Smoking In Peace Gardens

[nexusdee 10]

Anyone find it convenient that one of the main companies that claim passive smoking causes lung cancer is Johnson & Johnson, it's not like they have anything to gain by thousands of people wanting to stop smoking is it?

[sedith 19]

£20 a pack would sort it all out plus a refusal of treatment on the NHS for self inflicted smoking related diseases ...bring it on!

[nexusdee 10]

£20 a pack would sort it all out plus a refusal of treatment on the NHS for self inflicted smoking related diseases ...bring it on!

 

And once again smokers are public enemy number one on draining NHS resources after all apparently smoking is the only self infliction that requires medical treatment. But why not persuade the government to give a little more of the 11 billion it gets a year from smokers towards paying for the 5 billion a year smokers cost the NHS

[syne 10]

It's neither.

Cars are not a bad habit, they're an essential form of transport, and one which is constantly being targeted to reduce pollution.

Not unless I'm running my car simply to enhale the fumes and dislike it when anyone else complains.

I completely do, because an essential means of transport causes pollution it does not justify an addiction.

I haven't actually complained about either, I'd only be concerned if the smoker or the bus were indoors.

But only if they never use anything that burns fuel, including electricity.

No, smoking is not a key part of life, it's just a habit.

 

the post wasn't wholly directed at yourself, but in rebuttal;

cars are about as essential as rocketships and panda bears.

and as for reducing pollution lol its drops in an ocean they are pumping out deadly toxins en masse. Don't ever try and make out that cars are some how less damaging than cigarettes, to even hint at it is laughable.

 

No ones smoking for someone else to inhale, you don't like it? Oh well, move away..

Who needs to justify an addiction? mostly its a choice, you choose to smoke, you could stop but its a bit of a pain in teh asre for a week or two so you don't bother breaking the addiction as it gives a certain sense of -probably illusionary/deluded- satisfaction and saves all the exertion of will power.

 

The point is still, when someone who burns petrol complains about someone burning tobacco their sense of indignation is generally to be ignored because they are being a hypocrite.

[syne 10]

And yet another one who needs to make personal attacks just because someone doesn't agree with smoking.

 

There are some good compassionate smokers out there, and I pity them when the majority of smokers are angry ranters like yourself and make them all look bad.

 

you just proved his point.

[anywebsite 10]

Lets be honest, there wouldn't be any fun in smoking if it didn't annoy non-smokers & it's usually ex-smokers that get most annoyed. All those sour faced glum looking people in the peace gardens on a nice sunny day like this, sweating for a lovely cigarette, just blow a lungful of smoke in their direction & you can't see their frown for a couple of seconds.

Edited May 27, 2012 by anywebsite

[liam1412 14]

£20 a pack would sort it all out plus a refusal of treatment on the NHS for self inflicted smoking related diseases ...bring it on!

 

As I previously said, the cost of smoking related illness is paid for and more by tax revenue from smokers. Putting fags up to £20 per pack would mean that only the rich could smoke, meaning that surplus money made from smokers would no longer be available. But it's ok your health insurance at a few hundred quid a year would cover it.

 

As a smoker I actually think it's pretty bad that I justify it by saying the revenue outweighs the cost but there is something about "most" non smokers that makes me stoop to all new levels. I would rather pass a kidney stone than be a non smoker. I couldn't stand the look of my own self righteous face in the mirror of a morning.

 

What makes it worse is that nearly all of you non smokers would agree that a crack habit or heroin addiction was an illness and as such should be treated that way. Yet they don't put a penny into the coffers.

[liam1412 14]

Why's that then, what would you actually do with the money you saved... You'd spend it on other stuff, the government would get their cut, the shop would make a profit, the shop would spend the profit, the government would get their cut, etc...

 

Overall tax revenue probably wouldn't change very much at all.

 

I'd probably take a foreign holiday. Aside from the holiday itself the rest would be invested in some Greek taverna where I can have smoke without fear of been outcast.

[buck 11]

yeh and are YOU going happy clapping on sunday morning, REFORMED SMOKERS gob off more than people who never smoked, hypocryts.

I'm an ex smoker too, but I don't try to get on any smoker's case. When they visit me they smoke out on my deck but not in the house. I quit because I'm a cancer of the larynx survivor. The only thing that troubles me today is not the smell or even the danger of smoking, that's up tp the smoker him or herself to risk. But I am concerned that members of my own family are spending a lot of money on cigs, that would be better spent on their kids food and education. It's very hard to quit but it can be done.

[Cyclone 10]

the post wasn't wholly directed at yourself, but in rebuttal;

cars are about as essential as rocketships and panda bears.

On the contrary, the modern economy wouldn't exist without the car and the mobile geographically democratised workforce.

and as for reducing pollution lol its drops in an ocean they are pumping out deadly toxins en masse. Don't ever try and make out that cars are some how less damaging than cigarettes, to even hint at it is laughable.

They are though. The main gas to come out of a car exhaust is CO2, but even if they were a thousand times more harmful, it's irrelevant as they are two separate issues.

 

No ones smoking for someone else to inhale, you don't like it? Oh well, move away..

Who needs to justify an addiction? mostly its a choice, you choose to smoke, you could stop but its a bit of a pain in teh asre for a week or two so you don't bother breaking the addiction as it gives a certain sense of -probably illusionary/deluded- satisfaction and saves all the exertion of will power.

 

The point is still, when someone who burns petrol complains about someone burning tobacco their sense of indignation is generally to be ignored because they are being a hypocrite.

No they aren't, unless they simply burn petrol for fun.

[Cyclone 10]

I'd probably take a foreign holiday. Aside from the holiday itself the rest would be invested in some Greek taverna where I can have smoke without fear of been outcast.

 

So most of the money would go to a travel agent, who'd pay tax and would spend the profit. A some might be spent abroad. The economy wouldn't really suffer.

 

I don't understand this

What makes it worse is that nearly all of you non smokers would agree that a crack habit or heroin addiction was an illness and as such should be treated that way. Yet they don't put a penny into the coffers.

So crack and heroin are illnesses whilst a nicotine addiction isn't... And what coffer is it that non smokers avoid putting anything into? And how do they avoid it?

[Korl101 10]

Being a non smoker, I have found the comments on this thread interesting. My stance is that though I would like to see a ban on smoking in certain public places, I do accept the law as it stands, and try to keep away from smokers.

 

However, there is one thing smokers could do to improve their image and that is to stop throwing your fag ends on the floor. I see it far too often and it is one thing about smoking that is not necessary.

 

I would welcome legislation to ban smoking in private cars, but that should also include eating, drinking, shaving, combing of hair and applying make-up. As someone who travels a lot around Sheffield, I see daily, no actually hourly.