Sweetchariot, when are you going to weigh in with your opinion. So far nicotine has been doing all the talking for you and doing a very good job at making you look like an arrogant ass.

An arrogant ass?? I have not posted more than 3 times (OK now 4) on this thread, I would say that someone posting upwards of 20 times is the arrogant ass, as you are soooooo brainwashed you can't accept that somebody else may have a valid opinion.

Stop picking on John K. He is just trying to make a not so thinly veiled sales pitch for all his new age hocus pocus cures. Question is does he have a proper B visa and workpermit?

I am off to watch the footie on telly - I bet your post is not here when I get back

[Tony Clifton]

I haven't had a smoke in almost two months now. Then again, I can't remember the last time I was in a bar. it's the smokers on television that bother me!

[Prakanong]

I haven't had a smoke in almost two months now. Then again, I can't remember the last time I was in a bar. it's the smokers on television that bother me!

I thought they were pixelated out?

[Tony Clifton]

I haven't had a smoke in almost two months now. Then again, I can't remember the last time I was in a bar. it's the smokers on television that bother me!

I thought they were pixelated out?

Not when the cable company rebroadcasts a Chinese channel with pirated movies only.

[sibeymai]

As a recent ex-smoker I do support the concerns of non-smokers regarding passive smoking but I find this concern about smoking as opposed to general air quality a bit disingenuous.

If "non-smokers" were really bothered about the quality of the air they breathe then the internal combustion engine would already be banned, along with other major contributors to air pollution such as electricity generation or a multitude of industrial processes.

How many non-smokers who are villifying smokers in this thread live in Bangkok and drive cars ? Or do those living in Chiang Mai all leave during the smog season ?

Realistically, second-hand cigarette smoke is only a starting point in the battle to improve air quality. Smokers can rightly feel victimised when passive smoking complainants remain so silent about other contributors to air pollution.

Quite simply, if I choose to complain about a non-smoker driving in Bangkok and contributing to air pollution will that person give up driving their car where I might inhale the exhaust ? No chance. But smokers have voluntarily respected non-smokers wishes not to light up around them long before it was law, so who are the more considerate and reasonable group ?

[Gary A]

People who live in Bangkok or Chiang Mai are worried about cigarette smoke? Give me a break.

[Prakanong]

It the effiing awful smell I have to suffer and then the stinky residue on my clothes more than anything.

It's the watery eyes and tickling nose.

The urinating analogy is the correct one - I have to go piss in a urinal where is acceptable to piss so you can also piss off outside and smoke.

Society is moving on and people realise its a disgusting awful dirty little habit - there used to be spitoons in bar's and we do not put up with that anymore - its the turn of smoke now.

[DLock]

I have enjoyed the debate...but it has been somewhat hijacked by diversionary tactics.

Bottom line is that I don't like cigarette smoke and don't see why a person should make me suffer because of their addiction. Drug addicts will always defend their addiction of choice.

The "personal choice" argument is old and tired.

The "you have the choice not to go in that bar" is weak.

The "vehicle diversion and global pollution" attempt deserves it's own thread, and I will support that effort.

The "reports suggest smoking is not bad for you" is just ignorant.

Smokers will always say they are considerate, but it only takes one smoker to pollute a room.

I work with a bunch of smokers who will disappear 5-8 times a day for 10-15 minutes to smoke. The time suck is painful enough, but they really don't appreciate how bad they smell. I now hire only non smokers.

It's a matter of respecting other people, and any rationalization that smokers can come up with to justify making other people breathe their smoke is just disrespecting other people. Simple as that.

Very good post, I am forced to work with smokers and it is disgusting their lack of regard for the health of others, their weekness that results in their habit will be the downfall of them but they should not inflict that on others in the workplace or in pubs and bars. Bring on the ban.

As a smoker (probably looking to stop) I'd worked in that people deserved not to be subject to my habit, I hadn't realised how strongly people felt when not subject to the habit in any meaningful way. I'm a little puzzled by this. I mean does the smell of smoke make you want to puke for instance? Is this how all non smokers feel?

Moldy, I can only speak for myself, but yes the smell of smoke on heavy smokers clothes and breathe is really quite sickening to me. This really only holds true for me in the office environment where one cant help but be subjected to it. Some of the guys do try to mask the smell with mints, but it's certainly not pleasant. I guess they can smell themselves.

The time suck is also very annoying and just leads to complaints from others that the smoking staff get more breaks than they do. That discussion with smokers, some who are senior, does not go down well at all, and often ends in quite heated arguments, where inevitably the smokers win with sheer disregard for the rules. Hence, I will never hire a smoker again, regardless of how good they are. It's just not worth the pain.

And if anyone has tried to tell a smoker that they smell or that they are wasting at least an hour a day having smoke breaks...its not a pleasant discussion, so it never gets mentioned.

Maybe it's just me. Growing up with a Mother who smoked and insisted on keeping all the windows closed in the winter probably makes my dislike of smoking more intense...and yes, my Mother now realizes how bad her decision was, and how bad it must have been for us and thankfully she stopped. But she used the "at least I'll die happy" or the "I'm not hurting anyone" responses when we asked her to stop. It's only now she realizes how stupid he rationale was...that and losing 2 friends to emphacima(sp?)

Holy smokes! Who with any other options would want to work for you? A 5 minute break every couple of hours and your bitching. Most countries have outlawed slavery and employees are allowed breaks. In fact if you treated people with a bit more dignity you might find them to be more productive. dam_n you must be hated at work. Also, I hate to break it to you but people often talk shop on a smoke break and it is a chance to get to know people from other departments and improve interdepartmental working relationships. You wouldn't know that because your too busy wasting more time than you accuse the smokers of being bitter and angry.

As a smoker who rationalizes everything to support a filthy habit, I'm not surprised by your failure to grasp the point.

Firstly, its not a 5 minute break every 2 hours, its at least 15 minutes by the time they go down 37 floors, walk outside, smoke and comeback. We work in a nice office, not a machine shop. And its not every 2 hours, its at least 5-6 times a day. So, 5 x 15 = over an hour that I have lost in productivity. Why should they get an extra hour indulging their addiction? Dignity? You do honestly know what dignity means? It means the quality of being worthy of esteem or respect. Are you saying that smokers, by wasting time they are paid to work, are worthy of respect? Reaching.

But you missed the point. It's disruptive to other staff who often complain that smokers actually get a benefit from smoking. That has led to some members smoking just to get that break - a loss of more time. And whilst you cant smell yourself, let me tell you something you may not be aware of - you stink. Really, you stink. Your clothes stink, your breath stinks and it really is quite unpleasant to be around you.

We have plenty of lunches and social events to meet and mingle. We don't need impromptu smoke breaks to do that. You are really reaching on rationalizing that one.

Why do you think anti smokers are bitter and angry? Because we don't want to smell your smoke? I am not bitter and I am not angry at all. I am just expressing my opinion and how I deal with it. I don't hire people like you

The arguments put forward by ex-smokers on the quality of air issue belong on a separate thread and I support you. I do not like the smell of smoke. Its that simple. I am not commenting on world air quality, holes in the ozone or global warming. I'm talking about the smell of smoke in an enclosed space and how it irritates my nose and eyes.

The war on smokers is pretty much over. We are just walking around bayouneting the wounded.

Enjoy.

[Prakanong]

"I don't hire people like you

The arguments put forward by ex-smokers on the quality of air issue belong on a separate thread and I support you. I do not like the smell of smoke. Its that simple. I am not commenting on world air quality, holes in the ozone or global warming. I'm talking about the smell of smoke in an enclosed space and how it irritates my nose and eyes.

The war on smokers is pretty much over. We are just walking around bayouneting the wounded.

Enjoy."

Brilliant -

[Ijustwannateach]

Well, having walked around in some pretty big discos last night, I can report that there is no sign of a crackdown.

[sabaijai]

As a smoker who rationalizes everything to support a filthy habit, I'm not surprised by your failure to grasp the point.

Firstly, its not a 5 minute break every 2 hours, its at least 15 minutes by the time they go down 37 floors, walk outside, smoke and comeback. We work in a nice office, not a machine shop. And its not every 2 hours, its at least 5-6 times a day. So, 5 x 15 = over an hour that I have lost in productivity. Why should they get an extra hour indulging their addiction? Dignity? You do honestly know what dignity means? It means the quality of being worthy of esteem or respect. Are you saying that smokers, by wasting time they are paid to work, are worthy of respect? Reaching.

But you missed the point. It's disruptive to other staff who often complain that smokers actually get a benefit from smoking. That has led to some members smoking just to get that break - a loss of more time. And whilst you cant smell yourself, let me tell you something you may not be aware of - you stink. Really, you stink. Your clothes stink, your breath stinks and it really is quite unpleasant to be around you.

We have plenty of lunches and social events to meet and mingle. We don't need impromptu smoke breaks to do that. You are really reaching on rationalizing that one.

Why do you think anti smokers are bitter and angry? Because we don't want to smell your smoke? I am not bitter and I am not angry at all. I am just expressing my opinion and how I deal with it. I don't hire people like you

The arguments put forward by ex-smokers on the quality of air issue belong on a separate thread and I support you. I do not like the smell of smoke. Its that simple. I am not commenting on world air quality, holes in the ozone or global warming. I'm talking about the smell of smoke in an enclosed space and how it irritates my nose and eyes.

The war on smokers is pretty much over. We are just walking around bayouneting the wounded.

Enjoy.

[Pattaya46]

... last night, I can report that there is no sign of a crackdown.

Why do you want one now ?

The main announcement mention February 17th and the second one, most restrictive, February the 11th.

So you still have 1 or max 2 weeks before th smoking ban begin.

[sweetchariot]

Well, having walked around in some pretty big discos last night, I can report that there is no sign of a crackdown.

Maybe because the law is not in effect yet.

Come on SuperMod, read the thread.

[moldy]

It the effiing awful smell I have to suffer and then the stinky residue on my clothes more than anything.

It's the watery eyes and tickling nose.

The urinating analogy is the correct one - I have to go piss in a urinal where is acceptable to piss so you can also piss off outside and smoke.

Society is moving on and people realise its a disgusting awful dirty little habit - there used to be spitoons in bar's and we do not put up with that anymore - its the turn of smoke now.

So progressive, the planet is being destroyed.

[moldy]

As a recent ex-smoker I do support the concerns of non-smokers regarding passive smoking but I find this concern about smoking as opposed to general air quality a bit disingenuous.

If "non-smokers" were really bothered about the quality of the air they breathe then the internal combustion engine would already be banned, along with other major contributors to air pollution such as electricity generation or a multitude of industrial processes.

How many non-smokers who are villifying smokers in this thread live in Bangkok and drive cars ? Or do those living in Chiang Mai all leave during the smog season ?

Realistically, second-hand cigarette smoke is only a starting point in the battle to improve air quality. Smokers can rightly feel victimised when passive smoking complainants remain so silent about other contributors to air pollution.

Quite simply, if I choose to complain about a non-smoker driving in Bangkok and contributing to air pollution will that person give up driving their car where I might inhale the exhaust ? No chance. But smokers have voluntarily respected non-smokers wishes not to light up around them long before it was law, so who are the more considerate and reasonable group ?

Spot on. I recently stopped smoking, it's done nothing to clear my airways.

It's incredible people go crazy about smoke in a bar but seem not to give a toss about air quality outside.

I think the error in perception here is that the cig smoke is causing an allergy, it's not it's trigerring a problem you already have- your membranes are probably already heavily irritated - most probably by traffic pollution, and possibly other toxins.

I suppose cig. smoke is very visible. I guess non smokers are of an hysterical nature and we must make allowances. But God give us a break and get priorities right.

[Ijustwannateach]

Well, having walked around in some pretty big discos last night, I can report that there is no sign of a crackdown.

Maybe because the law is not in effect yet.

Come on SuperMod, read the thread.

Oops, my bad!