Disgusterous

Author Topic: Resist...  (Read 6906 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Resist...
« on: May 28, 2013, 05:13:49 AM »
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline boogs

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 11836
  • Reputation: 3
You only get one chance at this life so make the most of it .

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 62563
  • Reputation: -4
Re: Resist...
« Reply #2 on: May 28, 2013, 11:28:17 AM »
I haven't smoked for yonks, I don't being near someone smoking but I hate even more the way those barstards persecute those that do, even more so as they say they are doing it for my benefit.

It would be so easy to have pubs with smoking areas with proper filtration/extraction and if an employer wanted to do same then why not.

 
Well, whatever, nevermind

Online apc2010

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 65087
  • Reputation: -2
Re: Resist...
« Reply #3 on: May 28, 2013, 11:30:18 AM »
I haven't smoked for yonks, I don't being near someone smoking but I hate even more the way those barstards persecute those that do, even more so as they say they are doing it for my benefit.

It would be so easy to have pubs with smoking areas with proper filtration/extraction and if an employer wanted to do same then why not.

The ex-pat bastards here phone the old bill........ noooo:

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Resist...
« Reply #4 on: May 28, 2013, 12:02:22 PM »
I haven't smoked for yonks, I don't being near someone smoking but I hate even more the way those barstards persecute those that do, even more so as they say they are doing it for my benefit.

It would be so easy to have pubs with smoking areas with proper filtration/extraction and if an employer wanted to do same then why not.

I'm a never-smoker...  angel1

Like you, I hate the prosecution and de-normalisation of smokers...

BUT, I also hate the argument that boozers (assuming the law was every changed/relaxed) should be fitted with filtration/extraction systems to ensure the safety of the patrons and staff. This idea merely perpetuates the myth that second-hand smoke is dangerous and smokers are in some way filthy/abnormal.

It should be up to the landlord to decide if his establishment allows smoking or not... staff and customers can then choose if they want to be there or the (probably empty) non-smoking establishment up the road.
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 62563
  • Reputation: -4
Re: Resist...
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2013, 12:12:31 PM »
There is evidence that highest concentrations of second hand smoke are dangerous to a significant % of the population and that most do not want to be in any noticeable level of smoke.  Seems fair that a public house should do something but the ban was just vindictive.  The ceiling mounted extraction systems were just the job imho..

How are you on today's mooted ban of smoking in cars with young children?   Oz already has it.  I'd agree too.
Well, whatever, nevermind

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Resist...
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2013, 12:36:54 PM »
There is evidence that highest concentrations of second hand smoke are dangerous to a significant % of the population and that most do not want to be in any noticeable level of smoke.  Seems fair that a public house should do something but the ban was just vindictive.  The ceiling mounted extraction systems were just the job imho..

How are you on today's mooted ban of smoking in cars with young children?   Oz already has it.  I'd agree too.

There is actually no evidence that second-hand smoke is dangerous...

Surprisingly, after all these years of research and scare stories there is little evidence that primary smoking causes lung cancer either... yes, there is a statistically higher risk of getting lung cancer if you smoke but correlation isn't causation...

As for smoking in cars (outdoors, indoors, at home, at work, on the moon, etc.), it is no fucking business of the gubberment whether you do or not with or without children present....

The risks of smoking are well known to everybody (as are the risk of driving, skydiving, playing rugby, juggling chainsaws, riding a bicycle, swallowing swords, drinking meths, etc.) and it is down to adults to decide if they wish to take those risks (and expose their children to them) or not...
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Steve

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 62563
  • Reputation: -4
Re: Resist...
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2013, 01:03:34 PM »
So it would be OK for a parent to have their child juggling chainsaws then
Well, whatever, nevermind

Offline Nick

  • Needs to get out more...
  • ******
  • Posts: 108494
  • Reputation: -115
Re: Resist...
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2013, 01:16:27 PM »
It never did me any harm
Warning: May contain Skub
Cat sitter extraordinaire
Semi-professional crocodile

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Resist...
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2013, 01:28:54 PM »
So it would be OK for a parent to have their child juggling chainsaws then

That would be their parental decision to make...

...should the child come to any harm it would be the job of the courts to decide if the parents had acted irresponsibly or not...

What we don't need tho is a law banning children from juggling chainsaws. Like smoking in cars it would be unenforceable (see also mobile phones in cars) and therefore pointless...
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline The Moan Ranger

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 13952
  • Reputation: 1
  • No surrender
Re: Resist...
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2013, 06:29:57 PM »
Smoking is blamed for an awful lot of things it probably doesn't cause. But it is good to blame it as the gubberment can then tax it more heavily - "for your own good".

What DOES cause lung cancer is diesel fumes.  And we all breathe those fumes day in, day out to a greater or lesser extent.  So if the gubberment are really concerned about the health of us all, they should start by banning diesel.

No,  thought not...

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Resist...
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2013, 06:32:44 PM »
Smoking is blamed for an awful lot of things it probably doesn't cause. But it is good to blame it as the gubberment can then tax it more heavily - "for your own good".

What DOES cause lung cancer is diesel fumes.  And we all breathe those fumes day in, day out to a greater or lesser extent.  So if the gubberment are really concerned about the health of us all, they should start by banning diesel.

No,  thought not...

I fucking HATE IT when people end their argument, "No,  thought not"....  lol:
Pro Skub  Thumbs:

Offline Baldy

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 14085
  • Reputation: 0
Re: Resist...
« Reply #12 on: May 28, 2013, 06:46:08 PM »
Smoking is blamed for an awful lot of things it probably doesn't cause. But it is good to blame it as the gubberment can then tax it more heavily - "for your own good".

What DOES cause lung cancer is diesel fumes.  And we all breathe those fumes day in, day out to a greater or lesser extent.  So if the gubberment are really concerned about the health of us all, they should start by banning diesel.

No,  thought not...

 :thumbsup: In Londinion they still allow the wanked out buses from the 60's to pass the MOT even though the emit shite loads of crap from the diesel engines.  noooo:

Offline The Moan Ranger

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 13952
  • Reputation: 1
  • No surrender
Re: Resist...
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2013, 06:50:52 PM »
Smoking is blamed for an awful lot of things it probably doesn't cause. But it is good to blame it as the gubberment can then tax it more heavily - "for your own good".

What DOES cause lung cancer is diesel fumes.  And we all breathe those fumes day in, day out to a greater or lesser extent.  So if the gubberment are really concerned about the health of us all, they should start by banning diesel.

No,  thought not...

I fucking HATE IT when people end their argument, "No,  thought not"....  lol:

What ending would you have liked then?

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 152701
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Resist...
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2013, 06:56:54 PM »
Smoking is blamed for an awful lot of things it probably doesn't cause. But it is good to blame it as the gubberment can then tax it more heavily - "for your own good".

What DOES cause lung cancer is diesel fumes.  And we all breathe those fumes day in, day out to a greater or lesser extent.  So if the gubberment are really concerned about the health of us all, they should start by banning diesel.

No,  thought not...

I fucking HATE IT when people end their argument, "No,  thought not"....  lol:

What ending would you have liked then?

You could have ended with your previous (well argued) sentence....  ;)
Pro Skub  Thumbs: