It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Smoking Banned In Europe !!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 05:48 AM
link   
With the british goverment set to ban smoking in all public places in march of 2005 and europe looking to follow suite,i cant help but wonder the following things:-

I am a smoker,hopefully soon not to be! Its probably the stupidest,dirtiest,un-sociable hobby any one can participate in,not to mention the health risks,especially the risks taken by non smokers who have to endure passive smoking in restraunts pubs and clubs!
The proposed law would make smoking in the above recreational areas illegal.
I actually agree with implementing this law but i feel strongly that its wrong for the following reasons:-

1.Its another step in the direction of goverments slowly taking away are free will and our liberty.
2.Many buissnesses will loose trade from customers who will start eating and drinking more in their own homes just so that they can smoke.
3.The basic rights of what you should and shouldnt be able to do in your own restraunt and bar should fall directley into the hands of the owner of said buissnes.
4.There will be mass spendature by local goverment trying to implement this law with police officers spending more time trying to catch offenders of smoking in the above "banned" areas than actually out policing our crime ridden streets.
5.Police officers are going to be placed in potentially volitile situations with people angry and annoyed at having their civil rights altered after so many years of being taxed so heavily for participating in their selected past time.

How do you feel about it?

Regards.

[edit on 2-12-2004 by John bull 1]




posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:06 AM
link   
In an ironey of missdircetion the stronger a Goverment gets the more it worrys about the little guy trying to take away its power .And the more it trys to control said little guy .
read history the patterens the same for alomst every gov starts small with an idea good or bad. then grows at this point the people are mostly happy. Then it starts seeing enimes here and there real or not. Then its all down hill from there.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Can I add a few more reasons why I feel these things are wrong. I live in the US and well, one the top points they use to justify it is....look at how much it would save us in medical costs. (getting our healthcare industry under control would probably save more, but that is beside the point.) I think it's a naturally reaction, the more a person is held accountable for the needs of another, the more that they feel they should have some right to tell them how to behave, what to do, ect......to me, unfortunately, is my basic defination of slavery....we take people, we relocate them to places where they can't meet their own needs, and then we provide it for them, and somehow in our minds, we begin to think we own them--they become our slaves. The same lawyers who sunk the tobacco companies then proceeded on to the McDonalds and other fast food resturants......and the fat wars began. .....look at how much obesity is going to be costing us all in the future. You add to that the "it's their own fault" mentality that is taking place in the country, where everything just doesn't fit their perfect picture of what life should be, and well, it's why should I to help them, it's their own fault.

Which leads me to my next objection. How can a society shun the little habits of people, that little stream of tobacco smoke, or that Big Mac, and yet, then expect these same people to go to work in shops where they are being asked to breath in lead, aluminum, and other heavy metal dust, fumes from a wide assortment of toxic chemicals to produce all that new wonderful crap that they want.....and well not sound like a bunch of hypocrits?

Which leads me to my third objection......once all the media is played out, it will be easy for the masses of people to look at the sick and homeless and well, just say it's their fault. they should have ate better, not smoked, ect, ect. Only these other toxic chemicals have the power to destroy our body functions also, so how can you tell weather is was a bad habit, or his occupation, or maybe it was those pills that the FDA thought was safe but then turned out not to be.

There's another discussion on these boards titled refugees. When I was reading it all I could think of was how could someone, anyone, just stand there and watch a child drown. Well, I see all of this as a major push by the government with it's allies in the health feild, media, ect, to desensitize us and put us in a mental state which will just decide that it is perfectly acceptable to round up our neighbors, our friends, and our families, since, hey, they must of did something to deserve it, right?



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:30 AM
link   
Not only that. Smoking is literally demonized. The packs of cigs have a number of different labels proclaiming they 'cause death', 'you will die at an early age'...etc. I kind of like it.

Here is a friend of mind trying to make a statement. Note, this is the government label on the pack.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Hey, not in all Europe. In GB only. And in public places only. You can do anything you want in your house.

Instead of crying wolf, why don't you admit it was about time?



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 07:10 AM
link   


Hey, not in all Europe. In GB only. And in public places only. You can do anything you want in your house.


er? actually wrong...it comes in in Portugal aswell.

Crying wolf?.....about time?.....the post is nothing to do with it being "about time" its about the effects of implicating it,like i said, i smoke but id like to see it come in....its just what the knock on effects will be?



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:08 AM
link   
The point is, those who don't smoke shouldn't have to suffer the effects of second hand smoke because the rest of you feel like killing yourselves. So if you want to die, kill yourself in your own home, and don't take the rest of us with you.

Simple as that.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:14 AM
link   
In many parts of Canada this is already the law. No smoking in public places. It is absolutely justified. Rather than infringing on rights of smokers, it protects the rights of non-smokers to breathe clean air. However, it is not likely that many smokers will or have ever considered that.

Your point about the impact on business doesn't fly. The main reason being that people will still go out to eat and they will still go to the bar wether they can smoke there are not. There isn't a viable alternative that they can choose. Thus, businesses won't lose money.

EDIT: Police expenditures, these are also minimal. Once they become illegal in public places it becomes a real vocal faux-pas to light one up. The embarassment of being called out for lighting a cigarette in a public place is more than enough deterrant. On top of that, it is often the establishment that gets fined if they are caught with people smoking at their establishment, thus they are very pro-active in ensuring nobody is smoking.

I think that dismantles most of your argument for why it is a wrong decision (I do note that you are not against it, you just felt it was wrong).

Peace,
Lukefj

[edit on 2-12-2004 by Lukefj]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:14 AM
link   


The point is, those who don't smoke shouldn't have to suffer the effects of second hand smoke because the rest of you feel like killing yourselves. So if you want to die, kill yourself in your own home, and don't take the rest of us with you.


guys,guys,guys....look i know all this and i agree with you! im talking about the issues i posted and the effects it will have,not the whole i love/hate smoking thing!

Please stick to the thread or at least post something to do with it!



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Someone should have proposed this compromise: what if bars/restaurants who wanted to/could afford to were allowed to set up a special room, with a high quality extraction system, with the caveat that stafff would not be required to enter (i.e., you go to the bar & get your own drink).

The real issue is second-hand smoke, not smoking itself...

(Or, more people could "dip"!
)



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   
I'm looking to buy a few cc's of clean air, where would I go???

If I have the right to breath it, it must be out there somewhere in the world....all we have around here is polluted by car emmissions, and industiral pollution from the nearby factories....heck, I'd like some clean water too, the city's tap water is so concentrated with chlorine, we had to move to the country and use well water just so I could have my hands back...(I'm allergic to chlorine.)

The point that I am trying to make is that well, the same concept that is being used to protect the drunk from dying from second hand smoke could be used to take quit a few things away that most of us wouldn't want to do without.

As far as the effects on businesses, or there being compromises.....I don't think they are willing to compromise, the laws before the recent ones in NY were passes provided for designated smoking areas, ect....there were even alot of smokefree resturants around....didn't stop them from wanting more. And well, if you a rich bar like some in NY City, well, it will probably be a boom to your business if you hire a limo to sit outside your bar all night and be a nice warm sheltered smoking area, like some down there have...

If your a printing business or any other business with air made more toxic by the chemicals necessary to produce your product in this little area of the world though, you might be having problems with keeping your employees, since well, if you don't like to be around your employees cigarette smoke, well, why should they want to be around your carcinogens...You may find you employees running to the retail stores, or the office building in search of higher pay as well as cleaner air.......



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Nonsmokers so paranoid over a cigarette because they believe all the hype. No, I dont hear about all the other toxins in the air and food. As if smoking outside is going to kill them. I have noticed more non smokers are overweight. theres something to be considered in cost to the healthcare system.

Banning smoking outside has nothing to do with anyones right, and everything to do with the govornment sticking its nose where it does not belong.

Our habits are our own. They do not realize what sort of problems they shall create.

I found the big warnings on UK cogarette packs to be hysterical, funny, and typical hype BS govornment sponsored paranoia.

1. Smokers Die Younger. Wrong. george Burns lived to be over 100. My granny was a chain smoker and lived to be 80. My grandpa smoked, lived to be 86. My two eldest aunts smoke as well. They are in good health. I smoke and can easily outrun nonsmokers.
2. Smoking makes you sterile. When i saw that one, I was rolling over laughing. Both grandparents smoked, and they had 7 kids before my grandma got her tubes tied. all her kids smoke, and they all had kids too.
3. Smoking endangers your health. see number 1.
4. Quitting smoking greatly reduces health risks. what crap. I have known many people who quit, and either became obese, or started developing other problems.

All utter BS as far as im concerned. Sure, its bad for your health. But overdramatized in terms of all possible health risks!



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Good luck with quiting =D



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   
In the Niagara region in southeastern ontario smoking was banned in bars UNLESS they put in a certain kind of ventilation system and had smoker's own room, doors and all... That was optional...

I remember going to a few bars where they didn't have the system so everybody had to smoke outside, but i'll tell ya, it felt alot better on my lungs...
Why should the non-smoker's have to ingest the same thing you do if they don't want it? how fair is that???

the other bars had their own room or they closed off the "bar section" and then the booths and tables were for non smoker's....

Either way it works out, both smoker's and non smoker's get their wish, their is no infringing second hand smoke on other people's lungs, and the smoker's still get to smoke...


It's really not that bad.... Quite the opposite really... People were pissed off when they heard about it, but they adjusted and their just as happy..



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
Well I am a smoker and as TrueLies said in Ontario the smoking ban inside public establishments has been in affect for a while now, and to tell you the truth I like it because It gives me all the more reason to quit. They are trying to Ban smoking in Veterans Clubs that hire employees and serve food for money etc. Not all verterans clubs just the ones that sell food stuffs.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Check out this link..

It has a great deal of pros & cons regarding smoking etc..
some excellent replies are to be found.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I've always believed that smoking is a sign of low Self-Concept. People start smoking because they are nervous, or fat, or upset, or just have the real need to fit-in with others around them who may already be smoking, or a hundred other crutch-yearning reasons. Then they get hooked and like any addiction, its diffiicult to overcome. The strong minded and strong willed do it. The others? Well, they say they enjoy it. But really, what's to enjoy other than succumbing to the addiction need of the body?

Anyone with half a brain knows that banning smoking isn't going to stop people from getting cancer and sick in a hundered other ways. It isn't going to clean the air. It isnt going to help people think more of themselves. So is it worth banning it? Is it a baby-step on the road to betterment? Or do we turn our backs and say to hell with everyone else, light up another.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Arnold Missouri has already ban smoking. I'm telling you what. I've never drank a drink (or drank so few) in my life! Imagine, going into a bar to fine no smoking?!?!? WT?

But, to look at it from the side of the non smokers, I can't blame them for not wanting their health jepardized by our bad habbits.

Maybe if we smokers were more considerate and had always went outside to freeze our butts off (and *cough* catch a cold) for the non smokers they wouldn't be makeing these horrid laws.

I think they would be best off to leave it to the individual business owner. He/she can choose to be smoking or not, or segregate in such a way that the pollutants are kept from the others. It would be expencive - but I betting that all of the folks that USE to drink, eat and be merry in Arnold are now going to take their business to the next county over. I know I have.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Ok so here in the UK they want to stop people smoking in public. Well in restraunts etc thats fair enough in my opinion. Yes I'm a smoker and yeah I'd like to stop. But I do rather enjoy it.

The thing that makes me laugh is that they want to stop people smoking in the open air. Lets' all have a reality check here. The open air is quite large now isn't it? it's got something called 'wind' that alledgedley 'blows' things around including smoke. So dispersing it.

With all the global polution today it's not cigarettes people should be worrying about. I don't like bashing one particular country but if americans would only cut down their emissions like the rest of us (ok... most of us) it would be a start. But as it is they are one of the biggest poluters in the world.

Countries like the UK are but a raindrop in an ocean compared to these large countries. Although the UK is doing great things in cutting down harmful emissions other countries that don't do, wont have the same expense on top of their industry. Thus making there products cheaper, I see that as an unfair advantage.

This 'we're america or russia so we'll do what we like because we have big bombs' mentallity is that of an inward looking unintellegent people.
Smoking has been around along time. Does that make it right? No. But the amount of money that goverments have taken from smokers and used badly means to me it's a bit of a cheek. I'm not going to get into the numbers game as figures can prove whatever you wish them to.
Will any of this make any difference? NO! The lunatics are running the asylum at the moment. The same people who in the UK have mentioned banning Xmas because it 'offends' muslims (while still wanting them to have diwahli (spelling?) The world has gone mad.

Stop the world I want to get off!

Wayne...



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Skadi and Wayne,

They is nothing happening that would stop people from smoking outside. The only restriction is for smoking in public places (inside). Thsi is completely acceptable and I think absolutely the way to go. Like I said before, businesses win (fewer expenses cleaning and trying to get rid of the stench of smoke) and they don't lose business because there isn't an alternative where people can smoke unless they stay home. People aren't going to quit going out, so they deal with what is available.

I for one shout HURRAH! It's about time politicians stepped up to the plate and protected the lungs of the strong willed who have the ability to refuse cigarettes.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join