rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 really a question smokers (people who do it outside in public places) should ask themselves is "how many people have I killed?" 53800 a year die because of people smoking outside in public places, more so in offices and work places (687 a day) there are 11 million smokers in britain so as a percentage you have a 0.5% chance basically of killing someone the next time you light up in a public place. That might not sound like much to you but i'm sure to the persons family who dies it does. I'm just saying, smoke inside in your house/garden or whatever. But don't do it anywhere else where there are other people, its just plain unfair. Isn't it in the same interests for the non smoker to avoid people smoking, rather than hang around them bitching about it?
Slaggis Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Isn't it in the same interests for the non smoker to avoid people smoking, rather than hang around them bitching about it? No! How can you really avoid someone smoking and having to walk past them or sitting in a public building and having to breath in smoke. Its nt the non-smokers fault, we shouldn't have to run round making sure we avoid people smoking. It should be the other way round. Unless the smoker is in their house etc, thats makes no difference. Your killing yourseld and not harming anyone else.
rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 No! How can you really avoid someone smoking and having to walk past them or sitting in a public building and having to breath in smoke. Its nt the non-smokers fault, we shouldn't have to run round making sure we avoid people smoking. It should be the other way round. Unless the smoker is in their house etc, thats makes no difference. Your killing yourseld and not harming anyone else. Not laying blame here, just saying what's in their best interest. Supposedly smokers make up a minority of the population, you can cross the road to avoid them (was good enough for lepers) you can drink or eat in different establishments. We smokers, and drinkers, support the government more financially than any non smoker or drinker, we should be given more rights rather than have them taken away, it is only fair considering.
Atomic Boo Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I don't think either side is right or wrong in what they think. There are 2 main arguments and there are 2 valid points. Smokers say they have the right to smoke Non-smokers have the right not to inhale smoke This is why the ban came in, it allowed smokers still but not near people who didnt want it in a social area. I agree there should be places for smokers, but just a room next door wont see fit, there needs to be a totally different place otherwise things wouldn't work.
rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I don't think either side is right or wrong in what they think. There are 2 main arguments and there are 2 valid points. Smokers say they have the right to smoke Non-smokers have the right not to inhale smoke This is why the ban came in, it allowed smokers still but not near people who didnt want it in a social area. I agree there should be places for smokers, but just a room next door wont see fit, there needs to be a totally different place otherwise things wouldn't work. Here's an idea, deport all the non smokers, they don't pay as much in taxes as smokers so they have less right to be in this country. Then they can go bitch to another government.
Atomic Boo Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Here's an idea: Everything is fine as it is, and if anyone leaves, it should be the smokers; They choose to pay more tax.
somme Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Actually (not saying everything should be banned btw!) it would effectively stop it if it was banned completely. No it wouldn't.
Atomic Boo Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 It would increase if it was banned if anything. Makes it more valuable.
system_error Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 http://www.ash.org.uk/html/factsheets/html/fact08.html Around 11000 people die in the UK because of second hand smoking a year. This includes outdoor and indoor places. So I assume that most of the unneccessary deaths are because people stay in crowded places full of smoke and not outside. And I guess a anti smoking organisation won't use pro smoking statistics. So avoid indoor places where people smoke - I am sure your friends will respect that and go to non smoke clubs, bars whatever.
Twozzok Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I know that, i'm not a total dumbass (hopefully I dont make out to be one) but people that aren't REAL addicts can stop smoking. Its just will power. My dad smoked for 20 years, I asked him to stop because I didn't want to have to go to his funeral in a few years. It took him a couple of tries and it was hard for him, but he did it. So it can be done....and just because there are bigger problems in the world doesn't mean we can't deal with the smaller ones aswell does it? Anecdote != Fact. Also, walking by someone who is smoking is not going to kill you however you look at it. The research into passive smoking is done with people who work in bars, go to the pubs a lot etc. Not 'go walk past that persons moking and see if you get cancer : peace: And please, stop saying you (not aimed at you Haggis) hate people who smoke, just because someone smoke it does not mean they're a bad person. Yes some people you know may be bad people or whatever and smoke, but it doesn't mean everyone that does it is.
Slaggis Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Anecdote != Fact. Also, walking by someone who is smoking is not going to kill you however you look at it. The research into passive smoking is done with people who work in bars, go to the pubs a lot etc. Not 'go walk past that persons moking and see if you get cancer : peace: And please, stop saying you (not aimed at you Haggis) hate people who smoke, just because someone smoke it does not mean they're a bad person. Yes some people you know may be bad people or whatever and smoke, but it doesn't mean everyone that does it is. lol that walking past ppl thing was exaggerated..i was just a little worked up lol Anyways yeh, I dont think people that smoke are bad people (I know it wasn't aimed at me lol), I just dont get why they start smoking in the first place?
somme Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Why do people start doing anything. It's a question that will never be answered fully. People just do.
Bren Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I started to crave the urges for spliffs, when in places i couldnt have one or didnt want to have one, ie: on a night out drinking, a spliff or 2 will send me white, so id just have a ciggy, stop the urge to smoke, and carry on drinking.
AshMat Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 And please, stop saying you (not aimed at you Haggis) hate people who smoke, just because someone smoke it does not mean they're a bad person. Yes some people you know may be bad people or whatever and smoke, but it doesn't mean everyone that does it is. Thank you, very good point. I'd also like to say that spliffs are better than cigs in (nearly) every way, and you get more out of it. Though really i try not to do either too much. Only if it's around, which isn't often.
rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Here's an idea:Everything is fine as it is, and if anyone leaves, it should be the smokers; They choose to pay more tax. Good luck to the British economy if every smoker left the country.
The fish Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Good luck to the British economy if every smoker left the country. I'm all for it, the NHS would save loads!
Slaggis Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I'm all for it, the NHS would save loads! it would yeh, maybe the NHS would actually get better for once...Its cost them hundreds of millions (or is it billions?) to care for smokers.
rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 I'm all for it, the NHS would save loads! The government would lose more.
Slaggis Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 The government would lose more. ahwell, at least the NHS would get better, I'm all for it.
rokhed00 Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 ahwell, at least the NHS would get better, I'm all for it. Oh yes, I'm sure when a major share of the governments fund raising goes out the window they'll just forget about defence, education, the benefits system and all other outgoings just to concentrate on the NHS.
Slaggis Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Oh yes, I'm sure when a major share of the governments fund raising goes out the window they'll just forget about defence, education, the benefits system and all other outgoings just to concentrate on the NHS. I was joking - I know alot of the money for the country comes from smokers but i'm sure they could find other ways of getting it.
Bren Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 by raising every other tax, so fuck it, let people smoke.
Twozzok Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 Thank you, very good point.I'd also like to say that spliffs are better than cigs in (nearly) every way, and you get more out of it. Though really i try not to do either too much. Only if it's around, which isn't often. Obviously it's better :P Also, you say you're not addicted, that won't last long... trust me :P
Rummy Posted June 5, 2007 Posted June 5, 2007 That's why I said manslaughter instead of murder... It is, technically, manslaughter. It's an action which leads to the unintentional death of a person, and is not in self-defence. Yeah I know why you said it, my point is, even technically, it wouldn't count as manslaughter would it? I'm fairly sure the law on manslaughter has some slight further constraints than that simple little definition. In fact, I specifically added the word significant to my post to point that out. We got any law specialists here? Trying to get back on point, other than rokhed and a few others, I don't recall having actually read much opinion from smokers on the ban, as opposed to be arguing in favour and against smoking. It's their opinions I'm most interested in. Also, tax on cigarettes actually brings more in for the NHS than smoking related stuff takes out, so don't go using that argument here. I don't have a source to hand, but it was on The Wright Stuff the other morning, and I'm fairly sure they had a reputable source for it. For some of you, I cringe reading your posts, you seem to make an argument for one side, but totally disagree when it's completely turned around from the other point of view, effectively making you hypocrites. Sort it out.
Recommended Posts