Anti smoking hysteria.

[jimslip]

What is it with this lobby group of smoking haters? Speaking as an ex smoker I can't believe how smokers are being villified beyond reason. Why don't these nannying, do gooding fascists attend to hazards like carcinogens in diesel fumes, discharges from nuclear reactors, the hazards of excess drinking and the myriad of other dangers facing people every day?

These Nazi bastards wont be happy until they have made it illegal to smoke ANYWHERE and then what will they start on? Eating chips? Forcing people to eat only a vegetarian diet?

The latest ad on TV showing a woman smoking outside and plumes of smoke pouring through the cracks into her house and poisoning her child is utter bollocks! What about all the other fumes pouring into her house? No mention of these of course!

[img]http://liquorstorebear.files.wordpress. ... -fumes.jpg[/img]

[frankthring]

Perhaps Jim because you yourself were once a heavy smoker and didn`t
realise the misery you inflicted on others you have a soft spot for this
disgusting social habit. Smokers were for donkeys years utterly selfish
bastards filling the air around them - in bars, cinemas and scores of public
places - with their noxious fumes. If, now, they are getting it in the neck
I could not be happier.It is a disgusting habit, injurious to their health and
all around them....Yes, other fumes are foul too, but please do not have
any sympathy for smokers and their grubby behaviour.

[Dave Wells]

Fuck me Bill, I agree with every single word you say !!!!!!!!!!!

[Arginald Valleywater]

Simple fact is if smoking was invented now it would be banned and quite rightly so. Vile habit.

[Sam Slater]

It's interesting because I find that some of the most passionate smoking-haters are ex-smokers. As others have said, smokers have had it their own way for years. Polluting the air of cafes, pubs, clubs, toilets, restaurants, bus shelters, train stations, coaches, trains and buses for years was just accepted and non-smokers didn't have a say. Once evidence suggested that passive smoking was a real danger to others then banning smoking in public places was always going to come in at some point. Once your bad habit affects someone else's health then there really is no argument.

Your eating chips/vegetarian diet scenario doesn't follow the same logic, of course, because you can eat as much shit as you like, it won't affect my health. I don't think anyone's died from passive eating yet!

But this law has been passed for a long time now, Jim, why are you bringing it up? Has something irked you recently regarding this?

[andy at handiwork]

But Jim, it IS generally recognised that all the pollutants you mention are dangerous, and that's why there are regulations covering them. They may not me stringent enough but can you imagine the fuss there would be if it was stipulated that vehicle emissions had to be cut to virtually nothing.

[thealtruist]

I am a non smoker. Always have been and always will be. Never even tried it. But I loathe and detest the anti smoking propaganda. And that's all it is. Propaganda. There's so much bollocks being spouted by anti groups that it's hard to believe anything they say. It's a bunch of people trying to brainwash you into their way of thinking.

[andy at handiwork]

Which bit about 'smoking affects the health of smokers and many of those who have to put up with it near them' dont you know to believe?

[thealtruist]

All of it.

[Toliverwist]

As an ex smoker myself, I have to agree to some extent. While there seems a logic to banning smoking where it is going to effect other people, there seems something rather vindictive about other legislation.

I can see no proper reason, why it's not possible for a landlord who is himself/herself a smoker, hiring staff who smoke, and declaring the pub open for smokers. Non-smokers would not be forced to go there, and it would soon become apparent whether the decision was commercially viable.