Bangkok warns smoking in markets is illegal

[webfact]

ANTI-SMOKING CAMPAIGN
Bangkok warns smoking in markets is illegal

BANGKOK: -- Bangkok Metropolitan Administration has warned smokers not to smoke in markets or to face a fine of not more than Bt2,000, said Bangkok's deputy governor Pussadee Tamtai on Wednesday.

In Bangkok, there are altogether 338 markets that smoking is prohibited. She said the markets that failed to follow the anti-smoking laws are entitled to a fine of not more than Bt20,000.

She was speaking at an opening ceremony of a campaign for the markets to be free of smoking.

ThaiHealth Office had distributed pamphlets, stickers and banners to the markets through district offices in Bangkok. However a survey earlier this year showed that only 20.32 per cent of respondents saw them. Meanwhile 73.36 per cent witnessed smoking in the markets.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Bangkok-warns-smoking-in-markets-is-illegal-30245018.html


-- The Nation 2014-10-08

[smileplur]

If you have ever walked through some of the larger markets of Bangkok like Klong Toey's famous wet market, the smell of smoke would be akin to fresh air. I would like to have one lit cigarette in each nostril as I enter the market because the stench is so strong it makes my stomach turn. Basic hygiene should be one of their main goals ... smoking should be secondary!

[Costas2008]

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

[rhythmworx]

It's not too bad, if your at the market and really need a smoke you could roll up a squid and smoke that.

[BigBadGeordie]

Well so pleased they are hitting the MAJOR problems facing Thailand first!

[maprao]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

You can always go live in the UK or California where your wish is already a reality. In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

No heavy smoker would make a comment like that. Ah I bit lol

[spidermike007]

In Koh Samui there has never been any effort to uphold any of the smoking laws. If I walk into a restaurant on Samui, and ask for the no smoking section, the reply I usually get it "oh no problem, you can smoke anywhere". As is typical with the authorities in Samui, there are none. Or the ones who are on the island just do not care. Ambivalence is the best you can hope for. Law and order. Forget about it. Of course, the police on Samui are some of the least effective law enforcement officers you will find anywhere in the world. Some like that. Some of us would like a tiny modicum of law and order. Not UK or US style for sure. Just something.

[robblok]

Well so pleased they are hitting the MAJOR problems facing Thailand first!

Yes because these people have the power to make decisions about the whole Thailand. It is after all BMA and they really have mandate to rule the whole of Thailand.

Please think before you type.

[robblok]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

You can always go live in the UK or California where your wish is already a reality. In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

No heavy smoker would make a comment like that. Ah I bit lol

Or you could accept that smokers are a hunted species right now and rightly so their habits have caused cancer to many a bystander. Thailand is just catching up with the rest of the world.

[hawker9000]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

You can always go live in the UK or California where your wish is already a reality. In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

No heavy smoker would make a comment like that. Ah I bit lol

Or you could accept that smokers are a hunted species right now and rightly so their habits have caused cancer to many a bystander. Thailand is just catching up with the rest of the world.

Accept? Nope. Lol. They think it's some kind of human right to smoke wherever & whenever they please; non-smokers have no rights. (Oh, and BTW, the whole smoking<>cancer thing is just a big global conspiracy... Smoking is actually good for you!) "Ban cars; NOT tobacco!!!"

Thailand is slowly but surely catching up though - you're right. Every few months another baby step in the right direction.

Edited October 9, 2014 by hawker9000

[Jonmarleesco]

'... the markets ... are entitled to a fine of not more than Bt20,000 ...' Entitled to a fine? As in: the fine is a privilege?

[Halion]

Have to admit that all this anti smoking bullshit really gets up my nose. I am not advocating for smoking,I am simply saying that those in Bangkok are living in a highly polluted environment from the endless emissions from the traffic along with the dirt and dust that prevails all over this city and the rancid canals and klongs and that is before you even touch on the cooking stenches and toxic fumes from the wood fired BBQ's. Far too many people today just jump on a convenient bandwagon with little or no basic knowledge or priorities. Just as much carnage done via alcohol and driving,the casual sex industry,lack of proper parenting and arrogant attitudes.

[robblok]

Have to admit that all this anti smoking bullshit really gets up my nose. I am not advocating for smoking,I am simply saying that those in Bangkok are living in a highly polluted environment from the endless emissions from the traffic along with the dirt and dust that prevails all over this city and the rancid canals and klongs and that is before you even touch on the cooking stenches and toxic fumes from the wood fired BBQ's. Far too many people today just jump on a convenient bandwagon with little or no basic knowledge or priorities. Just as much carnage done via alcohol and driving,the casual sex industry,lack of proper parenting and arrogant attitudes.

So your reasoning is because its already bad its ok to make it worse. Hmmm kinda like giving someone who is down a few extra kicks in the gut because he is already in pain.

[Andre0720]

Have to admit that all this anti smoking bullshit really gets up my nose. I am not advocating for smoking,I am simply saying that those in Bangkok are living in a highly polluted environment from the endless emissions from the traffic along with the dirt and dust that prevails all over this city and the rancid canals and klongs and that is before you even touch on the cooking stenches and toxic fumes from the wood fired BBQ's. Far too many people today just jump on a convenient bandwagon with little or no basic knowledge or priorities. Just as much carnage done via alcohol and driving,the casual sex industry,lack of proper parenting and arrogant attitudes.

Typically,

A college or University graduate who smokes, will just keep on smoking and keep quiet about it.

No way on earth anyone can logically justify inhaling poison...

[rgs2001uk]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

You can always go live in the UK or California where your wish is already a reality. In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

No heavy smoker would make a comment like that. Ah I bit lol

In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

I cant vouch for the veracity of your statement, but will take your word for it, un effin believable.

The yoghurt and brown rice eaters should head to Kalifornia or Singapore.

Coming to a country with a live and let live attitude, 2 week millionaires the majority of them, first to complain about laws and the Facist State, never hear them complain about bloody joss stciks or those manky smelling mossie coils, that probably do more harm than a bit of second hand smoke.

Strange how we never hear them complaing about closing down all the "titty bars"?

And before all our high and mighty NON smokers jump on their high wagon and go off on one, I am a NON smoker, put that in yer pipe.

[Diplomatico]

Accept? Nope. Lol. They think it's some kind of human right to smoke wherever & whenever they please; non-smokers have no rights. (Oh, and BTW, the whole smoking<>cancer thing is just a big global conspiracy... Smoking is actually good for you!) "Ban cars; NOT tobacco!!!"

Thailand is slowly but surely catching up though - you're right. Every few months another baby step in the right direction.

Ha, ha. Project much?

Most places you go these days it's the anti-smoking zealots (hey, buddy) who think they own the world. Does anyone really believe that one shouldn't be able to engage in legal behavior on one's own property?

Really, do the non-smokers have more right to a sidewalk than smokers?

No and no.

[BigBadGeordie]

Well so pleased they are hitting the MAJOR problems facing Thailand first!

Yes because these people have the power to make decisions about the whole Thailand. It is after all BMA and they really have mandate to rule the whole of Thailand.

Please think before you type.

The problems facing Bangkok are in the main, with some specific exceptions, not unique to Bangkok, therefore I feel my comment is valid.

I am also sorry if I have offended your delicate sensibilities, I shall now go and sit in the corner with the other naughty boys.

[shirtless]

Smoking is a bad habit , but why stop at cigarettes why not ban cars motorbikes and other polluting machines ,

[OLDAUSSIE]

If your in the market you can just smoke a Kipper,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[robblok]

Well so pleased they are hitting the MAJOR problems facing Thailand first!

Yes because these people have the power to make decisions about the whole Thailand. It is after all BMA and they really have mandate to rule the whole of Thailand.

Please think before you type.

The problems facing Bangkok are in the main, with some specific exceptions, not unique to Bangkok, therefore I feel my comment is valid.

I am also sorry if I have offended your delicate sensibilities, I shall now go and sit in the corner with the other naughty boys.

The BMA is what this is about.. they are not the people who rule Thailand they can't tackle big problems its not their job. Not my sensibilities just logic. I know its rare thing these days.

You are asking the people in charge to do the job of the government of the country. Now your comments would be valid if this was something that came from the general. In this case its just city hall they have a totally different job description.

So your whole comments are invalid.

As for sitting in the corner.. if you like stuff like that by all means but not on my account please.

[BigBadGeordie]

Well so pleased they are hitting the MAJOR problems facing Thailand first!

Yes because these people have the power to make decisions about the whole Thailand. It is after all BMA and they really have mandate to rule the whole of Thailand.

Please think before you type.

The problems facing Bangkok are in the main, with some specific exceptions, not unique to Bangkok, therefore I feel my comment is valid.

I am also sorry if I have offended your delicate sensibilities, I shall now go and sit in the corner with the other naughty boys.

The BMA is what this is about.. they are not the people who rule Thailand they can't tackle big problems its not their job. Not my sensibilities just logic. I know its rare thing these days.

You are asking the people in charge to do the job of the government of the country. Now your comments would be valid if this was something that came from the general. In this case its just city hall they have a totally different job description.

So your whole comments are invalid.

As for sitting in the corner.. if you like stuff like that by all means but not on my account please.

Was unaware Bangkok is not part ot Thailand, as this is the case of course your comments are correct. Bangkoks problems are not Thailands problems, I was under the misaprehension that it was the capital city, I stand corrected.

Also if the cannot "tackle big problems" &lt;deleted&gt; are they doing running a major metropolitan city?

[robblok]

The problems facing Bangkok are in the main, with some specific exceptions, not unique to Bangkok, therefore I feel my comment is valid.

I am also sorry if I have offended your delicate sensibilities, I shall now go and sit in the corner with the other naughty boys.

The BMA is what this is about.. they are not the people who rule Thailand they can't tackle big problems its not their job. Not my sensibilities just logic. I know its rare thing these days.

You are asking the people in charge to do the job of the government of the country. Now your comments would be valid if this was something that came from the general. In this case its just city hall they have a totally different job description.

So your whole comments are invalid.

As for sitting in the corner.. if you like stuff like that by all means but not on my account please.

Was unaware Bangkok is not part ot Thailand, as this is the case of course your comments are correct. Bangkoks problems are not Thailands problems, I was under the misaprehension that it was the capital city, I stand corrected.

Also if the cannot "tackle big problems" <deleted> are they doing running a major metropolitan city?

Your obviously not well educated or deliberately trying to not understand it.

A goverment leads Thailand.. they go after the bigger problems

BMA (bangkok metropolitan area) is like a city council, they only have stuff like traffic, local planning that kind of things as tasks. So its exactly the thing they have to do.. smoking.. littering ect. Not large things like the unrest in the south the corruption there ect. Those are governmental affairs and are on a totally different level.

That is why your comment is invalid. They are doing exactly what it says in their job-description.

[BigBadGeordie]

The problems facing Bangkok are in the main, with some specific exceptions, not unique to Bangkok, therefore I feel my comment is valid.

I am also sorry if I have offended your delicate sensibilities, I shall now go and sit in the corner with the other naughty boys.

The BMA is what this is about.. they are not the people who rule Thailand they can't tackle big problems its not their job. Not my sensibilities just logic. I know its rare thing these days.

You are asking the people in charge to do the job of the government of the country. Now your comments would be valid if this was something that came from the general. In this case its just city hall they have a totally different job description.

So your whole comments are invalid.

As for sitting in the corner.. if you like stuff like that by all means but not on my account please.

Was unaware Bangkok is not part ot Thailand, as this is the case of course your comments are correct. Bangkoks problems are not Thailands problems, I was under the misaprehension that it was the capital city, I stand corrected.

Also if the cannot "tackle big problems" are they doing running a major metropolitan city?

Your obviously not well educated or deliberately trying to not understand it.

A goverment leads Thailand.. they go after the bigger problems

BMA (bangkok metropolitan area) is like a city council, they only have stuff like traffic, local planning that kind of things as tasks. So its exactly the thing they have to do.. smoking.. littering ect. Not large things like the unrest in the south the corruption there ect. Those are governmental affairs and are on a totally different level.

That is why your comment is invalid. They are doing exactly what it says in their job-description.

And you my friend are a patronising fool

[maprao]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If your in the market you can just smoke a Kipper,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, alt=cheesy.gif>

or smoke a sausage!!

On a serious note I work in a country where you can still smoke everywhere. Including shopping malls although I feel uncomfortable doing so.

I fly through a country that still has smoking lounges next to the bar.

But you are right we are a hunted species. I turned down an excellent job in Europe no smoking during working hours! (that should open a can of worms)

I hope I can retire to my her little piece Thailand before these small little freedoms are removed from my existence.

Edited October 11, 2014 by maprao

[nisakiman]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't find anything wrong with that.

Hope at the end they will ban smoking from everywhere.

And I am a heavy smoker.

You can always go live in the UK or California where your wish is already a reality. In CA you can't even smoke in your own condo.

No heavy smoker would make a comment like that. Ah I bit lol

Or you could accept that smokers are a hunted species right now and rightly so their habits have caused cancer to many a bystander. Thailand is just catching up with the rest of the world.

That is complete and utter tosh. You've obviously been thoroughly indoctrinated with the anti-smoker propaganda. But don't feel bad about it, robblok. Millions of people have been gulled in the same way, including the media and all the politicians (well, they live in a parallel universe anyway) who have enacted all the economically disastrous and socially divisive smoking bans at the behest of the fanatical anti-smoking zealots.

"Although numerous studies seeking to find strong (or any) evidence of a link between SHS (secondhand smoke, or “passive smoking”) and lung cancer have failed to find such, the popular wisdom (shared by most scientists) is that SHS is indeed a cause of lung cancer. One reason for this widespread mythology is the failure of news media — both general and scientific — to take note of these studies."

http://acsh.org/2013/12/two-stories-one-link-found-secondhand-smoke-lung-cancer-one-seems-care/

"A large-scale study found no clear link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer..."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/12/12/study-finds-no-link-between-secondhand-smoke-and-cancer/

"THE world's leading health organisation has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect."

http://web.archive.org/web/20021128202555/http:/www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/03/08/wtob08.html

If you only listen to (and believe) fanatics who are committed to a warped ideological agenda, then you are bound to entertain some pretty kooky ideas; ideas like a whiff of cigarette smoke causing cancer. If you actually engaged your brain and directed just a tad of commonsense towards this claim (that SHS is somehow dangerous), you might come up with things like 'but I thought the first rule of toxicology was that the dose makes the poison?", or "well how come back in the 1940s and 1950s when nearly everyone smoked everywhere, lung cancer was much, much less prevalent (per 100,000) than it is now?". You know, the sort of critical thinking that we used to be taught in junior school and were expected to deploy in higher education, rather than just accepting unquestioningly what any Tom, Dick or Harry says. Particularly if that Tom, Dick or Harry is a member of a fanatical, agenda driven group of zealots.

Edited October 11, 2014 by nisakiman

[hawker9000]

Hard to believe there are actually people who believe smoking is not hazardous to your health. Fortunately, as vocal as they strive so mightily (and in vain) to be, they obviously & fortunately don't control the narrative that is making it increasingly more difficult to smoke in public, and more expensive to smoke at all. I can't imagine a more foregone conclusion, as slow & incremental as the progress toward it is. Nor can I imagine one that has anything less to do with all the distractions & obfuscations smokers try & raise everytime some new tax or restriction causes the subject to come up. It's like watching hamsters on a wheel.

Edited October 11, 2014 by hawker9000

[robblok]

And you my friend are a patronising fool

The last resort of those who lost an argument.. they attack the messenger instead of the message.

Its so simple, BMA = Bangkok Metropolitan Area, with a similar job description as city hall, meaning things of transportation, rules in the city and stuff.

Government = the one in charge going over governing Thailand and big its major challenges and problems.

So it seems the BMA is acting within its job description and your comment about big problems in invalid.

Instead of accepting that you are wrong you try to attack the messenger.

Just the things a big bad anything would do.