It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable 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: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:03 AM
The fact that there are other things that are harmful also does not negate the fact that cigarettes and second hand smoke is dangerous to people's health.

Nobody is telling you to quite smoking, personally I hope people who choose to ignore the facts, like yourself, continue smoking. However, you continue to be ignorant of the fact that people who inhale second hand smoke in public places don't have a choice....unless of course smoking in these public places is banned (which it rightfully should be).

Feel free to smoke at home or outside all you want, but don't impose your filthy habit on children and other non-smokers. That truly should be a crime.


posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:10 AM
Do use use a camera that uses film, because if you do, and it's kodak film, you are asking probably thousands of employess, not to mention the residents of Rochester, NY to increase there chances of pancreatic cancer much higher than that 33% or whatever those studies that you have linked to probably are suggesting. We ask our employees every day to increase their risk for a wide assortment of diseases by going to work and producing the things we just love so much! And, well, if you wish to believe the "junk science" connected to global warming, every day when you get into your car and drive, you are condemning many species of animals to extinction, as well as asking a large segment of the population to endure disasterous weather systems, famine, drought, and a wide assortment of problems.

If some if junk science, all of it is, otherwise, let's see society take all of it seriously!!

posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 09:20 AM
Congratulations, you have clearly shown that you are unable to stay on topic. the issue here is banning smoking in public places in order to reduce the health risks in these public places. Instead you ramble on about the dangers of driving, and film.

If you want to skirt the issues that's fine, but atleast admit that the banning of cigarettes in public places is a great place to start and perhaps after that is accomplished we can move on to some of the concerns you have.


posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 01:43 PM
First of all, I am not downplaying the effects shs has on those in the workplce who are innocently exposed to it when I point out that in many instances those employees would be better off worrying about the other substances within the place!! You seem to be downplaying the effects of those other things.....why.....
Machinists go to work every day, they grind lead, aluminmum and other metal all day long. Go do a search on occupational hazards on google or something for any manufacturing occupation just about and read what they are being exposed to.

If someone exposing you shs and that should be illegal, well, the next conclusion would be that the production of most of our products should also be illegal, along with driving your car!

The laws in NY were put into place specifically to "protect the workers", well, I am asking by what justification should they intervene when it comes to shs, of which, hey, the idea of adequately ventilated smoking areas and such were suggested and rejected, and yet, they chose to ignore other much more dangerous carcinogens within that same workplace.

Emphasizing the dangers of shs isn't going to help in that area. I've already researched that, along with the substances that were in my workplace....which would kill any poor bird that happened to get stuck in the place within 24 hours by the way...along with many other occupations, including machinists, plumbers, shipbuilders, workers in plastic factories, ect. ect. ect.

While I was working in that print shop, there were many people who would develope asthma like symtoms once they began there. They'd go to the doctor. As far as I know, no doctor ever informed any of them that hey, that solvent, the styrene, the xylene, ect, ect would cause those problems, they just kept pointing at the small room far, far away where people smoked, or, in one case, the mold that was growing in a house. The smoking is gone, and well, another has left recently, because the problem still has cleared up!!!

The danger of shs doesn't even come close to that of some of the other stuff.

And, yes, I've been known to drive real slow sometimes while driving down the of the reasons I don't drive much anymore, ya see, for some reason, my feet, and well, my legs are starting, go dead, and well, then there's no pressure on the gas peddle is there.

That solvent and crap has been proven to cause nuerological problems also...but, how can I expect you to understand that isn't being blasted on the tv night after night like some other things.

Do a search on the envrionmental dirty dozen, you'll find the information I am referring to concerning Kodak...which well, I really don't know why I am knocking them so much since well, they probably aren't any worse than any other industry. And,well, they are phasing out the film and going into the nice clean digital industry. Of course, this is motivated by consumers, and the fact that the digital is much easier and more convenient that messing with the film and has nothing to do with any health or safety issues that might have been present with their previous operations.

the other hazards that happen to be in the workplace that they are banning shs from is not off topic!! "the health of the employees" is cited in the arguments for it, therefore discussion of those other hazards should be brought into consideration also....and compared with that of shs. How can you justify interferring with how a business operates itself, or treats their employees in that one regard, while ignoring substances that are posing risks that are 100 times or more likely to cause serious problems? You can't!

posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 04:28 PM
You have completely missed the point. I'm certain that there are other "more dangerous" things out there. I'm not dismissing that fact. I'm sorry if you were exposed to them....However, the fact of the matter is, smoking effects not only the people who have to work in the workplace, but all the other patrons as well. I'm not saying smoking should be illegal, just don't do it in our public places. It is a very simple solution for a very nasty and disgusting problem. Why not support it? What are the possible negative impacts of implementing this????NONE. You have yet to make a clear argument otherwise, you have simply tried to use smoke and mirrors to distract from the task at hand.

It's clear that some of those solvents have introduced themselves to your grey matter debilitating your ability to stay on track and focus on the task at hand. I'm sorry for that.



posted on Dec, 3 2004 @ 05:48 PM
People who get boozed up but are still able to get to their car have a better chance at causing an accident and theres a good chance that only one person in the car that gets hit will die and the left have to cope. Theres also evil drunks who make other peoples lives hell, sure, let then poison them selves but they still take it out on others one way or another.

As for the SUV's, Why did you buy such a big truck? SUV's today are cleaner then a bar of smokers but the other effects are much worse, more scrap, more exhust, less gas/oil for the world, more oil to drip, can't see around em and they will cream small cars which dont "need" as much gas.
Cell phones use microwave that you can't feel and the signal often peaks higher then the safe "dose" on microwave detectors and could be compaired to x-rays, they don't go straight to the reciever. I'd still like to see how many cell phones (putting out peak power as the average power) it would take to boil a small cup of water. SUV's and cell phones do have an effect but its just not as annoying or advertised.

Not that I'm against any of those things but its the banning of things that get to me, its the easy way out, they don't regulate things precieved as bad. These things should be regulated by a clear set of rules instead of bans, there are people who enjoy it even if you don't. You know there are people who would say YAY ban this or that, it doesn't effect me so it doesn't matter (its what people of athority do - or precieved athority). If we start banning every thing there will be alot of unhappy people, then the complainers will feel right at home!

If every one quite smoking, wouldn't they just pick something else to demonize or would that be enough?

The Wendys is near Winston Churchhill blvd and Dundas St.W

top topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in