Smoking Ban

! This post hasn't been updated in over a year. A lot can change in a year including my opinion and the amount of naughty words I use. There's a good chance that there's something in what's written below that someone will find objectionable. That's fine, if I tried to please everybody all of the time then I'd be a Lib Dem (remember them?) and I'm certainly not one of those. The point is, I'm not the kind of person to try and alter history in case I said something in the past that someone can use against me in the future but just remember that the person I was then isn't the person I am now nor the person I'll be in a year's time.

The smoking ban starts today in England – the last part of the UK to get a smoking ban.

From today, smoking in enclosed public places, workplaces and even company cars will be illegal and punishable by an illegal on-the-spot fine.

My employer has gone further than necessary and banned smoking anywhere on the premises, including the car park.

The smoking ban coming into effect today is only a partial ban, not the full smoking ban they enjoy everywhere else in the UK thanks to the interference of a Scottish MP who, despite the fact it doesn’t affect his constituents who already have a full smoking ban, decided to introduce an amendment to have the English ban watered down.

19 comments

  1. Calum (183 comments) says:

    The smoking ban is a good thing. Who suggested it is irrelevant. Just because it was a Scottish MP who suggested England adhere to a similar law as enforced across the rest of the UK doesn’t mean it is a load of shit.

    Were we to say only thing suggested by Englishmen should be done in England then would we have Penicillin, The Steam Engine, The telephone etc…

  2. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    I agree the smoking ban is a good thing, hence the line “not the full smoking ban they enjoy everywhere else”. You’re also showing your usual ignorance of facts about the interference of the Scottish MP – we were supposed to be getting a full smoking ban like they have in Scotland but thanks to the interference of a Scottish MP we got a partial ban. Your last line isn’t even worth replying to it’s so irrelevant.

  3. LJ (10 comments) says:

    You really need to get your facts straight, most of your posts just aren’t worth replying to because they are so factually inaccurate.

    You may wish to know that there are English people involved in the Scottish parliament (because they live in Scotland), no-one in Scotland has a problem with that. There will probably always be Scottish people involved in Westminster, even if it becomes just an English parliament, because there will always be Scottish people living in England. Although clearly if you had your way Scottish people would be kicked out!

    Mind you there are Asians involved in the Scottish parliament but you probably wouldn’t accept that either.

  4. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    Sorry, what inspired thpse accusations? It’s not nationality that matters, it’s who votes for the politicians making the decisions. The MP in question was elected in Scotland where a smoking ban is the responsibility of the Scottish Executive and he therefore had no mandate to involve himself in an English smoking ban.

    I have always supported an English Parliament for everyone in England, regardless of race or ethnic origin which you would know if you read my blog regularly.

  5. Scaffold (146 comments) says:

    “The Steam Engine”

    The Steam Engine was invented by Englishman Thomas Savery, you ignorant idiot Calum. James Watt only improved it many years after. Savery’s engine was patented in 1698, and Watt was born only 1736.

  6. Scaffold (146 comments) says:

    “You may wish to know that there are English people involved in the Scottish parliament (because they live in Scotland), no-one in Scotland has a problem with that”

    You’re messing nationality with constituency. It is not about their Scottishness, it is about having a say in other country matters while their own matters are devolved.

  7. Calum (183 comments) says:

    Scaffold, Saverys steam engine was rubbish. It wasn’t fully accepted and used until Watts additions. Scaffold, you are still to reply to my posts from the post on terror attacks. Was looking 4ward to a bit of argument on that.

  8. Vic (1 comments) says:

    On no account should a total smoking ban be allowed ! That is pure fascism, those who are trying to enforce it are pure fascists, and as such are dangerous and should be fought tooth and nail as any dangerous fascist should.

    The solution to the smoking/non-smoking problem is to have separate areas. That works perfectly well and there is no valid reason to change it. There is a lot of medical propaganda about smoking that is unproven or false, notably on the subject of passive smoking.

    It is pure humbug. The rights of smokers are just as important as those of non-smokers and let no-one say otherwise. Hitler singled out the Jews in the 1930’s just like people are singling out smokers now. It is very very dangerous and these people must not be allowed to get away with this, if only because it is an open door to other things ………alcohol, fatty foods, car exhaust fumes etc etc. Rail Travel is dangerous, air travel, cars on the road.

    You could argue that anything is dangerous and that it should be banned. The argument just doesn’t make sense. I have not one iota of doubt in my mind that these would-be banners are wrong and they must be stopped.

    The other thing, the most hypocritical thing of all, is that if cigarettes were really as dangerous as they would have us believe, then their sale would be banned, wouldn’t it ? Ah yes, but there is too much money involved. Cannabis, which is not dangerous at all, is banned ? Why? No-one knows, but it does containes less dangerous products than tobacco.

    All this goes to prove that the government are a load of hyprocrites and should in no case be listened to. It’s time the public stood up to these people who really take them for a bunch of idiots.

  9. wonkotsane (1133 comments) says:

    A full smoking ban should be allowed. Smokers have a right to smoke, non-smokers have a right not to breath in other peoples’ smoke. As it is the smokers that are actively doing something to force non-smokers to breath their smoke then it is only right that it is the smokers that should be inconvenienced. Just be thankful you can smoke in the street – if I had my way that would be banned and parents who smoke in enclosed places in the presence of their children would be charged with assault or something similar.

    If you choose to inhale carcinigenic, addictive smoke containing, amongst its harmful substances, cyanide and formaldahyde then that’s your choice but you should be the one who has to ensure that nobody else is put in a position where they might breath in your smoke.

    I saw a sign on Google which said something like “You like to smoke, I like to have sex – do you see me shagging on your desk?”

  10. Calum (183 comments) says:

    “Smokers have a right to smoke, non-smokers have a right not to breath in other peoples’ smoke.” Good point.

    I can’t believe vic that you are comparing the smoking ban to Nuremburg laws etc… That is rediclious.

    Also, on Cannabis, it is dangerous. It has all the ill effects of an unfiltered fag, plus the countless partially unknown ill effects of the cannabis itself. A splif has the same -ve effects of a normal cigarette, the tobacco etc… plus the mental and other problems (not just health but social problems as well) as yet not fully known caused by the marijuana.

    Vic, you are nuts!

  11. Scaffold (146 comments) says:

    “Scaffold, Saverys steam engine was rubbish. It wasn’t fully accepted and used until Watts additions.”

    OK, and Wright’s plane was also rubbish. It wasn’t accepted until Douglas built it’s C-47. Or maybe even until Boeing built their 747. You are talking crap as fucking usual.

  12. Scaffold (146 comments) says:

    “Scaffold, you are still to reply to my posts from the post on terror attacks. Was looking 4ward to a bit of argument on that.”

    Your posts?! There are neither questions, nor points there. There’s nothing to reply to.

  13. Calum (183 comments) says:

    Oi, oi Scaffold. Calm down. There is no need to insult me with “You are talking crap as fucking usual.” I think such of much of your posts, yet don’t say it. Why? Because of respect.

    I may disagree with almost everything you say and stand for, but that doesn’t mean you are talking shit. I may think it is a load of bull, but i would never say it so bluntly and crudely.

    Did communism not teach you to respect your fellow man, comrade? 😉

    There is no need to be so crude. This lack of respect is something all too common in British society today, a legacy of the me, me, me of Thatcherism.

  14. Calum (183 comments) says:

    Sorry, didn’t get to finish all of the last post.

    We shouldn’t expect respect, as the chav who tried to mug me the other day for merely looking at him and saying ‘eh? What?’ after he grabbed at my rucksack as i walked past after his m8 has said “oi blud, find out what fone (phone) that boi’ has got. (said a bit quieter) i wanna know if we should gauge it(steal it)”

    We shouldn’t expect respect, yet we should show it to others unconditionally. Respect should be earnt, but that doesn’t mean that we should treat people with disrespect until we truly respect them. We should treat people respectfully, even of we dislike them, we should show them respect. Respect is a mutual thing.

    Scaffold i respect you, but i don’t like you. I am not asking for respect, all i am asking for is a bit of politeness and civility. Something all to lacking in society today.

  15. John (37 comments) says:

    Erm, getting back to the subject of this blog. I was glad to learn that people in care homes will be allowed to smoke in their own rooms. Who are we to deny lifelong pleasures to the old and vulnerable? Isn’t the government considerate?

    Well … look at the small print. This exemption only lasts until 1 July 2008. After that date, those who lived through WWII to protect our freedom will have probably one of their only pleasures denied them. Makes you want to vomit, doesn’t it?

  16. lfb_uk (15 comments) says:

    As a smoker, I cannot support this ban in anyway!

    I believe that it is an imposition and unjust.

    With regard the Passive Smoking, nothing has been proved either way, and until it has, the status quo should remain.

    I do accept that non smokers deserve their space, so give them what they want, non smoking pubs. Just as they were given non smoking areas, it will never be enough. If one pub in 10 was allowed to be smoking, its that pub they would want to enter, they cannot live and let live.

    Also modern air cleaning units, clean the air upto .30 microns, which is enough to get rid of all the crap in cigs. If a pub had an air cleaner installed, it would have better air quality than outside!

  17. KeithS (80 comments) says:

    Sorry lfb_uk, but you’ve had your day.
    For years my visits to pubs, clubs, restaurants and other public venues have been spoiled by having people blowing smoke in my face and making my clothes, hair, and body stink. As a smoker, you don’t appreciate just how offensive this is to a non-smoker. There was no “live and let live” then, just a “Tough – live with it!” attitude. The majority (non-smokers) have now decided they want a more pleasant environment when they go out, so now it’s their turn to say “Tough – live with it!”

    “Also modern air cleaning units, clean the air upto .30 microns, which is enough to get rid of all the crap in cigs. If a pub had an air cleaner installed, it would have better air quality than outside!”
    Maybe. But pubs, clubs etc did not, by-and-large, install them, or installed ones with inadequate capacity, didn’t clean the filters, or didn’t maintain them. If they had installed them, there may not have been this backlash from the majority (non-smokers) against the minority (smokers). Compare and contrast this attitude with that of those pubs now rushing to install outside shelters, with seats, heaters for the benefit of smokers. Why didn’t they put this amount of effort into catering for the non-smokers?

    You’ve had your time, the era of smoke filled pubs, clubs, restaurants, etc is over, and consigned to the dustbin of history.
    Live with it!

  18. Catherine (1 comments) says:

    This is not about smoking anymore. From birth the public in the UK are taught the government are here to protect us…by taxing us at every opportunity and removing out freedom. Smoking is not a government issue. Its about respect. Respect for each other and for the enviroment you are in. My grandfather died from passive smoking related lung cancer. Do I blame every smoker in the UK? no! You remove the choice….you remove freedom.

    The smoking ban is part of the subtle way in which the government see how far they can push us….we are on a road to an “orwellion” Britain…

    Blair is going to be President of the EU…that should make the neocons smile 🙂

  19. axel (1214 comments) says:

    …but there wan’t the choice, that was the problem! Things have possibly too far in the ‘Anti’ direction but they will swing back soon enough. Maybe it is just a scottish observation but you do not realise how smelly pubs are, until you take away the number 1 smell of fag smoke, apparently I am seriously lucky I no longer have a sense of smell.

    Stale beer, stale piss and stale sweat do not make a fun night out.

    Be thankful for global warming, at least it makes outside better 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.