Smoking ban in all pubs and clubs

[Knoxville]

Smokers perform a service. Smoking doesn't. They would perform the service just as well if they didn't smoke (we will discount any arguments that if they aren't smoking they are feeling bad and cant work properly). Please don't trivialise your argument by talking rubbish.

You put someone that smokes 20 a day on a customer services desk in tesco for 6 hours, see how well they do they're job then, its hardly a trivial argument.

You bat away many of my points by saying that it would all be easier if every smoker just gave up, your right, but I and millions of others enjoy it (not are addicted to it, enjoy it) if you don't enjoy it chances are you've quit already despite the addiction as paying 5 quid for a pack of something you don't enjoy is something not very many people would do.

Point is my basic human right to smoke should be observed just like the rights of non smokers, we should be given the oppurtunity to enjoy a trip down our local wether we smoke or not, yes smoking is harmful to those that don't smoke aswell as those that do, but so long as the pub is filled only with people that understand and accept the risk while also having the choice to drink elsewhere in a smoke free environment I see no problem.

[Knoxville]

Smoking is a disgusting, addictive habit. Should be banned completely, and logic dictates that eventually it probably will be. Along with caffine, sugar, and alcohol (amongst others). Mega City One will by then exist and we'll all be held directly responsible for our action by Judges.

However, when I smoked (for about seven years) I always said that I'd love a ban 'cause it'd help me give up. Fortunately I had a son four years ago, and that helped me quit very quickly indeed.

Smokers, you're right, it's all about an infringement of your personal freedom, but if you're stupid enough to be killing yourself with smoke and harming people around you, then you're obviously not responsible enough to have the personal freedom you currently possess and it should all be taken away from you. You can complain all you like, but the ban will go through, will never be revoked, and there's nothing you can do about it but b1tch, and b1tch, and b1tch...

Something non-smokers have been doing for years, except they get laws passed and we loose more and more priveliges. Oh and just for calling me stupid and irresponsible im gonna have to insert half a kilo of golden virgina into your rectal cavity aswell as the usual carton of 200, is 2pm good for you?

[vincent]

Let me get right to the point........

Isnt this abit censorship ish?
that we all should be able to do wtf we want under the law?
aint we able to be free to destory our lifes slowly?

You see- Behind the smokers are humans- for whatever reason they take up the drug -mine was uncontrollable eating and stress

If they take the right away to public place- i dont mind- but it'll come to this...
You cant smoke in your own house-cos thats what it'll bowl down to within the years to come...

Yeh sure smoking aint doin us good we already know that i wouldnt be surprised that we see the "Rotting Teeth" method of scarying people to quit smoking....... [the US use it instead of having big bold letter on the packet that everyone ignores...]

Now answer me this question...

If Nicotine ISNT a drug- what is it?
If Caffinee ISNT a drug-what is it?

If you can give me a Intellectual answer that either is NOT a drug then i'll let u off other than that- Liek every single thing we eat,touch smell and inhale- is all Chemical.....

cos thats all a drug is- A Chemical- a part of that compound stimalates us liek with Fat,Sugar and other food chemical based drug.....

If you can tell me that you've NEVER in your life been addicted to at least one chemical then theres something wrong with your body.....

Quote=dkmech
They would perform the service just as well if they didn't smoke (we will discount any arguments that if they aren't smoking they are feeling bad and cant work properly).

How can this be then if their Aint any smokers?

How can NHS Smoking Cessation carry on being funded if their aint any smokers...?


Also people need to realise especially in todays Society that everythign we do slowly kills us- Drinking regularly can cause major Heart & kidney problems,too much daily intake or sugar can cause diabetes,too much fat can cause us obese,too much pollution [from factories] and Smog is bad for our lungs,too much stress from work and family factors causes Heart problems,too much TV or DVD or PC usage causes eyesight problems,

My opinion is...

Too much of everything these days Kills us slowly...... Without no shadow of a doubt....

I'm not saying Smoking is a good thing-but if your gonna dispute that Smoking aint good for your health then come to realise that everything we do too much of in life hurts us

[dkmech]

Quote=dkmech
They would perform the service just as well if they didn't smoke (we will discount any arguments that if they aren't smoking they are feeling bad and cant work properly).

How can this be then if their Aint any smokers?

How can NHS Smoking Cessation carry on being funded if their aint any smokers...?

I have a solution for this. We have special centres which will employ heavy smokers to smoke all day and use, unsuccessfully as we don't want to run out of this last resource of smokers, the NHS Smoking Cessation services to keep them in the job. Or maybe if people stop smoking the resources dedicated to helping them do that could be used to help people cope with stress or eating disorders or whatever else people need help with.

Reading some arguments here it seems that life is a race to do bad things to your body. And that smoking is a convenient way to limit your life-span and should be encouraged. If someone drinks too much coffee maybe they should try to cut down if they want to live longer. Why point at someone who is addicted to coffee as an excuse for smoking?

Is banning smoking (not smokers) in pubs and restaraunts a good thing? I don't know. Non-smokers will enjoy it. Smokers won't. Would it be better if all smokers quit? Yes. For everyone. Will this ban help? It will probably help some people. Particularly those who look at it in a positive way and try to use it to their advantage.

[Knoxville]

If all smokers quit your taxes and everyone elses will go up as a result, be they direct or indirect.

[dkmech]

I am prepared to live with that. I have enough compassion to be prepared to pay for my share of civil services and not rely on poisoning a minority of people just so I pay less tax. See, I love you all

[vincent]

Reading some arguments here it seems that life is a race to do bad things to your body. And that smoking is a convenient way to limit your life-span and should be encouraged. If someone drinks too much coffee maybe they should try to cut down if they want to live longer. Why point at someone who is addicted to coffee as an excuse for smoking?

It's more like the Human Race [as in the whole human beings of the world] rather than a race to kill ourselves quickly.... and the Point at someoen whos addicted to coffee is really biast due to the fact of the reason below...

some people cant control things- some people can control things- tis like how 1 person can sya " oh, i'll quit right now" and they dont have a smoke for around 12 months+,while others say the same thing but struggle.... its what makes us different- we all have different weaknesses and strengths if we was all same....

The world would be such a borring place...

[IBM]

But what is the cost in tax pounds of the burden placed upon the health services by smoking related diseases?

And you might enjoy it, but so do crack users, and you don't see them clamouring for the right to shoot up in public...and aside from the associated criminal activities that go hand in hand with hardcore drugs like crack, I'd rather have them next to me in a pub that some inconsiderate individual puffing out stench and pollution...

And yes, non-smokers do b1tch about smokers, but why shouldn't we. Smokers stink, and the smoke they produce is offensive and very unhealthy....doesn't it make you think that if enough people complain, maybe they've got a point?

[iranu]

I think it's ridiculous that a compromise has not been found. The two sides in this debate are the same as foxhunters/huntsabateurs, vivisectionists/anti-vivisectionists - they are never going to agree on anything. Thefore I expect MP's to vote for a compromise that does not squash the rights of those who wish to smoke, those that don't and the landlords who want their pubs to remain places where smokers can have a pint and a fag.

An outright ban is simply a lazy piece of regulation. It's more than workable for a bar to either have sufficient ventallation for there not to be a problem or keep the majority of the pub smoke free and provide a smaller, separate space for smokers. There would be no bar in the smoking section so bar staff would not be subjected to second hand smoke. I don't know of any non-smoking pub, if it's such a big money raiser to go non-smoking why hasn't the majority of UK pubs already done so?

I don't see what the difficulty is.

Just for information - Smokers pay £9.2 billion in duty and tax to chancellor per year, that is equivalent to a rise of between 2p and 3p on the basic rate of income tax. No government would pledge to raise tax by that amount - they would be voted out at the next election.

[Moby-Dick]

But what is the cost in tax pounds of the burden placed upon the health services by smoking related diseases?

And you might enjoy it, but so do crack users, and you don't see them clamouring for the right to shoot up in public...and aside from the associated criminal activities that go hand in hand with hardcore drugs like crack, I'd rather have them next to me in a pub that some inconsiderate individual puffing out stench and pollution...

And yes, non-smokers do b1tch about smokers, but why shouldn't we. Smokers stink, and the smoke they produce is offensive and very unhealthy....doesn't it make you think that if enough people complain, maybe they've got a point?

We've covered this - smoking costs around £2.7bn on the NHS , yet brings in aroudn £10bn in Tax revenue. I'll leave the maths up to you

also Crack is a drug thats smoked , so you'd probably be less happy

[IBM]

Okay, so you pay for your treatment....and you're quite right about Crack, my apologies, although given the potent nature of the drug, perhaps I would be happy, very happy...

I have but one question for smokers, if it's so great, would you recommend it to a child?

[Moby-Dick]

Of course not - I dont think anyone ever gets recommended to smoke ( think how little cigarettes are actually advertised ? )

If I could have gone back 10 years , perhaps I wouldn't have started and spent all that cash - parhaps I woudl have pee'd it up the wall instead ( well more than I did anyhow )

I can't think of anyone that took a conscious decision to start smoking.

[dkmech]

Cigarettes aren't advertised because its illegal. Its not illegal in some countries and in some others there are consessions, like for motorsports sponsorship. But in many places its illegal.

In fact its an example of an established practice becoming illegal and now being completely natural.

[Moby-Dick]

Tobacco advertising hasn't been restricted for that long , so why are kids taking to smoking in fhte first place ?

[dkmech]

I think you sort of contradict yourself there.

I.e. if it hasn't been restricted long then kids who haven't been exposed to it haven't had time to grow up and become part of the statistics. And if people are taking it up less then maybe its having an effect.

As for why kids take it up - there is enough smoking "role-models" among peers and on tv. They think its cool and rebelious and they start.

As for timeframe in general - true, it may not be restricted that long, but I think everyone is quite used to not having cigarette ads on tv now and doesn't feel like they something is missing.

[Big RICHARD]

I think it's ridiculous that a compromise has not been found. The two sides in this debate are the same as foxhunters/huntsabateurs, vivisectionists/anti-vivisectionists - they are never going to agree on anything. Thefore I expect MP's to vote for a compromise that does not squash the rights of those who wish to smoke, those that don't and the landlords who want their pubs to remain places where smokers can have a pint and a fag.

A compromise has been found:

Wanna smoke? Go outside or home.....