Smoking: Nanny State or time to stub em out?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Vegetius, Jun 20, 2005.

  1. Dammit yes! Smoking is a proven health risk.

  2. Dammit no! New Labour are too keen on banning things!


Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The papers were full of this story yesterday about the government wanting to ban smoking in all public places, as opposed to the current proposals (i.e. anywhere that serves food = no smoking). The government hotly denies any intention to implement a total ban.

    What do ARRSE'rs think? I've never smoked a tab in my entire life, don't really like being surrounded by smokers but the bloody-minded libertarian part of my brain really doesn't like the government interfering again in people's lives. What next? If only the government were as determined to stamp out kids smoking cannabis which they, er, more or less decriminalized. Hmmm.

    Saying that, I'm really torn as I was in Boston in the USA last year and going to a pub full of fresh air really is rather nice. And the down-right evil b'stard in me loves seeing smokers gathered in huddles outside offices, in the rain, feeding their silly, sixty-quid-a-week addiction.

    There's no "I'm not sure" in this poll, as in the real-life eventuality of a ban. It's Yes or No. I voted No on, as I say, libertarian grounds.

  2. I am all in favour of smoking. I don't myself but I know that if everyone gave up Big Brother would have to find a lot of cash from elsewhere. What I do think is important, however, is the right of non-smokers to breath clean air. Now for my part, I don't like the smell of smoke so I don't go to the pub that often (nothing to do with Mrs Primrose not letting me anymore). Those that don't have the choice are the bar staff, waiters and glass collectors. I believe this is who the legislation will be aimed at protecting and rightly so.

    One thing I am not looking forward to is the piles of dog-ends in the street outside pubs. I wonder if the goverment will provide any form of tax relief on the construction of outside shelters that publicans will probably want to errect when this law comes into force.
  3. mysteron

    mysteron LE Book Reviewer

    I am a failed Smoker. Given up for 6 months (Sounds like Alcoholics Anon, don't it?) I quite enjoy going to pubs where you can't smoke or has seperate areas to do so. Restaurants should be non smoking purely on hygeine grounds (I thought that even when I did smoke).

    On the liberation front. I think seperate areas where you can smoke (under a large extractor?) should be allowed. Give people the choice, minimise the difference. Oh, how I love the smell of Utopia.
  4. I think it should be for the owner to decide, who should be encouraged by being given a nice tax-break to go smoke-free (e.g. a reduction on his alcohol duty, which would make his place cheaper so more people would go there etc etc etc). But this is unthinkable to Blairy Poppins, who likes to wave the ban stick about like an Unwashed 75 moderator. Unfortunately they've got themselves into a mindset where a ban is the solution to all of life's wills (hell, ASBOs just ban specific people from doing specific things).
  5. mysteron

    mysteron LE Book Reviewer

    Not sure it is a great idea Stoat.

    Reduce tax on those who want to tow the party line. Wins votes from non smokers, what could possibly go wrong. The massive gap in the budget it will create and the increase on National Insurance and income tax for all. (That way Gordon can spend even more of tommorrows money.i.e you and my pension).

    However, I do agree that slapping bans on everything does not work.
  6. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    Pure Neue Arbeit " Look.[sincere] We know Best" [/sincere] crap

    I'm a fomer smoker who's NEARLY completely free of the weed...but I think it is bloody OUTRAGEOUS that these tw$ts think they have a licence to interfere in everbody's life......Obesity costs the National Health far more than smoking does ( thirty years of campaigning by the Anti-smoking lobby have left their mark in Britain and it's really noticeable when you go to another country like France or Germany, let alone East of Cyprus) when are they going to ban the vending machine companies selling sugar-loaded fizzy drinks to kids in our schools ?

    W+nkers! :evil:

    Le Chevre
  7. Fcuking cracking idea. My school gave out free drinks in the form of several water fountains situated around the various corridors.

    Still think smoking has no place in a public area though. Wonder what the line will be on private members clubs (ie not public places) where the membership have voted to allow it?
  8. The argument that smokers fund the NHS is a misleading one, as they also overuse its resources due to their filthy smoking-related illnesses.

    Fifteen years ago I would have argued for no restrictions on smoking, partly because I was a tabber then, but mostly because there were still the notion that if someone's smoke was offensive, they could be requested to desist. Not nowadays - I had to threaten to get some knucklehead thrown off a train the other week (at a station whilst stationary) to encourage him to shift his lard-arrse down to the smoking carriage.

    Premises (ie pubs) should apply for a smoking license and demonstrate that there is proper segregation and smoke extraction measutes. I don't mind people killing themselves but they're not dragging me down with them! Also, kids in smoking households (normally chav scum who don't see why they should step outside for a tab) should be registered as at-risk.
  9. Mr PVR

    I your suggestion about getting a licience is a very good idea and would encourage responsible publicans to provide facilities.

    As for your arguement about smokers providing funds to the NHS - I am intregued. Is this view of yours backed up by evidence or just a supposition. In my opinion (I am a nurse) most smokers will die from their habbit unless if they are not gotten by an accident/murder/some wierd occupational disease. By this I mean heart disease and cancer.

    Cancer. The types of cancer that smoking is related to are mouth (bad prognosis), larynx (bad prognosis), lung (bad prognosis if not caught very early), oesphagus (you're fcuked) and stomach (bad prognosis). The five year survival rates for these are very poor indeed. They may get radical surgury (a few thousand quid), chemotherapy (moderatly expensive over a short period of time) and radiotherapy (not too expensive)

    Heart disease. Heart attacks kill unless treated with a clot buster very quickly. Those who survive and do not get too much in the way of heart death will go onto a series of drugs to prevent another attack and will stay on them for the rest of their life. These drugs are not expensive. If they stay off the fags and adjust their life they should do well. Those who have a lot of damage and become cardiac cripples will go down hill and die early (a couple of years with home oxygen and maybe home help - moderatly expensive) Once you have had one heart attack and do not alter your lifestlye you will probably have another and another until curtains.

    Non-smokers. Especially sensible folk who do plenty of exercise and eat well - chance of living til a ripe old age is high. Get to 80 and you will probably need home help or residential/nursing care (£300-£1500 per week). You live until 90 (not an unrealistic age in 50 years) and the cost soon mounts up. Factor in a few hip/knee replacements and all manner of other gubbins and the cost mounts up quickly.

    My point. We should not be discouraging people to smoke. IMHO they provide a lot of money over their shortened lives and Mr Average Smoker will take out a lot less that I hope I do. However, I still don't want to breathe their filth.

    Here endeth the essay. :D
  10. I am a non smoker and was against this idea untill I visited Mrs Forniup's family in Ireland. It has been in there for a while now and i think it's brilliant. Most of the smokers still go as all the pubs have provided smoking areas outside complete with roofs and garden heaters for winter.
    another advantage is the cos all the smokers are outside killing themselves its easier to get to the bar!
  11. mysteron

    mysteron LE Book Reviewer

    Watching Sky News this am and the Torygraph allegedy states that the Government want to impose a ban on smoking in public places and will reward informers for enforcing the law.

    BIG BROTHER IS ALWAYS WATCHING. Whatever next? Thoughtcrime? Oh thats right to think that Neue Arbeit is bad in any way is wrong and it is racist/bigotted/unlawful/etc. The future is double plus good.
  12. Never smoked in my life, dirty filthy habit, remember watching mi old granda cough his lungs up of a morning, put me off for life, he knew back in 50's it was nicotene.
    But If people want to smoke their business. I like to ride mi M/cycle dangerous, daft but thats my thing.
  13. As a smoker - I would like to have the right to smoke in a public place but only in designated areas.

    Restaurants and anywhere food is served (as in Australia) should be non smoking. Pubs/clubs should have proper air extraction systems installed.

    Friends recently went to the ROI and said that there were ciggy butts all over the place on the streets. Said it was disgusting. Also there's nothing worse than having 20 or so smokers congregate outside your office block - looks so untidy. Better off having a room set aside for them to enjoy their dangerous habit.

    As for the Monetary value of smokers input into the economy.... imagine if they all lived to 80 or 90...... we'd be fooked. Pensions and NI contributions would rise astronomically. Financial projections are based upon smokers snuffing (no pun intended) it early.

    If El Presidentay Blair wants to ban smoking....... great. But ban completely - no holds barred. Total outright ban. See where that would get him......... Unemployed I think.

  14. Such an emotive issue! We have just had smoking banned in public rooms in the mess until after 2000hrs - what a difference it has made. Also, during official functions, smokers go outside!. It is now a pleasure to sit in the bar and have a few ales, without having your clothes reek of smoke.

    I am an ex-smoker, so arguably we are the worst anti smokers. However, I know how difficult it is to stop smoking, therefore encourage any efforts to remove smoking from most social situations. It would make it a lot easier for others to give up if smoking was banned from more places.

    I do appreciate the rights of smokers to kill themselves slowly, but the majority of us should not have to put up with smoking either at work, or on a night out.
  15. I too hold my hand up as that worst of critic - the ex smoker.

    However - i do believe the smoking ban would be good, If i want a smoke, i can get one, but i don't want to have to breathe other peoples when I'm out - thats why i gave up. It does hit when you get home from the pub and into your smoke free house that your clothes stink.

    I don't want to stop people smoking, its free choice, i just don't want my air more polluted than it already is!