I wish you could sue smokers!

Bettyboop

hartcjhart wrote: »

Now there has been some cob**ers sprouted by you anti smoke brigade but this really takes the biscuit,we have outside smoking shelters BUT they by LAW are not allowed to be enclosed AND there is no 100% percent scientific proof that secondhand/passive smoking causes lung cancer

I think you will find Google is your friend and for a fact that secondhand smoke is also a killer. You really are in denial!

momoyama

marleyboy wrote: »

Until they ban smoking completely

Now please don't misunderstand me. I've never called for a complete ban on smoking. What YOU do in YOUR home to YOUR body is up to you. I'm overweight. I know about the negative affects of that. But me being overweight is only harming ME. Don't inflict your smoking on ME (note to marleyboy -I'm not picking on you personally, just smokers generally). Most people do sometime that's against their own health be it in diet, stress, dangerous sports etc. I've never called for a ban on smoking, just a ban on smoking in public places and around vulnerable people. This, BTW includes parents smoking around their children and pregnant ladies smoking.

marleyboy wrote: »

Drivers are free to drive their pollution guzzling 4X4's

Semi- fair point. I agree that there are excess large-engined cars on the road and that should be addressed. There is also work being done to make the damage caused by cars less serious in the form of alternative power. But whereas smoking does nothing except cause harm, transport serves a very positive purpose.

marleyboy wrote: »

Drinkers are free to drink alcohol (which is just as deadly as tobacco - and serves just as much purpose).

Bovine Faeces! Alcohol in moderation has proven health benefits. Tobacco in no quantity at all as any health benefit.

marleyboy wrote: »

NON smokers will have to get used to the idea that all these smokers are deliberately going around blowing smoke in NON smokers eyes, as much as the Curry Houses deliberately go around wafting the smell of Curries n Kebabs in our faces

Ah, curry. I could murder (figuratively a curry now). What harm do curry fumes do?

marleyboy wrote: »

Non Smokers, welcome to the real World, where smoking indoors is relocated to the ever polluting outdoor life. Feel free to breathe it all in with the rest of us, or wear a mask.

Smokers, welcome to civilisation where intentionally harming people without good cause has not been acceptable... ever.

You know the irony? We all have bad habits. The smokers that I work with have the gall to chastise me for farting sometimes :rotfl:

marleyboy

I have seen no research that states alcohol is healthy, ive seen much more on its ill effects, just as much as i have seen on passive smoking, as for breathing in a burger, well no, it doesnt effect my health, but I dont know about the Vegan, who doesn't want to taste it.

Likewise its all well to say "a car serves a purpose", but I could say as a pedestrian, that it infringes my rights and my childs rights to breathe pollutant free, air.

To blankly say "erm but a car serves a purpose" is a typical "selfish" drivers attitude, much as a smokers "Yeah but, I need a cig". Obviously, whether you agree or not, cigarettes serve their purpose, whatever it is, they are sold for a purpose, just as much as a car is. Else, why on earth would we sell them, and who on earth would buy them.

Everyone can play selfish, I think NON smokers are selfish for not allowing smokers to have indoor venue's where THEY can socialise, now they want their outdoor venues too.

Smokers are quite right to point at vehicle smoke being just as bad, a vehicle exhumes a lot more lethal poison than any cigarette could do, whatever its purpose is.

NON smokers have got the rule of the indoor arena, from public transport, cinemas, clubs, bars, even bus shelters and railway platforms. But its still not enough.

The problem you have now, is Smokers can only smoke outdoors, from office block workers, to nightclub dwellers, there's only one place to congregate to when you want to smoke a cigarette. Outdoors with all the other deadly smoke churning pollutants.

Whether passive smoking is as bad as passive exhaust fumes, which I can assure you is far more lethal, then there should be no argument to smokers polluting the same space. whatever the reason is.

momoyama

marleyboy wrote: »

I have seen no research that states alcohol is healthy

It's an anti-coagulant. It's also an appetite stimulant.

marleyboy wrote: »

as for breathing in a burger, well no, it doesnt effect my health, but I dont know about the Vegan, who doesn't want to taste it.

"breating in a burger"? !!!!!!? You have a strange way of taking in substances. Oh yeah, you're a smoker. Of course

Regards burger, I can smell / taste your smoke. You can't taste the burger that I'm eating. Stupid argument.

marleyboy wrote: »

To blankly say "erm but a car serves a purpose" is a typical "selfish" drivers attitude, much as a smokers "Yeah but, I need a cig".

No it isn't. Because car do serve purposes. I do agree that there should be better segregation of vehicles and pedestrians, though.

BTW, you don't "need" a cig', you only think you do.

marleyboy wrote: »

cigarettes serve their purpose

What purpose? They serve no purpose whatsoever.

marleyboy wrote: »

Everyone can play selfish, I think NON smokers are selfish for not allowing smokers to have indoor venue's where THEY can socialise, now they want their outdoor venues too.

That's just utter male genetalia. All we want is freedom from smoke that's thoroughly unpleseant and detrimental to health.

marleyboy wrote: »

Smokers are quite right to point at vehicle smoke being just as bad, a vehicle exhumes a lot more lethal poison than any cigarette could do, whatever its purpose is.

As I said, we're addressing that.

marleyboy wrote: »

NON smokers have got the rule of the indoor arena, from public transport, cinemas, clubs, bars, even bus shelters and railway platforms.

No we don't. It's almost impossible to enter any of those places without walking through a thick cloud of smoke from the [EMAIL="b@st@ards"]b@st@ards[/EMAIL] gathering around the door.

marleyboy wrote: »

But its still not enough.

That's right.

marleyboy wrote: »

The problem you have now, is Smokers can only smoke outdoors, from office block workers, to nightclub dwellers, there's only one place to congregate to when you want to smoke a cigarette. Outdoors with all the other deadly smoke churning pollutants.

Makes sense.

marleyboy wrote: »

Whether passive smoking is as bad as passive exhaust fumes, which I can assure you is far more lethal, then there should be no argument to smokers polluting the same space. whatever the reason is.

Now, I can choose to walk a route that minimises my exposure to vehicle fumes. I can't choose a route to minimise my contact with the !!!!!!! smokers, as I usually lovingly refer to them, as they're all over the place. At least I can see where the road is, whereas I can't see the person hunched over lighting their cancer stick. Oh hang on, I needn't go to the shops, I can shop on-line and get my shopping delivered... by your exhaust fume belching large-engined vehicles!

aliasojo

Teenie_D wrote: »

I remember when I was as school a boy in my class used to come in absolutely stinking of stale smoke-obviously from one or both of his parents, i used to feel so sorry for him as other people would comment on it and he was clearly embarassed, it wasn't his fault though, just his parents!

My daughter's friend is the same. Her family are chain smokers and the girl absolutely reeks. I dread to think what the inside of her lungs is like. She gets sprayed with cheap perfume on her way out to school to try to mask the smell but it only makes it worse. She literally smells our house out if she's playing with my daughter so we try to make excuses why she can't come over.

It's such a shame that her family care more about their right to smoke than they do their daughter, because that's what it comes down to in the end. This kid has breathed foul air since birth and she is becoming more and more isolated because the other kids don't play with her due to the smell........yet the cig craving overrides that. It's a crying shame really. We'd be a healthier and wealthier society if the flipping things had never been invented.

Jo_F

A question for all the anti-smokers, if the government were to ban smoking tomorrow, make it totally illegal, would you be happy for your taxes to increase significantly to cover the shortfall in the government's coffers? Don't forget they will need to find that £8bn from somwhere.

Would you also be happy to have all these people suddenly living longer and being an extra drain on services? (if it is indeed true that smoking kills you earlier)

Would you also be happy to have to fork out to pay the unemployment benefits to all those that would lose their jobs as a result of the ban? (I mean all those people that work somehow within the whole industry surrounding tobacco?)

aliasojo

Personally, I wouldn't be happy about....but I'd accept it as a consequence of ridding society of something that is harmful.

Volcano

Jo_F wrote: »

(if it is indeed true that smoking kills you earlier)

Make that 3.

A truely shocking level of ignorance and denial that I wouldn't have thought could exist with the information availability we now have in the 21st Century.....

Jo_F

Volcano wrote: »

Make that 3.

A truely shocking level of ignorance and denial that I wouldn't have thought could exist with the information availability we now have in the 21st Century.....

Excuse me? We all know people that have lived healthy lives and died young, we all know people that have smoked like a chimney and lived long and fulilling lives. I am not ignorant, what I am sick of is the this, that and the other is bad for you, hmm well everything is upto a point, hell if we listened to it all, then no one would get out of bed in the mornings (and some may say even that is bad for you)

In my family we have smokers and we have drinkers, the smokers are still going strong, yet the drinkers are all dead, my uncle pickled himself and my ex husband died of multi-organ failure down to his drinking.

I am not ignorant, I simply choose to live my life as I see fit, I don't want people nannying me and telling me what I can and can't do for my own good, I am a responsible adult that is fully capable of making those decisions myself.

marleyboy

momoyama wrote: »

It's an anti-coagulant. It's also an appetite stimulant

Agree'd, it is also freely available to buy at the local newsagent.

momoyama wrote: »

"breating in a burger"? !!!!!!? You have a strange way of taking in substances. Oh yeah, you're a smoker. Of course

WRONG, if you took the bother to READ properly, you would see that I am NOT a smoker.
It seems, you don't like people dogging OTHER peoples filthy habits, as long as its only about smoking

momoyama wrote: »

Regards burger, I can smell / taste your smoke. You can't taste the burger that I'm eating. Stupid argument.

I can smell your burger, as any VEGAN could also do, but as I am NOT a vegan, I like YOU cannot assume they can't taste it. Not such a stupid argument from a NON smoker.

momoyama wrote: »

No it isn't. Because car do serve purposes. I do agree that there should be better segregation of vehicles and pedestrians, though.

So do bicycles, so do trainers. I could still argue that as people BUY cigarettes, they must have SOME purpose, else they would not be sold, obviously those addicted to them think they serve a purpose or they would be no need to purchase them. They don't sell underwater matches, as they have no purpose. Whether or not we agree to their purpose, smokers know what it is.

momoyama wrote: »

BTW, you don't "need" a cig', you only think you do.

Wrong again - I don't even THINK I need a cig, but what right have I got to tell a smoker that, I also don't think a drunkard NEEDS a drink, they only THINK they do. The same rule applies to cars, we have public transport, we have bicycles, we have legs, There was a time Cars weren't invented.

momoyama wrote: »

What purpose? They serve no purpose whatsoever

Again your WRONG, that such a product is mass produced, and is probably one of the governments biggest tax revenue's, obviously, it serves someone, somewhere a purpose, just because its not serving YOU a purpose, doesn't mean it has no purpose whatsoever. Why produce, sell and market a product, that has no purpose at all?

momoyama wrote: »

That's just utter male genetalia. All we want is freedom from smoke that's thoroughly unpleseant and detrimental to health.

Lol, now your twisting it to be some sexist issue, Do you have freedom to NOT smoke, in the restaurant, on the train or in the nightclub where your as free to drink? Do you have the freedom to NOT smoke at the Cinema, in the Office and in your own home?

All smokers want is freedom to smoke (wherever it is they are allowed to)

momoyama wrote: »

No we don't. It's almost impossible to enter any of those places without walking through a thick cloud of smoke from the b@st@ards gathering around the door.

Agreed, it never used to be like that, up until the Smokers were told "take it outside" which is what ALL smokers do now, safe in the knowledge that you will STILL complain about it.

momoyama wrote: »

Now, I can choose to walk a route that minimises my exposure to vehicle fumes. I can't choose a route to minimise my contact with the !!!!!!! smokers, as I usually lovingly refer to them, as they're all over the place. At least I can see where the road is, whereas I can't see the person hunched over lighting their cancer stick. Oh hang on, I needn't go to the shops, I can shop on-line and get my shopping delivered... by your exhaust fume belching large-engined vehicles!

Likewise I can choose to walk where exposure is limited, but not so in the City, the Main Road is by my Office, and its heaving with Trucks, lorries and cars emitting more fumes than the smoker stood by them could ever do. Smokers don't smoke where they want, they smoke where they can.

Whilst Smoking remains legal, it remains acceptable (at least to the smoker), whether you think that's a sexist,, egotistical, hypocritical or typical Smokers attitude, its a FACT and that changes NOTHING.