General Chat

about time too! As the only non smoker in my family, and with several friends that smoke it is a nightmare if you want to have a night out together. I understand that it's free choice to smoke, but what about my right to not breathe in second hand smoke and to go home without my clothes stinking to high heaven after a night out? I don't agree with a ban in the home or on the street, but i am really pleased that things will be nicer for social events in future. After all a smoker can always go outside when they want to smoke. Not ideal for them maybe, but surely a fairer system than we currently have. Yvette

Watch your taxes go up people

Joe in Kent Well said!!

Wonderful news. I have been in Ireland where smoking is banned from bars , Lots of the bars provide a covered area outside and some even have heaters for the colder weather,,,Perhaps , building and accessibilty permitting,,,some of the bars here will do the same,

The idea behind the ban is for everybodys health and the amount of revenue lost from tobacco sales is supposed to be outweighed by not so many patients being treated for smoke related deceases

As a non-smoker I am pleased, but I do feel that its the pubs themselves, (or rather the amount of alcohol consumed in them, which seems to be excessive these days!) that causes far more social and health problems than cigarettes! Can't see the Government doing anything about that though, seeing as they are all rather partial to a drop of the hard stuff themselves, lol! Bev x

This bill has not been introduced to stop people smoking, its purpose is 1. To protect the Health and Safety of those at work 2. To protect others from the effects of second hand smoke. That it may encourage people to stop smoking is a side benefit. There are no direct passive effects from alcohol Bob

Bob, I think that a woman or child getting beaten up by a drunken partner or father and a drunken driver killing god-knows-how-many people on his way home from the pub COULD be seen as the unhealthy effects of drinking on innocent people. Personally, I'd rather share a room with a smoker any day. Bev x

It wouldn't be fair for me to vote either way on this because these days I rarely go into pubs except the ones that have a restaurant and there, there are facilities for both smokers and non smokers. june xx

Bev / Gwynne those acts are illegal and rightly so. That some people commit some crimes does not mean we should not legislate ALSO on smoking, come on, be sensible. The point is that there is no such thing as 'passive drinking'. That is the point that the tobacco addicts can't seem to grasp. Even the heroine addict doesn't inject others Are you saying we should not control asbestos, it's iin the same class? There is no point in this, all smokers do is change the subject. The argument has been won Bob

I see your point Bob, but personally, I consider excessive alcohol consumption to be far more damaging to families, to the community and the individual than smoking, unpleasant though that is. It is obviously far more difficult to legislate against excessive drinking. Bev x PS I don't smoke

Surely the subject of this thread was the smoking ban, nothing whatsoever to do with alcohol. In answer to Jo in Kent's remark about the GR meets. The only thing that has spoilt them for me is the inhalation of other people's smoke. In answer to the fact that the non smokers there must be tolerant. We didn't have a choice as te meets always go to the smoking area. The best one I went to was at a Garden Centre (Webbs of Wychebold), when the smokers had to go outside to smoke. Maybe what the government loses on the taxes will be made up by what it saves on treating smoking relaated diseases on the NHS. Ann Glos

Naughty Mandy! This thread is about the effects of passive smoking, not industry, lolol!!! (Aren't exhaust fumes awful though??!) Bev x

I am witness first hand to the dangers of smoking. I lost my mum to lung cancer at 38 and my stepmum at 69 from Emphysema which WAS caused by smoking. Non smokers go into pubs and clubs, these are not proclaimed as smoking clubs, these clubs are meant for all. These are venues for all, its unpleasant for those who are non smokers as they are either forced to leave, or forced to inhale harmful unpleasant smoke . A pub/club for all, should be so for all, It should be comfortable for all, after all the non smoking members wont make it unpleasent for the smokers to sit in the same room , whilst non smokers have to put up with smoke and have no choice, apart from sitting in a gas mask. So it should be a comfortable environment for ALL. How about an asthmatic ? They cant enjoy a drink (a drink not a boozing session) in a smoke filled place can they ?...why ?...because smoking affects breathing and makes people ill You can choose to go into a pub and drink soft drinks all night, but you cant choose not to inhale he fag smog from several people. A moderate drinker will not harm anyone, the beer fumes will not cause ill health to another person in the room. A smoker will pollute their lungs and pollute the innocent bystanders with their smoke. I rarely drink, maybe the odd glass of wine at Xmas birthday or social occasion, or a glass of baileys. Tighter restrictions in Harlow (where I live) on drinking in public places such as shop hatches are coming in. Too right too ! But the drink debate shouldn't me mixed up with the smoking debate or used as an excuse that smoking is better than drinking. I notice whenever a smoking debate comes onto the board, others bring up that drinking/drugs/etc are worse than smoking, as if smoking does less harm The truth is it doesnt do less harm, its equally to blame for ill health and deaths. But that is another debate. Many of us non smokers are opposed to drunks ruining lives, of themselves and others. .Heavy drinking and bad behavior /alcoholics/drink driving and the consequences are a separate and important issue. I despise both. Drunks behavior can be controlled by the staff of the venue, if someone has had too much and is misbehaving,let the bouncers chuck them out.. Even non smokers would welcome that The subject boiled down is passive smoking in a venue by those who have no choice other than to leave. Whilst the smokers can enjoy themselves in the venue, but occasionally will have to light up outside. (if they can do it at work, have a fag break, they can do it in a pub) Elaine x

I agree with Speedy, there should be a room in a pub for smokers (that has no connection with the rooms for non-smokers ) as non-smokers have the rights to breathe clean air.However,smokers have rights too,and I would be the first to acknowledge that. Everyone has a point of view and is entitled to air that view without all this spiteful and (in some cases ) sanctimonious mud slinging. I can understand the gloating attitude from someone too young to know better,but come on ,the rest of us should have a little milk of human kindness,lets live and let live.From what I have seen the smokers are willing to accept (gracefully) the ruling so why all this nastiness? Maddy

Reading this thread is interesting and only proves what was said on another thread on this board. When people's ADDICTION is challenged, in comes comparisons with asbestos, alcohol etc etc. as a smokescreen (excuse that!!) As for the argument that a 'drink and a ciggie go hand in hand' times have changed. There's a lot we used to do as a matter of course that we don't now. It's not about 'rights' its about health and common sense. 5 years from now we'll wonder what all the fuss was about. Roy (3 months and one week free of ciggies)

pmsl at Meercat

In Australia they started with smoking and non smoking areas inside and out. That was a long time ago now as well. Then it moved to anywhere food was served. From there it was all inside venues, transport etc Now it includes many outside places as well. This does of course vary from state to state. However in NSW some local councils I think it is have been able to enforce smoking bans on beaches as well. I'm not sure if anything else has now been included. The reasoning behind this was; 1. Anywhere that was a confined space (ie no fresh air) it was argued that why should non smokers be constantly exposed to a smoke filled environment. 2. Why should other patrons also have to be exposed to smoke, when they are out to enjoy themselves. 3. In the outside areas like beaches where the smoking has been band, it was cleaners I think who complained about having to pick up so many butts. I know when I was in the Navy, if there was and emu parade(rubish pick up) non smokers weren't required to pick up smoking butts, I think that's it's discusting the thought of picking up something that has been in somebody elses mouth. One of the other departments when I was in the Navy gave all their non smokers an early mark one friday and all smokers had to stay back till knock off to make up for the time spent outside smoking. I have heard of that happening elsewhere. It may not seem fair to smokers, but then it's not fair to those that don't smoke either if they have to put up with it. Discrimination can be used on so many fronts and I think people today are getting too picky, and irrisponsible. Gypsy Joe

lmao at Meercat - I wonder if they've thought of all the violence it could bring? Debby

My husband reckons I've been shouting a lot more but can't say I've noticed! Has told me to light a fag up a couple of times - don't think he quite understands the situation!