Melbourne city centre aims to be smoke-free by 2016

[webfact]

Melbourne city centre aims to be smoke-free by 2016

MELBOURNE: -- Melbourne is pushing to become one of the first cities in the world to introduce a total ban on smoking in public spaces, officials said Thursday, with anyone wanting a cigarette required to use a designated shelter.

Melbourne city councillor Richard Foster said there was overwhelming support to extend smoke-free areas following a test in The Causeway, one of the bustling streets of Australia’s second biggest city.

"I think we’re going to actually attract people to Melbourne by being one of the first in the world to go smoke-free," Foster told Fairfax Radio.

"I think there’s overwhelming support to progress smoke-free areas given the great success we had with The Causeway."

Under the plan, it would be illegal for pedestrians, outdoor diners and even building site workers to light up in public areas within the central business district unless they are in designated shelters.

Like many other countries, Australia has already banned smoking in indoor public spaces such as bars and restaurants.

New York took the anti-smoking drive a step further in 2011 by banning smoking in most outdoor spaces, while other cities around the world have also moved to stop people from lighting up in parks and on beaches.

Lord Mayor Robert Doyle said any policy change should be incremental in the build-up to being completely smoke-free by late 2016.

"If we can show traders and businesses, just as happened in pubs and restaurants, that this doesn’t detract from your business... then bit by bit we will win that battle," he told the Herald Sun newspaper.

Anti-smoking group Quit Victoria and the Heart Foundation charity said in a statement that it was an excellent idea, but warned it may be hard to enforce.

"A total ban on smoking in the CBD may be difficult or impractical to enforce and smoking shelters could create ghettos," said Quit Victoria executive director Craig Sinclair.


-- The Nation 2014-05-15

[lee b]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

[neverdie]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

Smokers however (not all but most) will walk down the street and around the place chuffing away, blowing their obnoxious fumes everywhere. You can't escape it, as you pass office buildings and so forth there's literally thousands of these dopes applying their trade, the don't give a toss about anyone else, just their own dirty little habit. I am certain most don't realise how much it affects some people. On a relative still day with the slights of breeze I can smell the <deleted> at 20-30 metres and it's not pleasant.

Of course the smokers will chime in now abusing me about their right to smoke without any consideration about my right not to smoke their filthy dirty trail. My wife has a rare form of rhinitis and cigarette smoke can result is quite severe conditions (yes there are other triggers) so she actively avoids people smoking in the streets. We often change our walking route to avoid these a.holes.

I am happy for others to smoke and there should be designated locations where this can be done and these smoke houses could be funded by further increasing taxes on these cancer sticks. In reality, it's a filthy dirty habit which has proven ill health effects and if you want to slowly kill yourself using this method, please do so where it won't effect others.

Anyway, the tide is turning, slowly these disgusting indivuals are being moved along. Good riddance, I would almost consider moving to Melbourne as a result of this.

One final point, it simply amazes me the amount of smokers who discard their butts onto the ground, for some reason beyond me they don't see it as littering, but it's repulsive.

[Thakkar]

About time. But it should be everywhere. There are designated areas for people to leave their excrement (toilets), why not the same for second hand smoke?

T

[orosee]

Just spent a few days in Fukuoka which is a smoke free city in most parts already. Lighting up is allowed in designated areas only, basically wherever you find a public ashtray. Those are mostly a bit aside from very populated spots so not to annoy others, yet still pleasant to hang out around. Few butts lying about the city, generally a much neater appearance. In addition, lots of hybrid cars running on electricity. Makes for a quiet city with pleasant air. To compensate, certain coffee shops offer large, well ventilated spaces for smokers, which is missing from all of the more totalitarian plans to re-engineer humanity. In my opinion a smart way to tackle the problem as there's no excuse to light up in a prohibited area if there is a licensed opportunity just a few steps away. There's rarely a crowd, making the smoking a much better experience than the gassing chambers found at airports. Korea's going a similar way but missing out on logic here and there. Thailand ought to tackle general pollution first before further restrictions.

[MrY]

Here is the opinion of a considerate non-smoker:

Puff Away. It's your life. But consider others.

...and what does The Big Smoke being smoke-free have to do with Thaksin anyway..?

[Credo]

I usually don't smoke, but I am a smoker. For health reasons, I had to quit. But I love smoke. When I come out of a building and people are smoking the smell of fresh smoke is as enticing as freshly baked cinnamon buns.

Once in a while if I am out drinking, I will smoke for one night, but it's like an alcoholic falling off the wagon. I don't have a few cigarettes; I smoke the whole pack. Fortunately, the next day I have a little bit of a bad taste in my mouth (and no cigarettes), so I am back on the wagon.

It's easier not to smoke if I don't see anybody else smoking or smell any smoke.

[Cats4ever]

This is a proposal by a "wowser" councillor only at this stage. The minister has watered it down somewhat. I don't mind non smoking areas as long as smokers have somewhere handy to have a legal smoke. Outdoor areas were created largely when smoking indoors was banned. Non smokers want them now, although not during cold weather. Why not leave the call to business owners as to whether they run a smoking or non smoking establishment with their outdoor areas? Have a few designated smoking areas where pedestrians can light up, as well. I don't want to get in the faces of anti smokers; regrettably there are some who don't give me a choice.

[GAZZPA]

Really scary stuff..

I suspect that non smokers will see this as a triumph and jump on the bandwagon spewing their hatred for the sub human, filthy beasts who smoke.

This is all ridiculous, completely ridiculous. I do think that smokers should be considerate, there are people who don't want to breath in cigarette fumes, I get that, we all get that. But jus because some smokers are inconsiderate doesn't mean that a law should be passed that so blatantly infringes individual choice.

Now, I am sure there are non smokers who will say "why should I put up with your smoke,, blah, blah blah". But we are not talking about inside a building, in a restaurant, I never complained about that because I understand you don't want to sit in a hazy room breathing in second hand smoke. We are talking about outside, in the fresh air. I read from a particular aggressive poster a few minutes ago that he can smell someone smoking a cigarette, outside from 20 to 30 metres away,, total nonsense of course.

You have to ask yourself,,, is this really about protecting non smokers health or could it be that the stigma has simply gone too far? Be honest about this, don't just go with the flow. If on occasion you pass an inconsiderate smoker who does blow a cloud in your face, well that's impolite, for sure but what damage has it really done to your health? No damage at all.

So, my summary is this,, people who do not smoke have the right to not breath second hand smoke BUT smokers also have the right to smoke if they want to and on occasion whilst smoking outside a non smoker may walk a smoker and get a whiff of tobacco smoke,,, does this really require a law to prevent this?

We all need to really, really careful about how far we allow the nanny state to progress..

For all you non smokers who spit on the floor and write abusive things about smokers I hope you don't drink, and I hope your not fat.. If you are,, well then you are disgusting and they are coming for you next.

[GAZZPA]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

Smokers however (not all but most) will walk down the street and around the place chuffing away, blowing their obnoxious fumes everywhere. You can't escape it, as you pass office buildings and so forth there's literally thousands of these dopes applying their trade, the don't give a toss about anyone else, just their own dirty little habit. I am certain most don't realise how much it affects some people. On a relative still day with the slights of breeze I can smell the <deleted> at 20-30 metres and it's not pleasant.

Of course the smokers will chime in now abusing me about their right to smoke without any consideration about my right not to smoke their filthy dirty trail. My wife has a rare form of rhinitis and cigarette smoke can result is quite severe conditions (yes there are other triggers) so she actively avoids people smoking in the streets. We often change our walking route to avoid these a.holes.

I am happy for others to smoke and there should be designated locations where this can be done and these smoke houses could be funded by further increasing taxes on these cancer sticks. In reality, it's a filthy dirty habit which has proven ill health effects and if you want to slowly kill yourself using this method, please do so where it won't effect others.

Anyway, the tide is turning, slowly these disgusting indivuals are being moved along. Good riddance, I would almost consider moving to Melbourne as a result of this.

One final point, it simply amazes me the amount of smokers who discard their butts onto the ground, for some reason beyond me they don't see it as littering, but it's repulsive.

Your abusive references to smokers has removed all credibility of your argument. I quote "literally thousands of these dope", "these disgusting individuals", "blowing their obnoxious fumes".

Also, smelling smoke from 20 to 30 metres away, complete rubbish.

There has already been tightening of smoking in public places indoors (which i agree with), there is no need to create a law to make an entire city smoke free.

This is all going too far. Sadly I suspect you don't have the ability to think objectively about this topic.

[KhunSteven]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

However we are still in a situation where poor air quality is responsible for 1 in 8 deaths world wide. Perhaps it is a topic that Governments should pay as much attention to as they do smoking. It is easier to pick off individuals one by one than large corporations.

Moreover why not make tobacco an illegal substance? I speak as a non-smoker.

[GAZZPA]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

However we are still in a situation where poor air quality is responsible for 1 in 8 deaths world wide. Perhaps it is a topic that Governments should pay as much attention to as they do smoking. It is easier to pick off individuals one by one than large corporations.

Moreover why not make tobacco an illegal substance? I speak as a non-smoker.

It is an excellent point.

There are already laws in place to ensure that people do not need to breath second hand smoke indoors or in enclosed public places.

That is enough, there is no risk to non smokers walking past someone who is smoking outside and in my view most smokers are more considerate nowadays. I go back to my previous point, this is about stigma and nothing else, you can see it clearly by the aggressive references and in instances actual abuse towards smokers.

If it is such a huge issue then smoking should be illegal.

[Showbags]

Outstanding news.

Listen to all the weak minded cry babies above.....

[neverdie]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

Smokers however (not all but most) will walk down the street and around the place chuffing away, blowing their obnoxious fumes everywhere. You can't escape it, as you pass office buildings and so forth there's literally thousands of these dopes applying their trade, the don't give a toss about anyone else, just their own dirty little habit. I am certain most don't realise how much it affects some people. On a relative still day with the slights of breeze I can smell the <deleted> at 20-30 metres and it's not pleasant.

Of course the smokers will chime in now abusing me about their right to smoke without any consideration about my right not to smoke their filthy dirty trail. My wife has a rare form of rhinitis and cigarette smoke can result is quite severe conditions (yes there are other triggers) so she actively avoids people smoking in the streets. We often change our walking route to avoid these a.holes.

I am happy for others to smoke and there should be designated locations where this can be done and these smoke houses could be funded by further increasing taxes on these cancer sticks. In reality, it's a filthy dirty habit which has proven ill health effects and if you want to slowly kill yourself using this method, please do so where it won't effect others.

Anyway, the tide is turning, slowly these disgusting indivuals are being moved along. Good riddance, I would almost consider moving to Melbourne as a result of this.

One final point, it simply amazes me the amount of smokers who discard their butts onto the ground, for some reason beyond me they don't see it as littering, but it's repulsive.

Your abusive references to smokers has removed all credibility of your argument. I quote "literally thousands of these dope", "these disgusting individuals", "blowing their obnoxious fumes".

Also, smelling smoke from 20 to 30 metres away, complete rubbish.

There has already been tightening of smoking in public places indoors (which i agree with), there is no need to create a law to make an entire city smoke free.

This is all going too far. Sadly I suspect you don't have the ability to think objectively about this topic.

The only complete rubbish here is you telling me what I can and cannot smell. Try reading exactly what I said, I used words to the effects, ' with the slightest of breeze I can smell it at 20-30 metres'.

As a smoker, you may not be able to smell it, but I can, my wife even moreso.

As for my tems 'disgusting individuals' and 'blowing obnoxious fumes' fit perfectly, thousands of these dopes also applies, although I acknowledge that even intelligent individuals partake in that filthy habit.

For decades people like me have been FORCED to put up with your crappy second hand fumes, that's changing. Try recognising other peoples rights for fresh air over your own right to try and kill yourself slowly.

How dare you try to justify this selfish act. It's one thing to be ignorant of the fact but to do it knowingly. How would you like me to take a dump on your doorstep? Because a hot steaming stool is a lot safer than the crap you're blowing everywhere .....after all smokers having been doing the same with little or no consideration to me or anyone else for that matter. Doesn't really sound fair, does it?

What makes you think that you get to decide what's appropriate for Melbourne or any other city for that matter. Their people have spoken and the law makers are voting on it and about time.

Hopefully you only give yourself cancer, all the best with that, fancy doing that to yourself.

[neverdie]

Really scary stuff..

I suspect that non smokers will see this as a triumph and jump on the bandwagon spewing their hatred for the sub human, filthy beasts who smoke.

This is all ridiculous, completely ridiculous. I do think that smokers should be considerate, there are people who don't want to breath in cigarette fumes, I get that, we all get that. But jus because some smokers are inconsiderate doesn't mean that a law should be passed that so blatantly infringes individual choice.

Now, I am sure there are non smokers who will say "why should I put up with your smoke,, blah, blah blah". But we are not talking about inside a building, in a restaurant, I never complained about that because I understand you don't want to sit in a hazy room breathing in second hand smoke. We are talking about outside, in the fresh air. I read from a particular aggressive poster a few minutes ago that he can smell someone smoking a cigarette, outside from 20 to 30 metres away,, total nonsense of course.

You have to ask yourself,,, is this really about protecting non smokers health or could it be that the stigma has simply gone too far? Be honest about this, don't just go with the flow. If on occasion you pass an inconsiderate smoker who does blow a cloud in your face, well that's impolite, for sure but what damage has it really done to your health? No damage at all.

So, my summary is this,, people who do not smoke have the right to not breath second hand smoke BUT smokers also have the right to smoke if they want to and on occasion whilst smoking outside a non smoker may walk a smoker and get a whiff of tobacco smoke,,, does this really require a law to prevent this?

We all need to really, really careful about how far we allow the nanny state to progress..

For all you non smokers who spit on the floor and write abusive things about smokers I hope you don't drink, and I hope your not fat.. If you are,, well then you are disgusting and they are coming for you next.

Not aggressive, just calling a spade, a spade.

Suck it up princess. Apparently you like sucking in smoke, so try that one on for size.

No aggression, whatsoever.

[neverdie]

The hide of the very rude and aggressive poster that wants to tell someone else what they can or cannot smell. The Audasity.

Just because some people choose to dull off their sensories of smell and taste by smoking, they think all the other 'normal' people are the same.

[Diddl]

Yes, I agree with you Gazzpa, it is all about taking rights away, bit by bit, until you will have to get permission from the authorities to breathe!

Why do they concentrate so much on smoking when drinking is a bigger problem? I wonder if anti-smokers have ever done research on the subject of tobacco or whether, as I am inclined to think, they just believe all the garbage written out there to frighten people. As I always say, the majority of people need a big daddy now to tell them what to do, or not do, and society is becoming more and more intolerant of everything and everybody, they are ignorantly playing the game of the authorities that want to control. If you look back in time, you will find that people were more tolerant and rarely complained about others’ actions or behaviour as long they were not infringing on theirs.

Where is this all going? Do this, do that, don’t do this, don’t do that, and the sheeple just follow big daddy until some law will come up that affects them, and then they will complain some more but this time about how they are being affected! We no longer live in a free world because of the intolerant people who back the ‘new’ system of control, but they do not realise that they will be coming to bang on their door one day and it will be too late for them too!

Some have mentioned car exhausts, planes, etc., so why are authorities not allowing alternative fuel that is readily available since decades, even since Nikolai Tesla’s days in the early 1900s – why not complain about that? In the 1970s, an American created and ran his car on water, yes water, any type of water, tap water, pond water, river water, sea water, just water. This American guy was threatened and told not to tell people or drive his car on water. He refused to listen and was finally murdered and his plans where taken. Others have succumbed to the same fate whether it be on the subject of emissions, medicine, science, etc. You can even run a diesel car on cooking oil. Instead of polluting the atmosphere by throwing away your old and used cooking oil, you can actually filter it and put it in your diesel tank and all that is needed is a thimble-amount of a chemical added to it – but, I suppose, intolerant people would not like that either because the roads might smell of cooking oil!

Anyway, if you really want to know, and no doubt most of you don’t, tobacco is a medicinal plant that actually helps stimulate the pineal gland in your head amongst other things. It does not cause cancer. The fact is that cancer can be caused by the chemicals tobacco companies put in the cigarettes, just as companies also put such lethal chemicals in your food, in your crops, in your medicine, etc. So, why don’t you complain about that, or are you too much of a coward to complain to the authorities about what they are doing and allowing and prefer to pick on the innocent person who has done nothing wrong and is easier to attack? I call it bullying, and if you are one who imagines that cigarette smoke is going to kill you and who no doubt drives a car/motorbike and eats foods full of additives, then you are nothing but a bully, so don’t complain when a bully comes to your door! Who are you to decide what people can do or not do anyway?

Now you can enjoy yourselves by writing slandering comments. All I have to say is that I believe in freedom for all. Taking one freedom away is a guideline for taking all freedom away.

[GAZZPA]

Really scary stuff..

I suspect that non smokers will see this as a triumph and jump on the bandwagon spewing their hatred for the sub human, filthy beasts who smoke.

This is all ridiculous, completely ridiculous. I do think that smokers should be considerate, there are people who don't want to breath in cigarette fumes, I get that, we all get that. But jus because some smokers are inconsiderate doesn't mean that a law should be passed that so blatantly infringes individual choice.

Now, I am sure there are non smokers who will say "why should I put up with your smoke,, blah, blah blah". But we are not talking about inside a building, in a restaurant, I never complained about that because I understand you don't want to sit in a hazy room breathing in second hand smoke. We are talking about outside, in the fresh air. I read from a particular aggressive poster a few minutes ago that he can smell someone smoking a cigarette, outside from 20 to 30 metres away,, total nonsense of course.

You have to ask yourself,,, is this really about protecting non smokers health or could it be that the stigma has simply gone too far? Be honest about this, don't just go with the flow. If on occasion you pass an inconsiderate smoker who does blow a cloud in your face, well that's impolite, for sure but what damage has it really done to your health? No damage at all.

So, my summary is this,, people who do not smoke have the right to not breath second hand smoke BUT smokers also have the right to smoke if they want to and on occasion whilst smoking outside a non smoker may walk a smoker and get a whiff of tobacco smoke,,, does this really require a law to prevent this?

We all need to really, really careful about how far we allow the nanny state to progress..

For all you non smokers who spit on the floor and write abusive things about smokers I hope you don't drink, and I hope your not fat.. If you are,, well then you are disgusting and they are coming for you next.

Not aggressive, just calling a spade, a spade.

Suck it up princess. Apparently you like sucking in smoke, so try that one on for size.

No aggression, whatsoever.

Who said I smoked?

I don't like to read self righteous buffoons spouting their bigoted, poorly researched drivel to me and others.

Everyone knows smoking is bad for your health but as long as smokers are considerate there are already laws in place to protect against passive smoking. It does not need a "city ban" to deal with inconsiderate smokers, there are other ways.

Your ridiculous claim that you can smell and be effected by the fumes 20 to 30 metres away does little to persuade me, or I suspect any other intelligent and sensible person in your argument.

Wait, just a thought,, you're not a labrador are you?

[neverdie]

Yes, I agree with you Gazzpa, it is all about taking rights away, bit by bit, until you will have to get permission from the authorities to breathe!

Why do they concentrate so much on smoking when drinking is a bigger problem? I wonder if anti-smokers have ever done research on the subject of tobacco or whether, as I am inclined to think, they just believe all the garbage written out there to frighten people. As I always say, the majority of people need a big daddy now to tell them what to do, or not do, and society is becoming more and more intolerant of everything and everybody, they are ignorantly playing the game of the authorities that want to control. If you look back in time, you will find that people were more tolerant and rarely complained about others actions or behaviour as long they were not infringing on theirs.

Where is this all going? Do this, do that, dont do this, dont do that, and the sheeple just follow big daddy until some law will come up that affects them, and then they will complain some more but this time about how they are being affected! We no longer live in a free world because of the intolerant people who back the new system of control, but they do not realise that they will be coming to bang on their door one day and it will be too late for them too!

Some have mentioned car exhausts, planes, etc., so why are authorities not allowing alternative fuel that is readily available since decades, even since Nikolai Teslas days in the early 1900s why not complain about that? In the 1970s, an American created and ran his car on water, yes water, any type of water, tap water, pond water, river water, sea water, just water. This American guy was threatened and told not to tell people or drive his car on water. He refused to listen and was finally murdered and his plans where taken. Others have succumbed to the same fate whether it be on the subject of emissions, medicine, science, etc. You can even run a diesel car on cooking oil. Instead of polluting the atmosphere by throwing away your old and used cooking oil, you can actually filter it and put it in your diesel tank and all that is needed is a thimble-amount of a chemical added to it but, I suppose, intolerant people would not like that either because the roads might smell of cooking oil!

Anyway, if you really want to know, and no doubt most of you dont, tobacco is a medicinal plant that actually helps stimulate the pineal gland in your head amongst other things. It does not cause cancer. The fact is that cancer can be caused by the chemicals tobacco companies put in the cigarettes, just as companies also put such lethal chemicals in your food, in your crops, in your medicine, etc. So, why dont you complain about that, or are you too much of a coward to complain to the authorities about what they are doing and allowing and prefer to pick on the innocent person who has done nothing wrong and is easier to attack? I call it bullying, and if you are one who imagines that cigarette smoke is going to kill you and who no doubt drives a car/motorbike and eats foods full of additives, then you are nothing but a bully, so dont complain when a bully comes to your door! Who are you to decide what people can do or not do anyway?

Now you can enjoy yourselves by writing slandering comments. All I have to say is that I believe in freedom for all. Taking one freedom away is a guideline for taking all freedom away.

What about other peoples rights not to breathe in YOUR second hand cigarette smoke?

I think the scales have been tipped in the smokers direction for too long. If you want to partake, go right ahead but not somewhere,where it may effect someone else.

[GAZZPA]

The hide of the very rude and aggressive poster that wants to tell someone else what they can or cannot smell. The Audasity.

Just because some people choose to dull off their sensories of smell and taste by smoking, they think all the other 'normal' people are the same.

Is this referring to your claim that you can smell a cigarette from 20 to 30 metre's away?

[neverdie]

Really scary stuff..

I suspect that non smokers will see this as a triumph and jump on the bandwagon spewing their hatred for the sub human, filthy beasts who smoke.

This is all ridiculous, completely ridiculous. I do think that smokers should be considerate, there are people who don't want to breath in cigarette fumes, I get that, we all get that. But jus because some smokers are inconsiderate doesn't mean that a law should be passed that so blatantly infringes individual choice.

Now, I am sure there are non smokers who will say "why should I put up with your smoke,, blah, blah blah". But we are not talking about inside a building, in a restaurant, I never complained about that because I understand you don't want to sit in a hazy room breathing in second hand smoke. We are talking about outside, in the fresh air. I read from a particular aggressive poster a few minutes ago that he can smell someone smoking a cigarette, outside from 20 to 30 metres away,, total nonsense of course.

You have to ask yourself,,, is this really about protecting non smokers health or could it be that the stigma has simply gone too far? Be honest about this, don't just go with the flow. If on occasion you pass an inconsiderate smoker who does blow a cloud in your face, well that's impolite, for sure but what damage has it really done to your health? No damage at all.

So, my summary is this,, people who do not smoke have the right to not breath second hand smoke BUT smokers also have the right to smoke if they want to and on occasion whilst smoking outside a non smoker may walk a smoker and get a whiff of tobacco smoke,,, does this really require a law to prevent this?

We all need to really, really careful about how far we allow the nanny state to progress..

For all you non smokers who spit on the floor and write abusive things about smokers I hope you don't drink, and I hope your not fat.. If you are,, well then you are disgusting and they are coming for you next.

Not aggressive, just calling a spade, a spade.

Suck it up princess. Apparently you like sucking in smoke, so try that one on for size.

No aggression, whatsoever.

Who said I smoked?

I don't like to read self righteous buffoons spouting their bigoted, poorly researched drivel to me and others.

Everyone knows smoking is bad for your health but as long as smokers are considerate there are already laws in place to protect against passive smoking. It does not need a "city ban" to deal with inconsiderate smokers, there are other ways.

Your ridiculous claim that you can smell and be effected by the fumes 20 to 30 metres away does little to persuade me, or I suspect any other intelligent and sensible person in your argument.

Wait, just a thought,, you're not a labrador are you?

In your pathetic attempt to try and insult me, you are of course misquoting me. I referred to the wind, but as you try and twist things to suit yourself you just demonstrate what a selfish and inconsiderate person you really are. Read what I said, try to comprehend, obviously the smoke has damaged more than your nose and tongue, you rude arrogant individual (ohh the drama).

Sadly, you are now going to throw down your handbag because the people of Melbourne don't want you running around stinking the place up and dropping your dirty butts everywhere. Seriously, none of this should surprise you, but then again you only ever think about yourself, so I'm not surprised about that.

Please note I said nothing about that aweful pungent smell you omit from you're tobacco stained clothes, hair and body.

[Diddl]

What about other peoples rights not to breathe in YOUR second hand cigarette smoke?

I think the scales have been tipped in the smokers direction for too long. If you want to partake, go right ahead but not somewhere,where it may effect someone else.

Did I say I smoked? Assume, assume, assume, always assuming, only attacks and control!

[neverdie]

The hide of the very rude and aggressive poster that wants to tell someone else what they can or cannot smell. The Audasity.

Just because some people choose to dull off their sensories of smell and taste by smoking, they think all the other 'normal' people are the same.

Is this referring to your claim that you can smell a cigarette from 20 to 30 metre's away?

I can smell your trolling ways and I'm frigging thousands of kilometres from you.

Maybe I am a Labrador......which is still a few rungs above a smoker

[GAZZPA]

Yes, I agree with you Gazzpa, it is all about taking rights away, bit by bit, until you will have to get permission from the authorities to breathe!

Why do they concentrate so much on smoking when drinking is a bigger problem? I wonder if anti-smokers have ever done research on the subject of tobacco or whether, as I am inclined to think, they just believe all the garbage written out there to frighten people. As I always say, the majority of people need a big daddy now to tell them what to do, or not do, and society is becoming more and more intolerant of everything and everybody, they are ignorantly playing the game of the authorities that want to control. If you look back in time, you will find that people were more tolerant and rarely complained about others actions or behaviour as long they were not infringing on theirs.

Where is this all going? Do this, do that, dont do this, dont do that, and the sheeple just follow big daddy until some law will come up that affects them, and then they will complain some more but this time about how they are being affected! We no longer live in a free world because of the intolerant people who back the new system of control, but they do not realise that they will be coming to bang on their door one day and it will be too late for them too!

Some have mentioned car exhausts, planes, etc., so why are authorities not allowing alternative fuel that is readily available since decades, even since Nikolai Teslas days in the early 1900s why not complain about that? In the 1970s, an American created and ran his car on water, yes water, any type of water, tap water, pond water, river water, sea water, just water. This American guy was threatened and told not to tell people or drive his car on water. He refused to listen and was finally murdered and his plans where taken. Others have succumbed to the same fate whether it be on the subject of emissions, medicine, science, etc. You can even run a diesel car on cooking oil. Instead of polluting the atmosphere by throwing away your old and used cooking oil, you can actually filter it and put it in your diesel tank and all that is needed is a thimble-amount of a chemical added to it but, I suppose, intolerant people would not like that either because the roads might smell of cooking oil!

Anyway, if you really want to know, and no doubt most of you dont, tobacco is a medicinal plant that actually helps stimulate the pineal gland in your head amongst other things. It does not cause cancer. The fact is that cancer can be caused by the chemicals tobacco companies put in the cigarettes, just as companies also put such lethal chemicals in your food, in your crops, in your medicine, etc. So, why dont you complain about that, or are you too much of a coward to complain to the authorities about what they are doing and allowing and prefer to pick on the innocent person who has done nothing wrong and is easier to attack? I call it bullying, and if you are one who imagines that cigarette smoke is going to kill you and who no doubt drives a car/motorbike and eats foods full of additives, then you are nothing but a bully, so dont complain when a bully comes to your door! Who are you to decide what people can do or not do anyway?

Now you can enjoy yourselves by writing slandering comments. All I have to say is that I believe in freedom for all. Taking one freedom away is a guideline for taking all freedom away.

What about other peoples rights not to breathe in YOUR second hand cigarette smoke?

I think the scales have been tipped in the smokers direction for too long. If you want to partake, go right ahead but not somewhere,where it may effect someone else.

There are already laws in place to protect people from second hand smoke. And by and large I am ok with that and most smokers from what I see comply.

This topic is about a whole city enforcing a ban on smoking and the argument is that it is going too far, what about the right of the smokers to have a cigarette, considerately and in line with the current laws? I guess you don't care about that because it doesn't effect you but how far do you want the nanny state to go?

Why can't you see the bigger picture. We have to be careful how much freedom we are willing to give away before we can no longer do anything without fear of repercussions.

Wake up, you are already protected against passive smoking.

[neverdie]

What about other peoples rights not to breathe in YOUR second hand cigarette smoke?

I think the scales have been tipped in the smokers direction for too long. If you want to partake, go right ahead but not somewhere,where it may effect someone else.

Did I say I smoked? Assume, assume, assume, always assuming, only attacks and control!

My mistake, please accept my most heartfelt apology. I assumed you smoked but you're just a smokers apologist. Not sure what's worse.

[GAZZPA]

The hide of the very rude and aggressive poster that wants to tell someone else what they can or cannot smell. The Audasity.

Just because some people choose to dull off their sensories of smell and taste by smoking, they think all the other 'normal' people are the same.

Is this referring to your claim that you can smell a cigarette from 20 to 30 metre's away?

I can smell your trolling ways and I'm frigging thousands of kilometres from you.

Maybe I am a Labrador......which is still a few rungs above a smoker

"Trolling ways"? I am responding to your post, just because I don't agree with you and I am making my point doesn't mean I am trolling.

You are not fit to have a sensible debate about this due to your obvious bigotry.

And I suspect you are a labrador, you are happy to jump through hoops for anyone that tells you.

[neverdie]

There are already laws in place to protect people from second hand smoke. And by and large I am ok with that and most smokers from what I see comply.

This topic is about a whole city enforcing a ban on smoking and the argument is that it is going too far, what about the right of the smokers to have a cigarette, considerately and in line with the current laws? I guess you don't care about that because it doesn't effect you but how far do you want the nanny state to go?

Why can't you see the bigger picture. We have to be careful how much freedom we are willing to give away before we can no longer do anything without fear of repercussions.

Wake up, you are already protected against passive smoking.

Priceless, for years, decades, I've had to put up with smokers and now you want consideration from me.

I've been abused by smokers when I've requested they don't smoke in my presence and now you want me to care when you come to the smoke free city. Ok, I'm a reasonable guy, I'm sure you agree.

FYI, I do care and I agree you need somewhere to smoke. They need to build smoking rooms for you all. Ones with filters to help filter the air and keep it inside the room. They should fund this through increased taxes on cigarettes. Would you mind disrobing and showering on the way out? It really is an aweful pungent smell, I understand you don't notice it.

Good luck with your lung tumors.

[neverdie]

The hide of the very rude and aggressive poster that wants to tell someone else what they can or cannot smell. The Audasity.

Just because some people choose to dull off their sensories of smell and taste by smoking, they think all the other 'normal' people are the same.

Is this referring to your claim that you can smell a cigarette from 20 to 30 metre's away?

I can smell your trolling ways and I'm frigging thousands of kilometres from you.

Maybe I am a Labrador......which is still a few rungs above a smoker

"Trolling ways"? I am responding to your post, just because I don't agree with you and I am making my point doesn't mean I am trolling.

You are not fit to have a sensible debate about this due to your obvious bigotry.

And I suspect you are a labrador, you are happy to jump through hoops for anyone that tells you.

No, I'm only speaking for myself. Not jumping through hoops, I just thought your constant and pathetic attempts at misquoting me were a trolling attempt.

Anyway Gazza, I've got to run, the pleasure has been all yours. capiche?

[GAZZPA]

Seems I am not alone in seeing the stupidity of this plan.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/16/melbourne-may-be-the-first-smoke-free-city-but-at-what-price

[tw25rw]

What about banning all the cars and motorbikes. They let off fumes as well dont they. ? Oh yes planes traveling above, what about them??

It's a common suggestion by smokers Lee, but of course the need to get real.

Over the years there has been an ever tightening of the vehicle emission laws which has made great improvements on what motorcycles, cars and trucks pump out.

Smokers however (not all but most) will walk down the street and around the place chuffing away, blowing their obnoxious fumes everywhere. You can't escape it, as you pass office buildings and so forth there's literally thousands of these dopes applying their trade, the don't give a toss about anyone else, just their own dirty little habit. I am certain most don't realise how much it affects some people. On a relative still day with the slights of breeze I can smell the <deleted> at 20-30 metres and it's not pleasant.

Of course the smokers will chime in now abusing me about their right to smoke without any consideration about my right not to smoke their filthy dirty trail. My wife has a rare form of rhinitis and cigarette smoke can result is quite severe conditions (yes there are other triggers) so she actively avoids people smoking in the streets. We often change our walking route to avoid these a.holes.

I am happy for others to smoke and there should be designated locations where this can be done and these smoke houses could be funded by further increasing taxes on these cancer sticks. In reality, it's a filthy dirty habit which has proven ill health effects and if you want to slowly kill yourself using this method, please do so where it won't effect others.

Anyway, the tide is turning, slowly these disgusting indivuals are being moved along. Good riddance, I would almost consider moving to Melbourne as a result of this.

One final point, it simply amazes me the amount of smokers who discard their butts onto the ground, for some reason beyond me they don't see it as littering, but it's repulsive.

Your abusive references to smokers has removed all credibility of your argument. I quote "literally thousands of these dope", "these disgusting individuals", "blowing their obnoxious fumes".

Also, smelling smoke from 20 to 30 metres away, complete rubbish.

There has already been tightening of smoking in public places indoors (which i agree with), there is no need to create a law to make an entire city smoke free.

This is all going too far. Sadly I suspect you don't have the ability to think objectively about this topic.

Neverdie is right. They are disgusting. As are public urinators/defecators, people who spit on the footpath, people who put chewing gum on seats, people who put their feet on train seats, people who scrawl imbecilic 'tags' on other people's property etc etc. I am proud that this move is happening in my home city as an example to the world.