British smokers are pansies

TannyD · 21-04-2008, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eurosceptic Atlanticist

Yep, the prevailing attitude seems to be "Someone should do something about that - that is, someone other than me".

Well then we will continue to behave like good lickle sheeple then...

Little Englander (sour) · 21-04-2008, 04:47 PM

Something is being done about it according to a financial help programme on R4 this morning.
If, when you claim your annuity, you declare yourself to be a smoker the payout can be as high as 15% above that of a non-smoker.

Yes you've guessed it, pious, holier-than-thou non-smokers are declaring that they are smokers in order to take advantage of the bigger cheque.

The scam is growing so quickly that companies are now insisting that saliva samples are taken.

Anyone wish to borrow some spit?

mkpdavies · 22-04-2008, 01:02 PM

Not just smokers are pansies. The British population as a whole are pansies. I am thoroughly ashamed at the amount of restrictions, theft and ******** that the British people put up with. Where has the spine gone?

Millennium3 · 22-04-2008, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

Not just smokers are pansies. The British population as a whole are pansies. I am thoroughly ashamed at the amount of restrictions, theft and ******** that the British people put up with. Where has the spine gone?

I am sure it is still there - I think it is all these petty regulations that make the expression of it so much more difficult - who wants to make a heroic act of over filling their dustbin? I thought smoking restrictions might be one that had possibilities.

mkpdavies · 22-04-2008, 03:17 PM

I was in Barcelona the other week. No smoking bans in pubs and even restaurants there. Some places chose to ban it, some had no restrictions and others had split premises.

It felt weird being in a more free country. Especially given Spain's history!

brian pearson · 22-04-2008, 03:55 PM

Sat in roadworks the other day outside a working mans club I noticed a poor old bloke struggling to light up outside. Struggling because he only had one leg.

I hope they are happy!

TannyD · 22-04-2008, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millennium3

I am sure it is still there - I think it is all these petty regulations that make the expression of it so much more difficult - who wants to make a heroic act of over filling their dustbin? I thought smoking restrictions might be one that had possibilities.

Is it going to get to the point where people aren;t going to dispose of their rubbish in the bins on their property and just put it in other people's bins or the street bins in town?

kernow · 22-04-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TannyD

So when are we all going to stand up and say no? Or are we just going to agree with the first person who voices a rebellious plan and then sit back down leaving them still standing alone?

Unfortunately so very ,very true!

Millennium3 · 22-04-2008, 06:36 PM

Just noticed this in today's Daily Mail:

Smoking ban is extended to doorways and bus shelters
By KIRSTY WALKER, Daily Mail - More by this author »
Comments (53)

Smoking in the open is to be banned where it affects bystanders, ministers said yesterday.

The forthcoming ban on lighting up in public places has been extended to areas where there is an 'inevitable close grouping of people'.

It would include bus shelters, football grounds, the entrances to office buildings, train platforms and concert venues.

Has the smoking ban gone too far? Tell us in reader comments below

Health Minister Lord Warner said it would protect more people from secondhand smoking.

The Government has already said that the Health Bill will outlaw smoking in pubs and restaurants next year. But Lord Warner told the House of Lords yesterday: 'There will be places that will not be enclosed where there is a risk of harm from secondhand smoke due to the inevitable close grouping of people.

'Examples might be sports stadiums, bus shelters and entrances to public buildings or workplaces.'

Critics claim there is no scientific evidence that people can be harmed by passive smoking outside. Lord Stoddart said: 'I don't know of any study that says a whiff of somebody else's smoke out in the open air is dangerous.'

Simon Clark, director of prosmoking group Forest, said: 'This suggests that the public, MPs and peers have been deceived.

'Everyone was told they would be voting on a ban on smoking in enclosed places.

But the Government wants to go way beyond its remit by banning smoking outside. It is breathtakingly arrogant to talk about extending the ban before it has been voted in. Tobacco is a legal product. This is social engineering on a grand scale.'

The announcement comes weeks after a House of Lords report accused ministers of exaggerating the effect of passive smoke in enclosed places.

The Economic Affairs Committee said the Government ignored scientific research and the ban was a political one motivated by Labour's nanny-state tendencies.

Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt claims it will save thousands of lives.

But the report found 95 per cent of smoking-related deaths are caused by lighting up at home, not in the workplace.

It said: 'Given the evidence about the impact of passive smoking, we are concerned that the decision to ban smoking in public places may represent a disproportionate response to a relatively minor health concern.'

Peers voted this week against last-ditch attempts to exempt private men's clubs.

The new regulations will be published in a few weeks.

Stopping smoking in bus shelters has proved controversial in Scotland, where a ban was introduced earlier this year.

Stickers in Glasgow told people not to smoke as they waited for buses. But it emerged the shelters are exempt because the law applies only to places that are '50 per cent enclosed'.

But the Health Bill will include a wider definition to make 'additional places smoke-free'.

Stephen Alambritis, from the Federation of Small Businesses, said: 'We welcomed the ban on smoking in public places. But attempts to extend it to smoking outside are a step too far.'

Malcolm Clarke, of the Football Supporters' Federation, said: 'One of the problems with smoking in all-seater stadiums is that it is not possible to move if someone next to you lights up and that can spoil the enjoyment.

'On the other hand, some fans see it as a part of the game and cannot cope without a cigarette when their nerves are frazzled.'

• Scientists say children whose mothers smoke during pregnancy suffer the effects until they are 12.

Dr Manfred Neuberger, of the Medical University in Vienna, said children whose mothers smoked while pregnant were up to 40 per cent more likely to have poor lung function than those born to non-smokers. Exposure in early life increased poor lung function by up to 27 per cent.

Smoking ban is extended to doorways and bus shelters | the Daily Mail

What's the penalty for smoking in places designated as non smoking areas? Death, ten years, deportation?

mkpdavies · 22-04-2008, 08:01 PM

If I were a smoker, I'd no longer consider myself a part of society, thus would stop playing by the rules. On anything.

21-04-2008, 04:47 PM	#12 (permalink)
Little Englander (sour) Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 949 Party: English Democrats	Something is being done about it according to a financial help programme on R4 this morning. If, when you claim your annuity, you declare yourself to be a smoker the payout can be as high as 15% above that of a non-smoker. Yes you've guessed it, pious, holier-than-thou non-smokers are declaring that they are smokers in order to take advantage of the bigger cheque. The scam is growing so quickly that companies are now insisting that saliva samples are taken. Anyone wish to borrow some spit? __________________ Little Englander (bigoted)

22-04-2008, 01:02 PM	#13 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,178 Party: Libertarian Party	Not just smokers are pansies. The British population as a whole are pansies. I am thoroughly ashamed at the amount of restrictions, theft and ******** that the British people put up with. Where has the spine gone? __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

22-04-2008, 03:17 PM	#15 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,178 Party: Libertarian Party	I was in Barcelona the other week. No smoking bans in pubs and even restaurants there. Some places chose to ban it, some had no restrictions and others had split premises. It felt weird being in a more free country. Especially given Spain's history! __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

22-04-2008, 08:01 PM	#20 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 31,178 Party: Libertarian Party	If I were a smoker, I'd no longer consider myself a part of society, thus would stop playing by the rules. On anything. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

22-04-2008, 03:55 PM	#16 (permalink)
brian pearson Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: nottinghanshire Posts: 758	Sat in roadworks the other day outside a working mans club I noticed a poor old bloke struggling to light up outside. Struggling because he only had one leg. I hope they are happy!

22-04-2008, 06:36 PM	#19 (permalink)
Millennium3 Moderator Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Berkshire Posts: 4,611	Just noticed this in today's Daily Mail: Smoking ban is extended to doorways and bus shelters By KIRSTY WALKER, Daily Mail - More by this author » Comments (53) Smoking in the open is to be banned where it affects bystanders, ministers said yesterday. The forthcoming ban on lighting up in public places has been extended to areas where there is an 'inevitable close grouping of people'. It would include bus shelters, football grounds, the entrances to office buildings, train platforms and concert venues. Has the smoking ban gone too far? Tell us in reader comments below Health Minister Lord Warner said it would protect more people from secondhand smoking. The Government has already said that the Health Bill will outlaw smoking in pubs and restaurants next year. But Lord Warner told the House of Lords yesterday: 'There will be places that will not be enclosed where there is a risk of harm from secondhand smoke due to the inevitable close grouping of people. 'Examples might be sports stadiums, bus shelters and entrances to public buildings or workplaces.' Critics claim there is no scientific evidence that people can be harmed by passive smoking outside. Lord Stoddart said: 'I don't know of any study that says a whiff of somebody else's smoke out in the open air is dangerous.' Simon Clark, director of prosmoking group Forest, said: 'This suggests that the public, MPs and peers have been deceived. 'Everyone was told they would be voting on a ban on smoking in enclosed places. But the Government wants to go way beyond its remit by banning smoking outside. It is breathtakingly arrogant to talk about extending the ban before it has been voted in. Tobacco is a legal product. This is social engineering on a grand scale.' The announcement comes weeks after a House of Lords report accused ministers of exaggerating the effect of passive smoke in enclosed places. The Economic Affairs Committee said the Government ignored scientific research and the ban was a political one motivated by Labour's nanny-state tendencies. Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt claims it will save thousands of lives. But the report found 95 per cent of smoking-related deaths are caused by lighting up at home, not in the workplace. It said: 'Given the evidence about the impact of passive smoking, we are concerned that the decision to ban smoking in public places may represent a disproportionate response to a relatively minor health concern.' Peers voted this week against last-ditch attempts to exempt private men's clubs. The new regulations will be published in a few weeks. Stopping smoking in bus shelters has proved controversial in Scotland, where a ban was introduced earlier this year. Stickers in Glasgow told people not to smoke as they waited for buses. But it emerged the shelters are exempt because the law applies only to places that are '50 per cent enclosed'. But the Health Bill will include a wider definition to make 'additional places smoke-free'. Stephen Alambritis, from the Federation of Small Businesses, said: 'We welcomed the ban on smoking in public places. But attempts to extend it to smoking outside are a step too far.' Malcolm Clarke, of the Football Supporters' Federation, said: 'One of the problems with smoking in all-seater stadiums is that it is not possible to move if someone next to you lights up and that can spoil the enjoyment. 'On the other hand, some fans see it as a part of the game and cannot cope without a cigarette when their nerves are frazzled.' • Scientists say children whose mothers smoke during pregnancy suffer the effects until they are 12. Dr Manfred Neuberger, of the Medical University in Vienna, said children whose mothers smoked while pregnant were up to 40 per cent more likely to have poor lung function than those born to non-smokers. Exposure in early life increased poor lung function by up to 27 per cent. Smoking ban is extended to doorways and bus shelters \| the Daily Mail What's the penalty for smoking in places designated as non smoking areas? Death, ten years, deportation?