Topic: Smoking ban poll

[Baccy Man]

Jeannine I would agree with several of the negatives you pointed out.

Dangerous to your health.
I agree entirely there is only 1 brand of cigarettes that I have ever seen marketed responsibly you can see a transcript of their own health warning here http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=908350 this was in addition to the government heath warnings.

Dangerous to others around.
There is no scientific evidence to backup this claim.

Responsible for small birth weight.
Only if pregnant women smoke, many women give up whilst they are pregnant. It doesn't give me an incentive to give up as the chances of me becoming a pregnant woman are spectacularly low.

Costs tax payers millions in healthcare.
Smokers are tax payers & they pay an addition £7.5 billion in taxes on their cigarettes this more than covers the £1.5 billion to cover the heathcare costs. Although smokers are now at risk of being refused treatment for routine procedures unless they stop smoking for at least 1 month by Leicester City West Primary Care Trust & Norfolk Primary Care Trust has already taken the step of removing smokers from waiting lists.  I don't suppose it will take long for all other heathcare trusts to follow suit.
It would also pay for the littering mentioned by EJ & SnooziSuzi although littering is a seperate issue & I would not have a problem with on the spot fines for dropping cigarette butts as long as suitable bins for cigarette butts were made availiable (they are not in my area). When I am out I have a small sealed ashtray attached to my keyring to eliminate the need for littering.

Causes fires which cause deaths and financial grief.
That is irresponsible behaviour all smokers should ensure their cigarettes are extinguished before discarding them.

Addictive.
I agree completely but people make an informed decision about wether they take up smoking or not.

Low income families spend grocery money on them.
This would be completely irresponsible behaviour. I know loads of people on the dole who smoke but they always spend their money feeding/clothing their children, paying for scool trips etc.. before even thinking about spending it on cigarettes. Parents who drink heavily or use illegal drugs would be another matter though.

We are passing all of the above onto our kids.
Peoples kids are bombarded with information telling them not to smoke if they choose to ignore it & start smoking anyway how is that the parents fault.

[e4e5Kt-f3]

I gree that pubs and bars should be treated differently. These are not places for children although I can foresee that this new law will lead to a more kindergarten environment. ugh.
Some or many of you mistake a bar for an eating establishment which many old pubs have turned into. They are more akin to continental types.
Bars are for drinking.... not television, not meals, not children....
The irony of this new law is that not only does the `for`fraternity have no choice but the `against ` don`t either.
Insidious populist democracy.

[Larkshall]

I was apprenticed as a decorator and can remember seeing painters spewing their guts up when washing off pub ceilings because of the nicotine. When I became the boss I would not take on any pub redecorating, always priced it so high that we didn't get it. I used to give 5% discount for inside work in the winter + 5% for pensioners.

[cazy]

I’ve been following this thread without comment because most people are doing such a grand job; however, I can only keep my mouth shut for so long,

A few of my experiences, observations and thoughts.

My youngest son had an asthma attack at two years old, was rushed into hospital and admitted for five days.  His dad was a sixty a day man.

Three years of medication and numerous similar episodes followed.

Ex-husband traded me in for a younger model. (He came crawling back, was refused entry)  No more medication, no more asthma attacks.

My beloved Granddad smoked all his life and died of stomach cancer at eighty two?

My father died at seventy six of lung cancer, a heavy smoker, would give anything to have him around now.   Nineteen years on, mum still alive, non smoker.

I went to my best mate’s husband’s funeral last year, fifty two, smoked all his life, died of lung cancer.

Another mate, heavy smoker, is panicking now because she won’t be able to smoke when she goes to her local, yet she spent two hundred and fifty ponds on hypnotherapy last year in an effort to quit.

My eldest son smokes, always trying to give up.

My two step-sons smoke.  Every time they pay us a visit I hear ‘next time I see you I will have given up’.  I have never said a word about it to either of them.

Do ‘some’ smokers’ secretly want to stop and is part of their bravado down to fear of failure, “me thinks he doth protest too much”

I too have lung damage, contracted TB when travelling in my thirties and a smoky atmosphere makes me seriously ill.  I haven’t been to a pub for years, missed a lot of night out with my mates.  I would have been able to go if I’d had the option of a non-smoking room.

When I have a party most people congregate in the conservatory, a designated smoking area, full of smokers and non smokers alike, but I do keep the French doors open.

We have all accepted non smoking in restaurants and child friendly establishments which I think is a good thing, but there must be freedom of choice and some things need a little time. Slowly slowly catchy monkey!

We are all getting a bit fed up with the ‘nanny state’, EEC directives etc. and as a nation becoming increasingly insecure.  I think for some people this law is just another strike at the very essence of our heritage, the British way of life and our freedom, that’s why I do have a little sympathy for the guy who likes his pint with a cigarette.  However, I wish the dreaded weed had never been discovered and John Rolfe had stuck to his back garden growing roses.

[Jeannine]

I DO believe there is evidence to show it is harmful to others.

I did not blame the parents if their children smoke..the WE was meant to represent a country who allows it , I don't believe I mentioned parents,same goes for the pregant Mums, if it was banned they wouldn't have the choice, therefore their children unborn children would be protected. I also know of many families where drugs and cigarettes DO come before food for kids.

I believe as much as possible in free speech and freedom of choice but we do not allow folks to smoke opium or shoot heroin either, the government has taken that decision away form them ,had they not it would still be legal  too. I think there is enough data to show it is just as dangerous albeit in a different way.

XX Jeannine

[Baccy Man]

I DO believe there is evidence to show it is harmful to others.

I have done an awful lot of reading on the all aspects of tobacco from growing/manufacturing techniques, ritual uses, health effects, the financial side of it etc... I could quote a list of the 600 or so declared additives that are used in commercial tobacco but I would be unable to quote anything that demonstrates secondary smoke is significantly harmful which has not been disproved elsewhere & yes I have looked. I have never disputed the fact that tobacco is harmful just that I believe it is only harmful for the user.
If anyone believes the propaganda that is their decision I am rapidly losing interest in the subject.

I did not blame the parents if their children smoke..the WE was meant to represent a country who allows it , I don't believe I mentioned parents,same goes for the pregant Mums, if it was banned they wouldn't have the choice, therefore their children unborn children would be protected. I also know of many families where drugs and cigarettes DO come before food for kids.

Obviously I misinterpreted your comment "We are passing all of the above onto our kids." but I still believe people have enough information given to them to make an informed decision on wether to take up smoking or not.
As for cigarettes coming before kids that is neglect & is therefore a matter for social services & the NSPCC it should not happen.

I believe as much as possible in free speech and freedom of choice but we do not allow folks to smoke opium or shoot heroin either, the government has taken that decision away form them ,had they not it would still be legal  too. I think there is enough data to show it is just as dangerous albeit in a different way.

As for the comparison to opium & heroin I would say tobacco is more addictive & more dangerous to the user there are an awful lot more tobacco related deaths than there are opium/heroin related deaths, some of the additives legally put into commercially produced tobacco are probably much worse than anything heroin would be cut with. However this poll is about the ban on smoking in public places it is not about wether using  tobacco products will kill you or not the only anwer to that would be yes. If it was banned completely it would just go underground the same as all the other (now illegal) drugs have so people could still get hold of it the prices would go up drastically so people would start committing crimes to pay for it. The revenue it currently generates would be lost so there would be no money to deal with the problems it causes (unless the government decides to stop blowing up the middle east & starts using that money to resolve the problems in the UK instead). In my opinion an outright ban would do just as much harm as it would do good just in different ways.

[SnooziSuzi]

I still believe people have enough information given to them to make an informed decision on wether to take up smoking or not.

People do have the information and have done for years, but the fact is that they still choose to take it up and cause others to be affected by it. 

72% of people have voted that the ban should have been put in place, however only 27.1% of others could say either No or that the business owner should decide.  This forum is a great cross section of society as we have old and young, male and female, smokers, non-smokers and ex smokers.  Really the only thing that we all have in common is that we have a love of gardening, so can we please put this one to bed now and get back to being friends :'(

[Baccy Man]

SnooziSuzi I only started this poll after you requested it in the going for a smoke thread.

It would be interesting to have a poll on this subject to see truely how divided the lines are on this subject... anyone care to start one?

If you are satisfied you know how divided the lines are on the subject now that 60 people have voted & some of those people have interacted in debating the subject then I suggest we get Dan to lock the thread & it can disappear into obscurity & nobody will be able to drag it up again.

[SnooziSuzi]

I know you did, and thank you for doing it (didn't have the guts myself!)

It was an interestng thread with some opposing and valid comments. 
I'd be happy for the thread to be locked, I think everyone has had their say and gotten a lot of their chests. 

Thanks again for everyone's frank and honest comments  :D

[keef]

I still believe people have enough information given to them to make an informed decision on wether to take up smoking or not.

People do have the information and have done for years, but the fact is that they still choose to take it up and cause others to be affected by it. 

72% of people have voted that the ban should have been put in place, however only 27.1% of others could say either No or that the business owner should decide.  This forum is a great cross section of society as we have old and young, male and female, smokers, non-smokers and ex smokers.  Really the only thing that we all have in common is that we have a love of gardening, so can we please put this one to bed now and get back to being friends :'(

As i pointed out - this forum probably is'nt a good cross section on general pub gowers though.

[Jeannine]

Get back to being friends..............oh gosh, did we ever stop??

XX Jeannine

[Froglegs]

I still believe people have enough information given to them to make an informed decision on wether to take up smoking or not.

People do have the information and have done for years, but the fact is that they still choose to take it up and cause others to be affected by it. 

72% of people have voted that the ban should have been put in place, however only 27.1% of others could say either No or that the business owner should decide.  This forum is a great cross section of society as we have old and young, male and female, smokers, non-smokers and ex smokers.  Really the only thing that we all have in common is that we have a love of gardening, so can we please put this one to bed now and get back to being friends :'(

As i pointed out - this forum probably is'nt a good cross section on general pub gowers though.

 ;D ;D.....Why's that then Keef. ;)

[keef]

  ::) read the other thread..

[redimp]

Not reading most of this thread cos can't be bothered with most of the arguments seemingly repeated throughout.  I recently gave up smoking and timed it so I would be coming off the patches shortly after the ban came into play.  Therefore I have had the benefit of regular CO checks.  When i smoked I had a CO level of 20.  As a non-smoker who lives in an urban environment I have a CO level of 4.  The day I gave up smoking I had a CO test at about 10am and I was already down to 12 having been in the pub the night before - last f*g about about 12pm, so in 10 hours, I had cleaned 8 something or other units of CO out my system.  About four weeks in of being fagless, I went to the pub (still in the days of smoking) and did not have a cigarette 8)  It was a Friday.  I left the pub at the usual time and the following morning, went for my appointment and the Sad Addicts Clinic.  My CO reading was again back up to 9 :o  Bearing in mind I would have lost about the same amount over night, that meant I had a CO reading of about 17 based purely on passive smoking.  A smokers level of CO is harmful on its own without the associated tars, benzines etc so don't anybody lecture me that passive smoking is harmless. I have personal, documented and recent proof that says otherwise.

[Mrs Ava]

Here's a question for you....correct me if I am wrong, but it is now against the law to smoke in any enclosed public space/workplace.  Tonight we watched Heartbeat and old Alf Ventris was sitting in the Aidensfield Arms enjoying a good old smoke.  Yes, legal and okay in the 60's, and potentially filmed before the ban started, but does this mean from now on we will not see people smoking on TV programs and Films?  Dot Cotton in Eastenders for example (I assume she is still in it) ? I don't watch any other soaps apart from Heartbeat.  :-\

[Hyacinth]

EJ, I'd reckon that any series set in the Houses of Parliament (remember Yes Minister?) or in prison (Porrige?) or psychiatric units - oh! I forgot, I mentioned that already under 1)  :P....would have to include smoking if it was to portray real life...

Question...anyone know? Smoking allowed in solders' canteens in war zones? ::)

[Heldi]

If solders are soldering whilst in their canteens in war zones  ???  :D  I think they'd be very silly to smoke at the same time and how do they take a draw of a cig with their masks on...or drink a cuppa for that matter?  :D

[cazy]

You can't do the garden when it's raining, your fags go out.

Please do not drop f*g ends down the toilet, it makes them soggy and hard to light.