Smoking Ban To Be Reversed?

g hall · 12-05-2008, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millennium3

He's doing it to wind us up!

Either that or to use a phrase learnt from my father "He's as stupid as he stands high"

I just wonder where he learnt English and logic

Geoffrey Collier · 12-05-2008, 04:01 PM

I believe in freedom, but freedom under the law. That is our kind of freedom. We have been down this road on many times before. People used to smoke in cinemas, but then it was banned. Most small towns had two or three cinemas in the 1950's but with the rise of television, cinemas, one after another cinemas closed, but they would have closed with or without the smoking ban. But that didn't make the ban wrong. Public houses are going in the same direction.

Property ownership, whether private or public, is a legal concept. That ownership and its use are subject to law. In a civilised society that must always be the case. If publicans can decide for themselves whether smoking is allowed on thier 'private' property, can private bus companies, and train owners make the same decisions? Can smoking in the kitchens be allowed, whilst food is being prepared, on the grounds that eating in that establishment is not compulsory?

Working environments must be subject to law. The place of work has to be conducive
to the wellbeing of the employed and the residents in the immediate area. What other situation can be justified? Many laws had to be introduced because owners and employers failed to do what was necessary and reasonable of their own volition. That has been the history, particularly of urban society, over the past two centuries.

B.A.Ware · 12-05-2008, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Millennium3

He's doing it to wind us up!

I think you are right , he just cant grasp the point that people are free not to subject themselves to smoke if they don't want to.

Its a bit like me going to a concert and saying i have sensitive ears so they should turn the music down, come to think about it they should do the same in all night clubs just in case i want to go to one.

Its called freedom of choice.

g hall · 12-05-2008, 04:44 PM

What is wrong in having SMOKING and NON-SMOKING sections or is the whole concept of compromise far too sensible these days

and for those who don't know I am a non smoker.

mkpdavies · 12-05-2008, 05:07 PM

I think this is the worst case of denial I have seen for ages.

No one wants to admit they are fascist, but that exactly the case here I am afraid.

Geoffrey Collier · 12-05-2008, 05:35 PM

B.A. Ware: The question of noise in music halls is a matter under review. Two reasons, basically, Continuous noise can cause permanent hearing loss. If the musicians are deafened, who is liable to pay compensation? The matter is quite clear when dealing with hearing-loss which results from industrial noise, or military service.

Vistors to music concerts do attend by choice, but the music equipment must be set at a reasonable decibel level.

The other matter is more complex. Music from pubs and other venues, is imposed upon local residents quite independently of their will. No choice there I'm afraid. In some areas thios is a major source of annoyance.

g hall · 12-05-2008, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier

The other matter is more complex. Music from pubs and other venues, is imposed upon local residents quite independently of their will. No choice there I'm afraid. In some areas thios is a major source of annoyance.

On the subject of major sources of annoyance how can I get someone in officialdom to deal with Gordon the Moron and his cronies and the boy dave glee club ?

mkpdavies · 12-05-2008, 07:23 PM

YouTube - Britain is a miserable dump

Roland · 12-05-2008, 10:27 PM

Tom phill

Do you own a car?

If you do can you please stop going on about forcing others to inhale toxic chemical's.

Given the choice between spending one hour in a looked garage with either a smoker or a running car which one do you think you'd leave the garage alive ?

B.A.Ware · 12-05-2008, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier

B.A. Ware: The question of noise in music halls is a matter under review. Two reasons, basically, Continuous noise can cause permanent hearing loss. If the musicians are deafened, who is liable to pay compensation? The matter is quite clear when dealing with hearing-loss which results from industrial noise, or military service.

Vistors to music concerts do attend by choice, but the music equipment must be set at a reasonable decibel level.

The other matter is more complex. Music from pubs and other venues, is imposed upon local residents quite independently of their will. No choice there I'm afraid. In some areas thios is a major source of annoyance.

One of my friends has been into thrash music(heavy rock) been in a band all of his life still goes to thrash music concerts but suffers from tinnitus he totally accepts its his fault he made the choice and lives with the consequences unlike this nanny state which prefers to legislate against choice to satisfy the PC brigade when really they should be encouraging personal responsibility.

12-05-2008, 04:44 PM	#114 (permalink)
g hall Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 4,760	What is wrong in having SMOKING and NON-SMOKING sections or is the whole concept of compromise far too sensible these days and for those who don't know I am a non smoker. __________________ "That government is best which governs least." "This is a sharp Medicine, but it is a Physician for all diseases and miseries". "To be "matter of fact" about the world is to blunder into fantasy --and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful."

12-05-2008, 05:07 PM	#115 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,615	I think this is the worst case of denial I have seen for ages. No one wants to admit they are fascist, but that exactly the case here I am afraid. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

12-05-2008, 07:23 PM	#118 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,615	YouTube - Britain is a miserable dump __________________ 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

12-05-2008, 04:01 PM	#112 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 706	I believe in freedom, but freedom under the law. That is our kind of freedom. We have been down this road on many times before. People used to smoke in cinemas, but then it was banned. Most small towns had two or three cinemas in the 1950's but with the rise of television, cinemas, one after another cinemas closed, but they would have closed with or without the smoking ban. But that didn't make the ban wrong. Public houses are going in the same direction. Property ownership, whether private or public, is a legal concept. That ownership and its use are subject to law. In a civilised society that must always be the case. If publicans can decide for themselves whether smoking is allowed on thier 'private' property, can private bus companies, and train owners make the same decisions? Can smoking in the kitchens be allowed, whilst food is being prepared, on the grounds that eating in that establishment is not compulsory? Working environments must be subject to law. The place of work has to be conducive to the wellbeing of the employed and the residents in the immediate area. What other situation can be justified? Many laws had to be introduced because owners and employers failed to do what was necessary and reasonable of their own volition. That has been the history, particularly of urban society, over the past two centuries.

12-05-2008, 05:35 PM	#116 (permalink)
Geoffrey Collier Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 706	B.A. Ware: The question of noise in music halls is a matter under review. Two reasons, basically, Continuous noise can cause permanent hearing loss. If the musicians are deafened, who is liable to pay compensation? The matter is quite clear when dealing with hearing-loss which results from industrial noise, or military service. Vistors to music concerts do attend by choice, but the music equipment must be set at a reasonable decibel level. The other matter is more complex. Music from pubs and other venues, is imposed upon local residents quite independently of their will. No choice there I'm afraid. In some areas thios is a major source of annoyance.

12-05-2008, 10:27 PM	#119 (permalink)
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 856	Tom phill Do you own a car? If you do can you please stop going on about forcing others to inhale toxic chemical's. Given the choice between spending one hour in a looked garage with either a smoker or a running car which one do you think you'd leave the garage alive ?