Article: New smoking rules not well received

Ho3n3r said:
Non-smokers on here have never said you HAVE to stop smoking, only if you really must be a smoker, do it without affecting those who do not want to inhale your poison.
Click to expand...

How do they affect other people when they smoke in the currently designated areas? What the **** is wrong with you that you don't understand this?
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
Up until he pukes on you and/or starts a bar fight.
Click to expand...

So, how does his puke affect my health?

Also, if he starts a fight, that is also against the rules, so he will be thrown out, same as when he smokes.

You clearly are not getting the point non-smokers are trying to make. I guess you smoke in cars or rooms with innocent kids because you do not get what it does to others who dislike it.
 
b_crazy said:
How do they affect other people when they smoke in the currently designated areas? What the **** is wrong with you that you don't understand this?
Click to expand...

Now now, try being calm without lighting a ciggie ;)

My point is not about that, it's about the rules not being applied everywhere and people not smoking where they're supposed to be. You are the one not getting it.
 
Ho3n3r said:
So, how does his puke affect my health?

Also, if he starts a fight, that is also against the rules, so he will be thrown out, same as when he smokes.

You clearly are not getting the point non-smokers are trying to make. I guess you smoke in cars or rooms with innocent kids because you do not get what it does to others who dislike it.
Click to expand...
The point that you're not getting is that you're complaining on the basis that smoking is allowed everywhere, and somebody at a random pub is going to light up next to you. This is only the case in a designated smoking area, where you waive your right to complain if you enter it. Yes, even pubs have smoking and non-smoking areas now. If yours doesn't then you can find another one (just like smokers have to do if there is a no smoking policy), it's your right to choose, and it's the owner's right to choose who is allowed.
 
Ho3n3r said:
My point is not about that, it's about the rules not being applied everywhere and people not smoking where they're supposed to be. You are the one not getting it.
Click to expand...
Well there you go then, whose fault is it that the rules aren't being enforced? Have you complained to the management and/or authorities? If you witness a handbag being stolen, do you do something about it or do you go home and complain about it online?
 
Ho3n3r said:
So, how does his puke affect my health?

Also, if he starts a fight, that is also against the rules, so he will be thrown out, same as when he smokes.

You clearly are not getting the point non-smokers are trying to make. I guess you smoke in cars or rooms with innocent kids because you do not get what it does to others who dislike it.
Click to expand...

Why do people like you ALWAYS throw in innocent children into the picture? The point non-smokers are trying to make (or at least the decent ones) is that they DON'T care whether we smoke or not, as long as we don't do it in their faces. The point that smokers are trying to make is that this law will take away our freedom to smoke in DESIGNATED places where non-smokers should not be in the first place.

Having said that, wtf are you people on about blaming people for stuff you have absolutely no proof or right to be saying? I agree that some smokers do indeed smoke with their children in the car, and I as a smoker don't agree with that. But you cannot just say Smokers all smoke with little children in the car with all the windows rolled up? Do not make silly generalizations like that.
 
iAmThePope said:
Why do people like you ALWAYS throw in innocent children into the picture? The point non-smokers are trying to make (or at least the decent ones) is that they DON'T care whether we smoke or not, as long as we don't do it in their faces. The point that smokers are trying to make is that this law will take away our freedom to smoke in DESIGNATED places where non-smokers should not be in the first place.

Having said that, wtf are you people on about blaming people for stuff you have absolutely no proof or right to be saying? I agree that some smokers do indeed smoke with their children in the car, and I as a smoker don't agree with that. But you cannot just say Smokers all smoke with little children in the car with all the windows rolled up? Do not make silly generalizations like that.
Click to expand...

Because they are the worst affected by smokers being selfish. If you don't believe that it is wrong then there's no point in arguing with you.

Mike Hoxbig said:
The point that you're not getting is that you're complaining on the basis that smoking is allowed everywhere, and somebody at a random pub is going to light up next to you. This is only the case in a designated smoking area, where you waive your right to complain if you enter it. Yes, even pubs have smoking and non-smoking areas now. If yours doesn't then you can find another one (just like smokers have to do if there is a no smoking policy), it's your right to choose, and it's the owner's right to choose who is allowed.
Click to expand...

I full agree with you there. If you're a non-smoker and go sit in the smoking area at Spur, then you are, in my opinion, a moron.
 
The other thing people here seem to ignore is that this law came from the executive (minister). It's not the executives place to create laws in the first place, it's the function of the legislative (parliament). There is a separation of powers between the executive, legislative & judicial to protect the people from an abuse of power. This is enshrined in the constitution, highest law of the land. What happened here is one section of government overstepping it's mandate/bounds and it's illegal to start off with. Should this new law be brought before the constitutional court it will most likely be declared null & void.

But yeah, we should probably ignore this as well.
 
iAmThePope said:
Having said that, wtf are you people on about blaming people for stuff you have absolutely no proof or right to be saying? I agree that some smokers do indeed smoke with their children in the car, and I as a smoker don't agree with that. But you cannot just say Smokers all smoke with little children in the car with all the windows rolled up? Do not make silly generalizations like that.
Click to expand...

I see it every weekend. How is that not proof? :confused: Are you saying that you have never seen it?
 
ponder said:
The other thing people here seem to ignore is that this law came from the executive (minister). It's not the executives place to create laws in the first place, it's the function of the legislative (parliament). There is a separation of powers between the executive, legislative & judicial to protect the people from an abuse of power. This is enshrined in the constitution, highest law of the land. What happened here is one section of government overstepping it's mandate/bounds and it's illegal to start off with. Should this new law be brought before the constitutional court it will most likely be declared null & void.

But yeah, we should probably ignore this as well.
Click to expand...

If it's going through the wrong channels to be brought into power, well that's incorrect, no matter what the law is. But the government being incompetent, unscrupulous and unfair is a discussion for another day. I think we can find many existing laws that 'didn't go through the process'.
 
Ho3n3r said:
Because they are the worst affected by smokers being selfish. If you don't believe that it is wrong then there's no point in arguing with you.
Click to expand...

Please read my post again. Did I not say that I don't agree with that... I get just as irritated by it as you do.

Ho3n3r said:
I see it every weekend. How is that not proof? :confused: Are you saying that you have never seen it?
Click to expand...

I hear about drunk people beating their SO's every weekend, yet I do not say everyone that gets drunk beats their SO's.. Of course I see it. Every morning in fact. And just like you, I have no sympathy for the smokers, and I feel sorry for the kids. What I'm saying is not each and every smoker does that, therefore you cannot use that as a valid argument against smokers who don't
 
Last edited:
iAmThePope said:
The point that smokers are trying to make is that this law will take away our freedom to smoke in DESIGNATED places where non-smokers should not be in the first place.
Click to expand...

Law isn't saying you can't smoke in designated areas anymore, where are you pulling this out from?
 
2012 said:
Law isn't saying you can't smoke in designated areas anymore, where are you pulling this out from?
Click to expand...
From the article, which you clearly didn't read. The minister wants smoking banned in private property such as restaurants and pubs. There will therefore be no designated smoking area if he gets his way.
 
iAmThePope said:
Please read my post again. Did I not say that I don't agree with that... I get just as irritated by it as you do.



I hear about drunk people beating their SO's every weekend, yet I do not say you do.. Of course I see it. Every morning in fact. And just like you, I have no sympathy for the smokers, and I feel sorry for the kids. What I'm saying is not each and every smoker does that, therefore you cannot use that as a valid argument against smokers who don't
Click to expand...

I fully agree with you. I wasn't aiming it at all smokers. Just the ones not abiding to it 'just to show we will get away with it to spite the lawmakers' - which is a big percentage of the smokers I have come across. My previous employers were smoking in the office. I even complained about it to them formally, they went 'Oh really? Don't be picky', we went back to our seats and the people who smoke all lit up less than 5 minutes after.

Those are the kinds of people I have a problem with.
 
Ho3n3r said:
My previous employers were smoking in the office. I even complained about it to them formally, they went 'Oh really? Don't be picky', we went back to our seats and the people who smoke all lit up less than 5 minutes after.

Those are the kinds of people I have a problem with.
Click to expand...
I would have went to the department of labour. They don't fsck around when it comes to employee rights. And I'm a smoker.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
From the article, which you clearly didn't read. The minister wants smoking banned in private property such as restaurants and pubs. There will therefore be no designated smoking area if he gets his way.
Click to expand...

You miss the point, since when is a pub/resturant a designated smoking area?
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
From the article, which you clearly didn't read. The minister wants smoking banned in private property such as restaurants and pubs. There will therefore be no designated smoking area if he gets his way.
Click to expand...

Well if that means no-one will be able to have designated smoking areas, that's a bad move in my opinion. However, I think they are trying to prohibit smoking in all public places - including the many restaurants - that do not have a smoking area.
 
iAmThePope said:
Why do people like you ALWAYS throw in innocent children into the picture? The point non-smokers are trying to make (or at least the decent ones) is that they DON'T care whether we smoke or not, as long as we don't do it in their faces. The point that smokers are trying to make is that this law will take away our freedom to smoke in DESIGNATED places where non-smokers should not be in the first place.
Click to expand...

Um. But so what? Marijuana smokers don't have designated areas to smoke. What makes you so special?

Now maybe you'll see the issue. You're a substance abuser that wants to be treated differently from other substance abusers.
 
Ho3n3r said:
I fully agree with you. I wasn't aiming it at all smokers. Just the ones not abiding to it 'just to show we will get away with it to spite the lawmakers' - which is a big percentage of the smokers I have come across. My previous employers were smoking in the office. I even complained about it to them formally, they went 'Oh really? Don't be picky', we went back to our seats and the people who smoke all lit up less than 5 minutes after.

Those are the kinds of people I have a problem with.
Click to expand...

Well in that case they should get a hefty fine. It's not fair nor even common decency to smoke in a closed environment with non-smokers. Even if it was 100 smokers and 2 non-smokers I would agree that they should not be smoking in there.
If all smokers were considerate we would not be having this discussion :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X