I wish you could sue smokers!

OrkneyStar

I have said if before and will say it again.
Smokers, you are entitled to smoke.
Smokers, I am entitled not to smoke, or breathe your smoke, as is my child.
If we both remember this then surely we can co-exist ? I am happy for you to have your specific smoking areas (which, although I choose not to frequent, have no real problem with), as I have my specific non-smoking areas (where noone can smoke).
Where possible we both keep out of each others designated area and thus not irritate each other ?
In non-designated areas where people can smoke but are not designated specific 'smoking areas' then if you are already smoking I will choose not to stand close to you while you smoke, as you were there first I won't ask you to put it out (and would not expect you to!). Equally if you see me with my child can you please not come right up to me and light up (instead choose somewhere further away) ? Surely this is common sense, on both the part of the smoker and the non-smoker ? Consideration for others. I hate smoking but have friends who smoke and also respect the fact that others choose to smoke. I suspect places like bus shelters are perhaps the biggest bone of contention....not sure what the solution is there ?
On a final note I do think the fact that most smoking areas are outside is unfair, and at least in the current climate with so many still smoking, there should be provision inside for smokers. This is not accepting that smoking itself is ok, but accepting that the people who smoke are ok and should not be ostracised.
This said I would still say that the risks, and potential effects, of smoking should not be underplayed.
Ok, no doubt someone will find argument somewhere here!
OS

marleyboy

ShaShaSha wrote: »

And....as for everyone who said that car pollution is more dangerous than cigarettes - this is untrue...

Lifestyle factors are the biggest cause of cancer



Several organizations colluded to determine cancer risks. They found that lifestyle choices account for up to 60% of cancers whereas environmental factors accounted foronly about 3%. Lifestyle choices include smoking, poor diet and lack of physical exercise.

http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/news/lifestyle_factors_are_the_biggest_cause_of_cancer.htm



^^ I mean it does me or my family no harm if you dont eat well or exercise enough, but if you are smoking in a public space, where I have to go - then this isnt just killing you, but causing me actual harm as proved that NO level of passive smoking is safe.

I dont think anyone disputes the link between smoking and cancer.

As far as I am aware NOBODY disputes that smoking is more hazardous to car pollution, BUT "PASSIVE SMOKING" is far LESS dangerous than PASSIVE vehicle pollution, that little word you seem to miss out in your search.

Just as it is NON smokers right NOT to smoke, it is a NON smokers and SMOKERS right not to be polluted by vehicle fumes.

I think it only fair if second hand smoke pollution is addressed that the surrounding OTHER pollutants are included within the research.

It is fter all my RIGHT not to have to breathe in any car pollution as well as tobacco smoke.

Its not a difficult one to Google, Passive smoking and Air pollution from vehicle fumes. One is far more deadlier than the other, I repeat SMOG is not related to second hand smoke.

OrkneyStar

marleyboy wrote: »

I dont think anyone disputes the link between smoking and cancer.

As far as I am aware NOBODY disputes that smoking is more hazardous to car pollution, BUT "PASSIVE SMOKING" is far LESS dangerous than PASSIVE vehicle pollution, that little word you seem to miss out in your search.

Just as it is NON smokers right NOT to smoke, it is a NON smokers and SMOKERS right not to be polluted by vehicle fumes.

I think it only fair if second hand smoke pollution is addressed that the surrounding OTHER pollutants are included within the research.

It is fter all my RIGHT not to have to breathe in any car pollution as well as tobacco smoke.

Its not a difficult one to Google, Passive smoking and Air pollution from vehicle fumes. One is far more deadlier than the other, I repeat SMOG is not related to second hand smoke.

Marleyboy while I agree with your main point, the fact that passive pollution is more of a problem (or as big a problem as, some may say) than passive smoking, is not an reason to say that smoking is not a huge problem. I agree that pollution is a massive problem but think it is a separate issue to the main crux of this thread....of course thats just my opinion!
You will see from my last post that I although I am anti-smoking, I am not anti-smokers and totally appreciate they have the right to smoke, just as we all have the right to live in a non-polluted environment.
I actually find is sad just how polluted our environment is, and it is all down to us as human beings. We all pollute in one way or another, and all should do what we can to minimise this. Makes me so glad to no longer live in a city and have clean air to breathe.

Money_maker

OrkneyStar wrote: »

I have said if before and will say it again.
Smokers, you are entitled to smoke.
Smokers, I am entitled not to smoke, or breathe your smoke, as is my child.
If we both remember this then surely we can co-exist ? I am happy for you to have your specific smoking areas (which, although I choose not to frequent, have no real problem with), as I have my specific non-smoking areas (where noone can smoke).
Where possible we both keep out of each others designated area and thus not irritate each other ?
In non-designated areas where people can smoke but are not designated specific 'smoking areas' then if you are already smoking I will choose not to stand close to you while you smoke, as you were there first I won't ask you to put it out (and would not expect you to!). Equally if you see me with my child can you please not come right up to me and light up (instead choose somewhere further away) ? Surely this is common sense, on both the part of the smoker and the non-smoker ? Consideration for others. I hate smoking but have friends who smoke and also respect the fact that others choose to smoke. I suspect places like bus shelters are perhaps the biggest bone of contention....not sure what the solution is there ?
On a final note I do think the fact that most smoking areas are outside is unfair, and at least in the current climate with so many still smoking, there should be provision inside for smokers. This is not accepting that smoking itself is ok, but accepting that the people who smoke are ok and should not be ostracised.
This said I would still say that the risks, and potential effects, of smoking should not be underplayed.
Ok, no doubt someone will find argument somewhere here!
OS

That makes so much sense it could be end of the thread... unless those with personal vendettas, missions or deep-seated anger management problems need to continue to vent about how much better the world would be with only them in it

momoyama

OrkneyStar wrote: »

I have said if before and will say it again.
Smokers, you are entitled to smoke.
Smokers, I am entitled not to smoke, or breathe your smoke, as is my child.
If we both remember this then surely we can co-exist ? I am happy for you to have your specific smoking areas (which, although I choose not to frequent, have no real problem with), as I have my specific non-smoking areas (where noone can smoke).
Where possible we both keep out of each others designated area and thus not irritate each other ?
In non-designated areas where people can smoke but are not designated specific 'smoking areas' then if you are already smoking I will choose not to stand close to you while you smoke, as you were there first I won't ask you to put it out (and would not expect you to!). Equally if you see me with my child can you please not come right up to me and light up (instead choose somewhere further away) ? Surely this is common sense, on both the part of the smoker and the non-smoker ? Consideration for others. I hate smoking but have friends who smoke and also respect the fact that others choose to smoke. I suspect places like bus shelters are perhaps the biggest bone of contention....not sure what the solution is there ?
On a final note I do think the fact that most smoking areas are outside is unfair, and at least in the current climate with so many still smoking, there should be provision inside for smokers. This is not accepting that smoking itself is ok, but accepting that the people who smoke are ok and should not be ostracised.
This said I would still say that the risks, and potential effects, of smoking should not be underplayed.
Ok, no doubt someone will find argument somewhere here!
OS

See, this is entirely what I'm getting at and I believe would be the most "last word" of best compromise.

hartcjhart

Because most of what I do in life isn't available at night. Common sense. And the counter is I should be allowed "to do what the !!!! like when like [any time]".I caught you agreeing with me, but that's all. What's your point

the point is the same as you made I should be allowed to do what I like when I like

Bettyboop

Some smokers really are arrogant. No one is saying you can't do what you please when you like but has it ocurred to you that you are silently and slowly killing yourself? Tobaco and the chemicals that go into making cancer sticks relieve whatever it is you want to for 5 minutes or whatever but at the same time your body is being polluted with toxins? This would worry me if I were a smoker that's for sure!

hartcjhart

Oh but they are dictating if you read the whole thread

and we are all slowly dying,some faster than others maybe

we all ingest toxins every day

hartcjhart

OrkneyStar wrote: »

I have said if before and will say it again.
Smokers, you are entitled to smoke.
Smokers, I am entitled not to smoke, or breathe your smoke, as is my child.
If we both remember this then surely we can co-exist ? I am happy for you to have your specific smoking areas (which, although I choose not to frequent, have no real problem with), as I have my specific non-smoking areas (where noone can smoke).
Where possible we both keep out of each others designated area and thus not irritate each other ?
In non-designated areas where people can smoke but are not designated specific 'smoking areas' then if you are already smoking I will choose not to stand close to you while you smoke, as you were there first I won't ask you to put it out (and would not expect you to!). Equally if you see me with my child can you please not come right up to me and light up (instead choose somewhere further away) ? Surely this is common sense, on both the part of the smoker and the non-smoker ? Consideration for others. I hate smoking but have friends who smoke and also respect the fact that others choose to smoke. I suspect places like bus shelters are perhaps the biggest bone of contention....not sure what the solution is there ?
On a final note I do think the fact that most smoking areas are outside is unfair, and at least in the current climate with so many still smoking, there should be provision inside for smokers. This is not accepting that smoking itself is ok, but accepting that the people who smoke are ok and should not be ostracised.
This said I would still say that the risks, and potential effects, of smoking should not be underplayed.
Ok, no doubt someone will find argument somewhere here!
OS

Well put

at last a breath of fresh air:D in this debate I wholeheartedly agree with you,BUT there is bound to be someone who picks fault

snowmaid

I am an ex smoker. I never smoked with my older 2 but started again when my youngest was a few months old. I was a 'very good' mommy and wouldn't smoke inside - hubby and I smoking outside. We never allowed anyone to smoke inside at all.

My child started getting allergies, in particular 'glue' ear. He had 2 sets of grommets. We took him for a check up visit to the ENT Consultant , who bluntly told us that if we didn't stop smoking, he wouldn't be able to help our child anymore. We told him that we never smoked near him and only outside. He said that the smoke still effected him.

We both stopped smoking immediately, guess what, my sons ears cleared up immediately and so did his bronchial asthma.

We felt really terrible, as it was our smoking, albeit not in 'front' of him. that had been making him ill.

The NHS may be too politically correct to tell you to quit, luckily for us, our ENT Specialist in South Africa wasn't and told us how it is. We were making our child sick.

If you are a smoker and have children with allergies such as asthma, glue ear etc, I suggest you stop smoking.

Oh, and smokers, you do stink. After I quit my sense of smell returned. Well, I can walk into a house and tell straight away if someone smokes there. It hangs around the curtains and the carpets. It is vile. I am ashamed my home smelt like that, which it did, even though we smoked outside.