[Denerick]

Originally Posted by GarIT

In my opinion you smoking anywhere within 10 meters of my should be illegal. The general public should have the choice of whether to inhale smoke or not.

No matter how fat someone gets it won't affect me but if they smoke beside me it will.

Thats fair enough - to an extent. If I'm around someone and I know they can't tolerate the smell of smoke I'll generally move away from them. On a personal note I would probably choose not to associate with someone that touchy and prudish, but thats another issue.

How do you know this? Any proof? Anything I have read suggest that smoking has a lot of health risks involved with it especially with passive smoking and children.

Well d'uh. There isn't a smoker alive who won't agree with the statement that 'smoking is bad for you'. This is a matter of personal freedom.

For me it is, the only real problem with smoking is that people do it around me. I don't think smoking should be banned at all. I have no problem with other people smoking once its not near me. I think pubs and pubs should still have smoking areas, people should still be allowed smoke in their homes and there should also be public smoking areas. Once I have the choice to avoid where people may be smoking, I don't care what they do to themselves.

You've forced smokers out of offices, planes, nightclubs, bars... This is all perfectly legitimate. I'll be damned if you ever force me out of open air spaces in public parks. The issue isn't about second hand smoke (Its in the open air and people are usually too far away from each other to lead to any damaging second hand smoke) its about 'protecting the children' (IE 'Won't somebody please think of the children?') Its the sort of nanny state busybodyism that is progressively making our lives more gray and dominated by the state.

[EchoO]

Originally Posted by looksee

Don't know where you are getting your facts from

.

From the former Minister of state of Health and Children, Aine Brady, during the debate on the Public Health Tobacco Amendent Bill December 2010.

"Despite the significant tobacco control measures put in place to date and the widespread knowledge of the harm caused by tobacco consumption, smoking prevalence in Ireland remains high. The most recent SLÁN survey estimates 29% of the population smokes."

The then Fine Gael’s health spokesman, Dr James Reilly observed during the debate that there’s now two percent more smokers in Ireland(since 2004).

[Ellis Dee]

I believe banning smoking on beaches and in parks is going a bit too far (I'm a non-smoker myself), but Ireland should introduce tough anti-litter laws à la Singapore, where throwing a butt on the pavement can get you a fine of around €60.

By all means let people smoke in open spaces, but if they just throw their butts all over the place, it should cost them. Naturally, there should also be ashtrays and litter bins everywhere just in case smokers are not considerate enough to use those handy little metal boxes for keeping their butts and ashes in.




Naturally, the same or bigger fines would apply to other kinds of litter. And the system would be at least self-financing - at least until people copped themselves on and stopped turning the country into a pig sty.

[GarIT]

I think cars are a bad example as most of them have catalytic converters and they don't do much harm to people at all, the main damage they do is to the environment. I also don't support that. And I have said before that I would support a ban on all cars without catalytic converters. A better example would be fossil fuel power plants and home heating systems. Neither of these are good for people and should be kept as far away from people as possible and we need to work towards doing away with both of those.

The major difference between them and smoking is that they serve a purpose, The three examples provide heat, electricity, and transport. Smoking provides nothing other than a buzz or whatever people get from it.

My proposal should be to ban smoking in public places except in specific areas. I heard before that somewhere has a ban on smoking within 10 meters of doorways and I think that's a good idea, so people can't smoke at the front of a pub and make is so people have to walk by them. I would however think it would be acceptable for them to smoke out the back where people have a choice to go to or not.

Another solution is to make smoking fully legal anywhere but then make it an arrestable offence to not move away or put out the smoke if you are asked to by anyone else.

I am fully pro choice on anything, once I believe that it won't affect other people. I would never try to ban smoking completely. I would look to accommodate them in any way possible. I have even suggested before that we allow some pubs to gain specific licences that allow people to smoke inside, but they must put up warnings outside to warn possible patrons.

[Zombrex]

Originally Posted by miec

Having read the above I have to say that this is taking things too far. I can understand the desire to ban smoking cars where children are but banning smoking in parks and beaches is taking it too far. I personally don't smoke but I believe people should be allowed to smoke in open air spaces, they need to have somewhere to smoke and it would be extremely draconian if these measures were implemented. Besides if the government are serious about the scourge of smoking then they should ban them all together.

The Minister seems to be confusing two issues, the health effects of smoking in enclosed areas and the effect observing smoking has on children.

While the second is important I really don't think banning smoking in parks is going to do anything. Children take up smoking because either their parents or their peers take it up. They don't take it up because they see random people in parks smoking. It would seem a rather pointless exercise to ban smoking in parks.

[GarIT]

Originally Posted by Zombrex

The Minister seems to be confusing two issues, the health effects of smoking in enclosed areas and the effect observing smoking has on children.

While the second is important I really don't think banning smoking in parks is going to do anything. Children take up smoking because either their parents or their peers take it up. They don't take it up because they see random people in parks smoking. It would seem a rather pointless exercise to ban smoking in parks.

Smoking does have a negative affect on the people around the smoker even in open air places.

[the_syco]

Originally Posted by eyescreamcone

Smoking causes untold of sickness.
If it was invented today it would not be allowed.

Can we ban fat people whilst we're at it? Or is being fat allowed as it's a way of life, but people smoking is not a way of life?

Stop the import of smokes, and you'll find that there isn't enough money to pay customs to stop people from importing them.

[GarIT]

Originally Posted by the_syco

Can we ban fat people whilst we're at it? Or is being fat allowed as it's a way of life, but people smoking is not a way of life?

Stop the import of smokes, and you'll find that there isn't enough money to pay customs to stop people from importing them.

Being fat doesn't harm anyone but yourself, when will people understand this?

[paddyandy]

As an ex-smoker myself i think that's taking it too far .Some people will go crazy without a few drags .

[Zombrex]

Originally Posted by GarIT

Smoking does have a negative affect on the people around the smoker even in open air places.

Much less so than in enclosed areas though, and the health effects does not seem to be why he wishes to ban smoking in parks. I mean there are a lot of places in the open that the effect of second hand smoke would be worse than in a park.

[Zombrex]

Originally Posted by the_syco

Can we ban fat people whilst we're at it? Or is being fat allowed as it's a way of life, but people smoking is not a way of life?

It is illegal for a fat person (or any person for that matter) for force feed another person food. So yes, we have already banned the food equivalent to smoking.

[celticcrash]

We shall fight them on the beaches, we shall fight them on park benches,
We shall fight them from our 2.5L diesels.

[Procrastastudy]

LOL Celtic

The situation is it's very difficult on beaches to enforce the litter issues and people are in close proximity to each other. The other places it should be banned in bus stops for the same reason of proximity. Parks is a bit ridiculous though.

The issue with fat people is unless I they sit on you they are not damaging your health. It's a different story with smoking.

On people who smoke around their children - I personally think deserve a visit from a social worker.

[Wibbs]

Originally Posted by GarIT

Being fat doesn't harm anyone but yourself, when will people understand this?

Neither does so called second hand smoke in the open air. There is zero actual scientific evidence for it. Some of the stuff the anti smoking crowd come out with is classic. EG non smokers around smokers get more affected by the smoke coming off the lit end of a cigarette. You couldn't make it up. With this subject the ranting often takes precedence over science and common sense.

Take lung cancer and smoking. Smoking is a major causative factor in the disease and the single biggest preventable one. However, of lifetime smokers well under 20% of them will actually get it, 80+% won't. These are primary smokers remember with their direct intake of huge doses of potential carcinogens. People exposed to second hand smoke in situations like bus stops or outside pubs are at a vanishingly smaller level of exposure with a concomitant vanishingly small risk involved. IE to all intents and purposes none. In a park? C'mon, seriously. The micro particulates given off by diesels pose a significantly greater risk(living on a major road increases the risk of lung cancer in non smokers). Whatever about the social engineering aspects of not exposing kids to the smoking culture which is fine, the health angle is utter bullshít. Unless we want to throw science out with it.

make it an arrestable offence to not move away or put out the smoke if you are asked to by anyone else.

"Anyone else"? Do you mean agents of the government or any whiny handringer Joe Public who happens to pass by? If the latter, good Christ. We've enough killjoys around without actively recruiting them and giving them a sense of power.

[lounakin]

I would like to point out that it doesn't have to be harmful to be a problem. I'm an ex-smoker but never really smoked much anyway.
I don't think non-smokers should have to be subjected to random clouds of exhaled nicotine in the name of freedom. Because it doesn't smell nice and bothers many people, regardless of health issues, smokers should make sure they never subject anyone to their addiction.
Walking to work in the morning has become an ordeal for me as every business on the way has a person smoking outside the door at 7:50 or someone walking in front of me leaving a long trail of smoke. It makes me ill to smell it and I really don't think I deserve it.
The other day I was waiting for a friend outside St Stephen's G. centre and struggled to find a spot where I wouldn't be inhaling the smoke for the 10 minutes I was there. I didn't find one. Now... smokers are not bothered by the lack of smoke around them, why do we have to go out of our way to avoid them? They should be going out of our way.
It's not that smoking outside should be banned, but smokers should be way more considerate! Smoking is an addiction to most people, why oh why should we all suffer the consequence?