M-13 - Smoking in Public Places

[Denyse]

I feel strongly that smoking in public should be illegal. What about people with asthma (like my son) or people who are allergic to cig smoke. Or people who just don't want that gross smell on them all day?

There's no disputing the fact that cig smoke is very dangerous and bad for everyone who comes in contact with it. I have a right to protect my children and myself from that. If people want to smoke, despite knowing the consequences, then they have a right to do that in their own homes but I don't feel that right overrides my right to live a healthy, smoke free life.

I believe that Cig smoke is a poison and no one has a right to put poison into my son's lungs. (Or mine!)

[Ms Weasley]

A question to smokers: Why do you think your right to smoke overrides non-smoker's rights? Not just the right to breathe "clean air", but our right to sit down in a restaraunt and enjoy a meal where we do not have to smell gross smoke? To almost all non-smokers, cigarette smoke stinks. Immagine having to eat your meal while sitting next to something that smells really bad to you. Then immagine being told you just have to deal with it because a small portion of people think it's their right to ruin your meal. Sound fair? Well, that's what it's like for us non-smokers. Banning us from restaruants is unfair and cruel. Why should you get all the treats for trying to slowly kill yourselves?

Like I said, I quit quite recently, but I'll try to answer this.
To you, a smoker is ruining your meal by smoking. To a smoker, you are ruining their meal by not allowing them to smoke. It might sound warped to you, but one of the best cigarettes is the one after dinner. Take it away, and you often get a frustrated smoker.
Now, I'm not saying that smoking should really be allowed all through restaurants. It still is allowed in The Netherlands, but after 6 months in Australia (where legislation is different) I also find it quite gross. I'm all for smoking/non-smoking sections in restaurants. That way the smokers can have their after dinner ciggie while not bothering non-smokers.
When I was still smoking, I made sure I never smoked in restaurants when there were non-smokers around. Or if there were, I wouldn't smoke when they were having dinner.
Unfortunately this is turning more and more into a 'civil rights' thing. You might say 'what is your right to poison me' while smokers will say 'who are you to tell me I can't'.

[fllama]

Hate smoking, hate hate hate it! LOL But hey, if you wanna smoke that's fine, just don't do it around me or else I'm gonna have to chase you with a kitchen utensil - most possibly a spatula.

But yeah, if my friends and I walk past someone smoking we all start coughing outrageously loud and dramatically so -- and the guilty and shocked looks on the faces of the smoker.. absolutely priceless :D

By the way, what is the point of smoking? I mean, ok, we eat food to live, and we clothe ourselves from being naked, but is there an actual point to smoking? Besides inhaling a poisonous and addictive gas that could one day give you cancer.. it just reminds me of gum. What is the point of gum? We chew and chew and chew and then what? We either spit or swallow it (don't even go there), it doesn't give us anything, it's just -- Gah! Anyways, now that my garble is nearing to an end, I think I'll just go and lie down :)

[crookshanksmom]

Like I said, I quit quite recently, but I'll try to answer this.
To you, a smoker is ruining your meal by smoking. To a smoker, you are ruining their meal by not allowing them to smoke. It might sound warped to you, but one of the best cigarettes is the one after dinner. Take it away, and you often get a frustrated smoker.
Now, I'm not saying that smoking should really be allowed all through restaurants. It still is allowed in The Netherlands, but after 6 months in Australia (where legislation is different) I also find it quite gross. I'm all for smoking/non-smoking sections in restaurants. That way the smokers can have their after dinner ciggie while not bothering non-smokers.
When I was still smoking, I made sure I never smoked in restaurants when there were non-smokers around. Or if there were, I wouldn't smoke when they were having dinner.
Unfortunately this is turning more and more into a 'civil rights' thing. You might say 'what is your right to poison me' while smokers will say 'who are you to tell me I can't'.

To me, this is why places should have smoking lounges situated in far corners of building like restaraunts and bars (not retail places, there is NO NEED to smoke while shopping for clothing or supplies) that have separate ventalation. That way if a smoker feels the "need" to have the "best cig" they can do it, without their gross scent floating over to us while we enjoy a meal. Because there is no invisible barrier between non smoking and smoking sections, and the smoke does just drift over to us, especially after a smoker walks though our section to leave/go to the bathroom, or a waitress walks through who works in the smoking section to get to the kitchen/leave on break. So what you are saying is your rights DO override mine, and I think that is very unfair. It's like you're saying that smokers have a right to force non smokers to either never eat out or only be able to order take-out.

[Hagrid442]

In publicly-owned public spaces and hospitals, there should be no-smoking. Ok, a small enclosed smoking lounge. In family restaurants, there should be a smoking section and non-smoking section. Perhaps they should be enclosed, but it's not mandatory. Other privately owned places like bars and clubs... it's up to them. Some cities like New York have a general ban, and I don't think that's fair. It's a reasonable assumption that many people go to a club so they can smoke socially, and that it will hurt business if the club was wholly non-smoking. No to general smoking bans.

Know that this is coming from a non-smoker that is likely allergic to cigarette smoke. Know that this is someone whose mother is on an oxygen machine 24/7 because she once smoked.

[Chrysalis]

I think that enclosed smoking places in restaurants should be mandatory. Why? Because the smoke just wafts all over the room. Once we were seated right next to a table full of smokers. Ours was the non-smoking section. Theirs was smoking.

There is nothing wrong in segregating smokers and non-smokers in restaurants.

It's a vicious circle basically. Smoking is allowed in restaurants and bars ==> People who don't like cigarette smoke still feel they have to put up with it because they would like to have a social life too ==> As a result, everyone goes and smokers claim that the majority don't mind cigarette smoke.

[Spew Member]

In publicly-owned public spaces and hospitals, there should be no-smoking. Ok, a small enclosed smoking lounge. In family restaurants, there should be a smoking section and non-smoking section. Perhaps they should be enclosed, but it's not mandatory. Other privately owned places like bars and clubs... it's up to them. Some cities like New York have a general ban, and I don't think that's fair. It's a reasonable assumption that many people go to a club so they can smoke socially, and that it will hurt business if the club was wholly non-smoking. No to general smoking bans.

Know that this is coming from a non-smoker that is likely allergic to cigarette smoke. Know that this is someone whose mother is on an oxygen machine 24/7 because she once smoked.

I used to smoke, but I couldn't imagine smoking in a restaurant. People aren't allowed to here in California. I would even feel bad if I were outside and smoking around people who were eating. I thought it was gross.

The one exception and the only place where it should be acceptable to smoke indoors and around food is Las Vegas. ;)

[dumbleedore]

I think that enclosed smoking places in restaurants should be mandatory. Why? Because the smoke just wafts all over the room. Once we were seated right next to a table full of smokers. Ours was the non-smoking section. Theirs was smoking.

There is nothing wrong in segregating smokers and non-smokers in restaurants.

Except when you get a large group of people, half of which smoke, half of which don't, who go out to dinner- who gets the rights of where they sit?

[PhoenixUK]

There is nothing wrong in segregating smokers and non-smokers in restaurants.
Segragation isn't really very practical. Take at work: in the canteen, we have a seperate smoking room with one table in and then four tables seperated by glass to keep them apart? Result: all the staff cram into the smoking room so that we can all talk regardless of whether or not they smoke, so that we can all talk together, while 4 tables sit empty.

Unfortunately, unless you make non-smokers only ever befriend other non-smokers, it just unneccaserily splits up groups.

[Chrysalis]

So, if you go out with a large group of people, half of whom smoke, I imagine that the non-smokers won't mind sitting with the smokers. Either that, or the smokers just sit in the non-smoking section and go outside to smoke.

Really, we don't make any allowances for drunk driving, why for smoking?

[dumbleedore]

Really, we don't make any allowances for drunk driving, why for smoking?

I was going to reply to this with a comment that a smoking driver couldn't unknowingly hit a pedestrian- until I remembered my, erm, several near crashes whilst trying to find or light a cigarette :p So ignore my thoughts :p

Drinking is also another habit that some people like and some people don't- does this mean that drinking should be banned in resturants? Or have drinking and non drinking sections?

[~Tonks~]

I was going to reply to this with a comment that a smoking driver couldn't unknowingly hit a pedestrian- until I remembered my, erm, several near crashes whilst trying to find or light a cigarette :p So ignore my thoughts :p

Drinking is also another habit that some people like and some people don't- does this mean that drinking should be banned in resturants? Or have drinking and non drinking sections?

As far as I know you can't second hand drink. The implications of that are too gross. :lol: To me it doesn't matter if the woman at the table next to me has a glass of wine. She's putting that in her body and it's staying there. It's not leaving her body and spreading throughout the room to affect other patrons. Granted, a customer could become too drunk and therefore get belligerent, but they would be removed and the situation would be cleared.

[PhoenixUK]

As far as I know you can't second hand drink. The implications of that are too gross. :lol: To me it doesn't matter if the woman at the table next to me has a glass of wine. She's putting that in her body and it's staying there. It's not leaving her body and spreading throughout the room to affect other patrons. Granted, a customer could become too drunk and therefore get belligerent, but they would be removed and the situation would be cleared.
Look at the effects of drinking: domestic violence, sexual abuse, public disorder, death by driving while under the influece of alcohol, as well as social issues such as child neglect, divorce and alcoholism. Then tell me that alcohol doesn't have consequences to other people again.

[~Tonks~]

Look at the effects of drinking: domestic violence, sexual abuse, public disorder, death by driving while under the influece of alcohol, as well as social issues such as child neglect, divorce and alcoholism. Then tell me that alcohol doesn't have consequences to other people again.

We were talking about these things being used indoors in enclosed areas and affecting the general public within the same area. If this is how you want to address it I could go off on the countless health concerns to children and adults as well as the costs of health care associated with smoking related illnesses and all of the little issues inbetween, such as smoking in bed and burning one's house down, as well as rude people using the beach as an ashtray, which is one of the grossest forms of litter.

If someone sits next to me in a restaurant and has a drink I don't even know it. If someone is smoking like a chimney at the table behind me it's going to be very evident.

[Laufa]

A question to smokers: Why do you think your right to smoke overrides non-smoker's rights? Not just the right to breathe "clean air", but our right to sit down in a restaraunt and enjoy a meal where we do not have to smell gross smoke?

Firstly, no human being is more rightfull than another. That includes non-smokers. Second, most restaurants are divided into smoking and non-smoking areas. If you don't like the smoke; don't go there. It's up the owner and not the government. People don't always need to be told what to do.

To almost all non-smokers, cigarette smoke stinks. Immagine having to eat your meal while sitting next to something that smells really bad to you. Then immagine being told you just have to deal with it because a small portion of people think it's their right to ruin your meal. Sound fair? Well, that's what it's like for us non-smokers. Banning us from restaruants is unfair and cruel. Why should you get all the treats for trying to slowly kill yourselves?

Well, I'm a non-smoker, and I always sit in a non-smoking area during dinner. If I'm with a friend who smokes, I ask him/her not to do so while I'm having my meal, or move to a non-smoking area.
It does sound fair that a smoker can smoke where smoking is allowed, yes. Like I said, it's your choice to go to a place which isn't divided into smoking and non-smoking areas.

If you don't like it, start your own restaurant. Ban smoking. The government doesn't have to decide what's good for you and what isn't, you have free will and if you don't like something because it affects you, do something that changes that affect - on you.

Where I'm from there has been talk about banning cigarettes (we have these large stickers on the packs, you're not allowed to talk about cigarettes in public without saying how dangerous they are (That's really funny, one guy who owns a tobacco store put up large signs: "WARNING! Cigarettes inside!"), and 70% of bars and restaurants have to be smoke-free and you're not allowed to advertise cigarettes.)

Love,
Eyrún

[~Tonks~]

Firstly, no human being is more rightfull than another. That includes non-smokers. Second, most restaurants are divided into smoking and non-smoking areas. If you don't like the smoke; don't go there. It's up the owner and not the government. People don't always need to be told what to do.



Well, I'm a non-smoker, and I always sit in a non-smoking area during dinner. If I'm with a friend who smokes, I ask him/her not to do so while I'm having my meal, or move to a non-smoking area.
It does sound fair that a smoker can smoke where smoking is allowed, yes. Like I said, it's your choice to go to a place which isn't divided into smoking and non-smoking areas.

If you don't like it, start your own restaurant. Ban smoking. The government doesn't have to decide what's good for you and what isn't, you have free will and if you don't like something because it affects you, do something that changes that affect - on you.

Where I'm from there has been talk about banning cigarettes (we have these large stickers on the packs, you're not allowed to talk about cigarettes in public without saying how dangerous they are (That's really funny, one guy who owns a tobacco store put up large signs: "WARNING! Cigarettes inside!"), and 70% of bars and restaurants have to be smoke-free and you're not allowed to advertise cigarettes.)

Love,
Eyrún

In a bar/pub that is also a restaurant I can kind of see why this is ridiculous, as there tends to be a different atmosphere in a bar that is also a bar and restaurant as opposed to a family restaurant or a fine dining establishment.

It's not my fault or any other non smoker's fault that someone else chose to get so addicted to a substance that they can't sit and enjoy a meal without lighting up. Unless you plan on sitting and socializing for hours, in which a bar or conference room or private room is probably more appropriate, can't you control the urge for the time it takes to order, receive, and consume the average meal, which is maybe forty minutes? My mom is a smoker, currently trying to quit, and even when she was determined to keep smoking, she didn't like being in restaurants where people were smoking around her because she didn't like tasting it with her food.

Smoking sections are easier said than done. The only time I've seen it really work is when one half of the restaurant is non-smoking and the other half is smoking and they're seperated by several doors and the kitchen and there's a different crew for each.

[Hollis]

Smoking sections are easier said than done. The only time I've seen it really work is when one half of the restaurant is non-smoking and the other half is smoking and they're seperated by several doors and the kitchen and there's a different crew for each.

YEP, I've been to a place like that in Wisconsin, which will be one of the last places probabyl to ban smoking. A favorite Brew-pub though recently had a fire and moved to a new location where they had the room to seperate the smokers from the non-smokers. However, the bathrooms were right next to the smoking section and STUNK.

Regarding air filtration, even if you use hospital grade filters, it doesn't really work for cigarette smoke. (this is according to a lung doctor that I know quite well).

I remember a bus trip from hell, the train broke down around midnight and we all had to get on a bus for 10 hours to read the next train. ONE woman (with a little kid) was chain smoking for hours. The rest of the bus revolted finally and refused to let her get back on when we stopped for a break one time (there were other buses to take ther the rest of the way). YEAH! for non-smokers standing up for clean air.

I don't want to do the drug that you are smoking thank you.

[dumbleedore]

In a bar/pub that is also a restaurant I can kind of see why this is ridiculous, as there tends to be a different atmosphere in a bar that is also a bar and restaurant as opposed to a family restaurant or a fine dining establishment.

I can see your point there, Tonks- bars/pubs are places you expect to be smoky- it's a social place where food isn't normally consumed. If you go into a pub, you get the pub smell- I find a pub smell incredibly sickening.

But at the same time, this will sound funny, you can't classify a restaurant as a 'family' restaurant- all restaurants should be family restaurants- even if it is a fine food establishment, you should be able to take your family everywhere. And I had a point, but I lost it...

[Tane]

A pub to me is a place where should smell ale not cigarette smoke and I would love to go to a pub that no longer stinks of smoke or see cigarette ends in an ash tray on the table. So I would not really mind if they banned smoking in public places because some people will not go into certain pubs due to the odor left from smoking.

[Ilse]

I think that there should be smoking and non-smoking areas in public places, a smoking place should be optional, but a non-smoking place/room should be normal.

I hate to admit but I do smoke, and I'm not proud of it. Call me weak or a loser, but the fact is: I smoke.

But that doesn't mean that I like to sit in a room where a lot of people smoke. I hate it if people smoke in cars, very small rooms etc, airplanes, trains etc. And I don't mind not smoking when there are people who can't stand it. Who am I to let someone else breath in my filthy air?

Anyway, Tane said that she doesn't like to sit in a pub where people smoke, and that you should smell the ale in stead of sigarettes, but I would like to say that I don't like the smell of alcohol, or the fact that people get drunk in public or even drink in theaters...that doesn't mean that I don't go to a bar and have a drink. I know that people drink and smoke in a pub, so when I choose to go there I can't complain. If there are enough people who want to start a non smoking pub, I'll support them, if there are enough people who want to start a non alcoholic bar I'll support them, but I've never seen anything like it.

[Chrysalis]

I was going to reply to this with a comment that a smoking driver couldn't unknowingly hit a pedestrian- until I remembered my, erm, several near crashes whilst trying to find or light a cigarette :p So ignore my thoughts :p

Drinking is also another habit that some people like and some people don't- does this mean that drinking should be banned in resturants? Or have drinking and non drinking sections?
If the guy at the table next to me has a drink it doesn't affect me. Maybe his life at home, but not me, not at that moment. However, if he lights up a cigarette, I breathe in the smoke.

[Laufa]

In a bar/pub that is also a restaurant I can kind of see why this is ridiculous, as there tends to be a different atmosphere in a bar that is also a bar and restaurant as opposed to a family restaurant or a fine dining establishment.

Hey, I'm all for smoking and non-smoking sections, though. If people don't want to breathe smoke, they have the right not to. However, those who do, have the right to.

It's not my fault or any other non smoker's fault that someone else chose to get so addicted to a substance that they can't sit and enjoy a meal without lighting up. Unless you plan on sitting and socializing for hours, in which a bar or conference room or private room is probably more appropriate, can't you control the urge for the time it takes to order, receive, and consume the average meal, which is maybe forty minutes? My mom is a smoker, currently trying to quit, and even when she was determined to keep smoking, she didn't like being in restaurants where people were smoking around her because she didn't like tasting it with her food.

It's the same with me. I'm an ex-smoker, really, (social at times) but I can't stand being in a restaurant and people smoking in my food. That's why most restaurants here, anyway, have the two sections completely diveded, often of different floors.

Smoking sections are easier said than done. The only time I've seen it really work is when one half of the restaurant is non-smoking and the other half is smoking and they're seperated by several doors and the kitchen and there's a different crew for each.

Well, since it became legal here, it hasn't been a big of a deal. Coffeehouses just keep x many tables smoke-free, and usually have them in one corner of the room and non-smoking in another. Even though Reykjavík is a small city (120000 people) most people smoke when going coffeehouses. Yet only 30% of it is allowed to be a smoking area.

Fair?

I don't know. IMO, it's up to the owner of the restaurant.

Love,
Eyrún

[dumbleedore]

Just FYI, I can't remember if I've posted this before, but here in Australia all restaurants are non-smoking and when you're in a pub or club, you can't smoke within 1 metre of the bar (in NSW- in Queensland you can smoke at the bar, but they're getting rid of that). If the pub or club has a bistro or restaurant incorporated, it has to be non-smoking. All shopping centres and office buildings are non-smoking.

[OptimisticGirl]

I think smoking is wrong to begin with. All it does is make peope sick and even kill them. My dad smokes a lot of the time, and I don't really like that. I feel a little proud because my mom quit because of me. But smoking can cause lung cancer and other diseaes. 50,000 people die every year of lung cancer due to secondhand smoke. I don't want to get lung cancer by the time I'm 21.

[Hollis]

Hey, I'm all for smoking and non-smoking sections, though. If people don't want to breathe smoke, they have the right not to. However, those who do, have the right to.

Sure, smokers have a right to smoke OUTSIDE.


It's the same with me. I'm an ex-smoker, really, (social at times) but I can't stand being in a restaurant and people smoking in my food. That's why most restaurants here, anyway, have the two sections completely diveded, often of different floors.

HA, I have so many friends who claim to be ex-smokers, only smoke at a party. But congrats on quitting! mostly. One of my ex-smoker friends says that now, he can't stand the taste of a ciggarette now. That's the thing is that smoking dulls your taste-buds and sense of smell.


Well, since it became legal here, it hasn't been a big of a deal. Coffeehouses just keep x many tables smoke-free, and usually have them in one corner of the room and non-smoking in another. Even though Reykjavík is a small city (120000 people) most people smoke when going coffeehouses. Yet only 30% of it is allowed to be a smoking area.

So cool! that you are from Iceland, I'm still saving up my pennies to travel and go hiking in Iceland.
I still don't understand how having part of a room for smokers seperates the smoke from the non-smoke air-space. Impossible.

Fair?
No

I don't know. IMO, it's up to the owner of the restaurant.
not up to medical studies and non-smokers and children? What about the right's of kids to not breath smoke? They don't have a choice if they have to go to a restaurant with their parents who may be smokers.

[PhoenixUK]

not up to medical studies and non-smokers and children? What about the right's of kids to not breath smoke? They don't have a choice if they have to go to a restaurant with their parents who may be smokers.
Until you're 18, it's up to your parents to make that kind of decision for you. If they expose you to cigarette smoke that's their choice, and it's a pretty stupid idea for babies, but if the child is older doing it occasionally is unlikely to have an adverse effect on health.

[~Tonks~]

Until you're 18, it's up to your parents to make that kind of decision for you. If they expose you to cigarette smoke that's their choice, and it's a pretty stupid idea for babies, but if the child is older doing it occasionally is unlikely to have an adverse effect on health.

:huh:

So would it be okay for parents to let their kids get a beer from the fridge or a shot from the liquor cabinet any time they want?

Is it okay if parents make the decision to have a meth lab in their basement?

Hey, the kid can't decide these things, they're not 18, it's the parents' decision...

[Laufa]

Sure, smokers have a right to smoke OUTSIDE.

They're talking about banning that, too, here. Smoking in public places et al.
And oh, smokers have the right to smoke where smoking is allowed.



HA, I have so many friends who claim to be ex-smokers, only smoke at a party. But congrats on quitting! mostly. One of my ex-smoker friends says that now, he can't stand the taste of a ciggarette now. That's the thing is that smoking dulls your taste-buds and sense of smell.

Well, I never was a daily smoker :) But when it got past parties and coffee-houses, I just decided to stop it. And thanks :)
I understand what he means. Personally, I don't like cigarette smoke, it irritates my eyes.
What do I do?
I go to the place in the coffeehouse where smoking is prevented (the larger part of the place) and eat or drink there :)


So cool! that you are from Iceland, I'm still saving up my pennies to travel and go hiking in Iceland.
I still don't understand how having part of a room for smokers seperates the smoke from the non-smoke air-space. Impossible.

Oooh, a fan of my country :) Well, it's a great country, but I can't wait to get out of here..;)
And it does work, here at least. Must be all the clean air :p
No, seriously, there's most often a door between smoking and non-smoking areas, or a wall. Either that or they are quite far away from each other, with direct barriers.


not up to medical studies and non-smokers and children? What about the right's of kids to not breath smoke? They don't have a choice if they have to go to a restaurant with their parents who may be smokers.

Erm, if a doctor, non-smoker or child owns the place, yes it's up to them.
Seeing as both my parents smoke, they never light up over dinner. After dinner, they go to the smoking areas and have light!

Love,
Eyrún

[michelle3654]

I don't smoke and doubt I ever will. I was born premature so my lungs are bad enough.

[PhoenixUK]

:huh:

So would it be okay for parents to let their kids get a beer from the fridge or a shot from the liquor cabinet any time they want?

Is it okay if parents make the decision to have a meth lab in their basement?

Hey, the kid can't decide these things, they're not 18, it's the parents' decision...
Yeah, but as I said, if you drink a beer or whatever the effects are immediate. That said, teaching responsible drinking should be part of being a parent. However, passive smoking, though not ideal, is not something that is likely to cause more damage then, say, living next to a really busy road or something. Life is made up of risks, but if they're acceptably low, then in my opinion it's okay for an adult to make their own decisions, unless you really want a nanny state with government legislation setting out exactly what you can and can't do.

[Chrysalis]

Links?

[des06]

can't you control the urge for the time it takes to order, receive, and consume the average meal, which is maybe forty minutes?

Don't know what you're used to but when my family goes out to dinner we like to go out, talk, and eat at a leisurely pace. It usually ends up taking about 2 hours. Thats a pretty long time. In addition for many smoking isn't always about satisfying a craving-sometimes it just feels good.

So would it be okay for parents to let their kids get a beer from the fridge or a shot from the liquor cabinet any time they want?

Is it okay if parents make the decision to have a meth lab in their basement?

Hey, the kid can't decide these things, they're not 18, it's the parents' decision...

No but then again second hand smoke isn't illegal.

[Tane]

Second hand smoke should be illegal though because not everyone enjoys there cloths smelling due to someone else’s smoking habits.

Banning smoking in a public places probably will happen in the UK at some point, it would not be that hard to do as CCT cameras are being placed all over and if the government want to earn money out of fining people who do smoke in public places then they will find an effective way of catching them out. I mean they did it with the road cameras to catch speeding drivers didn't they.

[Slim_Moody]

you know what!
Smoking should be banned before you could say "smoke".
A cigarette is a drug and so are its other forms. when you inhale it your lungs start to blacken out and becomes like a black shopping bag(no kiddin dude!). Next you veins and arteries begin to contract and you suffer from heart diseases.
There are so many people who smoke in public places and i dont like that. It becomes something like " you are superior when you smoke " or " i'm coolest guy in the block because i smoke".
Nah!
This is total garbage and instead smoking becomes and example and from public youngsters smoke too when they see such people with a tobacco pencil in there mouth.
In the end, what do they get?
Ans)- Black life or Sorrowful death with a lot of pain. people begin to hate you. you lose your mind and then pain beyond endurance.

From the pointers above atleast smoking in public places should be banned and a huge fine should be imposed on those who smoke.
Cigarettes should be made more expensive and so on.
Smokers should be discouraged and so on.

It would be ok to smoke in your house but no in the public places because you are not only ruining your own life but others too.

In my country people smoke everywhere and there are no laws against it. In the end many get smoker's cough and others suffer from heart diseases.

(Sorrow)

[PhoenixUK]

I mean they did it with the road cameras to catch speeding drivers didn't they.
Yes, but with cars it's easy to identify the driver by the numberplate, but CCTV doesn't do that. Any attempt to place a total ban on smoking in public places would be both impractical (smokers would be unable to work etc.), as well as a massive infringement on civil liberties and would be a step further towards a "nanny state" - maybe we should ban fatty food now, because that's a health risk? Anyway, as The Telegraph (http://money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/09/21/cnimp21.xml) reports, any ban has a far larger effect on hospitality rather than cigarette companies. So, maybe we should go mess up the economy at the same time... and maybe you'd be prepared to pay higher taxes or take a cut in public services to make up the loss in tax revenue?

[~Tonks~]

Yes, but with cars it's easy to identify the driver by the numberplate, but CCTV doesn't do that. Any attempt to place a total ban on smoking in public places would be both impractical (smokers would be unable to work etc.), as well as a massive infringement on civil liberties and would be a step further towards a "nanny state" - maybe we should ban fatty food now, because that's a health risk? Anyway, as The Telegraph (http://money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/09/21/cnimp21.xml) reports, any ban has a far larger effect on hospitality rather than cigarette companies. So, maybe we should go mess up the economy at the same time... and maybe you'd be prepared to pay higher taxes or take a cut in public services to make up the loss in tax revenue?

The idea of purposely perpetuating the use of a health hazardous vice to maintain the economy is a weak solution to maintain what little lingering strength it has.

Saying that smokers would be unable to work if smoking was banned in public places is no better than terribly obese people going on disability because they are immobile. It's a poor excuse.

The difference between all of the comparisons brought up against tobacco, and smoking tobacco, is that if people eat loads of fatty foods, they can't really force me to second-hand eat it, unless they pry open my mouth and puke down my throat. Same with alcohol. If someone is sitting in a restaurant eating a half pound cheeseburger with greasy french fries drinking a huge mug of beer, it doesn't effect me. Unless for some reason they go into a hysteric conniption fit and throw their food and spew their beer all over the place, or unless I stared at them while they were eating, I wouldn't even be able to tell what they ordered or what they were drinking. However if they are sitting there smoking, I will be able to tell. It will smell in the restaurant, the air will be hung with smoke, my eyes will be dry and red and irritated, as well as my nostrils, my hair and clothes will smell, my food will be less enjoyable, and my lungs will ache after I leave. This obviously effects other people.

In terms of health costs, yes, obesity is actually starting to beat out smoking related illnesses in terms of that, but both are due to a lack of responsibility and making the choice yourself, which is why I don't think the public should be footing the bills for either case. Nobody who starts smoking today can ever say they don't know how bad it is for you, that would be a total lie, and even the less bright bulbs in the pack know that if you eat nothing but junk in too large of quantities and live a sedentary lifestyle, you will get fat. And, no, you shouldn't ban snack foods, because eating some chips once in a while or having a cheeseburger on occasion doesn't hurt you, as long as you also maintain a well balanced diet with healthy foods and get plenty of exercise. There is no proof that one can become addicted to french fries and chocolate shakes (unless someone has something they'd like to show me in terms of evidence, which honestly I would be more than happy to look at and see.) While my friends and I laugh about that and would like to think so, there isn't, whereas it's proven that nicotine is highly addictive. I'm not necessarily saying smoking should be banned, so I don't know why you keep bringing up the nanny-state and saying perhaps junk food should be banned as well, but again, the only thing that relates the two is the health costs, which I think are frivolous anyhow. However, someone can wolf down junk food and unless there's some real freaky osmosis going on, it's not going to affect MY health, whereas if someone is smoking around me, I will be effected.

Now, I agree that it's probably a tad ridiculous to say that nobody should be able to smoke anywhere. If they're outside walking down the street, people can easily go around/in front of them. I think it's rude to light up in a crowd, but if there's reasonable space to move around and avoid it, I don't see a big deal.

As for the "massive infringementon civil liberties," I'll never believe how backwards this is, and if you're a smoker who is determined to smoke and feels they have a right to smoke you'll never see how backwards this is, either. Don't non-smokers have a basic right to be able to breathe clean air, which is what human beings are supposed to breathe? Yet we're the ones who are being looked at and told that if we don't like cigarette smoke we should go somewhere else. :rolleyes:

[PhoenixUK]

Unfortunately, the argument "Oh, I have as much right to breathe clean air" is fundamentally flawed, as we've already discussed, but just as another attack, the number of places that you can breathe smoke free air majorly outnumber places where you're likely to be subject to passive smoking, these primarily being restaurants, clubs and pubs: more simply, places where people go to be social and relax. No matter what you say, smoking is an integral part of that, both in the atmosphere (stereotypical "smokey" pub) and also as part of the way that people want to relax. And, let's get in in context here, smoking is a relatively mild way to do that: you won't get a smoker breaking into your house or mugging you for money the way a drug addict may do. But, the fact still remains: it's a tiny minority of places and you must in theory get greater enjoyment out of being there than by sitting at home and saving your money. And, besides, there are some totally non-smoking restaurants anyway, and no doubt if you really wanted to search you'd find a no-smoking bar as well. The prices would be really high because the customer base would be reduced, but, hey, what price can you put on being away from us nasty smokers?

As to the whole, "Smoking is the worst activity that some people still consider to be social", I'd say that both junk food and alcohol have far bigger effects on my life than smoking, even if I was a non-smoker. The worst that can happen from smoking is that I might cough, I'll have to wash my clothes and there's a tiny, incredibly small chance that I might suffer some negative health effects from passive smoking, although this is almost impossible if you only ever go to the pub for socialising and only really has a small chance of affecting full time bar staff/waitresses etc. Now, thanks to alcohol there's vandalism, people don't feel safe going out at night because of drunks, and there's again a drain on resources as the emergency and health service has to deal with alcohol related incidents and problems. Now, junk food: once again, people who can't control how much they eat in turn eat up my hard-earned tax getting drugs off the NHS to help them loose weight, but fatty foods have a much larger effect on society: food changes to cater for them, both in terms of larger portion sizes (well, we couldn't possible have them having just a small portion of chips, could we?) and also more fat, sugar and salt in food in general. Take my town: eating options are all-you-can-eat pizza buffet, McDonalds, Burger King, KFC or a supermarket sandwich laden with fat and additives before a stupidly sweet pudding, probably washed down with Diet Coke to make me feel better about all the cr*p I've eaten before. Now, is that kind of diet going to do me any good? No! And why do I have no healthy sandwiches or salad choice? Well, it's because the same fat blobs who probably cough at me pointedly when I smoke have changed the food market into utter rubbish, storing up no end of health problems for me later in life.

Smoking isn't perfect, but to claim that we're the only ones at fault, or, dare I suggest it, that we're causing the biggest health problems is simply wrong.

[~Tonks~]

Unfortunately, the argument "Oh, I have as much right to breathe clean air" is fundamentally flawed, as we've already discussed, but just as another attack, the number of places that you can breathe smoke free air majorly outnumber places where you're likely to be subject to passive smoking, these primarily being restaurants, clubs and pubs: more simply, places where people go to be social and relax. No matter what you say, smoking is an integral part of that, both in the atmosphere (stereotypical "smokey" pub) and also as part of the way that people want to relax. And, let's get in in context here, smoking is a relatively mild way to do that: you won't get a smoker breaking into your house or mugging you for money the way a drug addict may do. But, the fact still remains: it's a tiny minority of places and you must in theory get greater enjoyment out of being there than by sitting at home and saving your money. And, besides, there are some totally non-smoking restaurants anyway, and no doubt if you really wanted to search you'd find a no-smoking bar as well. The prices would be really high because the customer base would be reduced, but, hey, what price can you put on being away from us nasty smokers?

Actually when I lived in California and they put the ban on smoking in restaurants, patronage went up. I can't find the link for the statistic since this is going on quite a few years now (as I haven't been back in over three) but I clearly remember hearing about it on the news as well as reading about it in reaction to people screaming it would cost them money.

I've said before that I would expect to go into a bar or pub and see people smoking. There are just some interior places where it shouldn't be done, and would be ridiculous.

.Smoking isn't perfect, but to claim that we're the only ones at fault, or, dare I suggest it, that we're causing the biggest health problems is simply wrong.

I don't think I've seen a person on this thread who has claimed that smokers are the only ones at fault, and I haven't even gotten the impression that anyone has suggested this. People who carelessly stuff their faces and get more and more obese and then drain the system make me just as angry, but it's silly for smokers to point to those people and say, "well they're a problem too, see!" A problem is a problem. It isn't made any more acceptable because there are other problems, and that's one of the things that is majorly wrong with our society - people excuse their problems with the fact that others exist, as if them being commonplace is reason to forgo action.

Again, I don't even think smoking in general should be banned. If someone wants to slowly kill themselves they can be my guest. Just do it in your own space.

[Tane]

They track pickpocket in the same way using CCT cameras in cities, which is to say that they can not us video footage to record those that smoke in city streets for example and send them a fine if they are caught. Especially when you consider that the government in the UK has been thinking of ID'ing everyone to make it easier to cross reference them when things go wrong.

I mean they are tracking down drunken people on the street so it might not be that long before they might implement such a similar act on smokers in public places where they are not allowed to smoke. There is nothing stopping people from smoking in there own homes but why around people who wish not to inhale the smoke, they have rights too through the clean air act really.

[PhoenixUK]

Actually when I lived in California and they put the ban on smoking in restaurants, patronage went up. I can't find the link for the statistic since this is going on quite a few years now (as I haven't been back in over three) but I clearly remember hearing about it on the news as well as reading about it in reaction to people screaming it would cost them money.

I've said before that I would expect to go into a bar or pub and see people smoking. There are just some interior places where it shouldn't be done, and would be ridiculous.
So... you don't mind people smoking in pubs and bars? But, that's the only place people really smoke inside: at work they're already forced into a smoking room or outside, and God forbid if you try to smoke in a shop, hospital or anywhere else. Basically, open spaces (where any risk of passive smoking is very low), bars, pubs and your own home are the only places where you can smoke anymore. But, as I said, I quoted the Telegraph article. That's a reliable news source. If you can provide counter evidence, be my guest.

I don't think I've seen a person on this thread who has claimed that smokers are the only ones at fault, and I haven't even gotten the impression that anyone has suggested this. People who carelessly stuff their faces and get more and more obese and then drain the system make me just as angry, but it's silly for smokers to point to those people and say, "well they're a problem too, see!" A problem is a problem. It isn't made any more acceptable because there are other problems, and that's one of the things that is majorly wrong with our society - people excuse their problems with the fact that others exist, as if them being commonplace is reason to forgo action.

Again, I don't even think smoking in general should be banned. If someone wants to slowly kill themselves they can be my guest. Just do it in your own space.
And I haven't ever said that smoking isn't a problem: it's unhealthy, doesn't smell very nice and I recognise that. I just think you have to balance the desire of one group of people to at least have somewhere to partake in a habit that they enjoy/are addicted to, and the desire of another majority to have a slightly more ambient condition, which they could avoid anyway.

They track pickpocket in the same way using CCT cameras in cities, which is to say that they can not us video footage to record those that smoke in city streets for example and send them a fine if they are caught. Especially when you consider that the government in the UK has been thinking of ID'ing everyone to make it easier to cross reference them when things go wrong.

I mean they are tracking down drunken people on the street so it might not be that long before they might implement such a similar act on smokers in public places where they are not allowed to smoke. There is nothing stopping people from smoking in there own homes but why around people who wish not to inhale the smoke, they have rights too through the clean air act really.
Oh, sorry, what I didn't realise is that you actually want a police state where people are persecuted by monitoring and law enforcement for smoking. That's just stupid, and another fine for petty beaurcrats to legislate for along with dropping litter etc. Anyway, CCTV is currently used to spot drunks, but I think any attempt to allow CCTV to be able to bring up personal information on you would be a gross invasion of privacy. As for the Clean Air Act, that's to prevent sulphuric pollutants and not cigarette smoke, hence is totally irrelevant: you can't legally sell cigarettes and reap the tax benefits from them and then ban anyone actually smoking them except in their own home.

[~Tonks~]

So... you don't mind people smoking in pubs and bars? But, that's the only place people really smoke inside: at work they're already forced into a smoking room or outside, and God forbid if you try to smoke in a shop, hospital or anywhere else. Basically, open spaces (where any risk of passive smoking is very low), bars, pubs and your own home are the only places where you can smoke anymore. But, as I said, I quoted the Telegraph article. That's a reliable news source. If you can provide counter evidence, be my guest.

I don't know where you live, I'm assuming the UK by your name, correct me if I'm wrong, since that would be sensible, but I know in California, patronage went up, especially considering what kind of state it is and the liberal leanings of the majority of people who lived there. Maybe in places in Europe patronage went down, but in California, it went up.

People have always enjoyed a smoke with a drink. That's typical. I would expect this in pubs as there's a certain subgroup of people who are going to frequent them regardless of what goes on in them. Restaurants to me are a different case because I care to taste my food and I go in there to fill a basic human need - eating! I don't need to drink, so if I go in a pub, I'll expect to be in a smoky room. I need to eat, everyone needs to eat, and while you could argue I don't need to go in that restaurant, again, why? Because I should be accomodating someone who took up an addiction, while I did not? It's disgusting to be eating and be breathing in smoke while you eat. I've even watched people smoke while they eat and it's just insane to witness because how anyone can enjoy their food while doing that I have no idea. To imply that smokers are forced out of smoking at work is a moot point. Of course someone shouldn't be allowed to sit at their desk and smoke like crazy. It distracts the worker, his or her fellow employees, and doesn't make a very good impression on possible clients and business patrons.

There's just obvious places people shouldn't be able to smoke - hospitals, airplanes, gas stations, to name a few. I don't agree that people should be banned from smoking on their own private property, or in their houses, or their cars, or even walking down the street, and hell, even if a restauranteur wants to allow smoking throughout their restaurant, you're right, I can not go in, and odds are I probably won't anyway if that's the case, but when an establishment is smoke-free, and smokers complain about that, or say they have a right to smoke, it's a double standard. When it comes down to an issue of one's right to smoke and another person's right to not breathe it in, and the non-smoker is told to deal with it, it's backwards, and nothing is going to convince me otherwise of that. I realize there are umpteengillion pollutants in our air, but I don't go suck on the end of a muffler.

[PhoenixUK]

I don't know where you live, I'm assuming the UK by your name, correct me if I'm wrong, since that would be sensible, but I know in California, patronage went up, especially considering what kind of state it is and the liberal leanings of the majority of people who lived there. Maybe in places in Europe patronage went down, but in California, it went up.

People have always enjoyed a smoke with a drink. That's typical. I would expect this in pubs as there's a certain subgroup of people who are going to frequent them regardless of what goes on in them. Restaurants to me are a different case because I care to taste my food and I go in there to fill a basic human need - eating! I don't need to drink, so if I go in a pub, I'll expect to be in a smoky room. I need to eat, everyone needs to eat, and while you could argue I don't need to go in that restaurant, again, why? Because I should be accomodating someone who took up an addiction, while I did not? It's disgusting to be eating and be breathing in smoke while you eat. I've even watched people smoke while they eat and it's just insane to witness because how anyone can enjoy their food while doing that I have no idea. To imply that smokers are forced out of smoking at work is a moot point. Of course someone shouldn't be allowed to sit at their desk and smoke like crazy. It distracts the worker, his or her fellow employees, and doesn't make a very good impression on possible clients and business patrons.

There's just obvious places people shouldn't be able to smoke - hospitals, airplanes, gas stations, to name a few. I don't agree that people should be banned from smoking on their own private property, or in their houses, or their cars, or even walking down the street, and hell, even if a restauranteur wants to allow smoking throughout their restaurant, you're right, I can not go in, and odds are I probably won't anyway if that's the case, but when an establishment is smoke-free, and smokers complain about that, or say they have a right to smoke, it's a double standard. When it comes down to an issue of one's right to smoke and another person's right to not breathe it in, and the non-smoker is told to deal with it, it's backwards, and nothing is going to convince me otherwise of that. I realize there are umpteengillion pollutants in our air, but I don't go suck on the end of a muffler.
So... basically, your only problem with smoking is that you don't like it when you're trying to enjoy a meal? Well, as a thought, a lot of high street restaurants are smoke free: pretty much any fast food outlet, cafe and quite a few restaurants too. If you really don't like smoking you could always go to one of those, but assumedly enough people don't mind to the extent that they get enough bums on seats in the non-smoking section to have the sections worthwhile. And, to your other point about smokers complaining about smoke free restuarants, although that might be a small minority, I think the rest are just thankful that we have somewhere to relax in public and smoke at all. And, anyway, it probably isn't as persistent, repetitious and arrogant as the self-righteous non-smoker who'll make snide coughs and comments like, "I was hoping that I'd have my meal without smoke cancer." Believe it or not, we are both human and most of the time pretty considerate: we don't blow smoke over you or make comments about you. Unfortunately, being a smoker seems to also entail being the butt of jokes by people who think they're somehow better than you because they don't smoke. I could claim I'm entitled to go out without constant harassment, but I don't, because of course, I'm damaging your health in a tiny way so it must be my fault...

[~Tonks~]

So... basically, your only problem with smoking is that you don't like it when you're trying to enjoy a meal? Well, as a thought, a lot of high street restaurants are smoke free: pretty much any fast food outlet, cafe and quite a few restaurants too. If you really don't like smoking you could always go to one of those, but assumedly enough people don't mind to the extent that they get enough bums on seats in the non-smoking section to have the sections worthwhile. And, to your other point about smokers complaining about smoke free restuarants, although that might be a small minority, I think the rest are just thankful that we have somewhere to relax in public and smoke at all. And, anyway, it probably isn't as persistent, repetitious and arrogant as the self-righteous non-smoker who'll make snide coughs and comments like, "I was hoping that I'd have my meal without smoke cancer." Believe it or not, we are both human and most of the time pretty considerate: we don't blow smoke over you or make comments about you. Unfortunately, being a smoker seems to also entail being the butt of jokes by people who think they're somehow better than you because they don't smoke. I could claim I'm entitled to go out without constant harassment, but I don't, because of course, I'm damaging your health in a tiny way so it must be my fault...


I feel like you're getting offended, and you really don't need to be.

I don't think smokers are bad people, nor do I think I'm any better than a smoker just because I don't smoke. My mom is one who is currently trying to quit right now, and she's one of the most considerate ones I've ever met. She won't smoke indoors or in cars or in restaurants even if she has the option of being in the smoking section (and yes she was this way before she decided to quit) and she never squashes her butts out on the ground. And she moves away from a crowd if she wants one.

I also don't think it's polite to make comments like that, because its unnecessary. If you want someone to stop smoking around you, you should just ask them nicely to please refrain, and if they give you an attitude then that's when it becomes a real problem.

Just as you have experienced unruly nonsmokers, there are unruly smokers who have a bad(expletive) attitude about their smoking and think that it should be allowed everywhere and that people who don't like it are wussy pansies. Both are the minority, but that fact doesn't make either group any less annoying.

[PhoenixUK]

I feel like you're getting offended, and you really don't need to be.

I don't think smokers are bad people, nor do I think I'm any better than a smoker just because I don't smoke. My mom is one who is currently trying to quit right now, and she's one of the most considerate ones I've ever met. She won't smoke indoors or in cars or in restaurants even if she has the option of being in the smoking section (and yes she was this way before she decided to quit) and she never squashes her butts out on the ground. And she moves away from a crowd if she wants one.

I also don't think it's polite to make comments like that, because its unnecessary. If you want someone to stop smoking around you, you should just ask them nicely to please refrain, and if they give you an attitude then that's when it becomes a real problem.

Just as you have experienced unruly nonsmokers, there are unruly smokers who have a bad(expletive) attitude about their smoking and think that it should be allowed everywhere and that people who don't like it are wussy pansies. Both are the minority, but that fact doesn't make either group any less annoying.
I'm not offended, I just think that as a group smokers tend to be disproportionally victimised because of health campaigns that highlight the possible dangers of passive smoking, to the point where if you point out to someone the dangers are miniscule they'll just ignore you or think that you're lying. But... yeah... so, basically, if smoking was banned except in clearly marked restaurants, bars, pubs and clubs, outside and on private property you wouldn't have a problem with it? (Note: that's pretty much the current situation in the UK anyway...)

[~Tonks~]

I'm not offended, I just think that as a group smokers tend to be disproportionally victimised because of health campaigns that highlight the possible dangers of passive smoking, to the point where if you point out to someone the dangers are miniscule they'll just ignore you or think that you're lying. But... yeah... so, basically, if smoking was banned except in clearly marked restaurants, bars, pubs and clubs, outside and on private property you wouldn't have a problem with it? (Note: that's pretty much the current situation in the UK anyway...)

Not really. And the restaurants (not bar/pub restaurants, just restaurants) that allow smoking throughout are very rare in the United States, or at least in the area where I live now in Washington. I only know of one and it's very small and very old, and you can tell when you go in there that it's been family owned for ages, and most of the people who go in there are older people who keep to themselves and are farmers or truckers. And that's not to stereotype, that's really how it is. Most restaurants will be smoke free or have seperated sections, and it's getting to the point where people demand to have actual barriers, not just designated areas, because it can drift.

I still go to clubs and pubs knowing what I'm getting myself into, because it's just typical that sort of practice would be going on in there, and I leave when I want, and I don't go if I don't want to go. I also know that for some people when they drink they smoke. I have no idea how that correlates, as I am not a smoker or a heavy drinker, but it probably goes along with the effect of the drugs. I realize food can cause a craving in smokers, but honestly it's just kind of gross when you're a nonsmoker trying to eat and you're breathing it in, that's all. Fortunately that is becoming less of a problem.

I try to take a middle ground stance on everything and that is why I think it would be ridiculous to try to tell people they can't even smoke walking down the street, or in their own privacy, or outdoors. The smoking police is such a ridiculous idea. My college tried that and nothing was ever done to enforce it.

[elfgirl831]

I don't like people smoking in public places, but it is the smoker's body and if they choose to harm it, they have every right to do so. I think that it is a good idea, however, to provide special smoking areas so that people who do smoke will not harm anyone else with second hand smoke.

[offca]

I am strongly against smoking in public places. But it is more a call for being sensitive for other people' feelings, than banning anything.
I am very sensitive to smoke – I don't have asthma, but when I smell smoke, I have a headache. I can smell smoke from really afar, and I hate when I walk on the street behind someone who smokes. Does he/she think the smoke disappear? And sometimes when I am unlucky and take breath just in same moment the smoker breath out, I'm choking, and it is really disgusting feeling. In Poland a lot of people smoke, and many times really bad, smelly cigarettes. People who smoke a lot, and for many years bad, cheap cigarettes smell so strongly, that sometimes when I sit next to such person in a bus – I really try not to breath, as I feel like puke (honestly – that's the reaction of my body).
I do not go to pubs or cafes as there is always strong smoke, and clothes and hair are so smelly after! Bleeh.

Smoking is not like drinking – that I can say if someone wants to do it, it his/her business. Smoking affects everyone around, not only in bad feeling, but in health. Why someone would have a right to injure my health? I have problems with my lungs any way, I do not need extra help.
If someone wants to smoke – he should do it at home, or in places that allows that (sections in restaurants etc.).

I was now on summer courses in university. During break people were going out to sit in a courtyard. It was supposed to be "fresh air". But there were so many smokers, that there was no fresh air at all.
There was also a guy, who was heavy smoker. He used to go out during class, and come after ten minutes, smelling so obviously with cigarettes, that it was not pleasant to sit in one room with him! I guess he would be surprised how I knew he was smoking ;)

Unfortunately most smokers just don't think that smoke doesn't disappear and even if they smoke on "fresh air", waiting for bus or this like, it can be very hard for people who standing even seven-ten meters from him/her.

I know how hard it is to drop smoking. My Mom has been smoking since she was 9 years old! (orphanages…) She tried a few times, now again tries to quit. But even if she was smoking heavy, she would never smoke on the street, in the elevator (isn't that great feeling to step in the elevator just after some smoker???) etc.

[LynorEclipse]

Smoking in public places drives me insane!!! I especially hate it when people are smoking outside one of the English Arts buildings on campus, because there is a large roof over the area and it just gets trapped and I have to breathe it. I hope I'm not offending anyone, but I really don't want to breathe in second hand smoke. I'm an athlete and I care about my health. I love that my home town (Ottawa) has a non-smoking by-law for restaurants and other public buildings. When I went to Europe with my high school choir and band in my graduating year, I was one of the two students who did not go to a pub on nights off, and it was because of the smoking. People were smoking in the schools that we were performing at. That surprised me, but, then again, completely different cultures. And, that's cool, but I still don't like breathing in second hand smoke. Sorry if this seems babbly. I've got a fever right now and I'm not exactly sure what I'm saying. Being in bed all day is boring...

[cristina]

I really cant´t stand it!!! They´re hurting they´re own body and they djust don´t care!
When someone smokes close to me my nose starts hurting and i run from that place, i don´t tell to that person that is smoking anything because i don´t want to be rude and because i respect other´s trusts. but it is so anoying! they´re ruyning they´re lifes! I think that the price of cigarettes should be very up and that sloud be forbidden smoke in closed spaces, but this doe´sn´t happen in my country (Portugal), probably because more than half of the gonverment smoke!

[PhoenixUK]

this doe´sn´t happen in my country (Portugal), probably because more than half of the gonverment smoke!
Actually, it's technically because the tax revenues earned from cigarettes are massive, which probably part pay for the public services you currently enjoy. if they banned smoking, then you'd have to make up the shortfall through paying extra taxes (not that most of the people on here care about that, because most of you don't pay taxes yet...).

[dumbleedore]

They´re hurting they´re own body and they djust don´t care!

Speaking up as a smoker, I do care that I'm harming my body. I know that smoking will kill me in the end. I know all the dangers. I've tried quitting. The best thing I can do is be polite about where/when I smoke.

Actually, it's technically because the tax revenues earned from cigarettes are massive, which probably part pay for the public services you currently enjoy. if they banned smoking, then you'd have to make up the shortfall through paying extra taxes (not that most of the people on here care about that, because most of you don't pay taxes yet...).

The money garnered here in Australia from poker machines, cigerettes etc is astounding- wish we had a government to use the money well ;)

[Amadeus]

I really cant´t stand it!!! They´re hurting they´re own body and they djust don´t care!
When someone smokes close to me my nose starts hurting and i run from that place, i don´t tell to that person that is smoking anything because i don´t want to be rude and because i respect other´s trusts. but it is so anoying! they´re ruyning they´re lifes! I think that the price of cigarettes should be very up and that sloud be forbidden smoke in closed spaces, but this doe´sn´t happen in my country (Portugal), probably because more than half of the gonverment smoke!
You are making it sound as if all smokers are evil.
My father is a heavy smoker who smokes about 1~2 packs a day
It is not because he doesn't care about his body that he keeps smoking
I wouldn't know how hard it is since I am not a smoker myself, but apparently, smoking is not something that you can just decide to quit and succeed
Do you think that smokers do not have the brains or the intelligence to know that smoking is physically harmful?
Do you think all the smokers keep smoking just because they want to?
If you think so, please do some more background research on this before you accuse all smokers of not caring about their body at all.

[Gewndolyn]

I understand the need to smoke, well, kind of. I never have, but some of my relatives do. BUT!! I am seriously allergic to cigarret smoke. I start to break out in hives and my throat closes, if I'm around it too long. So, while smoking is their business, be aware, some people can't be around it. It's not fair, but sometimes, I can't go to resturantes, because they have a bad smoking section...

[dumbleedore]

I wouldn't know how hard it is since I am not a smoker myself, but apparently, smoking is not something that you can just decide to quit and succeed

Quitting is hard- you can't just go 'cold turkey'. You can, and some people (like myself) can last- however you find yourself in a situation, something happens etc and you slip back into it. I've been pretty good myself for the past few weeks, compared to normal, but I've slipped again.

[LynorEclipse]

You are making it sound as if all smokers are evil.
My father is a heavy smoker who smokes about 1~2 packs a day
It is not because he doesn't care about his body that he keeps smoking
I wouldn't know how hard it is since I am not a smoker myself, but apparently, smoking is not something that you can just decide to quit and succeed
Do you think that smokers do not have the brains or the intelligence to know that smoking is physically harmful?
Do you think all the smokers keep smoking just because they want to?
If you think so, please do some more background research on this before you accuse all smokers of not caring about their body at all.

I have never smoked, but I believe that it is hard to quit - I've been having an extremely hard time trying to quit procrastinating, and I still haven't succeeded (this is a major problem for me, I've been a procrastinator since age 10, and it gets worse each year... I still haven't done an essay due last Monday worth 15% of my mark, and I'm in university!). I realize many of you will not see this as a valid connection, but it makes sense to me. It's more than a habit, it's an addiction, and I hate it.

Anyways, the reason I'm replying to this is that, no, I don't think smokers are stupid because they can't stop, but I do think it wasn't the smartest idea to start in the first place. I understand that those of older generations may have started because it was a normal thing to do, but to people of my age and society, who've been bombarded with information on smoking and the deterioration of health, I don't understand why you would even start! We have choices in this world, and sometimes they may not be obvious, but there are always at least two options, and one may very well be to be ridiculed because you are the only one not smoking - well at least you showed yourself some respect! I am really interested to know why one would start to smoke with the knowledge of what it does to you. Is it just weak character? Smoking is definitely not cool in my opinion. If people who were informed of the effects of smoking didn't start, then there would be less people smoking in public places, and I, and many others, wouldn't have to be annoyed about it.

[dumbleedore]

Alright- I have a quick question to give you all before I dash off...

If you went to a restuarant and on your way in you saw most of the staff sitting outside, smoking. These staff were the staff that then prepared your food, served it etc etc. Would you be turned off by the fact that you saw them smoking? Would it have an effect on your experience at the certain restuarant?

Assuming, of course, that when the staff returned to work they followed OH&S procedures and washed their hands etc.

[Classical_Wizar]

You know that raises a good question I never thought about it that way, but I don't think it would bother me. I would just assume that they washed their hands before preparing my food there are just some things that one doesn’t want to think about.

[thethirdman]

Alright- I have a quick question to give you all before I dash off...

If you went to a restuarant and on your way in you saw most of the staff sitting outside, smoking. These staff were the staff that then prepared your food, served it etc etc. Would you be turned off by the fact that you saw them smoking? Would it have an effect on your experience at the certain restuarant?

Assuming, of course, that when the staff returned to work they followed OH&S procedures and washed their hands etc.

At the Pizza Hut where I work, managment makes staff go stand out of the way by the dumpster to smoke. Aparently some customers complained that it looks bad to have them standing in plain sight just smoking. While I don't mind smokers making my food, I will say that it looks a little lazy when there's five employees sitting on a curb with cigarettes hanging out of their mouth...whether they're on break or not.

[Ana-Magus]

I thought about this thread as I was driving the other day.

I was in traffic, and the person in the car ahead of me lit a cigarette and stuck his hand (with the cigarette) out of the window. All of a sudden, the 2nd hand cigarette smoke filled my car. It was all I could smell. I tried to change the fan setting to circulate internal air only, but it was too late, the smell was there.

As an ex-smoker, the smell of cigarettes doesn't bother me to the point of disgust (that seems to be the theme of this thread). But the smell was very strong, almost as if someone exhaled cigarette smoke in my face.

So why don't the ban smoking in cars? Does that idea sound a little ridiculous to you? Based on my experience, I would say the smell was much worse than the smell of someone smoking in a restaurant. At least in a restaurant, I could leave and get out of the offesive environment. In my car, I was trapped in traffic, I had no choice but to breathe the 2nd hand cigarette smoke that came into my car.

I understand that the person was smoking in their personal property (their car). But they were exhaling onto the public road. Should smokers be forced to keep their windows up when smoking in their cars?

If you are going to ban one, you should ban both - right?

[Firebolt_2007]

Smoking is already disgusting, but smoking in public is selfish and inconsiderate. If you want to kill yourself, do it in the privacy of your own home, don't blow that disgusting smell in peoples faces and give them cancer from being around you. That's the way I see it.

[dumbleedore]

At the Pizza Hut where I work, managment makes staff go stand out of the way by the dumpster to smoke. Aparently some customers complained that it looks bad to have them standing in plain sight just smoking. While I don't mind smokers making my food, I will say that it looks a little lazy when there's five employees sitting on a curb with cigarettes hanging out of their mouth...whether they're on break or not.
That's what made me think of it thethirdman- my own job. We all sit outside- the entire crew and management- whilst 2 of us smoke and if we get customers we run back inside. It does look bad but we can't do it out the back because we need to watch for customers and out the back is right next to our drive-thru service which looks even worse when the person doing drive-thru is taking your order whilst smoking. Not good.

Ana-Magus, re: smoking in cars- I admit that I smoke in my car, however I don't hang the cigerette out the window like a lot of people do, I have my window open only slightly. However, a ban on smoking in cars/traffic would be hard to regulate. A car is personal space- it's like saying you can't smoke in any house.

[Kassy]

I'm not a smoker and I will never think about doing it nor will I actually do it. Just the thought makes me gag! I do not agree with the thing about people smoking in public place at all. They can do it at home if they want to, but why disturb people who don't smoke? even if there are different sections of the restaurant, you can still smell it. It makes me gag. And plus, I have asthma just like my brother, so I doubt he or I will ever smoke.

[Barney]

All governments should ban the sale and smoking of cigarettes/cigars etc completely. Class A drugs are banned because they are dangerous, so cigarettes, which are also dangerous, should also be banned.

Not only is smoking disgusting, it kills people after long, lingering deaths which put pressure on health systems. Why should my taxes go to support some selfish idiot?

[PhoenixUK]

Why should my taxes go to support some selfish idiot?
Firstly, the fact that you call smokers "selfish idiots" is a reflection on how narrow minded a lot of non-smokers are on the issue of smoking: that smokers are somehow malicious and "out to get you", for whatever reason, which is patently untrue. Smoking is most probably an antisocial habit, but it's also highly addictive and *gasp* pleasurable. That's why people do it, not because we have some reason to get all non-smokers. Secondly, the tax raised on cigarettes is approximately three times the cost of smoking on the health service and other smoking-related costs. So, effectively, I could ask, "Why should I support you? Why shouldn't I demand a better quality of healthcare than you, because I'm effectively subsidising your treatment?". Of course, I don't, because I don't believe that you should suffer just because I'm mean and want to pay the minimum in tax and stuff that I can.

They can do it at home if they want to, but why disturb people who don't smoke?
Equally, why totally restrict a legal activity that a large percentage of the population does just to suit you?

[Zimphella]

I don't really have a problem with people who smoke, I mean I'm dating a smoker although I myself do not do it. I do have a problem with people smoking in restaurants though. You go and are asked if you want smoking or non-smoking, but its not really non-smoking is it? It should be do you want smoking or second-hand smoking. Theres nothing worse than trying to eat and have smoke come into your face.

[Stayce]

I never had a problem with it until I became a nurse. Masses get cancer, asthma, and CHF, etc from second hand smoke. The other clincher for me was after living in California where you have to be 25 ft away froma building to smoke for several years I walked into a Appleby's restaraunt in Missouri. It was so dirt and disgusting inside but they were so used to it they didn't even notice. It really is a very drastic difference. My mother smoke and after 4 years in her new home her walls had so much smoke that they we yellowed and disgusting. You could plainly see where picture frames went and the furniture was. It is the same with lungs. You can plainly see the layers. I am glad for Californias laws now.

[Tiberius]

Just recently, within the last week, a law was passed here in Australia which will make it illegal to smoke in pubs and clubs by July 2007. Health groups are very pleased, but the pubs and clubs are saying that the change is too fast.

I don't get that. In what way is it too fast? It's more than two years, for crying out loud! Is that not enough time to remove the ashtrays and put up "No Smoking" signs?

[dumbleedore]

Just recently, within the last week, a law was passed here in Australia which will make it illegal to smoke in pubs and clubs by July 2007. Health groups are very pleased, but the pubs and clubs are saying that the change is too fast.

I don't get that. In what way is it too fast? It's more than two years, for crying out loud! Is that not enough time to remove the ashtrays and put up "No Smoking" signs?

It's the change in social habits. The clubs can do it whenever they like, it just has to be done by July 2007. One club in the Illawarra is starting from the 1st of November.

[Tiberius]

They're just worried that when the law makes it illegal to smoke in clubs that it will drive a lot of their patrons away. And that's why they want it to take longer.

But, isn't that sort of thinking encouraging people to continue smoking? Shouldn't we be using things like this as a way to encourage people to quit smoking?

[yue16]

I am a smoker. I smoke but not in public areas. Smokers inhale only 40% of the smoke that comes out of cigarettes. The remaining 60% is being inhaled by bystanders around the smoker. I want to smoke, but I don't want others to see me as a bad influence because of smoking publicly, so I smoke when no one is around. :eyebrows:

[Kirsten]

They're just worried that when the law makes it illegal to smoke in clubs that it will drive a lot of their patrons away. And that's why they want it to take longer.

But, isn't that sort of thinking encouraging people to continue smoking? Shouldn't we be using things like this as a way to encourage people to quit smoking?
Quite apart from being asthmatic, I hate cigarette smoke with a passion, and I have avoided going into pubs and clubs for years because of it. The quicker smoking is banned in Scotland, the quicker I'll be back in the pubs. Although to be honest, it wouldn't do the population of Scotland any harm to stay out of pubs a bit more.

Several smokers I know are using the proposed ban in Scotland as impetus to quit - the people who only smoke socially (shouldn't that be antisocially?) are saying they'll give up altogether.

[PhoenixUK]

Several smokers I know are using the proposed ban in Scotland as impetus to quit - the people who only smoke socially (shouldn't that be antisocially?) are saying they'll give up altogether.
The problem is that figures from places that have banned smoking show little difference in the actual numbers of people smoking, instead all that happens is an infringement of civil liberties. It's also important to remember that a Populus poll showed that people support restrictions on smoking, similar to what we already have, but don't support an all out ban. I think the problem is that by the nature of this board most members are likely to be anti-smoking, but it doesn't mean that that's representative of public opinion :).

[Fairyliquid]

If smoker wish to damage their health then let them....i dont think they have a right to damage ours. If they wish to smoke, they should go somewhere that doesnt hurt anyone else.

[Prof.Blink]

All governments should ban the sale and smoking of cigarettes/cigars etc completely. Class A drugs are banned because they are dangerous, so cigarettes, which are also dangerous, should also be banned. It would never work. At least not in Britain anyway. There are too many smokers out there for an outright ban to ever be enforced properly. Prohibiton in America in the 1920's never worked, I imagine a similar situation would occur if cigarettes were banned altogether too.

Personally, i don't like the smell of smoke and I cannot understand why people do it. The one thing that really annoys me is if your waiting for the bus or something, with a whole bunch of people, and someone's smoke just blows into your face. Yuck!

I would ask that smokers be a bit more considerate; I don't have a problem with people smoking (whatever you guys choose to do is up to you), just so long as it isn' t in my face. Consideration for the people around you is all that is necessary, IMO.

[~Tonks~]

Quite apart from being asthmatic, I hate cigarette smoke with a passion, and I have avoided going into pubs and clubs for years because of it. The quicker smoking is banned in Scotland, the quicker I'll be back in the pubs. Although to be honest, it wouldn't do the population of Scotland any harm to stay out of pubs a bit more.
:rotfl:

Same here. I'm not asthmatic but I have allergies and I too hate it. I don't like to go in any clubs, pubs, or bars (aside from the fact that the majority of them in the US a. cost an arm and a leg to get in, b. are packed full of people that try to grab your butt when you dance, or c. are dirty and shady) because of how thick the air tends to be with smoke. So naturally I stay out. I don't feel I am missing much. Although, I have my own little theory - I've found that the times when I'm quite drunk, I could care less about cigarette smoke. Perhaps thats how some people tolerate it. :lol:

[MagicMuggle]

I have noticed that throughout these last few posts on this page that no one has mentioned what it's like to have a parent or signifigant other smoke within your family/relationship. No one has acknowledged the fact of how much of a strain the smoking ban has put on certain smoking famlies and how much more inconvenient and harder it makes to spend time with them. Take my mother for example. Our family hardly ever goes out as much as we used to because of the ban. Say we wanted to go to Tim Hortons, or a restuarant or something along those lines. We can't just go in and sit down and bond for a few hours without cigarettes lingering in the back of her mind and making us leave that much earlier. It makes me so upset that the fact my mom can't go in and sit down in the smoking section and light one up for a few minutes and put it out of her mind. I've read where some of you can't stand the smell due to asthma or personal dislike, but it's not like she's sitting across from you blowing smoke rings in your face. She has the deciency to turn her head when exhaling and she holds the cigarette to her side so the smoke drifts away from you. That's all she worries about. She doesn't even smoke inside the car or the house because she cares that much. I personally dislike the smell of smoke but hey, if that's the way she does it, it doesn't bother me.

It's the same with my grandmother. I only get to see her because she only comes to visit twice a year. Now she's 80+years old. I don't see the point of her quitting now considering I don't think her body and personality could handle the sudden deprivement of nicotine, tar and all the other toxic ingredients. When we go to a restaurant our choice in my town is so unlimited, it's unreal. It's like your forced to go to one place or the other...or just don't go at all. I know a few people will think that you can stay home and have just as much fun, I agree, but she comes for vacation and where is the fun in that?

Now the way I've been going on it sounds like my grandmother and my mom seem like chain-smoking addicts, but they're not. I believe my mother does it out of sheer habit. It's sad really. She's a 52 year old woman who began smoking since she was 11. You must be thinking 'wow 11...Her parents didn't have a good hold on her did they?...' To tell you the truth, it wasn't even her fault. All thats left to blame is her innocents to the matter of smoking, and her cousins. Heres a quick rundown: She catches them smoking, they figure they're busted so they give her one too so they can drag her down with them is she taddled on them. How responsible is that? To offer an eleven year old a cigarette? I think to even offer anyone a cigarette is disgusting much less an eleven year old. So here we are today. A 52 year old mother with emphisyma(sp.?) who has a husband, a daughter, and 8 year old son. To me, spending time is crucial at this point. If we can't do that, what is there we can do? I know that you don't have to go out to spend time with each other and bond, but when we do, it's such a change and makes it all the more fun.

I'm not trying to give my families life story, I just wanted to give you an opinion from the other side. I hope this opens your eyes and for some of you, your opinions on the smoking ban. I know this is just my case, but odds are that there are a lot of other ones out there just the same as mine.

[dumbleedore]

b. are packed full of people that try to grab your butt when you dance

The problem being... :evil:

the people who only smoke socially (shouldn't that be antisocially?) are saying they'll give up altogether

One thing I've discovered is there's no such thing as being a social smoker- a lot of social smokers smoke in non-social situations, saying 'oh, it's just one'...

[Fiddle Faddle]

On the subject of smoking bans..
Here in Ireland smoking is banned in all enclosed workplaces - thus in pubs, clubs, restaurants - and to be honest, it is the non-smokers who are suffering most! It is just like what Magic Muggle said - many non-smokers like to spend time with smoking friends - now they get to huddle outside with us in the freezing cold, or more often, get left inside minding all the jackets and bags and drinks while the rest of us go and smoke!
Which really goes to prove that extreme measures really benefit nobody. Yes - smoke while eating is vile - and banning smoking in all places where food is served is a very good idea, but for the rest of it, I hope that other countries DO NOT follow Ireland's lead, and seek instead to establish well ventilated, heated, properly seperated smoking areas in pubs and clubs.

[Kobila]

In responce to magic muggle, if your mother can't go somewhere for a couple of hours with out smoking it sound like she has too much dependence on the dang thing, honestly not doing somewhere because you can't smoke is the most ridiculus thing I have ever heard of, and frankly selfish on her part. Smoking in a restuarant while others who dont smoke have to sit there and smell the nasty things is rude, take it outside! I do however think that not allowing smokers to smoke out side is taking it a bit far, in some parts of Arizona you arent allowed to smoke on the side walk let along a bar. They should also allow smoking in bars, poolhalls and sports arenas, basically anywhere where familys with children wont be:D

[Kirsten]

I don't like to go in any clubs, pubs, or bars (aside from the fact that the majority of them in the US a. cost an arm and a leg to get in, b. are packed full of people that try to grab your butt when you dance, or c. are dirty and shady) because of how thick the air tends to be with smoke.
See, that's just what I miss. Clubs packed with dirty shady people who grab your butt. I hope they'll all still be there when the ban is on and I can go back to clubs...

[vickyweasley]

I Hate When Everybody Is Smoking Around Me. They Think That It´s Ok, But It´s Very Desconsidered / Bye

[ravenclaw02]

Wow, this is a really lively debate! Personally, I feel that smoking in enclosed public spaces should be banned. It's not a discrimination issue, it's a public health issue. I choose not to smoke because I would like to keep my body as healthy as possible - what right does someone else have to smoke in an enclosed space and pollute my body and endanger my health? We all know that second-hand smoke kills, just as first-hand smoke does. I have no problem with someone choosing to smoke, but just as I respect smokers' choices, I would wish that they would respect my decision not to smoke. If you must have a ciggarette that badly, then you can muster up the energy to go outside and do so. Besides, if we all agree that smoking is unhealthy, perhaps a smoking ban in enclosed spaces will help to promote quitting smoking, and that's quite a good thing, isn't it?

[puer]

I think at least there should be a required smoking and nonsmoking sections at restrounts , pubs, and bars. :shrug: Thats it.

[ravenclaw02]

I think at least there should be a required smoking and nonsmoking sections at restrounts , pubs, and bars. :shrug: Thats it.

The problem with smoking and non-smoking sections in most places though is that there's no clearly defined areas, so smoke ends up wafting its way into the non-smoking section anyway. Plus, it discounts all of the service people: waiters/waitresses, bartenders, hosts/hostesses, etc. I'm sure that many of them are non-smokers, and would prefer not to have to put up with customers smoking. I read an article that said that non-smoking bar staff are increasingly coming down with pulminary diseases, even lung cancer, due to the massive amounts of second-hand smoke that they're exposed to. I agree with you that it's a better solution than nothing at all, but I don't think that it's the ultimate solution to a very pressing problem.

[dumbleedore]

I read an article that said that non-smoking bar staff are increasingly coming down with pulminary diseases, even lung cancer, due to the massive amounts of second-hand smoke that they're exposed to. I agree with you that it's a better solution than nothing at all, but I don't think that it's the ultimate solution to a very pressing problem.

That's why here in NSW you can't smoke within a metre of the bar. I know it's not much as the smoke floats around, but they don't get it breathed all over them as much.

[daniel4hp]

Since this thread is nearing 500 posts, I'm going to restart it.