Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

The absurdity of the smoking ban.

24

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How would making money from allowing people to smoke indoors not be illegal? It's against the smoking ban, so it's illegal. Argue that the laws unjust, just don't argue that a law shouldn't exist because people who would subsequently be breaking the law will lose business.
    I wasn't saying that. I was talking about the hypothetical scenario in which certain cafes and places were given special dispensation by the law.

    If it's legal and it doesn't matter how harmful it might be so long as patrons understand the risks. Such places should simply be allowed to allow smoking.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just shows that as well as the livelihoods of the rural publicans who are struggling to get by anyway are being threatened, the shisha cafe proprietors' livelihoods are also under threat. So as well as being anti-traditional Britain, Labour are also anti-cultural diversity and respecting people's way of life.

    There's one thing to be allowed to not go to a pub 'and breathe other people's filthy smoke' but what do people expect when they go to a shisha cafe?

    Seriously, when will this fucking fascism end?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    even though the smoking ban is the single best thing ever, this is ridiculous.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    O_o wrote: »
    even though the smoking ban is the single best thing ever, this is ridiculous.

    See - even anti-smoking fascists agree it's retarded!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    at the end of the day I don?t see why they should get treated any different to pubs or other cafes?, if they are really that unhappy why not sell up and move somewhere that allowing smoking?

    So tell me, why haven't you moved somewhere that doesn't have speed bumps?

    It's a completely non-sensical argument. Those businesses currently act within the law, a change in law puts them out of business even though smoking is still legal. I'd say this was an example of "the law is an ass"
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    I've heard a rumour that at least one airline that has bought the A-380 superjumbo is considering creating a smoking room. That certainly would be a welcome development and a victory for common sense.

    I wonder if a smoking room would be legal or not under the smoking ban legislation we're getting.

    The ban does not allow for separated areas (no matter how well ventilated - even a separate building with state of the art ventilation equipment would be illegal). Even if a group of smokers clubbed together to set up a private drinking club for smokers it would be illegal.

    The smoking ban we're getting would do Hitler proud, it's far more extensive and airtight than the anti-smoking policies he pioneered in Nazi Germany - where smoking bans were invented.

    There's no reason for not having a smoking carriage on long distance trains - Deutsche Bahn in Germany today have separated and well ventilated smoking areas on most trains and it works well for everybody. There's no reason why it can't work on a plane. (I've actually heard before that when smoking was allowed on aeroplanes the air quality was better for all passengers since airlines changed the air more frequently...instead of pumping old air around for longer). Still, I wouldn't bet on ever being able to light up on the superjumbo...but fingers crossed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I am against the smoking ban but this is just taking it a little too far and sounds rather odd to me.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    at the end of the day I don?t see why they should get treated any different to pubs or other cafes?, if they are really that unhappy why not sell up and move somewhere that allowing smoking?

    So they should leave the country? A tad on the drastic side isnt it? Or is this a case where they should be 'going home' anyway?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There's no reason for not having a smoking carriage on long distance trains - Deutsche Bahn in Germany today have separated and well ventilated smoking areas on most trains and it works well for everybody. There's no reason why it can't work on a plane. (I've actually heard before that when smoking was allowed on aeroplanes the air quality was better for all passengers since airlines changed the air more frequently...instead of pumping old air around for longer). Still, I wouldn't bet on ever being able to light up on the superjumbo...but fingers crossed.

    I dont even smoke (well very rarely) but I spent my train ride up to Scotland in the smoking bit, there was loads of room and I got a table to myself instead of just one seat.

    And yes, air changes were significantly more frequent when they allowed smoking on planes, the air would be a lot healthier if they allowed it again.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    So they should leave the country? A tad on the drastic side isnt it? Or is this a case where they should be 'going home' anyway?


    no its not like that at all, but if i want to spend the afternoon smoking Cannabis in a cafe i go to amsterdam, surly if i want to kill myself by sitting in a smoke fillied room why should i have more of a right to do this?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    no its not like that at all, but if i want to spend the afternoon smoking Cannabis in a cafe i go to amsterdam, surly if i want to kill myself by sitting in a smoke fillied room why should i have more of a right to do this?

    Perhaps because smoking is legal here. But of course I would argue that both should be allowed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    Perhaps because smoking is legal here.

    yeah but once the ban comes in then it wont be legal to smoke in a cafe, its the way the world works, things change and businesses have to adapt to change or die and make way for new businesses. that’s the way the world works.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    that’s the way the world works.

    You do tow a beautiful government-approved line. "The way the world works" is that there is no compromise or freedom of choice as we wholly trust over governors to lay down the law with all of our best interests at heart? Ha ha!

    RE: The story, well that's as about as absurd as it gets. If a business's main aim and source of income is - essentially - smoking well then as Man of Kent says that is a conflict of interests between the fact that smoking is legal but smoking in enclosed public spaces is not. Even if that is their aim and no one who is hugely averse to smoking would set foot in it, jeez! What about our freedom to trade? :chin:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    yeah but once the ban comes in then it wont be legal to smoke in a cafe, its the way the world works, things change and businesses have to adapt to change or die and make way for new businesses. that’s the way the world works.

    Wow, thats a lot of faith you have in government there. Personally I think if people want to take risks they should be allowed, you apparently dont.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    budda wrote: »
    Wow, thats a lot of faith you have in government there. Personally I think if people want to take risks they should be allowed, you apparently dont.

    you could say the same about allowing people to play Russian roulette in a cafe, at the end of the day laws are made to protect people just because they have been doing it before doesnt mean its right for them to carry on doing it,
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I wonder if a smoking room would be legal or not under the smoking ban legislation we're getting.

    The ban does not allow for separated areas (no matter how well ventilated - even a separate building with state of the art ventilation equipment would be illegal). Even if a group of smokers clubbed together to set up a private drinking club for smokers it would be illegal.

    The smoking ban we're getting would do Hitler proud, it's far more extensive and airtight than the anti-smoking policies he pioneered in Nazi Germany - where smoking bans were invented.

    There's no reason for not having a smoking carriage on long distance trains - Deutsche Bahn in Germany today have separated and well ventilated smoking areas on most trains and it works well for everybody. There's no reason why it can't work on a plane. (I've actually heard before that when smoking was allowed on aeroplanes the air quality was better for all passengers since airlines changed the air more frequently...instead of pumping old air around for longer). Still, I wouldn't bet on ever being able to light up on the superjumbo...but fingers crossed.
    AFAIK countries can ban smoking on any airliners flying its airspace but airlines are free to allow smoking over international waters.

    Of course in the times we live in, it would not be unthinkable that some countries will deny entry to airliners that allow smoking in their planes even if all the butts have been put out before the plane enters the country's airspace. Such is the rabid extent of the anti-smoking mafia.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    you could say the same about allowing people to play Russian roulette in a cafe, at the end of the day laws are made to protect people just because they have been doing it before doesnt mean its right for them to carry on doing it,

    Suicide is legal, so technically that wouldnt be against the law, although the handgun probably would be. But the comparison is just silly anyway because smoking isnt anywhere near as dangerous as russian roulette.
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    It SHOULD be the owner's choice if there premesis allows smoking or not. That's my opinion.

    Fucking hell. This though, in honesty, is like Amsterdam banning smoking in Cannabis Cafes. Of course a fucking Shisha Cafe will be smokey. Idiots.

    Government being stupid again. Supprise level, 0%.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    :lol: Although I agree. If you're going to impliment a smoking ban on health grounds, then you can't make exceptions. Argue for a landlords right to choose, argue that the health risks are unproven, but if their are health risks, then why should someone be exempt, just because that happens to be their niche?

    The legislation does make exemptions.

    Amendment 16, I think :chin:

    (Although, the "Welsh Assembly" have disregarded the retailer part of it).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    yeah but once the ban comes in then it wont be legal to smoke in a cafe, its the way the world works, things change and businesses have to adapt to change or die and make way for new businesses. that’s the way the world works.

    Is it just me or does this smack of cultish overtones?

    Hewitt was quoted as saying that there would be no exceptions - that shisha cafes would be treated exactly the same way as licenced premeses, cafes, restaurants, private members' clubs, gentlemen's clubs etc. etc.

    This of course is the same Patricia Hewitt who was quoted in the Times a few weeks ago saying that smokers should be forced to quit before being allowed to receive treatment on the NHS (conveniently forgetting the NHS' founding principle being universal healthcare for all, regardless of your lifestyle, legal democratic choices etc. etc.). What a bunch of sanctimonious, we-know-better-than-you fascist scum. What amazes me is that most people in this country are taken in by it and continue to vote for these fuckers!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What amazes me is that most people in this country are taken in by it and continue to vote for these fuckers!

    Not me :no: They've def done more harm than good for this country, and certainly don't look out for people......and they dare to call themselves 'Labour'?! :mad:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I ain't voting for them. Couldn't care less about the ban anyway, i'll still smoke so don't mean much to me. As for not letting these cafes off i think it's a bit daft. total overkill.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Lacy wrote: »
    I ain't voting for them. Couldn't care less about the ban anyway, i'll still smoke so don't mean much to me. As for not letting these cafes off i think it's a bit daft. total overkill.

    But in Islington (London), they're even going for a total ban on the streets!! With a fine if you do smoke (I think)....so if you lived here, you couldn't even go outside for a smoke!! :shocking:

    I'm a non-smoker, but that doesn't seem right to me....total nanny state....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    HanHan wrote: »
    But in Islington (London), they're even going for a total ban on the streets!! With a fine if you do smoke (I think)....so if you lived here, you couldn't even go outside for a smoke!! :shocking:

    I'm a non-smoker, but that doesn't seem right to me....total nanny state....


    That's totally fucking absurd. Last time I checked, the year was 2007, not 1007. If people in this country allow governments to get away with these kinds of tyrranical attacks on human rights - where will it end? I can already see people dressed like traffic wardens handing out tickets to people for smoking in the streets.

    Outside, there is virtually NO risk from passive smoking (not that there is any inside...) because of a marvellous device called wind. Anyway, in the streets, we are in far more danger from exhaust fumes than from tabacco smoke. What a load of fascist nanny-state claptrap.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    you could say the same about allowing people to play Russian roulette in a cafe, at the end of the day laws are made to protect people just because they have been doing it before doesnt mean its
    right for them to carry on doing it,

    OK now you're purporting utter nonsense.

    By your logic the government should be able to enact and enforce any law which would protect people from themselves; I'd like to see you get out of bed in the morning in that world.

    Legal requirement to stretch in the morning - don't want to pull any muscles; nothing but fruit and fibre for breakfast - no naughty sausages; no one would be getting in motor vehicles - far too dangerous, both for ourselves and other people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    OK...hmmm...I may have got it a little wrong about smoking in the streets...:blush: makes no mention of it here: http://www.smokefreeislington.nhs.uk/PAGES/go.asp?PageID=676&Path=3&parent=670.0700&instance=715

    It's things like you're not allowed smoking shelters on the street outside buildings, etc.....but check out the bit about exemptions!! They HAVE made some (to hotels, psychiatric hospitals, etc...)...if they're willing to make some exemptions (especially to hotels...why hotels??), then why not to other establishments like shisha cafes?? :confused: It's all a bit confusing...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Only hotel rooms are exempt. Presumably the government concedes that private hotel rooms cannot be classified as a public place.

    That said, the entire 'public' smoking ban shows a worrying disrespect for private property. Pubs, restaurants and cafes are not 'public' property, they are privately owned businesses and it's a very tyrannical government that tells a landlord he can't light up in his own pub.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    HanHan wrote: »
    It's things like you're not allowed smoking shelters on the street outside buildings, etc.....but check out the bit about exemptions!! They HAVE made some (to hotels, psychiatric hospitals, etc...)...if they're willing to make some exemptions (especially to hotels...why hotels??), then why not to other establishments like shisha cafes?? :confused: It's all a bit confusing...

    They are bringing it in slowly in psychiatric hospitals, and I guess it will be brought in in prisons at some point too, but I wouldnt want to be a guard when they do.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    AFAIK countries can ban smoking on any airliners flying its airspace but airlines are free to allow smoking over international waters.

    Of course in the times we live in, it would not be unthinkable that some countries will deny entry to airliners that allow smoking in their planes even if all the butts have been put out before the plane enters the country's airspace. Such is the rabid extent of the anti-smoking mafia.

    Ah I see. Well, yes, I could see the likes of America, Britain and Ireland doing just that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It happened in Ireland too with the Cigar Smoking Clubs having to shut down.

    Can't see why any rational person would support closing these Shisha Cafes down.
Sign In or Register to comment.