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.
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Oh I am considerate - I always ask people if they mind and if they do object, I go outside or whatever, but at the same time, I hate the way we are treated as second-class citizens just for smoking.
There are other factors than smoking to the previous statistics... For example nutrition (the Japanese have a very good diet), alcoholism, obesity, lifestyle, mental health, physical exercise ect... So smoking could still be harmful, but a mixture of other factors could also be the cause of death.
I don't see why a government which gets a shitload of tax from cigarettes would say that it's harmful for any reason other than to save the NHS money for smoking related diseases.
And again, it isn't about your health, it's about people around you not wanting to breath in chemicals (read the post I did about what is found in cigarettes) or come home from a night out stinking.
The main arguement which seems to be sported by smokers is that they want to smoke at the expense of the enjoyment and health of non-smokers who tend to be in the majority. Can't they wait for a cigarette? or stand outside?
Nobody needs to smoke after all (and this comes from somebody who has been a smoker for years), being able to smoke isn't a right, it's a liberty which can ruin the enjoyment of a night out for other people...
For me it's the holier-than-thou attitude a lot have. All those smokers, common as muck they are. :yeees:
Don't see why so many of them get on their high horse because people want healthier places to socialise in... I mean nobody is stopping anybody from smoking... It is just about stopping smoking in pubs or closed spaces.
Either have special "smokers pubs" or ban it completely is what I say.
And nobody is yet to call smokers "common".
You don't get it. I am not saying that smoking doesn't smell or cause a nuisance. I am aware it does, and will happily admit it.
I am just saying that there is no need to exagerate on the effects - it doesn't help your case.
We really really aren't exaggerating the effects. When I have been in a smoky pub for the evening, my entire being smells, from my hair and skin to my clothes. When I wake up in the morning, my throat and eyes are sore, my nose is blocked up and I feel like I have a hangover, despite the fact that I don't drink. And these are just the tanglible effects, I'm not even talking about the nasty chemicals here. This stuff is in no way an exaggeration. When I visited Ireland not long after they had implimented their ban, we went to pubs most nights and it was such a relief to wake up in the morning with no headache and without smelling awful, especially since we were camping.
I am just saying that having to wash your hair several times, and not just once, and your sweat smelling of smoke, is either exageration or not connected to the smoking but a physical problem to begin with.
You guys seriously don't listen.
How are you treated as second class citixzens? Or do you think that you as asmoker are more important than non smokers and therefore should have the right to smoke wherever you want, whenever you want? :rolleyes:
A friend of mine does this and both times I've been out with him, I've stood out there with him and talked to him whilst he has his cigarette.
I'm getting sick of this, instead of actually admitting that other people (non smokers) are affected by smoke your saying were exaggerating and treating you like second class citizens. Smoke gets everywhere no one is exaggerating. And by the sound of it people think there banning smoking altogether.
Buses and trains are a bit different. They're a form of public transport and unavoidable; by contrast you don't need to go in the pub on your way to work. I don't really object to smoking bans on buses and trains. That said I think smokers should always be accommodated where possible. Separate areas on buses aren't really viable but on trains it's perfectly reasonable for at least one carriage to be reserved for smokers. (Until not that long ago GNER did just that. And in Germany most train services seem to have at least a carriage designated smoking and it works well).
Seriously, if your sweat smells of smoke, then there's something seriously wrong with you. I'm sorry.
And again - you're not listening. I'll be the first to admit that yes I can smell it heavily on my clothes after a night out and that they go in the wash immediatly (though then again, they would even if they didn't smell of smoke) - yet I'm just stating that it doesn't help your case when going over the top with your descriptions.
Either way, have explained myself enough on this petty point. If you guys choose to argue about it do it with yourself. If you truly still don't understand what I am trying to say, then you're past saving anyway.
I dont need saving thank you, you need the saving weather or not you want it.
My position is well stated- I am happy for people to smoke when and where they want, so long as I can have a pint and a piss without being forced to breathe it in.
But the smoking lot on here are guilty of a gross misrepresentation- smoking is not being "banned", the law is simply that you need to step outside the building for the 30 seconds or so it takes you to chuff your Lucky Strike. I really genuinely don't understand why this is such a big deal. I get to sit in the pub and enjoy my pint and my pork scratchings without breathing in your smoke, you get to enjoy your pint and pork scratchings and have a cigarette when you need one.
The other thing, of course, is that this legislation is not being brought in for the punters, its being brought in for the staff. If any other piece of workforce health and safety legislation was left for the employer to choose (say, crash hats and harnesses for builders) Aladdin et al would be pissing themselves with anger. Why's this any different?
Why is the inconvenience of having to stand outside for 30 seconds (something which smokers are happy to do on public transport and at work) so bad? I get to enjoy my pint without having an asthma attack and without my clothes stinking of smoke, and you get to enjoy yours too. Isn't that what "consideration" is all about, taking into accounts the wishes and needs of others?
Why is your right to smoke in the pub (when standing outside for 30 seconds doesn't exactly rank with sacrificing your eldest daughter in the hardship stakes) greater than the right of my asthmatic mother-in-law and wife to go in the pub full stop? Answer me that, showing consideration for the needs and wishes of the 85% of people who do not smoke, and maybe I will begin to sympathise with the "persecutuon".
Non smokers do not effect the health of smokers in public indoor places.
Smokers do effect the health of non smokers in public indoor places.
Therefore, smokers should have to go outside to do their smoking. It makes perfect logical sense and a lot of smokers need to stop being so incredibly selfish. Its as simple as that. Non smokers should not have to stay away from pubs to save their health when EVERYONE- smokers and non smokers can all go together.
When i have a night out i suffer for an average of 3 days after. I get a sore throat, a croaky voice, a blocked nose, sore and itchy dry eyes, asthma symptoms, a cough, and i fucking reek head to toe and so does everything that i took out with me.
I wouldnt consider puffing car exhaust fumes in someones face in a pub then throw a hissy fit because it became illegal, so why should i tolerate someone puffing poisenous fag fumes into my face causing me to suffer.
It DOES harm others, and it DOES kill. And other than that its dam right disgusting to be surrounded by smoke. Its like being in a room full of smelly dangrous farts, only the smell doesnt leave you when your out of the building, it lingers.
Ive heard so many smokers arguing that if non smokers dont like it they shouldnt go out. Selfish fucks. Enjoy dying of lung cancer wont you :thumb:
The damage on pubs and bars will be slower, it will not have an effect on all - but it's indisputable Kermit that there are a lot of pubs where smokers form a lot more than 25% of the customers and it will hurt some places.
You know it's much more than 15%. And you know in a lot of pubs and clubs it's probably nearer 50%, in some even over 50%.
Which isn't that easy in a club. Lots of us like a cigarette with a few drinks in a pub. The ban stops that.
People have always smoked in pubs. If you hate smokers you're not going to take a job in a pub. (Likewise if you're a vegetarian sickened by the sight of meat you probably won't get a job in a butchers).
This patronising talk of 'protecting' bar staff is rather annoying. I work part time in a pub as well as working part time in a supermarket. I was fed up to recently hear of Christians and MPs wanting 'protection' for shop workers working Sundays and on Christmas Eve and the same goes with this talk of 'protecting' bar staff. (Oh and a lot of bar staff smoke - more than 15%, where I work it's the minority who don't...) I like working Sundays and whilst I can't speak for all bar staff, like a lot of others I don't mind working in a smoky environment.
I have no right to smoke in a pub, just as I have no right to smoke in somebody else's house. But I do believe a landlord has a right to allow me to smoke in their pub.
A pub isn't a public service that you fund in your council taxes. It's a private business. If you don't like the service they offer (i.e. if they don't have a decent non-smoking area) I suggest you take your business elsewhere.
It's affect. :rolleyes: And it's also pretty insignificant. Going to a smoky pub a few times a week isn't going to have any major impact on long term health. (French people after all go out more than us, French restaurants rarely have non-smoking areas let alone smoking bans yet the French live longer...Although, that is of course something to do with them not eating the crap Brits do but still, the smoking ban won't have any big impact on overall public health).
Quite remarkable. Whether I smoke or not when I go out I never have those problems... Tbh I don't think I know of any smoker who gets a blocked nose, dry eyes and a cough from a few hours in a pub. How awful regardless. How ever would people like yourself have coped fifty years ago when people smoked everywhere? I wonder if non-smokers moaned so much back then. What ever will you do when smoking is banned and you can't blame your common cold on those nasty smokers?
If you're particularly sensitive and know that you will get a 'blocked nose' or whatever from going out - you should remember that nobody is forcing you to go out to pubs. (There's lots of non-smoking alternatives).
Er, no, that's a description in that it's a house open to the public...It's still a private business.
That's actually the first time you've 'reminded' me.
Supermarket staff do not really have a 'shorter' day on a Sunday. If you've worked in a supermarket you'll know people are working before and after the shop opens... I don't really have an argument for keeping the present Sunday trading rules other than that the status quo works well.
What?
Bollocks. Unless you live in a tiny hamlet with nothing more than a pub and a Church there's usually plenty of choice for basic work. (Starbucks, McDonald's, retail, restaurants, etc). Most people who work in pubs work there not because there's no alternative but because they like working in that kind of environment. Pay and benefits in retail or a chain like Starbucks are generally quite a bit better than a pub).