Passive Smoking

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by Fletch

i have lived with fuzzy and nomme for 7 years and they only in the past year have quit.

 

i became used to smoke, even now they have stopped and there is a very distinct difference in the house i do not care about smoke of any type.

 

i go out a fair bit and my mums mates smoke, i dont care they can smoke its their problem let them sort it out

 

My advice to people who dont like smoke and cant out up with it, move!

 

your next question will be

 

why should i move when i want to be there?

 

well why should they move??

 

its an on going circulalr motion! neither person will move untill forced to, by either authorities or law!

 

Where do you suggest non-smokers move to that is genuinely non-smoking, Mars?

 

You say that it is their [the smokers] problem if they smoke. Unfortunately, as you may have noticed, smoke does tend to drift and be breathed in by non-smokers.

 

I did, specifically, make this a thread about PASSIVE smoking rather than smoking in general. The issue in question is not whether or not people have the right to smoke but whether or not non-smokers have the right to be protected from smoke.

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by panda79

what i want to know is what are the health fascists going to ban next:loopy:

 

I don't claim to be an expert on Fascism but I'm not quite sure your description of non-smokers as Fascists is particulary accurate. The issue of whether or not non-smokers deserve protection from passive smoking appears to me to have very little to do with Fascism.

 

It is interesting that you see the issue in terms of a ban rather than one of protection. Perhaps you should take a look at the latest poll results. Out of the five smokers who have voted four of them favour protection for non-smokers.

[slimsid2000]

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?

 

Unfortunately in my experience the answer is yes.

[bellis]

Originally posted by slimsid2000

I don't claim to be an expert on Fascism but I'm not quite sure your description of non-smokers as Fascists is particulary accurate. The issue of whether or not non-smokers deserve protection from passive smoking appears to me to have very little to do with Fascism.

 

It is interesting that you see the issue in terms of a ban rather than one of protection. Perhaps you should take a look at the latest poll results. Out of the five smokers who have voted four of them favour protection for non-smokers.

you mean the poll on here ? ...........

 

hitler was anti smoking look what happend to him:loopy:

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by panda79

you mean the poll on here ? ...........

 

hitler was anti smoking look what happend to him:loopy:

 

True. he was also a t-total vegeterian. The question is do you consider all non-smokers to be like Hitler?

 

What exactly are your views on passive smoking? Do you feel that non-smokers deserve any protection at all or do you favour allowing smoking anywhere at anytime?

[bellis]

to a certain degree i do .................. i actually voted I smoke but believe it right to protect non-smokers if that means anything:loopy:

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by panda79

to a certain degree i do .................. i actually voted I smoke but believe it right to protect non-smokers if that means anything:loopy:

 

Then I don't understand your views that wanting to protect non-smokers equates to some sort of Fascism. Surley a much better historical annology would be the public health reforms of the 19th century.

[bellis]

as i said in one of my earler postings on this subject theres plenty of bars with no smoking sections most with exellent air conditionng ..............the thing is if you ban smoking whats it going to be next ?

[slimsid2000]

Originally posted by panda79

as i said in one of my earler postings on this subject theres plenty of bars with no smoking sections most with exellent air conditionng ..............the thing is if you ban smoking whats it going to be next ?

 

I, for one, haven't suggested that anything be next. Also you really must be more specific about your termonology. As far as I am aware, nobody is suggesting that smoking be banned, only that non-smokers should be entitled to full protection from smoke in public places. This is clearly not the case as the law stands now.

 

Neither did I specifically mention bars; passive smoking is a problem in many public places not just bars. As for smoking sections it all depends on whether or not the smoking section is a seperate room with closed doors to prevent smoke from drifting into the non-smoking area. Often this is not the case. Seperate 'open plan' areas are not by any means truely effective.

 

As for air conditioning this is even less effective in offering protection. At best it reduces the amount of smoke in the air. It most certainly does not eliminate it alltogether.

[slimsid2000]

I would be interested to find out if Sheffield Council are planning to use proposed powers to protect non-smokers in public places.

 

I understand the Government may introduce such powers.

 

Does anyone know the current situation?