Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to
and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head
Of course if someone is really fat (easily as dangerous as smoking) it doesnt harm you, but then neither does outside second hand smoke - to any degree which is going to reduce your life.
But surely if you breathe alot of second hand smoke in, it will affect you?
Because it affects everyone? Why should I have to beathe in other peoples' dirty habits? And quite a few smokers are inconsiderate about it anyway. Yes, there are a few I know of who will ask if I'm okay with them smoking around me, but not everyone's like that.
How much time do you spend outside hanging out with smokers?
what do you think the revenue of shops is going to do?
I used to live with one. Quite a few of my friends smoke as well.
Bit like feminism.
That's not my problem.
WTF? Random... :chin:
I see :thumb: What else is there to do on a Wednesday afternoon when you can't go down the pub and smoke yourself and everyone else to death?
What else is there to do on a Wednesday afternoon when you can't go down the pub and smoke yourself and everyone else to death?
I didn't mean it like that- i do actually agree with having separate rooms for smokers- at least then people can't complain about it. But Pubs are the place where most people complain about it being too smoky. I'm just against not allowing people to smoke outdoors. Isn't this meant to be a free country, provided whatever you're doing isn't hurting anyone?
Oh, I agree completely.
I'd prefer to have smoking and non-smoking pubs (or yes, at least rooms) because the only thing I can imagine being more annoying than having smoke "blown in your face" (rarely, if ever, see this happen - just for the record) is having someone harping on in your ear about the dangers of passive smoking and all the damage you're doing to your lungs.
It is utterly preposterous to even suggest banning smoking outside. I can't get my head around the twisted logic there!
I'd say live and let live, but then someone will jump in with a "smokers aren't letting anyone live; they're murderous, selfish cunts" or similar. Ah, how I love these threads :thumb:
I hate to say it, but if you lived with a smoker then not only is that your choice but an outside ban would do you no good anyway.
If your friends smoke surely you can ask them to do it down wind of you, or not to blow the smoke at you?
It's a bit hard to complain about smoking outdoors when in most cities you're breathing in all those lovely diesel fumes.
I've said it once and I'll say it again:
People needs cars; they DON'T need cigarettes. Or do you expect everyone just to walk everywhere?
It's a fair compromise, and one i'm happy with. I get to go out without my wife having an asthma attack, and you get to give yourself cancer.
It's not exactly good though either, is it? :rolleyes:
Man Of Kent wrote:
They don't need gas guzzlers. They don't need diesel engine.
You get more pollutants in your average car driving a mile than you do in more than 100 cigarettes.
So, how do you intend to find that £9bn tax gap when smoking levels reduce?
Man Of Kent wrote:
Has it ever been a pain... home of single malt for crying out loud. Radioactive waste wouldn't stop me...