Ban smoking in public places?

positron · 03-07-2010 10:12AM #1

As a non-smoker I dislike the smell and the sight of people puffing away at bus shelters, railway stations etc, at times with no consideration for people around them, and then there's the litter - I read somewhere that more than half of all litter in our cities and towns are cigarette butts! And the most important benefit from any step to discourage smoking is it's effect on nations health - healthier, more productive people and less cancer, stroke cases to hospitals around the country - which is more money saved.

Based on the above it sounds like a win-win for everyone, except of course the initial discomfort to smokers, and probably tobacco industry might take another small hit (small as people will continue to smoke at their homes or whatever).

Any thoughts?

MagicMarker · 03-07-2010 10:15AM

So, it's banned in private/work/enclosed places.

You want it banned in public places?

So, smokers should only be allowed smoke in their own homes?

Retarded.

Smoking outside doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't smoke.

Sea Sharp · 03-07-2010 10:20AM

Next you'll be saying that smokers should be put in camps so that they can concentrate on quitting.

Lando Griffin · 03-07-2010 10:21AM

Litter? If the councels bothered to put bins at these places you might be able put your butt in but they dont bother.

El Weirdo · 03-07-2010 10:24AM

I dislike the sight of fat people. Can we make sure that they stay in their homes?

Improbable · 03-07-2010 10:25AM

To be honest, if it bothers you so much, don't cozy right up to them at the bus stop or train station. Banning them at enclosed public areas/work etc makes sense. Banning them outdoors is completely overkill.

Mike 1972 · 03-07-2010 10:27AM

Dunno if it would make much difference healthwise. We are into diminishing returns territory with this one

The litter point is a valid one but then by extension shouldnt chewing gum be banned/restricted too

Dont think its time for a ban yet but maybe some restrictions at train stations and bus stops

Caoimhín · 03-07-2010 10:28AM

positron wrote: »

And the most important benefit from any step to discourage smoking is it's effect on nations health - healthier, more productive people and less cancer, stroke cases to hospitals around the country - which is more money saved.

Fúck that nanny state crap, sure the sun causes skin cancer, should we ban people from going outside?

Its my life, if i want to choke myself smoking then i bloody well will.

akamossy · 03-07-2010 10:28AM

MagicMarker wrote: »

So, it's banned in private/work/enclosed places.

You want it banned in public places?

So, smokers should only be allowed smoke in their own homes?

Retarded.

Smoking outside doesn't bother me in the slightest, and I don't smoke.

Even though I hate the smell of smoke too, I agree with this post. You can't ban it everywhere, bit stupid to be honest

Improbable · 03-07-2010 10:29AM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Dunno if it would make much difference healthwise. We are into diminishing returns territory with this one

The litter point is a valid one but then by extension shouldnt chewing gum be banned/restricted too

Dont think its time for a ban yet but maybe some restrictions at train stations and bus stops

What kind of restrictions would you have in mind?

mikemac · 03-07-2010 10:32AM

It's fine as it is.

Though maybe something can be done with gangs of smokers hanging around front doors.
Our local hospital has one main entrance and that's where everyone goes, staff and patients to smoke.

It's like walking through a cloud, anything up to 15 people right beside the door many times.

Would it be that hard to set up a bench away from the front door?
Maybe this is what the OP means

Improbable · 03-07-2010 10:34AM

feelingstressed wrote: »

It's fine as it is.

Though maybe something can be done with gangs of smokers hanging around front doors.
Our local hospital has one main entrance and that's where everyone goes, staff and patients to smoke.

It's like walking through a cloud, anything up to 15 people right beside the door many times.

Would it be that hard to set up a bench away from the front door?
Maybe this is what the OP means

Thats not a bad idea. I wouldn't even be particularly opposed to banning them outside of hospitals. But I think it would make much more sense to set up a dedicated smoking area away from the main thoroughfare.

Snowie · 03-07-2010 10:35AM

I like smoking......

music.babe75 · 03-07-2010 10:44AM

Banning smoking in all public spaces would be stupid.

However, I'm a smoker and hate the way people huddle at the doors to pubs etc - its not fair on non-smokers going in and out - I always make sure I stand away from the door.

What does annoy me is say in Pearse Station in Dublin, the smokers only have a small bit of platform down at the end to smoke, now when non-smokers come down to stand beside you and then give out about the smoke its like, you have the whole rest of the platform to stand!!!!!

Likewise when nonsmokers are in beer gardens and give out about the smoke and say they can't sit out there - GO INSIDE - its smoke free!!!! We have to be outside hail rain or snow - you only want to come out on the one day the sun shines!!!!

Biggins · 03-07-2010 10:47AM

Slightly off topic but I think it just looks daft that people are burning leaves and paper in front of their face/lips - and paying for this privilege be it in-doors, outdoors or anywhere. :pac:

Radharc na Sleibhte · 03-07-2010 10:48AM

But I thought smoking was cool?

Improbable · 03-07-2010 10:48AM

Biggins wrote: »

Slightly off topic but I think it just looks daft that people are burning leaves and paper in front of their face/lips - and paying for this privilege be it in-doors, outdoors or anywhere. :pac:

It's called an addiction for a reason.

positron · 03-07-2010 10:49AM

MagicMarker wrote: »

So, it's banned in private/work/enclosed places. You want it banned in public places?

Yes, that's the gist of what I am suggesting alright.

Lando Griffin wrote:

Litter? If the councels bothered to put bins at these places you might be able put your butt in but they dont bother.

A lot of smokers are blind to bins around them. Don't believe me? Go to any railway station around the country - I am yet to come across a platform that doesn't have a bin, and just look at the tracks to see how many butts you can count between each rail sleepers? On a sidenote, at Drogheda station, I have lost count the number of times I have seen the IrishRail workers flinging their cig butts on to the track - while they are just meters away from bins - in their own stations!!

Mike 1972 wrote:

The litter point is a valid one but then by extension shouldnt chewing gum be banned/restricted too

I don't have the figures but if you compare litter from chewing gum to litter from cigarette butts, we are talking tens of folds. So I don't think it apples. Also chewing gum is not (so far anyway

) injurious to health.

Mike 1972 wrote:

Dunno if it would make much difference healthwise. We are into diminishing returns territory with this one

Yes. Banning smoking in public areas has been done in other countries in the world, and the results have been extremely positive so far.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban#Effects_on_health

Several studies have documented health and economic benefits related to smoking bans. In the first 18 months after Pueblo, Colorado enacted a 2003 smoking ban, hospital admissions for heart attacks dropped by 27% while admissions in neighbouring towns without smoking bans showed no change. The decline in heart attacks was attributed to the smoking ban, which reduced exposure to secondhand smoke.[38] A similar study in Helena, Montana found a 40% reduction in heart attacks following the imposition of a smoking ban.[39] However, a larger and more recent study found that workplace bans in the USA are not associated with statistically significant short-term declines in mortality or hospital admissions for myocardial infarction or other diseases.[40]

Caoimh&#237 wrote: »

Fúck that nanny state crap, sure the sun causes skin cancer, should we ban people from going outside?

Going out in the sun and smoking are not comparable, and you know it.

I was only floating an idea, don't shoot me for that please!

And like the link above, there are clear health benefits to it. And I am yet to see a valid negative point about this idea, other than the ones I stated, and the general paranoia stuff like 'nanny state' etc.

Again, just thinking out loud!!

Cookie_Monster · 03-07-2010 10:49AM

feelingstressed wrote: »

Though maybe something can be done with gangs of smokers hanging around front doors.
Our local hospital has one main entrance and that's where everyone goes, staff and patients to smoke.

It's like walking through a cloud, anything up to 15 people right beside the door many times.

the existing ban covers this, its just not enforced by anyone, like employees smoking in employer vehicles etc.
It supposed to 5-10 metres from and entrance

Mike 1972 · 03-07-2010 10:49AM

Improbable wrote: »

What kind of restrictions would you have in mind?

A designated area at railway stations/platforms for example.

Gordon · 03-07-2010 10:50AM

positron wrote: »

As a non-smoker I dislike the smell and the sight of people puffing away at bus shelters, railway stations etc, at times with no consideration for people around them, and then there's the litter - I read somewhere that more than half of all litter in our cities and towns are cigarette butts! And the most important benefit from any step to discourage smoking is it's effect on nations health - healthier, more productive people and less cancer, stroke cases to hospitals around the country - which is more money saved.

Based on the above it sounds like a win-win for everyone, except of course the initial discomfort to smokers, and probably tobacco industry might take another small hit (small as people will continue to smoke at their homes or whatever).

Any thoughts?

As a father of none I dislike the smell and sound of babies at bus stops, being pushed around shopping malls with complete disregard for other pedestrians in the vicinity, they make a lot of noise and I read somewhere that there is more rubbish from dirty nappies than there is from other rubbish! If there were less babies around then there would be less people off work tending to the babies, less people clogging up the hospitals with their babies hence more productive people and more money saved.

Based on the above it sounds like a win-win for everyone, except of course the initial discomfort to people that want babies, and maybe the baby industry may make another small hit (small as people will still continue to have babies at their homes or whatever).

positron · 03-07-2010 10:51AM

music.babe75 wrote: »

Banning smoking in all public spaces would be stupid.

Why? I have listed reasons for why it's a good idea. No one has actually posted a good / valid reason to say why it's a bad idea..!!

positron · 03-07-2010 10:54AM

Gordon wrote: »

As a father of none I dislike the smell and sound of babies at bus stops, being pushed around shopping malls with complete disregard for other pedestrians in the vicinity, they make a lot of noise and I read somewhere that there is more rubbish from dirty nappies than there is from other rubbish! If there were less babies around then there would be less people off work tending to the babies, less people clogging up the hospitals with their babies hence more productive people and more money saved.

Based on the above it sounds like a win-win for everyone, except of course the initial discomfort to people that want babies, and maybe the baby industry may make another small hit (small as people will still continue to have babies at their homes or whatever).

Gordon, you know yourself that having babies with you is not remotely similar to deciding to light a cigarette. Non-argument really, and you know it!

Gordon · 03-07-2010 10:56AM

positron wrote: »

Gordon, you know yourself that having babies with you is not remotely similar to deciding to light a cigarette. Non-argument really, and you know it!

Hey, I'm giving you my opinion and floating an idea, don't shoot me for it! I just happen to think that babies should be kept inside away from society, that's all

Biggins · 03-07-2010 10:56AM

Improbable wrote: »

It's called an addiction for a reason.

True, true...
If there had to be a practical reason for all the things we do, I would have to justify all the times I've whacked people.

positron · 03-07-2010 10:57AM

Caoimhín wrote: »

Its my life, if i want to choke myself smoking then i bloody well will.

Absolutely fine with me. And I am not arguing for taking away your freedom to smoke. My only concern would be that when you inflict cancer or a stroke, would you not ask my tax money to look after you? Well, you personally may have the funds to look after your illness, but vast majority of the smokers would expect others to foot the bill - so this is a small step to discouraging them, that's all.

stovelid · 03-07-2010 10:57AM

Detest smoking and am fully behind it being banned in enclosed spaces but let them smoke outside, ffs.

positron · 03-07-2010 10:58AM

Gordon wrote: »

Hey, I'm giving you my opinion and floating an idea, don't shoot me for it! I just happen to think that babies should be kept inside away from society, that's all

Perfectly fine with me - and let your idea be judged on it's own merit by others. Why would you want to use that against the smoking ban idea then?

Improbable · 03-07-2010 11:01AM

positron wrote: »

Absolutely fine with me. And I am not arguing for taking away your freedom to smoke. My only concern would be that when you inflict cancer or a stroke, would you not ask my tax money to look after you? Well, you personally may have the funds to look after your illness, but vast majority of the smokers would expect others to foot the bill - so this is a small step to discouraging them, that's all.

Would you also like to ban overeating? or how about just being even slightly overweight?

Gordon · 03-07-2010 11:04AM

positron wrote: »

Perfectly fine with me - and let your idea be judged on it's own merit by others. Why would you want to use that against the smoking ban idea then?

I'm not, I'm giving my opinion on not wanting to see babies and their dirty side effects like noise pollution, nappy pollution and health pollution etc etc

03-07-2010 11:06AM

Biggins wrote: »

Slightly off topic but I think it just looks daft that people are burning leaves and paper in front of their face/lips - and paying for this privilege be it in-doors, outdoors or anywhere. :pac:

Goddamnyou Biggins.. I looked down at my rollie nd felt pretty stupid straight away.
Then I continued to smoke and everything was ok again.

Ban smoking in public places?

Ban smoking in public places? 330 votes

Comments