absolutely... I think ICR has overdosed reading the tabloid (rabidly incorrect) reports on smoking. I notice he/she/it fails to address my point on WHERE this missing tax would be regained from... any ideas, ICR? And SOME smokers require medical attention due to their habit - not ALL. Same as SOME people require medical attention after being exposed to fumes from cars... same as SOME mothers require medical attention after having 6 babies in succession, same as SOME people require medical attention because they enjoy extreme sports.

 

Are we planning on a second-class second-rate NHS service for THESE people, too.. people who, let's face facts, pay FAR less into the treasury coffers than smokers do.....?

 

And far from expecting you to be grateful that I smoke - I do, of course, expect you to be grateful for the COLOSSAL contributions I have made to your tax fund due to my smoking.... contributions you are more than likely yet to even START paying. 12 year old Robbie Williams fans, eh? You couldn't make it up...

 

And, as Kimi is so frightfully worried about smokers polluting our lungs - I wonder if he's ditched his car, too... you know, to help us all live a cleaner life? After all, a car is absolutely an unnecessary luxury in these days of round the clock public transport and is FAR more harmful to us than stray cigarette smoke......

 

 

oh where to begin .............

 

we could start with the extreme sports I participate in - and pay LARGE insurance premiums for.

 

we could explain to you very slowly that I am infact even older than you (if the 68 in your name refers to your year of birth) and have been paying tax weekly since I was 16 .

 

but do you know - I really can't be arsed.

I have clearly stated my opinion of smoking - to which I believe I am entitled.

 

If everyone stopped smoking tomorrow - taxes would obviously have to rise to compensate for the loss in revenue ..... what I believe young people call a no-brainer.

 

 

oh and for the record I am a 'she'

 

 

 

I love a good clean b**ch fight :dance: keep it clean

 

 

Are you caling me a b**ch? :o :o :o

Absolutely.. When I first moved down to London, it was the general air pollution that got to me far more than people smoking in bars or clubs (which I was used to..). As far as I'm concerned car exhaust fumes are a far bigger threat to the environment than people smoking,

 

yep, car fumes are a bigger threat to the environment, but theres no comparison with inhaleing directly from a burning bit of plant material. tobbacco smoke doesnt harm the environment, it does harm you!

 

ive never been effected by traffic fumes in the same way that fag smoke gets me...

 

yep, car fumes are a bigger threat to the environment, but theres no comparison with inhaleing directly from a burning bit of plant material. tobbacco smoke doesnt harm the environment, it does harm you!

 

ive never been effected by traffic fumes in the same way that fag smoke gets me...

 

With air pollution, it's a drip, drip effect if you get my meaning... And if you actually think that somehow traffic fumes are not at least a contributory factor in a lot of respitory problems, then frankly you're not looking at medical evidence....

 

Cleaner, greener ways to drive cars is possible, the options are just not being looked at because of vested interests...

 

With air pollution, it's a drip, drip effect if you get my meaning... And if you actually think that somehow traffic fumes are not at least a contributory factor in a lot of respitory problems, then frankly you're not looking at medical evidence....

 

Cleaner, greener ways to drive cars is possible, the options are just not being looked at because of vested interests...

 

Its not a question of vested interests though its a question of economics, an oil based economy like ours would collapse if the car industry dumped oil/petrol engines and became powered by other substances, our economy like it or not is largely built around oil

This country is a major oil producer though Scott and oil revenues are one of the major things that powers our economy and the oil produced whether we use it internally or export it will be largely used for motor cars and for industry, I don't doubt those things you listed would be greener and would reduce pollution but they make a tiny tiny fraction of our country's revenue barely a drop in the ocean whereas North Sea oil is one of the things that prevents this country being a banana republic

 

Oil revenue far outstrips tobacco revenue

 

Well, if we're such a big shot in the oil production stakes then how come we import the vast majority of the oil we consume....? North Sea oil is not used to drive cars.. Your argument just doesn't square up mate... Britain comes pretty far down a long list of oil producers which has the US, Russia, every Middle East country, Venezuela and plenty other places before you get to us....

 

And I think you'll find that electric cars would be a hell of lot cleaner and less damaging to the environment, as are engines run on oil seed rape, water and petroleum gas... Britain could be leading the way in finding alternate sources of energy, we have the expertise and the scientific talent to be world leaders in this quest and we can sell these discoveries around the world. The oil is gonna run out, quite possibly in our lifetime, there is less and less north sea oil being refined every year. You pro-Oil people are living in a dream world, it's time to wake up and find an alternative because it aint gonna last forever... And if you think that fukkin' up the planet tomorrow is an acceptable price to pay for so-called 'economic stability' today then you're just being incredibly foolish and short-sighted. Who the hell are you to condemn future generations to environmental catastrophe...?

Its not a question of vested interests though its a question of economics, an oil based economy like ours would collapse if the car industry dumped oil/petrol engines and became powered by other substances, our economy like it or not is largely built around oil

 

You think cars are the ONLY thing that oil is used for...? Oil is used for many purposes (the manufacture of plastics for example....), driving car engines is only one possible use.....

 

And are we so scientifically inept that we couldn't actually produce the alternate sources of energy for cars...? We CAN produce electricity you know... And you dont see the bonus, if we dump oil as an energy source for cars then we dont rely as much on FOREIGN oil imports from unstable regimes....

 

we could start with the extreme sports I participate in - and pay LARGE insurance premiums for.

 

so if you were, say, stuck in a hole in the side of a mountain - and required urgent hospital attention - you wouldn't need to drain our NHS, then... yes?

 

For too long in the UK, people have been prohibited from simply doing what they enjoy - the rot set in with Adolf Thatcher... it's continuing with Bliar.

 

Smoking isn't the huge health risk they have us believe - especially 2nd hand smoking - I've yet to see ANY valid reports as to what it actually does to you.... because, you know what? I've a sneaky feeling this is one big lie.... and 2nd hand smoking, whilst not very pleasant or nice on your clothes...actually does VERY little if ANYTHING to your lungs.

 

I'm all for an outright car ban in all major cities if we're becoming this paranoid about supposed health risks - when, and only when, the Government does this will I believe they are truly, honestly concerned about our health. All banning smoking is doing is building a smokescreen for the appalling and hideous problems this country is facing - it's a great headline-grabber, will cause much news and will conveniently distract from the REAL problems.

 

Also - this smoking ban simply won't be enforced in many establishments.... a friend of mine owns 2 pubs in Cardiff city centre... his motto is that he point-blank refuses to allow this Goernment to shut him down (which it will should he ban the smokers... he'd have about 10% of his customer base still visiting..).... if the non-smokers don't like it - his attitude is "please don't come in"...and if they cause a problem, they won't be allowed in - full stop. Him, and quite a few others, will undertake this policy - and good on them I say. I know I would if I owned a bar.

 

And... you're an ADULT Robbie fan?!?!?!? :o

so if you were, say, stuck in a hole in the side of a mountain - and required urgent hospital attention - you wouldn't need to drain our NHS, then... yes?

 

For too long in the UK, people have been prohibited from simply doing what they enjoy - the rot set in with Adolf Thatcher... it's continuing with Bliar.

 

Smoking isn't the huge health risk they have us believe - especially 2nd hand smoking - I've yet to see ANY valid reports as to what it actually does to you.... because, you know what? I've a sneaky feeling this is one big lie.... and 2nd hand smoking, whilst not very pleasant or nice on your clothes...actually does VERY little if ANYTHING to your lungs.

 

I'm all for an outright car ban in all major cities if we're becoming this paranoid about supposed health risks - when, and only when, the Government does this will I believe they are truly, honestly concerned about our health. All banning smoking is doing is building a smokescreen for the appalling and hideous problems this country is facing - it's a great headline-grabber, will cause much news and will conveniently distract from the REAL problems.

 

Also - this smoking ban simply won't be enforced in many establishments.... a friend of mine owns 2 pubs in Cardiff city centre... his motto is that he point-blank refuses to allow this Goernment to shut him down (which it will should he ban the smokers... he'd have about 10% of his customer base still visiting..).... if the non-smokers don't like it - his attitude is "please don't come in"...and if they cause a problem, they won't be allowed in - full stop. Him, and quite a few others, will undertake this policy - and good on them I say. I know I would if I owned a bar.

 

And... you're an ADULT Robbie fan?!?!?!? :o

 

What is it with a smoker that he can't go 2 hrs without a cigarette or however long he spends in the pub ? if he takes his kids to Disneyland that is a 10 hr flight and he is not allowed to smoke then or on any other plane so why is he sad enough to not go to a pub any more because he can't light up for a couple of hours ?

as an ex smoker you will know the answer - a pint without a fag, for a smoker, is absolutely unthinkable - Christ, even NON smokers get the urge for a fag when they have a pint, nevermind smokers!

 

Smoking isn't the huge health risk they have us believe - especially 2nd hand smoking - I've yet to see ANY valid reports as to what it actually does to you.... because, you know what? I've a sneaky feeling this is one big lie.... and 2nd hand smoking, whilst not very pleasant or nice on your clothes...actually does VERY little if ANYTHING to your lungs.

 

I'm all for an outright car ban in all major cities if we're becoming this paranoid about supposed health risks - when, and only when, the Government does this will I believe they are truly, honestly concerned about our health. All banning smoking is doing is building a smokescreen for the appalling and hideous problems this country is facing - it's a great headline-grabber, will cause much news and will conveniently distract from the REAL problems.

 

 

Well, dude, passive smoking did kinda kill Roy Castle, let's not forget that.... Saying that the health warnings are a lie seems a bit like denial on your part... But, I am gonna defend your right to smoke though, because like I said in a previous thread, people will do stupid sh!t to themselves and there's nothing anyone can really do to stop them....

 

I do agree that this whole 'smoking debate' is a bit of misdirection taking us away from the bigger issues, such as pollution....

 

as an ex smoker you will know the answer - a pint without a fag, for a smoker, is absolutely unthinkable - Christ, even NON smokers get the urge for a fag when they have a pint, nevermind smokers!

 

There were times in my smoking days where I would smoke regularly in pubs but that was more because my mates would flash the packet at me and offer me one than any grreat craving, when everyone else was smoking it was hard not to smoke oneself but I did not get cravings if I did not smoke which usually I did not if I went to the pub on my own or whatever.

 

as an ex smoker you will know the answer - a pint without a fag, for a smoker, is absolutely unthinkable - Christ, even NON smokers get the urge for a fag when they have a pint, nevermind smokers!

 

You're right there Russ, cant argue with that, I'm a non-smoker but even I'll join in on a night out with mates who do smoke if I'm offered one....

 

There were times in my smoking days where I would smoke regularly in pubs but that was more because my mates would flash the packet at me and offer me one than any grreat craving, when everyone else was smoking it was hard not to smoke oneself but I did not get cravings if I did not smoke which usually I did not if I went to the pub on my own or whatever.

 

Nonsense, the more you drink, the more you get a craving for it... I was out recently with another non-smoker mate, and both of us wished we'd brought a pack of fags.... :lol: :lol:

Nonsense, the more you drink, the more you get a craving for it... I was out recently with another non-smoker mate, and both of us wished we'd brought a pack of fags.... :lol: :lol:

 

lol well I rarely went to pubs unless it was with mates and in a typical evening of lets say 4 hrs in a pub I would probably have got through 10-15 cigarettes :o but on the rare occasions I went on my own it was usually a quick pint before catching the train and I just did not light up, having said that since giving up smoking I have by and large avoided pubs like the plague for the very reason being that I was scared I might start smoking again

so if you were, say, stuck in a hole in the side of a mountain - and required urgent hospital attention - you wouldn't need to drain our NHS, then... yes?

 

 

Smoking isn't the huge health risk they have us believe - especially 2nd hand smoking - I've yet to see ANY valid reports as to what it actually does to you.... because, you know what? I've a sneaky feeling this is one big lie.... and 2nd hand smoking, whilst not very pleasant or nice on your clothes...actually does VERY little if ANYTHING to your lungs.

 

..as the hole in the side of the mountain wont be in this country - no I wont be popping into an NHS hospital, my insurance covers all medical care abroad including a nice little helicopter to get me out of my hole, oh and even medical care when I return to this country. So I wont be needing your tax - thanks anyway.

 

and your comment about passive smoking - how anyone can actually believe that passive smoking doesn't cause harm?

I could quote evidence, such as the significantly increased risk of cot death in babies who live in a house with smokers .... but you obviously would think I was making that up too.

 

 

 

as an ex smoker you will know the answer - a pint without a fag, for a smoker, is absolutely unthinkable - Christ, even NON smokers get the urge for a fag when they have a pint, nevermind smokers!

 

I can honestly say I have NEVER had the urge for a cigarette, whether in a pub or not.

 

To be honest I have been disturbed by the control such an unattractive habit has had on friends - one of whom doesn't go on longer flights because she can't go that long without a fag. (her kids wont ever get to Disneyland....???)

 

I understand that smoking is addictive - but to have your life (and finances!) controlled by something that ultimately will kill you, whilst making you rather smelly in the mean time seems rather scary.

 

but back to the point of the thread!!!

 

I agree with a smoking ban in public places - but then as a non-smoker I would!

..but as smoking actually remains a legal habit a ban in ALL public places seems a little extreme.

 

I also agree that is should apply to ALL public places - and even if there is a potential loop hole for MPs - they should set an example and not use it.

 

 

and that is all I have to say about that :mellow:

Edited December 6, 200618 yr by ICR

 

 

and your comment about passive smoking - how anyone can actually believe that passive smoking doesn't cause harm?

 

 

because nearly EVERY smoker ive ever known just ignores the facts about the harm it does... russ here on this thread displays classic denial. cars, kids, anything but the fact that every drag he takes in is slowly killing him. smoke is filth, just look inside the lungs of any smoker.

 

fine if russ or anyone wants to smoke, they can, but pur-leez dont ignore the facts here... it filth, it is killing you.

the whole Roy Castle debate is a strange one - here is a man who made his living in these smoky workingmen's clubs, who quite happily took the cash when nobody else wanted him or even knew who he was... then, when he contracts cancer some 40 years down the line... oh, how convenient to blame those clubs from all those years ago - what baloney.

 

And far from being in denial - I'm well aware of the health risks of smoking for me - what I seriously doubt is this apparent risk of 2nd hand smoking - I have yet to see ANY facts regarding this, any comprehensive studies or reports, and I maintain that I think it's a load of propaganda rubbish - I don't think second hand smoke affects you at all.

 

And cot deaths - I think the reason for these has very little, if anything, to do with smoking parents. It may be a fact that children born from smokers will have chest and lung defects or weaknesses.... but I don't believe cot deaths arise from being in a house with smokers at all. However, someone on this thread has evidence that this is the case - I'd like to see that evidence.

 

And to the adult Robbie Williams fan - so you agree with me that anyone participating in extreme sports in the UK should be made to pay far higher taxes to cover possible injuries and possible drain on the NHS, yes? Because your argument regarding smokers is exactly the same - a dangerous hobby that is a risk to yourself (and sometimes others) that is a possible colossal drain on NHS funds and resource. Surely if these people participate in such foolhardy sports, they should get 2nd class service from the health service - is this what you're saying?

 

As for long haul flights - EVERY smoker thinks twice about long train, plane and car journeys because they would be unable to smoke... the same as no smoker would dream of going to a non-smoking establishment... the same as smokers tend not to go to the cinema very often (myself included). When will the 30-40% of smokers in this country stand up and say NO, THIS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH - we want smoking cinemas (they'd be a huge hit), exclusively smoking bars (which bars are, currently, anyway, just about), trains and planes? You're not talking about a small minority - you're talking about not far off HALF the population in the UK who smoke... and who are being treated as if they no longer exist.

 

It's utter lunacy - and the pious, smug non-smoking brigade have been getting their way for far too long - just you wait til the smoking ban is in force - THEN the $h!te will hit the fan, because smokers, myself included, WILL NOT be told what to do - end of.

As for long haul flights - EVERY smoker thinks twice about long train, plane and car journeys because they would be unable to smoke... the same as no smoker would dream of going to a non-smoking establishment... the same as smokers tend not to go to the cinema very often (myself included). When will the 30-40% of smokers in this country stand up and say NO, THIS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH - we want smoking cinemas (they'd be a huge hit), exclusively smoking bars (which bars are, currently, anyway, just about), trains and planes? You're not talking about a small minority - you're talking about not far off HALF the population in the UK who smoke... and who are being treated as if they no longer exist.

 

It's utter lunacy - and the pious, smug non-smoking brigade have been getting their way for far too long - just you wait til the smoking ban is in force - THEN the $h!te will hit the fan, because smokers, myself included, WILL NOT be told what to do - end of.

 

I am amazed that a so called intelligent man can advocate the idea of smoking in cinemas, smoking in a cinema is the ultimate fire hazard, pitch darkness all it takes is for one ****wit to drop his cigarette in the middle of a movie and there would be hundreds of people burnt to a crisp, on safety grounds alone that is one of the most absurd things I have come across on this board. As for flights again there are serious safety dangers, a bout of turbulence over the Atlantic and a smoker drops his cigarette when the plane shakes and there will be a fire on board, why should 30% endanger the lives of 70% ?

 

As for passive smoking not having an effect you are talking nonsense, the last time I went to a party and there were people smoking there the next morning my throat was absolute $h!t and I was coughing, not because I had a cold but because I was in the same room as cigarette smoke

 

If you want to violate the smoking ban go right ahead but I hope you have very deep pockets from the fines you get :)

the whole Roy Castle debate is a strange one - here is a man who made his living in these smoky workingmen's clubs, who quite happily took the cash when nobody else wanted him or even knew who he was... then, when he contracts cancer some 40 years down the line... oh, how convenient to blame those clubs from all those years ago - what baloney.

 

And far from being in denial - I'm well aware of the health risks of smoking for me - what I seriously doubt is this apparent risk of 2nd hand smoking - I have yet to see ANY facts regarding this, any comprehensive studies or reports, and I maintain that I think it's a load of propaganda rubbish - I don't think second hand smoke affects you at all.

 

And cot deaths - I think the reason for these has very little, if anything, to do with smoking parents. It may be a fact that children born from smokers will have chest and lung defects or weaknesses.... but I don't believe cot deaths arise from being in a house with smokers at all. However, someone on this thread has evidence that this is the case - I'd like to see that evidence.

 

And to the adult Robbie Williams fan - so you agree with me that anyone participating in extreme sports in the UK should be made to pay far higher taxes to cover possible injuries and possible drain on the NHS, yes? Because your argument regarding smokers is exactly the same - a dangerous hobby that is a risk to yourself (and sometimes others) that is a possible colossal drain on NHS funds and resource. Surely if these people participate in such foolhardy sports, they should get 2nd class service from the health service - is this what you're saying?

 

As for long haul flights - EVERY smoker thinks twice about long train, plane and car journeys because they would be unable to smoke... the same as no smoker would dream of going to a non-smoking establishment... the same as smokers tend not to go to the cinema very often (myself included). When will the 30-40% of smokers in this country stand up and say NO, THIS IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH - we want smoking cinemas (they'd be a huge hit), exclusively smoking bars (which bars are, currently, anyway, just about), trains and planes? You're not talking about a small minority - you're talking about not far off HALF the population in the UK who smoke... and who are being treated as if they no longer exist.

 

It's utter lunacy - and the pious, smug non-smoking brigade have been getting their way for far too long - just you wait til the smoking ban is in force - THEN the $h!te will hit the fan, because smokers, myself included, WILL NOT be told what to do - end of.

 

When Roy Castle was playing in those club, the health risks of smoking were not widely known, you're talking about the 50s and 60s here...

 

I have to agree with Craig on the "Smoking In Cinemas" front, daft idea, do you know what the seats in cinemas are made out of...? They'd got up like a bloody tinderbox spewing toxic fumes if some tw@t dropped a lighter or summat.... And I dont particularly want to watch a film through the haze of cigarette smoke frankly... Bad enough having to tolerate unaccompanied, noisy brats who go to see the latest Bond film....

 

I'm unconvinced by the cot death theory though, otherwise it wouldn't happen to parents who are NON smokers, which it has done, so I'm unconvinced that smoking does really play that important a role in cot deaths....