Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Ban smoking in public places?
Options
Comments
-
Last time i saw you was in a smoking area, smoking one of my fags.
Did you quit , congrats !
Ah, a designated smoking area
More redirected anger....sad in a way.
Maybe you can explain a little better? Or do you have anything to add to the debate at all?Improbable wrote: »Iamxavier, I would agree with you to a certain extent. You do have the right to breath as much fresh air as you want. And yes, designated smoking areas away from the main entrances and such would be a very good idea and I'm all for that. The point is, public areas like bus stops and train stations are not exceedingly small. I wouldnt even mind a designated smoking area in a train station.
Yea, I know, but would you light up a smoke if there were people in the small bus stop? I'm thinking of the normal bus shelters. A train station is not that small, but you can still get the smoke exhaled from people. Why should people have to move to facilitate the selfish smoker? If I am sitting and a smoker sits beside me should I be obliged to move so he can have a smoke? It should be he who moves elsewhere, away from people, and have some courtesy.The point is that you cannot simply cozy up to someone at a train station who is having a smoke, stand right next to them when you could stand anywhere else and then ask them to put their cigarette out because its bothering you.
Can be difficult and you may cause unwanted conflict.Don't have anything to say about the litter issue as you're right on that one with about half of all litter being cigarette litter.
And what about your neighbors if you happen to be a smoker? Should they have the right to knock on your door and ask you to stop smoking because you smoke in their general vicinity?
Not at all, unless you are blowing smoke through a hole in the wall :P The person next door won't be effected in any way from the smoke in your house.Morkarleth wrote: »Why did you quote that entire post just to respond with two lines of text?! It was right above your own!
Why did you post this???
I didn't see it mentioned; enforcing a ban on smoking outdoors would be almost impossible without huge CCTV installations and a ridiculous waste of the police force's time.
It sure would, probably don't have the infastructure here for it. Doesn't have to be the police who deals with it, but they can if they come accross it if they are on the beat, you know? Could have something like the litter wardens, or parking wardens. Can increase jobs
Anyway, would be mainly for cities, towns, built up areas in general. Wouldn't be much of a problem if a farmer was smoking in a field (I know that's private land)
Another thing a public smoking ban would help is reduce the amount of young people starting to smoke.0 -
-
-
-
It might if they fell on you!
Your argument is weak.bit harsh?
Such is life. Reality is harsh. Are you denying facts?What about farts? How do you feel about breathing my farts?
A natural gas which comes from every body, which is not harmful in that dosage. It's something that cannot be avoided.Yes they do. It's called the open air, where it rains and it's cold, and now you would like those cleansed too?
That's not a designated smokers area. It's cold? It rains? Stop complaining, it's your choice to smoke. Is it outrageous to want clean air? It's a fundamental right, it's a very reasonable request.It is and nobody is taking that away from you, unlike you who wants smokers rights infringed to suit your social convenience.
Social convenience? You might want to explain that one because I haven't a clue what you are talking about. You take that right away from me when you smoke next to me in a public place. You can see that, right?You could shoot them. This would solve the problem too.
Wow... :rolleyes:LOL!
Is that the best retort you can come up with? What's so LOL about bush fires and people dying?Oh, right, ye olde "boo hoo" argument. That's reasonable. I didn't misquote anyone. Everybody else has their rights, smokers are banned from smoking in enclosed spaces where secondhand smoke is an issue. We're talking about outside where it is not an issue.
What? Are you for real? Second hand smoke is not an issue becuase you are outside? Think about that for a second...You can lol lol all you like but it doesn't actually support anything you're saying.
I am letting you know, that what you said is quite laughable...We're talking about outside here. Take two steps out of the direction the wind is blowing and suddenly you have nothing to get hysterical about.
I know exactly what we are talking about. Thinking that because you are outside and it disolves the problem, is quite silly.So would banning all packaging for anything, locking everyone inside their homes or just exterminating the human race. The point being, the fact that it would achieve the desire "less litter" doesn't neccessarily mean it's a reasonable proposition.
Packaging is essential for many products. 50% less litter is not something to turn your nose up at because you have vested interests.I suppose I should just put *wink* *wink* *wink* in my post, that's a much better way to make an argument.
You know well what emoticons are for, no?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
Israel Elegant Comb wrote: »What? Are you for real? Second hand smoke is not an issue becuase you are outside? Think about that for a second...
Let me be very clear about this: Unless you are standing face to face with someone then second hand smoke is absolutely not a concern when you are outside. If you are so unlucky as to have the wind blowing it directly into your face then I do not think it is unreasonable to expect you (or they) to move approximately twelve inches to avoid it. Second hand smoke as a health concern is only relevant in a contained area where the smoke lingers and is constantly breathed by everyone present. The reason we have a smoking ban in pubs and restaurants is because the staff were experiencing long term second hand smoke exposure from being in a contained environment. It has nothing to do with self righteous hysterical people throwing a fit about a trace of smoke whisking by them on the wind while waiting for a train.I am letting you know, that what you said is quite laughable...
Haha, ok, hang on. I describe someone's argument as ill thought-out (showing that there were many factors he was not considering) and fascist (referring to the casual dictatorial nature of his wishes) and you criticise me, but you going lol lol is perfectly acceptable?
You're just awful at this.I know exactly what we are talking about. Thinking that because you are outside and it disolves the problem, is quite silly.
Assuming your concern has something to do with the health risks of second hand smoking then yes, being outside absolutely dissolves the problem. If your concern is a self-righteous, pretentious and hysterical hissy fit over seeing someone doing something you don't like then obviously you're going to have problems, but second hand smoke is probably the least of your problems in that case.Packaging is essential for many products. 50% less litter is not something to turn your nose up at because you have vested interests.
We can reduce litter by enforcing anti-littering laws. Again, saying that it will reduce litter does not automatically justify your argument. I can point out that banning chocolate bars would reduce litter because their packaging gets tossed on the ground, but that would be rather unreasonable of me, just as it is unreasonable of you.You know well what emoticons are for, no?
People who can't express their arguments using words?0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Op said he/she disliked the sight of people smoking. Just pointing out that it is a ridiculous reason to ban smoking in public places.
Sure would be a really bad reason to ban something, but there are regulations and the likes already linked to asthetics. Banning smoking because you don't like the look of it is not wise. Banning smoking because it may influence others to pick up the habbit is not such a bad thing.Also, designated smoking areas? There is one. Outside.
:rolleyes:As may banning them altogether.
That wouldn't be right though, they should still be allowed to smoke, just not around other people who are health concious.While we are talking about banning people from doing things that upset/offend other people, can we ban unemployed people from spending their money in pubs/on alcohol. After all, its not their money, their presence isa bad example to others and they really should be spending their time looking for a job.
This has been done to death It's off topic too.Improbable wrote: »No, I wouldn't go and stand right next to someone to light up. But by the same token, I wouldn't feel obliged to put it out if they came and stood next to me unless they had absolutely nowhere else to stand.
That's fair enough, same way I wouldn't drink and drive, drive wrecklessly etc etc, but there are people who do these things and that's who the bans and laws target, although people like you will get caught up in it too. Plenty of times I have had people sit or stand next to me then spark up a fag. It's just pure ignorant.Feel free to ask a smoker to stand a little bit further away from you if it bothers you. And really, train stations are NOT small enough to cause you to breath in any significant amount of second hand smoke as long as you're not trying to avoid the smoke and cop a feel at the same time. Thats really a question of courtesy more than anything else. Do we really need a law passed because it offends your sense of courtesy. Just ask them to move if it truly bothers you that much. Lets face it, with such an unenforcable ban, the ones with courtesy would not do it anyway or would move if you asked. The ones who don't move would never follow the ban anyway.
Are you saying if this was implemented, it would have no effect what so ever? Why should I have to go out of my way to ask others to stop doing what they are doing because it is harming me, making my good clothes stink etc etc? I shouldn't have to do that at all, plus it causes conflict. Not everyone is going to be nice about it and oblige. Ask the wrong person to move or stop smoking and it may not end well for you. Some train stations are small enough for smoke to hinder people.Don't really know what you mean by that. You may cause conflict by not standing next to someone?
Asking a complete stranger to put out his fag or to move away, I can't see it going down well.What about in a case where you may be smoking in the garden and the wind happens to carry it over to the next door garden?
That's being a bit pedantic, no? Also, smoking in your garden would be fine, as it's not on public property 0 -
Israel Elegant Comb wrote: »That wouldn't be right though, they should still be allowed to smoke, just not around other people who are health concious..
What health risk do you think smoke wafting by you in the wind poses? Particularly if you (or the smoker) can move left or right a foot or two?
I'll help you; absolutely none. As regards smoking outdoors, the 'health' card is just a hysterical reaction from the uneducated and easily upset.Israel Elegant Comb wrote: »This has been done to death It's off topic too.
Its on-topic; dont you think that the unemployed (particularly spending their money on alcohol) are a bad example to be setting other hard working people? And distasteful? And you cant just step a foot to the side to entirely rid yourself of them if they are drinking in your pub.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Everyone,
Like Mike mentioned above, poll speaks for itself - and it clearly shows majority doesn't mind people smoking in public.
I have been accused as a 'fascist' - I was only expressing an opinion, with a bunch of points that I thought supports the issue, along with a poll that's open to everyone to vote and view the results. If someone things that's fascist, what are you smoking (and can I have some?
)I don't know what he's going on about in relation to South America, but in reference to India he is probably getting confused about the "smoke-free" city of Chandigarh. It is only smoke-free in the sense that our entire country is smoke-free, ie, enclosed places like bars and restaurants. And it's not even being enforced. Why he leapt to the conclusion that this meant no smoking on the street I have no idea, especially considering that in the rest of India you can walk around smoking a fag in the bank or tax office.
Zillah, thanks for the good posts - even if they are against, you have raised some valid points, and I do accept some (well most) of them.
About banning in public places - here's a list of bans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans
See France in particular!
About India in particular: http://abhisays.com/india/smoking-ban-at-public-places-in-india.htmlSteyr wrote:Personally i despise smoking as i have had family members pass due to smoking related illness but i also believe it would be a law that you would not be able to 100% enforce.
I totally agree with this.
Thanks again for all comments folks, for or against. A debate is what I was looking for, I wasn't looking to enforce my view to any of you! Let's please not take this personally!
0 -
-
Everyone,
Like Mike mentioned above, poll speaks for itself - and it clearly shows majority doesn't mind people smoking in public.
I have been accused as a 'fascist' - I was only expressing an opinion, with a bunch of points that I thought supports the issue, along with a poll that's open to everyone to vote and view the results. If someone things that's fascist, what are you smoking (and can I have some?)
Zillah, thanks for the good posts - even if they are against, you have raised some valid points, and I do accept some (well most) of them.
About banning in public places - here's a list of bans: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans
About India in particular: http://abhisays.com/india/smoking-ban-at-public-places-in-india.html
I totally agree with this.
Thanks again for all comments folks, for or against. A debate is what I was looking for, I wasn't looking to enforce my view to any of you! Let's please not take this personally!
Well this forum is now over I think, due to the pole that is.
Looking at the above well smoking is a bad thing, and as a smoker that's correct. But you have to give what people want, so what does every one want that is -- a perfect world to live in -- well, we dont have this in place, and its not just Irish, Ireland, its all over the world.
So what do we do with the currect plan, how do we change things here in Ireland.
There are many thing's out there in this world that will kill you even quicker like speeding in small town's. Today walking my dog and crossing the road, i had to run to get to the other side with the dog, because of a speeding young girl in the village. And did not she give a toss, no way just kept driving with the head facing forward, with me there, running like a fool.
Thats what the world is coming to ( a sad place )
Michael0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I would have thought it fairly obvious.
You are redirecting anger from other issues and aiming it at "smokers".
What exactly are you talking about? I appretiate the free psychoanalysis, but what has this got to do with smoking in public places? While you are at it, you can tell me what the "other issues" happen to be, as I am unaware of them. A little off the mark there Nodin, to say the least. Wouldn't expect any less from you thoughLet me be very clear about this: Unless you are standing face to face with someone then second hand smoke is absolutely not a concern when you are outside.
Wrong.If you are so unlucky as to have the wind blowing it directly into your face then I do not think it is unreasonable to expect you (or they) to move approximately twelve inches to avoid it.
Why should I have to put myself out, why should others have to put themselves out to ask selfish people to be more considerate of others?Second hand smoke as a health concern is only relevant in a contained area where the smoke lingers and is constantly breathed by everyone present.
Wrong.The reason we have a smoking ban in pubs and restaurants is because the staff were experiencing long term second hand smoke exposure from being in a contained environment. It has nothing to do with self righteous hysterical people throwing a fit about a trace of smoke whisking by them on the wind while waiting for a train.
You're not bad at the auld sensationalis tabloid style writing. "Trace" "Whisking" oh lol... "Hysterical people throwing a fit" Where?. Self righteous... :rolleyes: Why stop there?Haha, ok, hang on. I describe someone's argument as ill thought-out (showing that there were many factors he was not considering) and fascist (referring to the casual dictatorial nature of his wishes) and you criticise me, but you going lol lol is perfectly acceptable?
It's far from facist and ill thought... Some of your suggestions were very lolable.You're just awful at this.
Sensationlist, saber rattling, nonsense? I know
Assuming your concern has something to do with the health risks of second hand smoking then yes, being outside absolutely dissolves the problem.
No it doesn't. Again, you are wrong.If your concern is a self-righteous, pretentious and hysterical hissy fit over seeing someone doing something you don't like then obviously you're going to have problems, but second hand smoke is probably the least of your problems in that case.
Stop making crap up.
It has everything to do with what I listed, if you took the time to read it. I stated a few times that I couldn't give a shít if people smoked or not. None of my concern. What is my concern is some ignorant fool blowing cancer stick smoke in my face.We can reduce litter by enforcing anti-littering laws. Again, saying that it will reduce litter does not automatically justify your argument. I can point out that banning chocolate bars would reduce litter because their packaging gets tossed on the ground, but that would be rather unreasonable of me, just as it is unreasonable of you.
I fail to see how chocolate bars directly effect the health of those who do not eat them. Maybe you can point that out to me?People who can't express their arguments using words?KnifeWRENCH wrote: »Then you either haven't read the thread properly or are very selective about reading any posts that disagree with you.
Banning smoking in public places would be the stuff of a nanny state; stop trying to dismiss that mere paranoia.
Not at all, it's not nanny state politics.Wade in the Sea wrote: »And neither is short term second hand smoke ingestion by you
It's unpleasant to breath it in, it can be damaging, it's disgusting, it's ignorant etc etc. To believe that second hand smoke is not harmful is just beyond words.I am complaining that people who do not smoke feel they have the right to dictate to people who do. Your Human Rights are not infringed. You are not at risk from open air exposure to second hand smoke. If you want to crusade for clean air take on the Cement industry. They contribute 5% of the worlds Co2 and pose a much bigger threat to your life.
Yea, thing is they have a right to breath fresh air
Also, cement is alot more useful than cigarettes, no?Because there are no health risks. Your argument is social and everything else is about whether you are emotionally and socially discommoded or not.
No health risks? Wow... See above.
I have no idea wtf you are talking about in the rest of that sentence...I LOL because you hold up California as a good example. It would take too long to go over that but take a look sometime at the type of legislation that gets taken seriously in that state. As an old advert once said, All the best nuts are Californian"
That's a fairly weak argument to say the least.Stupid idea to ban smoking in public.
Smoking outside is healthier than smoking inside so you can't argue any health benefits for it for the actual smokers. Doesn't effect non smokers health side when outside. If you forced people to smoke indoors more children would probably be exposed to second hand smoke.
It's not forcing people to smoke indoors, just not in public places. Why does smoking outside not effect peoples health?Cars buses trucks etc cause more pollution and negative health effects than outdoor smoking would so why don't you go campaign to get these banned first if you're so concerned.
That;s not the best suggestion really, considering these vehicles are essential. Smoking is not.Smokers pay enough tax that there should be enough ashtrays nearly everywhere so there shouldn't be any need to litter.
The tax is spent on fixing the smokers via the HSE. Spending that money on ashtrays would be rediculous.Improbable wrote: »The health argument I take seriously. This, not for a smoke loving second! So what if you don'l like the smell of it. Why should I care? Maybe I don't like the smell of your cologne/perfume. Maybe I don't like the smell of whatever you had for lunch. Maybe we should pass a law against the consumption of onions or garlic in public. The health argument is valid. This piece of babble which isnt even moderately thought out is not!
I don't think the smell of what oyu had for lunch or somebodies perfume will linger on your clothes. Onions and Garlic are also benificial... so that argument is not a great one to be honest. Would you like to be subject to the smell of second hand smoke while waiting on a bus or train or other? Do you think it's nice?And were I to care, it would not be my fault if you chose to walk behind me. Get ahead of me then. Or walk on the other side of the road. Or stop for two seconds so I can get further ahead so you don;t smell it. If someone is smoking at a bus stop, don't go and stand right next to them. Same thing for a train station. The train station one REALLY gets me because they're so large, unlike a bus stop which I admit isn't that big. But even then, you have more than enough room to avoid it if you think about it.
Ah, "i'll do what I want to do and I don't care about you, if you have a problem then move"... nope, that just doesn't cut it to be honest. You are putting somebody else out. That's not good.Improbable wrote: »So we should spend a lot of money and go through the entire process of drafting up new legislation just because you cant spare 2 minutes to move out of the way or ask someone else to? Just because 1 or 2 inconsiderate people inconvenienced you once upon a time?
See above.michael222 wrote: »Hello
As the pole is showing leave as it is, a clear winner.
does not matter which way you look at it
Michael
If we were to go by AH poles, we could be a little bit foooked AH is not the best cross section of people to be asking these sort of things anyway.What health risk do you think smoke wafting by you in the wind poses? Particularly if you (or the smoker) can move left or right a foot or two?
I'll help you; absolutely none. As regards smoking outdoors, the 'health' card is just a hysterical reaction from the uneducated and easily upset.
:rolleyes:Its on-topic; dont you think that the unemployed (particularly spending their money on alcohol) are a bad example to be setting other hard working people? And distasteful? And you cant just step a foot to the side to entirely rid yourself of them if they are drinking in your pub.
How is it on topic? It's a completely different subject. It's a topic for another thread, but if you insist I can set you straight. People can spend their money on what they wish. The money does not belong to the "hard working people". There are 450K people on social welfare in Ireland today. Do you begrudge them a few pints?OP,
Personally i despise smoking as i have had family members pass due to smoking related illness but i also believe it would be a law that you would not be able to 100% enforce.
I don't think there are many laws that are 100% enforceable.michael222 wrote: »Well this forum is now over I think, due to the pole that is.
Looking at the above well smoking is a bad thing, and as a smoker that correct. But you have to give what people want, so what does every one want that is -- a perfect world to live in -- well, we dont have this in place, and its not just Irish, Ireland, its all over the world.
So what do we do with the currect plan, how do we change things here in Ireland.
There are many thing's out there in this world that will kill you even quicker like speeding in small town's. Today walking my dog and crossing i had to run to get to the other side with the dog, because of a speeding young girl in the village. And did she give a toss, no
Thats what the world is coming to ( a sad place )
Michael
That's not the best analagy. Seriously people...
There are rules against speeding, are there not?
Anyway, with time, things change. I can see this law being introduced in my lifetime. It makes perfectly clear sense to me...0
Advertisement