Smoking ban for public places - Opinions

[Rich]

There is no 'right' to smoke. Unless it's a right by omission, ie it's not illegal.

Waving your arms about is legal, if someone happens to walk into the way why is it my fault?

 

Cos if you're waving your arms around and accidentally smack some random person in the face, they're legally entitled to sue your arse off for the injury, why do you think the likes of Injury Lawyers 4 U can afford to have TV time every other ad break?! Because this Country is seriously getting way too much like America, where people sue other people over the slightest little thing.. Someone falls over a Pothole in the street for instance, they decide "Oh I'll sue the Council for that, the pothole shouldn't have been there!" WRONG! You should've been looking where you were walking ya dozy chuff!

[discodown]

Being alllowed to purchase cigarettes does not give you the right to smoke them, when ever you want. There is a distinction. I can legally buy a stero but I have no right to play my music at full volume at 4am.

I repeat the point, being allowed to do something is not the same as having the right to something. - "The basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled, often held to include the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and expression, and equality before the law."

those are rights, not being allowed to selfishly indulge in a narcotic drug. So you have the right to opine that smokers have rights, but you would be incorrect in your opinion.

 

And when I posited punching smokers, as smoking adversley affects others, you didn't like that suggestion. Are they really so different, both actions are antisocial and result in discomfort to the other person?

 

But smokers have been doing that to non-smokers for years. And that's the bit I object to.

I'm not anti others smoking, it's just that I have desire to join in with their habit and resent being forced to do when I go out. If I want to drink say a pint of beer, a wine drinker next to me would be very annoyed if I was to continually slop my beer into his glass. That's effectively what smokers do. They force other to partake of their toxic drugs, which is extraordinarilly selfish really and it's astonishing it's allowed at all really. And very soon it won't be.

what utter and complete rot. so what you are telling me is you want people who partake of a perfectly legal drug to stop doing it because you are too weak to resist your former addiction and you want to partake of your drug of choice in peace. you also don't appear to know the difference between smoke and a smash in the face

 

you are also so adamant that you are right you are willing to break the law and call people who disagree with you morons. i'm so astounded at your utterly ridiculous point of view i'm going to start smoking!

[Cyclone]

As i said above you have a choice, you dont have to go to a pub, but you probably do because you want to, i don't have to smoke but i do because i want to.

If im in a room and encouraged to be racist, should i be racist because others object to me not being.

Fu££ that im my own person and ill make my own choices, if you dont want me to smoke - punch me - but im gonna punch you back.

calling people morons and threatening to punch people because they smoke suggest to me, you should be banned from public places along with smoking because both are found by many to be unpleasent

 

it won't be necessary to punch you will it, the law has quite sensibly been changed to make it illegal (soon) for you to smoke in a enclosed public place. Quite clearly we both have the right to go to the pub, equally you have the right when there not to be punched and I have the right not to breath crap which you put in the air.

So i'll go to the pub and promise not to punch anyone and you go along and promise not to smoke.

[Cyclone]

Cos if you're waving your arms around and accidentally smack some random person in the face, they're legally entitled to sue your arse off for the injury, why do you think the likes of Injury Lawyers 4 U can afford to have TV time every other ad break?! Because this Country is seriously getting way too much like America, where people sue other people over the slightest little thing..

 

Rich, that was my entire point. If i injure people with my arms I get arrested for assault (not sued). So why should someone else be allowed to put poison in the air you're breathing?

[Cyclone]

you also don't appear to know the difference between smoke and a smash in the face

 

One of them just causes temporary pain and injury, the other increases the chance of several fatal diseases and effectively poisons you. Both sound pretty unpleasant.

[troyhark]

what utter and complete rot. so what you are telling me is you want people who partake of a perfectly legal drug to stop doing it because you are too weak to resist your former addiction and you want to partake of your drug of choice in peace. you also don't appear to know the difference between smoke and a smash in the face

 

you are also so adamant that you are right you are willing to break the law and call people who disagree with you morons. i'm so astounded at your utterly ridiculous point of view i'm going to start smoking!

 

Not the brightest person on the planet are we? Do you actually read posts before responding? For instance - What former addiction do I have, I'm curious now? And which drug of choice do I wish to partake in? A clue for you, I don't do drugs, legal or otherwise, not for any moral reason, I just find them and those who rely on them, incredibly boring. Though if people want to use drugs, I think they should be allowed to, smoking included. Just don't force me to join in.

 

If someone were to try and punch me I have the luxury of being able to dodge a punch and be allowed to prevent my assailant from trying again, but with smoke, I get it shoved up my nose whether I like it or not. So, yes I can tell the difference between them, thank you for asking.

 

 

I don't call people who disagree with me morons, people are more than welcome to alternative opinions. I save morons for really dim people. Like you, who stated this particular interaction with

what a moronic thing to say

So not only are you unable to read, you're a hypocrite too.

 

Try reading posts properly before responding in future.That includes all of the words and preferably in the right order.

[tom3t0]

If someone goes to a pub it to have a drink/meet their mates, it's not because they want to join in other people's drug use. If you want to smoke fine, you go outside and have one. Expecting the majority, who do not smoke to put up with your addiction is junkie thinking.

people go to the pub to take alcohol (a drug) and join in with other's alcohol use

And the translation of that is?

was in english, no translation was needed

I don't mind you smoking, you can smoke as many fags as you want, making me smoke them is what I do object to. And that's the bit you don't seem to understand.

you go to non smoking pub, ill go to a smoking pub

As smoking seems to kill off brain cells I will explain once more.

Punching people is anti social as is smoking. I am not condoning either, just comparing the two.

I call people morons if they seem to have no brains, not because they smoke.

As for smokers right, grow up. Smokers have as much right to smoke as I have have to punch smokers in the face, as I find that very stress relieving.

comparrisson of punching a person in the face and smoking as actions which are anti social is not the above statement.

The above statement implies that ABH and GBH should be legal because smoking is. From your own logic i can conclude you would most certainly call yourself a moron as the above statement makes it appear you have no brains.

[tom3t0]

what utter and complete rot. so what you are telling me is you want people who partake of a perfectly legal drug to stop doing it because you are too weak to resist your former addiction and you want to partake of your drug of choice in peace. you also don't appear to know the difference between smoke and a smash in the face

 

you are also so adamant that you are right you are willing to break the law and call people who disagree with you morons. i'm so astounded at your utterly ridiculous point of view i'm going to start smoking!

if you are to start i will advise you to buy duty free cigarettes, this way you will not have to pay money in to the nhs to pay for the actions of a drunk on a friday night punching a woman/random stranger in the face

[troyhark]

people go to the pub to take alcohol (a drug) and join in with other's alcohol use

No they don't, they go to have a drink of their own choice, not necessarily alchoholic and are not forced to share others drinks whether they want to or not. Or they go for a meal, which many pubs serve.

 

 

was in english, no translation was needed

The individual words may have been in English, as for meaning, it may as well have been in Hokkian. You posted gibberish. Viz-

If im in a room and encouraged to be racist, should i be racist because others object to me not being.

Crap grammar and punctuation are not how to communicate clearly. And now you mention it, you 'not being' seems like a good suggestion.

 

you go to non smoking pub, ill go to a smoking pub

No, I'll go to a non smoking pub and soon so will you.

 

comparrisson of punching a person in the face and smoking as actions which are anti social is not the above statement.

The above statement implies that ABH and GBH should be legal because smoking is. From your own logic i can conclude you would most certainly call yourself a moron as the above statement makes it appear you have no brains.

Like Discodown, you are having reading difficulties. Smokers have no rights to smoke, like I have no rights to punch people in the face, the legality of buying cigarettes is independent of being allowed to smoke. And that was what I was saying, not that everyone should punch smokers. Tempting as it may be with many inconsiderate and selfish smokers.

If you actually bothered to read the whole thread, you would have read that.

 

You don't really understand arguing the difference regarding using analogies when arguing as opposed to be being quite literal, do you? So I accurately use the phrase moron in your case, as you seem to be equally dim and as illiterate as DD. Whereas you calling me a moron, when it is you who cannot read or understand analogies, is only underling your own inability to read and parse sentences.

[troyhark]

if you are to start i will advise you to buy duty free cigarettes, this way you will not have to pay money in to the nhs to pay for the actions of a drunk on a friday night punching a woman/random stranger in the face

Try reading all the posts before coming out with such idiotic and innacurate nonsense. Reading the odd word here and there doesn't count.

Some useful links for you

http://www.literacycenter.net/

http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/Database/adultres.html