Anti-smoking rules move into rentals

[dalem]

Originally Posted by Brian Douglas

What the hell has killing Jews got to do with the subject??
Smoking is a harmfull habit to ones health and also a personal issue that everyone must make a choice about.
Why countries dont have a refferendum on the issue and let voters decide beats me!!

Second hand smoke is not proven to be any sort of danger, it's just another bogeyman the people and governments latch onto to gain more control over your life. And the more power you give to the State, the worse it gets.

-dale

[glyn]

Originally Posted by dalem

Second hand smoke is not proven to be any sort of danger, it's just another bogeyman the people and governments latch onto to gain more control over your life. And the more power you give to the State, the worse it gets.

-dale

Quite right. These howlers have lost all sense of proportion. A far greater case can be made against alcohol. Ever hear of a smoker having a cigarette and mowing someone down in a stupor? No, neither have I. Alcohol takers do it though. Does nicotine in the proportions its absorbed into the human body cause violent mood changes? No. Alcohol does, and any newspaper will inform you of wife-beating and family misery. Worried about particulate matter from a cigarette or cigar? Carry on worrying then and ignore the exhaust from countless lorries and cars, diesel locomotives, factory chimneys, farm machinery and everything else. Make sure you keep beating the drum to inform the world of the evils of smoking, and for Heavens sakes don't develop a sense of proportion.

[SteaminDemon]

[quote=tankie;458927]

Originally Posted by SteaminDemon

People don't get fined when the dog urinates in the grass though. Here is the whole point, if the business owner wants to permit smoking in their establishment, they should have that right. It is the same as if a business owner does not want to permit smoking in their establishment. Why do we need a law for such a common sense thing? Being you dont want the 2nd had smoke invading your fresh air as you say, you dont have to go to that place of business. It's really simple if you think about it. Freedom Of Choice.

Maybe we should ban car's, trains, trucks, and anything else that emits pollutants with your way of thinking. QUOTE]

Ever seen the advertisements for electric cars etc etc , now i wonder why people are going towards them in manufacturing ? and it aint just my way of thinking , its millions , (but i have never said BAN it ,or BAN that ,or any other sort of BAN , i said im glad its been BANNED in public places , like i say if you want that filth , you go fetch tiger ) , including just about every govt in the world ? And also ref your freedom of choice , yup i agree 100 % we all have that choice , so i ask the smokers to make a choice , choose to go elswhere from me ,because the way you put it is , if i dont like it i can go elsewhere , well guess what , so can they , see , it works both ways . The law as you put it , is there to make sure people who do not smoke , dont get 2nd hand smoke , because smokers being the self centered people they are cant think for themselves ( must be all the nicotine poisoning their last remaining brain cell ), they think they have a god given right to inflict it on everyone nearby .Why do they not understand ( some do )that people do not want it invading their clean AIR . and if a business owner wants to have smoking in the workplace , once again what right does he/she have , to inflict it on people who do not smoke , smoking is an unattural act , working to survive is not.

Agreed on the pissy dog tho ?

Have a nice day .

Tankie "and if a business owner wants to have smoking in the workplace , once again what right does he/she have , to inflict it on people who do not smoke , smoking is an unattural act , working to survive is not"

You see, right there. THE BUSINESS OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE WHEATHER OR NOT THERE WILL BE SMOKING IN THEIR ESTABLISHMENT. If you do not want to go there because smoking is permitted there, you do not have to go. You can go to the place that has "No Smoking" in that place of business. If you were a business owner you just might understand. The only thing the business owner is doing is excersizing their right to choose how they would like their business to run, smoking or not.
What about the businesses that had spent thousands of dollars making seperate smoking rooms with smoke eaters and such, just to be told there is no smoking period. Simply rediculous.

As to electric cars and such. You want it both ways. Where does the electricity come from anyway? And yeah, an all electric tractor trailer.....the thing would be so heavy from all the battries and would probably only be able to go 2 MPH pulling all that weight. There again, people want it both ways. We dont want pollution, so lets make all electric cars that get their power from a power plant. Now, combination Diesel Electric, and Gas Electric they are making for autos is more effective than just straight electric that needs to be plugged in.

As to the apartment issue in this post. Did you bother to check prior to you renting that some of your family has health issues and that you need to ensure the unit you would be inhabiting has a no smoking policy? Or would be able to accomodate you? Many land lords will work with you, you just have to ask. Instead, you waited until it was a problem, then decided to voice your opposition without doing research.


Tim:"While I agree with your sentiment I believe business owners would have problems trying to enforce a ban on smoking if there is not some supporting legislation that allows them to do so."

Why does there need to be a law for such a common sense thing? They do make signs such as "No Smoking" and "This is a smoke free establishment". It is not that hard to enforce. Before all these smoking bans were starting to come around, there were many non smoking businesses that explained it plain and simple with a sign "This resturant is smoke free", and nobody smoked there. If someone were to complain about the issue, they would have no ground to stand on being there was ample notification that the establishment was smoke free.

[omon]

Originally Posted by THL

The reason for the certain pet buildings in apartments are because some people are highly allergic and even a little pet dander coming into the hallway could send them off into an allergic fit. What about the people allergic to smoke, which is just as difficult to contain as pet dander. Or the people with athsma?

no pets policy has nothing to do with anyone allergic to dogs. landlords don,t care, what they do care, is be responcible if some dog bites someone, on their property, lawsutes is what they care, and money.
thyere is a way to have small dog even in no pets building, it takes time and money, but it is possible.

[dave lukins]

Some idiot Professor has asked for Smokers to pay a £10 year licence fee. He want people to show their licence before they can buy cigarettes.

[Knaur Amarsh]

Originally Posted by dave lukins

Some idiot Professor has asked for Smokers to pay a £10 year licence fee. He want people to show their licence before they can buy cigarettes.

Thats such a ridiculous idea.Already,the anti-smoking lobby is campaigning for increasing tobbaco prices,to "discourage" people for smoking,which again is crap.If I want to smoke a cigarette inspite of all their paranoid warnings,I ll want to smoke a cigarette even if it's more expensive.Of course,if they make it really expensive,the lower middle class working guy will probably be forced to switch to a cheaper,possibly unfiltered brand,which won't exactly serve their purposes,would it?I fail to understand the purpose of such a 10 bucks license fee suggestion,it sends out the wrong idea.As soon as one country implements it,anti-smokers all over the world will be all for it.Seen it already in case of the ban on smoking in public places fiasco......

[glyn]

Originally Posted by Knaur Amarsh

Thats such a ridiculous idea.Already,the anti-smoking lobby is campaigning for increasing tobbaco prices,to "discourage" people for smoking,which again is crap.If I want to smoke a cigarette inspite of all their paranoid warnings,I ll want to smoke a cigarette even if it's more expensive.Of course,if they make it really expensive,the lower middle class working guy will probably be forced to switch to a cheaper,possibly unfiltered brand,which won't exactly serve their purposes,would it?I fail to understand the purpose of such a 10 bucks license fee suggestion,it sends out the wrong idea.As soon as one country implements it,anti-smokers all over the world will be all for it.Seen it already in case of the ban on smoking in public places fiasco......

As ever, the poor old public is seen as an unending source of revenue by his government. Perhaps we should propose a tax on those politicians who come up with absurd ideas!

[dave lukins]

Originally Posted by glyn

As ever, the poor old public is seen as an unending source of revenue by his government.:mad: Perhaps we should propose a tax on those politicians who come up with absurd ideas!

Sad to tell you this Glyn but.. his Government is ours

"The proposal is one of Health England's suggestions for preventing illness which has been sent to health minister Lord Darzi Simon Clark, of smokers' rights group Forest, said the smoking permit proposal was outrageous.

"We are becoming not just a nanny state but a bully state," he said.