Smoking establishments - Debate, not abuse.

[Guest]

Workers health in public buildings was one of the main reasons the smoking ban was made law, not the request of non smokers.

 

Smoking is a hobby which is addictive. For decades that addiction has spoilt the enjoyment of others.

 

The majority of the public support the ban.

 

The best thing is to keep the addiction in private, it really is the best for everyone.

 

1 - You're quite correct - but nothing will change in that respect - the only people employed would be people who smoke anyway?

 

2- Quite correct, it is addictive but we don't ban other things which are addictive.

The smoking addiction is no longer spoiling anything for anyone and will stay that way.

 

3 - Why is it best that it should it be done in private? - drinking isn't done in private and there are many addicted to drink.

With my suggestion, that addiction will be undertaken in the company of like minded people with the same addiction.

 

How come you get to be the one who decides what is "best for everyone"?

I presume you wouldn't visit one of these smoking establishments so why should it bother you anyway.

I don't go in brothels so I don't care what happens inside them - why is smoking different?

I think we are quickly proving that all this anti-smoking hysteria is not because we are a problem to non-smokers but purely and simply aimed at spoiling smokers pleasure.

[wellyman]

No we dont, most smokers respect those that would prefer a smoke free enviroment and that is understood, so give those of us who do smoke a bit of slack.

Long before the smoking ban shops,cinemas,restaurants, buses, taxis, hairdressers, aircrafts, offices and factories was not allowed and we as smokers are not asking for those places to be returned to smoking status.

I am not sure that if we had dedicated smoking rooms in pubs that we would need the following services, meter readers(that would take place at the point of entry of the incoming mains supply), delivery drivers (not sure the smoking room would be in the cellar), licence inspectors (they would inspect out of hours), firemen (If they are attending a fire there are more problems than smokers), policemen (only if they are there to arrest a smoker) and finally a cleaner (well if the site is not cleaned before oppeing time that is bad management)

 

All in All you are talking a load of the brown stuff. sorry please excuse me I have to go I have a take away at the back door, but as I have been smoking at the back door I have to walk out in the snow from the front door to the back door to collect my delivery.

 

And yes we have 6 inches of snow. Go and have a common sence injection and try and listen to what people are trying to say.

 

What makes you think you are the spokesperson for all the UK's smokers? Have you asked the other 10 million?

[SnailyBoy]

1 - You're quite correct - but nothing will change in that respect - the only people employed would be people who smoke anyway.

 

2- Quite correct, it is addictive but we don't ban other things which are addictive.

The smoking addiction is no longer spoiling anything for anyone and will stay that way.

 

3 - Why is it best that it should it be done in private?

drinking isn't done in private and there are many addicted to drink.

With my suggestion, that addiction will be undertaken in the company of

like minded people with the same addiction.

 

How come you get to be the one who decides what is "best for everyone"?

I presume you wouldn't visit one of these smoking establishments so why should it bother you anyway.

I don't go in brothels so I don't care what happens inside them - why is smoking different?

I think we are quickly proving that all this anti-smoking hysteria is not because we are a problem to non-smokers but purely and simply aimed at spoiling smokers pleasure.

 

For a start smoking has not been banned, just in public buildings.

 

Like anything posted on this forum it is the opinion of the poster, so my opinion is that smoking in private is best for everyone. The ban was introduced by the democratically elected government.

 

My opinion is that you really need to get used to the ban and accept the repercussions for your personal addiction.

[sandie]

Workers health in public buildings was one of the main reasons the smoking ban was made law, not the request of non smokers.

 

Smoking is a hobby which is addictive. For decades that addiction has spoilt the enjoyment of others.

 

The majority of the public support the ban.

 

The best thing is to keep the addiction in private, it really is the best for everyone.

 

I would like to correct you Smoking in public buildings was banned long before the blanket ban, because of the non smokers.

You say the majority of the public support the ban, please provide your facts.

You say keep the addiction in private, so binge drinkers,drug addicts etc can go out on the streets, but smokers are not allowed.

 

And for the last few years people like you have spoilt the enjoyment for us.

Please find another cause to champion

[Bloomdido]

Your idea is a sensible opttion, but the chance of it taking off is next to nill.

There are 3 threads on smoking on here and each one has been hyjacked by the none smoking brigade.

 

This is an open forum! What do you want? A special 'smokers only' section of Sheffield Forum to stop non-smokers butting in?

[Guest]

For a start smoking has not been banned, just in public buildings.

 

Like anything posted on this forum it is the opinion of the poster, so my opinion is that smoking in private is best for everyone. The ban was introduced by the democratically elected government.

 

My opinion is that you really need to get used to the ban and accept the repercussions for your personal addiction.

 

1 - Well, it's public buildings we are discussing.

2 - Yes, we are all entitled to our opinions so this includes you although I fail to see why you have an opinion on smoking establishments if you wouldn't go in one.

3 - I have just pointed out why your opinion is not relevant to somewhere where you would never go.

4 - I personally, and I'm sure other smokers will tell you the same, will accept the repercussions of our addiction.

[Grandad.Malky]

But you haven't added anything, let alone two pennorth.

 

If you actually have anything to say, then please say it.

I suspect that you just can't find anything to say so you decided to try and hijack the thread and you are simply proving that solid arguments against my suggestion are few and far between, if there are any at all.

 

Because you don’t like what I said doesn’t mean I said nothing.

 

smoking as been banned in public places, get over it.

[Guest]

What makes you think you are the spokesperson for all the UK's smokers? Have you asked the other 10 million?

 

 

I don't, for one moment think I'm the spokesperson for all the other smokers in the UK but I wouldn't mind asking them if I knew who they were.

Suffice to say that I will be quite surprised if any of them post in and take me to task about it.

[SnailyBoy]

I would like to correct you Smoking in public buildings was banned long before the blanket ban, because of the non smokers.

You say the majority of the public support the ban, please provide your facts.

You say keep the addiction in private, so binge drinkers,drug addicts etc can go out on the streets, but smokers are not allowed.

 

And for the last few years people like you have spoilt the enjoyment for us.

Please find another cause to champion

 

Smoking was not allowed in many buildings such a doctors, cinemas, hospitals, airports.....because the owners of the buildings I'm sure felt that it was in the best interests of their users.

 

Here's a little evidence to show the support. Also considering that lack of placard waving outside Parliament, I suppose that could be an indication. Even the fox hunters managed to do that.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6225582.stm

 

http://www.24dash.com/news/Local_Government/2009-07-28-National-survey-reveals-solid-support-for-UK-public-smoking-ban

 

As for spoiling the enjoyment of others, you've lost me. The law came in, I (and the vast majority of country) welcomed it. It wasn't personal, pretty much the same as when fox-hunting was banned.

 

Try a different hobby, sky-diving for instance. Loads of fresh air and to my knowledge it isn't banned in pubs. So a good result all round.

[Antics^^]

There seems to be a lot of virtual high-fiving going on between the clique of smokers on SF.

 

Just because you don't agree with a comment does not mean that it isn't a constructive, sensible opinion.

 

The idea of a pub employing only smoking seems a little naive. What about the dray men, police men, fire wardens, maintenance men, licensing authority, delivery men. All who would require access to a pub throughout the year.