New Smoking Ban - Public Places & Beaches

Stiffler2

Knob head wants to introduce a new smoking ban which extends to public places and beaches.

WTF is this $h1t. I f00king hate this country these days, this is not the country I grew up in, it's just full of complete tards these days.

Source :

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0424/pro-smoking-group-hits-out-at-reilly-ban-plans.html

Pro-smoking group hits out at Reilly plans to ban smoking in open areas

Quote :

Forest Éireann said, unlike previous restrictions on smoking, the proposal is not evidence based, and appears to be cosmetic.

Spokesman John Mallon told RTÉ's Morning Ireland such a move would further marginalise people for the habit of smoking, which is still legal.
Mr Mallon questioned Minister Reilly's assertion that the move would de-normalise smoking for children.

"It's based on preferences and tastes, and that's quite dangerous in the area of legislation,” he said.

“Because you have to ask yourself what do you restrict next? Is the sight of a fat person sending a signal to a young child that it's okay to be overweight?

"In this case, it's a departure. It's not a case that it's bad or a danger. It just looks bad. That's very cosmetic at one level, and one wonders what else looks bad and whose tastes are we following in this."

===============================================

So they ban smoking in pubs, fine. you want us to stand outside, fine.
Now you want to ban smoking outside. Fook Off.

Next we'll have to smoke under the duvet at home.
The law used to be their to protect & serve. Now it's just there to control the masses at will.

When will the BS end, we need to get a terrorist / Sinn Féin into Gobberment immediately and get rid of all these twats by whatever means neccessary. At least we'll know where we stand with SF.

I suppose most of you agree with him though, which is sad, but Hey, that's the "Ireland" we live in today....

FatherLen

it will never happen. policing it would be impossible.

DrumSteve

They should really make you wear balloons over your heads to capture the smoke so none of the rest of us have to breathe in that ****e.

Seachmall

If they want to outlaw smoking just outlaw smoking. This pussy footing around the place is fucking stupid, and a swift "fuck off" is all that'll be received should anybody tell me I can't smoke at the end of my driveway.

demanufactured

I would support this...smoking is ****ing stupid in this day and age......stick your nose in an ashtray....thats what you smell like.

Seachmall

demanufactured wrote: »

I would support this...smoking is ****ing stupid in this day and age......stick your nose in an ashtray....thats what you smell like.

I apologise if I don't smell as you'd like, but unless we've found ourselves in a relationship with each other in the last 10 minutes then your senses are of no concern to me.

Julia London

Im an ex smoker. But i would not support/agree with dumbing down the public and imposing this law. People should execute common sense. If your smoking in a public place dont blow smoke at people have a bit of manners simple as that.
I dont think people should be smoking in their cars with children present, but again i would hope peole have sense not to do this. I wouldnt want to ban it.

Stiffler2

demanufactured wrote: »

I would support this...smoking is ****ing stupid in this day and age......stick your nose in an ashtray....thats what you smell like.

I don't care how I smell to other people because I don't give a flying F**K what other people think of me or how I smell to others.

If you don't like what you smell then move 10 metres down the road, simples. I don't like the smell of fish. I think we should ban all fishing / fish shops and gee. Is that how it works around here ??


This place is turning into North Korea.... seriously..

Conbhar

Fuk that ****e, its bad enough for those of us who do smokes, that whenever we wana have a puff on a nite out or in a pub, we all have to either go out to some overcrowded "smoking area" or fuk off outside, ***** :mad:

Guy:Incognito

Julia London wrote: »

I dont think people should be smoking in their cars with children present, but again i would hope peole have sense not to do this. I wouldnt want to ban it.

If they did then the ban woulnd effect anyone and there'd be not problem. But people are stupid.

Stiffler2 wrote: »

I don't care how I smell to other people because I don't give a flying F**K what other people think of me or how I smell to others.

If you don't like what you smell then move 10 metres down the road, simples. I don't like the smell of fish. I think we should ban all fishing / fish shops and gee. Is that how it works around here ??


This place is turning into North Korea.... seriously..

Someone eating fish beside you wont give you cancer.

davet82

ffs we're gonna die younger than you, what more do they want

Seachmall

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Someone eating fish beside you wont give you cancer.

Neither will standing 5 feet from me for 4 minutes in the open air.

jaffacakesyum

I'd support this. Why should other people suffer for your stupid choices? I don't particularly mind the smell, but I've asthma and can't stand people smoking in public places, like waiting for the bus or something. It's ridiculously rude. If I did smoke, I'd make sure not to smoke around others.

MellowToast

they should ban fat people from public places....I like this idea. the amount of smokers is going down (which i am part of) but the amount of people who are overweight is increasing, and they are much worse to look at and they do set an image standard their own kids. if the parents are fat so will the kids be because they think it is ok. well no, its not ok to be fat. i don't care about peoples self esteem, that will be solved when they get rid of the extra fat on their body and stop eating more than a body needs. a smoker can smoke anywhere they want without affecting that many people, but a fat person has to be stepped around in both physical terms and in speech. good gaud never call a fat person...fat, its a social no no apparently.

FinnLizzy

I like the smoking ban as it is. We can get away from the ****e music in nightclubs and have normal conversations, and the non-smokers have to come out to US! Muhahaha.

Julia London

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If they did then the ban woulnd effect anyone and there'd be not problem. But people are stupid.




Someone eating fish beside you wont give you cancer.

If you ban everything we will ened up with a nanny state. PC Ireland gone mad. I dont smoke now but neither do i want the government dictating out bans on everything to people. Before you know it we will be calling each other, commrade and shopping our neighbours to the fecking police 1984 style.:)

44leto

As a smoker I am for this, the smoking ban was one of FFs better things to introduce.

I suffer because of my addiction so any measure that will prevent people from taking it up I am all for.

Ban the fukcen things altogether.

Mellio

The responses of smokers is pretty normal, no one likes to be told they smell disgusting however comparing smoke to a fish and not caring what others think about them smoking in front of them is hardly acceptable.

Yes we have become a bunch of rightous idiots and we will jump on anything to be able to put down the next person but lets be honest smoking is just pumping chemicals into your lungs that are neither good for the person smoking, there kids or family nor the public from passive smoking(yes passive smoking is very real not a myth) and the environment.

I think it shouldnt be banned from public places but people shouldnt have to suffer other peoples habits so smokers should be more mindful of where they are lighting up.

Seachmall

Mellio wrote: »

however comparing smoke to a fish and not caring what others think about them smoking in front of them is hardly acceptable.

I don't like the smell of your deodorant. I demand you change it!

Do you

A) Change your deodorant.
or
Not care what I think about your deodorant.


Passive smoking is real, but standing beside me at a bus stop will not give you cancer.

I am pie

I am mystified as to why anyone would want to proudly identify themselves as a smoker. To me, more than banning cigarettes, that displays a lack of intelligence or ignorance.

I don't think you should ban smoking on beaches, bt i'd fully support a very very hefty fine for leaving butts on the sand or littering with them. Animals and children shouldn't have to put up with some moron's stinking butts.

44leto

Mellio wrote: »

The responses of smokers is pretty normal, no one likes to be told they smell disgusting however comparing smoke to a fish and not caring what others think about them smoking in front of them is hardly acceptable.

Yes we have become a bunch of rightous idiots and we will jump on anything to be able to put down the next person but lets be honest smoking is just pumping chemicals into your lungs that are neither good for the person smoking, there kids or family nor the public from passive smoking(yes passive smoking is very real not a myth) and the environment.

I think it shouldnt be banned from public places but people shouldnt have to suffer other peoples habits so smokers should be more mindful of where they are lighting up.

I am all for it, but stick to the facts, passive smoking in a public outdoor area is a negligible danger, car exhausts and industrial pollutants are a lot more riskier.

The purpose of this legislation is to stop new smokers from taking it up and that is good enough for me, as a smoker, to be for this policy.

OldGoat

Do the figures add up?
If the object of the exercise is to reduce exposure of children to the sights, sounds and smells of smokers then why pick on sites like parks and beaches where the numbers of smokers is infatisimal in comparrison to the numbers of smokers in towns and cities?

Is the Minister saying that there are more children in the parks and beaches then in the commercial centers?

If they were serious then THAT is where smokers should be targeted. Ban smoking from the streets and paths where the largest numbers of smokers are gathered..

So you have to ask yourself why they are not being serious about this. They won't ban smoking compleatly because of the loss of income.
Someone is making policy just for the sake of policy, to be seen politicing in the public eye.

jaffacakesyum

Seachmall wrote: »

I don't like the smell of your deodorant. I demand you change it!

Do you

A) Change your deodorant.
or
Not care what I think about your deodorant.


Passive smoking is real, but standing beside me at a bus stop will not give you cancer.

Bull****. Passive smoking CAN give you cancer. If you're exposed to passive smoking daily, for example at bus stops, on the street, at parties, friends smoking around you etc. you can suffer from the same effects as the person smoking.

There are something like 250 known carcinogens in one cigarette, with thousands of other chemicals that may also be possibly damaging. What makes you think that second hand smoke isn't damaging to the people around you?

Not to mention, non-Cancer relating effects. Smoking paralyses the cilia in your trachea (the things that help clear normal secretions from your lungs and mucous linings), puts you at risk of developing chest infections which could lead to pneumonia, causes vasoconstriction of your arteries (basically makes them smaller, so you're at risk to lots of things there).......I could go on.

It's INCREDIBLY ignorant to thing that second hand smoking does no damage.

HOS 1997

Is there any proof that the smoking ban has decreased the number of smokers in Ireland?

SEPT 23 1989

HOS 1997 wrote: »

Is there any proof that the smoking ban has decreased the number of smokers in Ireland?

Increased especially young women

py2006

Stiffler2 wrote: »

Knob head wants to introduce a new smoking ban which extends to public places and beaches.

WTF is this $h1t. I f00king hate this country these days, this is not the country I grew up in, it's just full of complete tards these days.

Tards throw theire finished cig butts on the ground in public places.

Seachmall

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Bull****. Passive smoking CAN give you cancer.

Intermittent short periods of passive smoking in an outdoor area are, as 44leto said, negligible.

tfitzgerald

I Think this is part of a plan they hatched to increase the price of cigarettes . The will come back soon saying they were going to ban them but we won't instead we a going to increase the price by 1 euro . But only to encourage people to stop smoking .

44leto

OldGoat wrote: »

Do the figures add up?
If the object of the exercise is to reduce exposure of children to the sights, sounds and smells of smokers then why pick on sites like parks and beaches where the numbers of smokers is infatisimal in comparrison to the numbers of smokers in towns and cities?

Is the Minister saying that there are more children in the parks and beaches then in the commercial centers?

If they were serious then THAT is where smokers should be targeted. Ban smoking from the streets and paths where the largest numbers of smokers are gathered..

So you have to ask yourself why they are not being serious about this. They won't ban smoking compleatly because of the loss of income.
Someone making policy just for the sake of policy, to be seen politicing in the public eye.

I think it is because parks and beaches are publically owned land, towns and city paths are not.

I remember reading about this law being introduced in California and it was something similar.

But to be honest I am out of my depth. But if I am right the poor PS will not only have to leave the building to smoke, but the premise.

_sparkie_

even if it does come in there is no way to enforce it. here in hong kong you are not allowed to smoke in a good few public places like walkways, on the water front and in parks but there is just no way to stop people from doing it. you would need wardens on every street or non-smoking spot 24 hours, its just not possible.

Battered Mars Bar

They should bring in a law whereby us normal decent non smoking people can throw water balloons at people who smoke in public.

Stiffler2

I'm leaving tomorrow for North Korea, it's become too strict in Ireland.

jaffacakesyum

Seachmall wrote: »

Intermittent short periods of passive smoking in an outdoor area are, as 44leto said, negligible.

And have you any facts to back up that it is negligible? I'd respect smokers a lot more if they accepted the fact and said 'listen, I know this is bad for my health and for those around me' and just tried not to smoke around others. I know of only one smoker who is like this.

A quick google revealed:

The California Environmental Protection Agency estimates that secondhand smoke exposure causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 22,700-69,600 heart disease deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in the United States

Each year in the United States, secondhand smoke exposure is responsible for 150,000-300,000 new cases of bronchitis and pneumonia in children aged less than 18 months. This results in 7,500-15,000 hospitalizations, annually

May seem negligible to you, but I'm sorry, people inflicting this on innocent people p1sses me off.

Peetrik

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

Passive smoking CAN give you cancer.

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

It's INCREDIBLY ignorant to thing that second hand smoking does no damage.

So do trans fats. So unless you only eat raw vegan foods then its INCREDIBLY ignorant (Lacking knowledge or awareness in general) of you to slate smoking but continue to eat foods that cause cancer.

In fairness if you ban smoking because of potential health risks then you have to ban alcohol and mc donalds for the same reason.

I dont smoke myself but I am very much against any laws that 'protect us from ourselves'.
There is a lot of information on the negative effects smoking has on health, if someone wants to smoke anyway then they should be free to do so.

SEPT 23 1989

When they have finished with the smokers they will go after the fatties

readyletsgo

This is just a silly law to pass, it will never work. How would they police the whole country outdoors all day every day?
I am a smoker, it stinks its bad for me I know this, any idiot can tell you that. I dont mind smoking outside instead of indoors in a pub, no prob with that. But its OUTSIDE in the AIR, its not like us smokers are filling up the outdoors with smoke, it disappears ffs. Its just silly.

I highly doubt the govt. will do an all out ban on smoking at the end of the day also.
A pack of smokes cost €9.50 or so. The govt. makes around €6 in tax, most people by a pack a day, that min €42 in tax per week from each smoker. Its one of the biggest draws for money for them, why would they try and loose that?
Cancers is also going to get you in one way or another too, of course smoking doesnt help but jaysus its not the only cause of cancers!

Hopefully I will give up soon but these silly new laws are just, ugh, stupid!

Pace2008

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

There are something like 250 known carcinogens in one cigarette, with thousands of other chemicals that may also be possibly dais why maging. What makes you think that second hand smoke isn't damaging to the people around you?

In an outdoor area? I dunno, like, diffusion? Think of the difference between being exposed to toxic car fumes on an open street, and hooking up a hose to an exhaust pipe and pulling it through your window.

Exposure to second-hand smoke smoke in a confined area is a risk factor in the development of cancer. I s support the indoor smoking ban for this reason. Some people may find the smell of smoke in an open area to be unpleasant*, which why I stand away from the crowd at a bus stop, and I don't light up in queues for ATM's, but it is not known to be an actual risk to your health.

*Though curiously I have found that the people who seem to be put out by a brief waft of smoke frequently are the kinds who are not the most easygoing and seem to be put out by everything in general

Snowie

let me get this straight there going to ban smoking in public places....

My local garda sations open for an hour once a day...


who's going to police nosey grannies ?

jaffacakesyum

Peetrik wrote: »

So do trans fats. So unless you only eat raw vegan foods then its INCREDIBLY ignorant (Lacking knowledge or awareness in general) of you to slate smoking but continue to eat foods that cause cancer.

In fairness if you ban smoking because of potential health risks then you have to ban alcohol and mc donalds for the same reason.

I dont smoke myself but I am very much against any laws that 'protect us from ourselves'.
There is a lot of information on the negative effects smoking has on health, if someone wants to smoke anyway then they should be free to do so.

I know full well what can give you cancer. I'd advise everyone to look at the American Institute of Cancer Research's documents if they'd like advice on diet and physical activity levels that are recommended to help prevent cancer.

The difference between diet and smoking is that diet is self inflicted. If you eat a lot of red meat or trans fats you're inflicting any potential health problems on yourself, not on others. That's what annoys me. If people could inject cigarettes then by all means go ahead, I just think smoking is ignorant, rude and disrespectful to the people around them.

Maudi

Seachmall wrote: »

demanufactured wrote: »

I would support this...smoking is ****ing stupid in this day and age......stick your nose in an ashtray....thats what you smell like.

I apologise if I don't smell as you'd like, but unless we've found ourselves in a relationship with each other in the last 10 minutes then your senses are of no concern to me.

all this fat troll is doing is making a smokescreen for the peasants to bicker about while him and kenny continue to rob the country..and its working beautifully...read postings above of simpering idiots...

44leto

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

And have you any facts to back up that it is negligible? I'd respect smokers a lot more if they accepted the fact and said 'listen, I know this is bad for my health and for those around me' and just tried not to smoke around others. I know of only one smoker who is like this.

A quick google revealed:



May seem negligible to you, but I'm sorry, people inflicting this on innocent people p1sses me off.

The California Environmental Protection Agency estimates that secondhand smoke exposure causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 22,700-69,600 heart disease deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in the United States

Each year in the United States, secondhand smoke exposure is responsible for 150,000-300,000 new cases of bronchitis and pneumonia in children aged less than 18 months. This results in 7,500-15,000 hospitalizations, annually

Is that figure derived from indoors or outdoors????

People are allowed smoke in their homes and that is were that figure is derived.

So yes outdoor second hand smoke is dangerous but negligible when it comes to other outdoor pollutants, so I stand by my post.

Bruthal

Peetrik wrote: »

So do trans fats. So unless you only eat raw vegan foods then its INCREDIBLY ignorant (Lacking knowledge or awareness in general) of you to slate smoking but continue to eat foods that cause cancer.

In fairness if you ban smoking because of potential health risks then you have to ban alcohol and mc donalds for the same reason.

I dont smoke myself but I am very much against any laws that 'protect us from ourselves'.
There is a lot of information on the negative effects smoking has on health, if someone wants to smoke anyway then they should be free to do so.

People around you eating mc donalds or drinking alcohol do not cause you to ingest any of it. Its completely within your control to do so or not.

jaffacakesyum

Pace2008 wrote: »

In an outdoor area? I dunno, like, diffusion? Think of the difference between being exposed to toxic car fumes on an open street, and hooking up a hose to an exhaust pipe and pulling it through your window.

Exposure to second-hand smoke smoke in a confined area is a risk factor in the development of cancer. I s support the indoor smoking ban for this reason. Some people may find the smell of smoke in an open area to be unpleasant*, which why I stand away from the crowd at a bus stop, and I don't light up in queues for ATM's, but it is not known to be an actual risk to your health.

*Though curiously I have found that the people who seem to be put out by a brief waft of smoke frequently are the kinds who are not the most easygoing and seem to be put out by everything in general

There is diffusion when you smoke outdoors, no doubt about it. But what people aren't getting is that, I'm not talking about one person suffering second hand smoke from waiting at a bus for 5 minutes and that's it. I'm saying, this person may have to get the bus 2 or 3 times + a day every day, 5-7 days a week. Coupled with that, you have exposure in other public places, parks, beaches, etc. Coupled even further with that, you may have close friends or family that smoke so as well as outdoor second hand smoke you're exposed to it indoors.

Anyway, the point I'm making is that just because it's outdoors doesn't mean it's not bad for your health. Over 80% of cigarette smoke is invisible so just because most of the visible smoke isn't directly blown in somebodys face while waiting for the bus, doesn't mean it's not harmful.

44leto

_sparkie_ wrote: »

even if it does come in there is no way to enforce it. here in hong kong you are not allowed to smoke in a good few public places like walkways, on the water front and in parks but there is just no way to stop people from doing it. you would need wardens on every street or non-smoking spot 24 hours, its just not possible.

Maybe as it is not possible to totally enforce the drinking and driving laws, people still do it with little chance of been caught. But you make it socially unacceptable then everyone enforces it. That is what happened with the original smoking ban.

Nobody wants to be seen flouting the law, so public smokers become social pariahs.

That I think is the aim. PS I am a smoker.

Bannasidhe

robbie7730 wrote: »

People around you eating mc donalds or drinking alcohol do not cause you to ingest any of it. Its completely within your control to do so or not.

People around me who have saturated themselves in perfumes and aftershave etc etc cause me a severe allergic reaction. Can we ban those too?

If they are banning smoking from public places like beaches and parks for cosmetic reasons, then they should ban fast food, fat people, drunk people, etc from these places and they should employ thousands of wardens across the country to police the ban. Its pointless implementing something that is not enforced.
Fat smokers should then be kept under house arrest in case they are seen by impressionable children.

Rabies

Stiffler2 wrote: »

Knob head wants to introduce a new smoking ban which extends to public places and beaches.

WTF is this $h1t. I f00king hate this country these days, this is not the country I grew up in, it's just full of complete tards these days.

Source :

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0424/pro-smoking-group-hits-out-at-reilly-ban-plans.html
<snip>

I stopped reading after the first few lines. The highlighted bits are enough.

If its not starting off like an intelligent conversation or something at least a teenager could handle, then the rest is prob tripe.



Without reading the article, my opinion is smokers need to pay a little more attention to their environment. No need to out right ban it. But to be fair, there can be a crazy amount of cigg butts left on the beaches.

frank9901

i was not aware of this new york outdoor smoking ban


Nicotine lovers in New York are limited even further as to where they are allowed to light up as another smoking ban is introduced.

New York State is creating smoke-free areas outdoors at New York state parks and historic sites, including around playgrounds, beaches and pools.

Announcing the ban this week, state officials said it was done to make the six state parks consistent with their city-run counterparts, where smoking is already outlawed.
The Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation says the smoke-free zones will be around recreation areas, including beaches and picnic shelters. The agency operates 178 parks and 35 historic sites.
People are already prohibited from smoking in famous outdoor areas including Manhattan's Central Park, the car-free part of Times Square and Coney Island's broadwalk - with anybody who violates the law being fined $250.

Parks officials say that the new ban will protect children and others from the dangers of secondhand smoke and reduce litter from discarded cigarettes.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2130175/Smoking-ban-extended-New-Yorks-state-parks-beaches.html#ixzz1t3F2ok00


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2130175/Smoking-ban-extended-New-Yorks-state-parks-beaches.html#ixzz1t3EwMUJq

DarkJager

They are called "public" areas for a reason -anybody can use them. This idea of banning smoking in parks is getting dangerously close to majoritarian tyranny than being any form of democracy (the views of the majority trump the views of a minority). What baffles me is that people inhale toxic fumes everyday that are generated by traffic but now feel the need to complain about people smoking outdoors? This country can be a horrible ****ing joke some times. Self appointed moral guardians are scum.

Seachmall

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

And have you any facts to back up that it is negligible?

After up to, and over, 39 years of repeated and prolonged exposure to second hand smoking in enclosed areas there is no detectable risk after cessation of exposure [PDF].

How much damage do you think 5 minutes of passive smoking in the open air will do?

I'd respect smokers a lot more if they accepted the fact and said 'listen, I know this is bad for my health and for those around me' and just tried not to smoke around others. I know of only one smoker who is like this.

And I'd respect your criticisms more if they were based on science.

A quick google revealed:



May seem negligible to you, but I'm sorry, people inflicting this on innocent people p1sses me off.

While interesting, it's not relevant.

Stiffler2

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

And have you any facts to back up that it is negligible? I'd respect smokers a lot more if they accepted the fact and said 'listen, I know this is bad for my health and for those around me' and just tried not to smoke around others. I know of only one smoker who is like this.

A quick google revealed:



May seem negligible to you, but I'm sorry, people inflicting this on innocent people p1sses me off.

Your argument makes no sense, where is this scientifical data you speak of? I don't want a pasted quote from google, I want the actual scientific data and the scientists who made this up put in front of us here to make their argument.

The reason your argument makes no sense is why stop their, why not ban anything or everything that is deemed passive and bad to other users health ?

For example, I am allurgic to peanuts yet you can buy them in the shop and eat them in front of me in public, I think we should ban peanuts.

For example, Let's ban nuclear energy because of what happened in Chernobyl & Japan because it affected civilans health.

Let's ban diamonds because innocent people are dying in Africa from blood diamonds.

Let's ban mobile phones because they might give you brain radiation.

Let's ban fat foods because of fatties.

Let's ban xbox, Ps3 and wii's because of Andrers Brevik

I could do this all day but reallistically I think non-smokers need to wake up and smell the foul air that is coming from their arses or maybe they would prefer to live in a world where you can't make your own decisions because of the law.

The smoking ban inside I did not like but simply have to put up with it.
Smoking ban in public places is ridiculous