Passive Smoking

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by tim_rutter

 

Also, Im sure if a total ban was brought in, you could still get away with having a sly smoke in your local pub.

 

Not if I saw them they wouldn't. It would be a phone call to the relevent autorities and a nice big fine for both smoker and landlord.

 

Some of us have waited too long for this to come in to see it ignored once it does.

[chickmonk]

Just posted about this on the (almost identical) thread on Sheffield Chat...

Smokers evidently more interesting because all the non-smoking sections in pubs are empty. This is because all the non-smokers (who hate smoking) sit with their smoking mates because they are more interesting. If the non-smokers were more interesting, then the smokers would sit in the non-smoking section (unable to smoke but with interesting company).

 

So, the fact that the smokers don't move means that they are the most interesting.

[slimsid2000]

As I said on the other thread, why should it always be the non-smoker who has to compromise?

[nick2]

Originally posted by slimsid2000

As I said on the other thread, why should it always be the non-smoker who has to compromise?

 

 

I think chickmonk is trying to point out that they don't have to, they do it through choice, though once smoking is banned it won't be a problem as all the smokers will be outside smoking while all the non-smokers will be sat inside.

[JBee]

Originally posted by dinp

To the smokers here, do you not realise how rude and inconsiderate it is to go and stand/sit next to someone and puff away. Do you do this in front of your non-smoking friends?

 

I know you cant help the direction of the wind, but a bit of common courtesy would be appreciated. I don't want YOUR fumes in MY face, if I did, i'd stand next to you!

 

I agree, and I can't believe that nine people have now voted for 'I'm a smoker and I feel I should be able to smoke anywhere'. That means we've got nine very selfish people on this forum, who don't care about giving others lung cancer or asthma. Wonder if they'll reveal themselves?

 

It's no wonder smokers get labelled selfish and disgusting.

 

I'm an occasional smoker myself. But there's no way I would ever light up if it was going to cause other people offense, if it was going to blow in the direction of anyone else, or in a public place.

 

I'm not a big fan of second hand smoke myself (just the first-hand, direct hit variety!!!), and there's nothing worse than walking down the street, minding your own business, and then a smoker cutting in front of you and blasting you with a cloud of filth.

 

Smoking is my choice and I own up to the fact that it's a dirty habit. Fellow smokers should realise that they have no right to inflict it on other people, because it's a killer.

 

What if sunbed users suddenly brought a giant UV ray machine into a public place and baked everyone with it?

 

All this 'freedom of choice/expression' b*****ks is just an excuse for selfishness.

[chickmonk]

The non-smoker *doesn't* have to compromise. They can sit in the non-smoking section. But they don't cos they want to sit with their friends. Who smoke.

 

I reckon there are 4 types of people

 

1. Smokers who smoke

2. Smokers who don't smoke (these are smokers at heart but have given up the weed)

3. Non-smokers who smoke (the 'social smoking, nicking-your-fags type)

4. Non-smokers who don't smoke (the never have smoked and the ex-smokers who are really anti-smoking)

 

I fall into category (1) but may become category (2).

[slimsid2000]

I just feel that it is considered more socially acceptable for non-smokers to sit with smoking friends in a smoking area and endure the smoke than to ask the smokers to sit in a non-smoking area and not smoke.

 

Am I wrong in this?

[Cyclone]

given the option I sit in non smoking, fortunately I don't have many smoking friends, and to be honest if they insist on sitting in the smoking section they can carry on the night on their own.

[sheffco]

Slim Sid answers his own questions, in that his replies are really boring. I can't imagine him taking part in any of the lively discussions I have with my interesting smoking friends.

They have lives, experiences, jokes and anecdotes. Usually gleaned from their interesting lives and careers.

I agree with chickmonk, and my friends fall into catergoty 1 & 2.

Myself being definitely cat' 1. (80+ per day)

I can't really visualise the scenario of some of these "Ban the Anything" fanatics trying it on in any of the scenes I frequent.

Mockery, castigation, if not castration come to mind, but then, with the invincibility of youth and ignorance, they would still believe they have a right to try and change peoples habits of a lifetime.

Every time I see some person who having reached the age of 100 years plus, bleating on about their secret of long life. (Never smoked - Never Drank - Nevr went with naughty ladies).

I think "Why bother living" must be hell of a boring 100 years??

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by sheffco

Slim Sid answers his own questions, in that his replies are really boring. I can't imagine him taking part in any of the lively discussions I have with my interesting smoking friends.

They have lives, experiences, jokes and anecdotes. Usually gleaned from their interesting lives and careers.

 

It may well be that some smokers are interesting a witty people but so are some non-smokers. I don't know what evidence you have for saying smoking is relevent to it one way or the other.

 

As fior me being dull - well you should have seen me ram that large ashtray up that selfish smoker (sideways)