Off Topic Stoptober
- Thread starter Chazz Rheinhold
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Tbf I've recently cut down a lot on my smoking and only really smoke whilst I'm at work or when I'm out drinking (which is crazy rare) and the only thing that got me to stop is the cost. In which case I've swapped from cigarettes to tobacco now and am much happier with everything
Then you carry on mate.
As long as you don't throw your tabs on the floor, blow smoke in my face, sit near me in a restaurant then puff away.
Ignoring the fact that the NHS aren't responsible for street sweeping, if people weren't forced to go outside for a cig, most of those tab-ends wouldn't be there.
The money generated is enermous, it far exceeds every single cost you could possibly attribute to smoking.
Anyone who objects to smoking should do so on the grounds that it makes people ill, there is absolutely no financial case.
I'm not justifying people chucking tabs or any other litter onto the floor, or that two wrongs cancel each other out, but I couldn't help but smile when the I was driving along, listening to a radio presenter discussing a campaign to target people dropping cigarette ends. At the time, I was dropping well back from a skip wagon that was going to be a lot lighter by the time it reached the tip.
It would have taken quite a few smokers to leave the volume of mess it left, and it and more could have been resolved in one prosecution of the company.
I would imagine the cost of removing chewing gum is far more than sweeping up cigarette butts. Which, in any case, are swept up with all the stuff discarded by people who are either ignorant with no consideration of others or too lazy to out anything in a bin.
I stopped smoking 13 years ago but the anti-smoking fanatics still irritate me. It is a legal habit so pubs should have rooms where smoking is allowed. The other alternative is ban it altogether and be prepared to pay higher taxes to replace the lost revenue for the government. Though I should imagine a ban would be as successful as Prohibition was in the USA when more alcohol was consumed than at any other period in their history.
You can just imagine some grandly titled "enforcement officers" pouncing on little old ladies of pensionable age or young lasses for dropping a cig in the floor whilst studiously ignoring gangs of yobs swilling out of cans scattering rubbish everywhere or "travellers" messing up areas and saddling councils with massive bills to clear up.
You're spot on. I can't say I kept that close an eye on it, but it certainly seemed to be the ones least likely to be confrontational that were charged and used as an example.
NorthFerribyTiger
Well-Known Member
I have no issues at all with people smoking, it is entirely their choice to pour dozens of highly toxic substances into their bodies, as has been said, the tax revenues exceed the costs to the rest of us taxpayers through the NHS etc. What I did object to (which has largely been reduced by the ban in public places) was the removal of my right not to smoke their second hand fumes......going for a meal or a pint is a much more pleasant experience now & you don't come home smelling like an old ashtray.
Let people do what they want as long as it doesn't affect others.......but clamp down heavily on those where it does.....those who become violent when drunk/drugged.....or those who risk the lives of others by driving under the influence, or operating heavy machinery under the influence.....make the offence of causing death by drunk driving one of murder with penalties to reflect that.....and causing an accident while under the influence carry an attempted murder charge (after all a car can become the most dangerous weapon available in the UK)........we need to adopt a zero tolerance approach to anyone selfish enough to drive after alcohol/drugs....all too often people sympathise with these idiots when they are caught
Let people do what they want as long as it doesn't affect others.......but clamp down heavily on those where it does.....those who become violent when drunk/drugged.....or those who risk the lives of others by driving under the influence, or operating heavy machinery under the influence.....make the offence of causing death by drunk driving one of murder with penalties to reflect that.....and causing an accident while under the influence carry an attempted murder charge (after all a car can become the most dangerous weapon available in the UK)........we need to adopt a zero tolerance approach to anyone selfish enough to drive after alcohol/drugs....all too often people sympathise with these idiots when they are caught
Also, hammer those who cause accidents who are not in possession of a driving licence, insurance, MOT, Vehicle Excise Licence etc as they shouldn't be on the road in the first place. Is it a coincidence that the first rise in road deaths for a long time has coincided with the large increase in immigration? People come here from places where they have a very different attitude to driving.
I stopped smoking on 01/07/98 after England had been knocked out of the World Cup, every day since then I've used nicotine chewing gum, I'll probably die of cancer of the mouth but my lungs'll be lovely and pink! If people want to smoke that's fine by me, it's their body and their money.
My wife stopped nearly two years ago, she uses lozenges, she'd tried everything but finally found that lozenges worked for her. My eldest lad has just stopped as they've just had their first child, he's using one of those vaping things and he's doing well. My youngest lad's never smoked, and my eldest, my daughter, still smokes, but I'm hopeful that she'll stop if she ever has a child.
I'm a firm believer that nowadays, if someone wants/needs to stop smoking, that there's a suitable nicotine replacement product, and some, like the vaping things, are almost identical to the real thing without the disgusting stench left on your clothes. That's the one thing that I didn't realise, how bad the smell is/was on you and your clothes. Years ago I was a rep and used to force two or three cigs down in my car between appointments, I'd then go into meetings with buyers, it's only now that I realise how I must have stunk to them, especially the non smoking buyers!
My wife stopped nearly two years ago, she uses lozenges, she'd tried everything but finally found that lozenges worked for her. My eldest lad has just stopped as they've just had their first child, he's using one of those vaping things and he's doing well. My youngest lad's never smoked, and my eldest, my daughter, still smokes, but I'm hopeful that she'll stop if she ever has a child.
I'm a firm believer that nowadays, if someone wants/needs to stop smoking, that there's a suitable nicotine replacement product, and some, like the vaping things, are almost identical to the real thing without the disgusting stench left on your clothes. That's the one thing that I didn't realise, how bad the smell is/was on you and your clothes. Years ago I was a rep and used to force two or three cigs down in my car between appointments, I'd then go into meetings with buyers, it's only now that I realise how I must have stunk to them, especially the non smoking buyers!
I think there should be rooms for smokers again, it's only fair. I mean if you go into a pub smoking room (which should be clearly labelled) as a non smoker and moan about it then you're just a dick. It'll be the same people who, upon leaving the pub, walk through the group of smokers and moan or make snidey remarks that they're in the way.
I don't think they should have smoking in pubs that serve food (unless the premisis was big enough to accomodate both without the diners smelling smoke while they eat) but ones that don't should be alright as the increased revenue from smokers will offset the loss of serving food.
I don't think they should have smoking in pubs that serve food (unless the premisis was big enough to accomodate both without the diners smelling smoke while they eat) but ones that don't should be alright as the increased revenue from smokers will offset the loss of serving food.
NorthFerribyTiger
Well-Known Member
The problem is that this was triggered by the Roy Castle case & the prospect of companies being sued where an employee may be able to claim damages for illness which "could" be caused by 3rd party/passive smoke.....there is absolutely no possibility that there will ever be such changes to the rules as the current legislation has full cross party support & most are in favour of tougher legislation
But you could easily get out of that by putting a clause into employee contracts stating that they waive any health claims due to smoking related illnesses. In Germany and Japan they have small "smoking cafes" where you can have a beer (but not eat) and a smoke inside, don't see why it couldn't take off here.
How does it work for prisoners and guards where (I think) prisoners can smoke in their cells?
NorthFerribyTiger
Well-Known Member
Simple, because there is cross party support to ultimately try to end smoking in the UK........there is not & I do not see there ever being an appetite in the UK for that policy to change or make smokers even more a pariah than they currently are