 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
As from the 12th December 2005 the public transport in the whole of Switzerland has been declared a smoke free environment. Smoking is therefore no longer permitted on any trains, buses, boats and closed stations buildings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
In fact smoking's not been allowed on trams and buses for many years. The extension to trains was announced about 6 months ago but some guy, I can't recall the name, who's a millionaire from aviation tried to set up new smoking carriages. It seemed ironic, how many airlines allow smoking? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Good news for me as I was quite shocked last year when riding a train up to the Engelberg valley at how smokey and dirty the train compartment was... Most un Swiss-like I thought So I will not miss this at all...!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
ise,
I dunno, even at 10 X £10 a pop, it might add up over a year (How many people 'offend'?) But sadly you're probably right. Needs to be £100 per offence, and £1k to the tobacco company. Proceeds from fines to go to the NHS (or equivalent). How's that for a radical new (un)Health Tax! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AxsMan, A good point. When Italy banned it last year, IIRC 60% of smokers surveyed said that they'd stopped as they'd just been waiting for suitable incentive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't like people smoking around me either, but I have a free will and go elsewhere. As for it being made unlawful to smoke in bars - that's just one step too far. The bar owner should be able to make his own decision if he allows smoking in his bar or not.
I'm not a smoker, at least not any more. I'm an ex-smoker and in the category of those that are meant to be less tolerant of smoke than those that never-had-a-smoke. I wasn't even a party-smoker, I smoked 20-a-day for almost 20 years and thoroughly enjoyed it. I absolutely miss it, and just wish they'd invent a cigarette that wasn't damaging to ones health. However, I do know only too well of the dangers as a close member of family died as a direct result of smoking, as did an Uncle of mine; And, Yes it is damaging to those around the smoker.
I don't go into smokey bars and I don't let people smoke in my car. On the same token it's a free world and if you want to smoke in a bar where it is permitted then you should be able to do so. Smokers like the combination of smoking with a drink, as they do like to smoke after a meal. Smokers also tend to desire a cigarette at times of "waiting", so smoking on a bus or a train would be natural for them.
But no, not only now are smokers made to feel like a murderous criminal, you wish to persecute them further and make them feel ostricised from public places.
They know they stink, they know it's possible that they will die from smoking related diseases, and now you wish to make their enjoyment soured by forcing them to smoke in cubicles (as per airports) or outside in the cold.
Shame on the selfish war mongerers who rally round to point the finger of shame at smokers.
 rant over!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Markos, Made complete sense with this bit.
| Quote: |
I don't like people smoking around me .....
..... it is damaging to those around the smoker.
|
Rapidly downhill after that.
Actually, I agree that in principle a proprietor ought to be free to decide if he wished to allow smoking on the premises. Customers could choose whether they wished to go in. The problem is that, say at a train station or in a small town, customers may not have an alternative choice so that the proprietor could quite cynically be ensured of custom anyway. There would have to be rules to ensure a properly smoke-free choice were always available. But a smoke definitely doesn't go with food. Particularly not someone else's food. You may be "waiting" for your meal or digesting it after it's gone down, but people around you are in the middle of theirs. I've always considered that exceptionally crass amongst smokers.
If you don't like people smoking in your car I'm sure you'd see that people would find smoking in a bus or train you are travelling on equally unpleasant.
A lot of smokers don't know they stink. I often ask how many they smoke and they ask how I know they smoke. It's the same as those who eat certain diets or allow dogs the run of their homes - the smell receptors adapt and you become tolerant and much less sensitive to the smell, such that you may not believe there is any odour at all. But there is. A lot also don't think they will die from smoking related diseases. Somehow they don't think the statistics apply to them, just to someone else.
In a public area indoors or out, smokers have no right to impose their habit on air shared by others.
There's no finger-pointing or war mongering in this. Just fairplay, good sense and practicality. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On the point of smoking dulling the sense of smell. I know two top class perfumiers who smoke a lot and their sense of smell is razor sharp.
The world renown accounts they produce for is proof of this..
But I agree smoking is a bad habit and I am entirely for smoke-free zones in public places
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
slikedges, you're obviously very anti-smoking, or at least that is coming through very strongly from your replies. You've voiced your view that the balance should be firmly placed on the non-smokers side, and that smokers are in the wrong.
All that I have tried to do is extend your thought capacity to understand how all this negativity towards smokers affects them. Then you simply took two points I made, which you already agreed with, and said that they made sense whereas everything else you slammed.
I didn't necessarily offer any solution, I pointed out what smokers enjoy. You steam rolled it once again by trying to find stupidity in the smoker.
Once again, I will point out that I smoked for almost 20 years and I've been a non-smoker for well over two years. I will also once again point out that I've ridden along the awful road of seeing a close member of family die from cancer caused (most likely) from smoking. This is what qualifies me to be able to comment with a tangible level of understanding from both sides of the fence.
We've all got preferences of what we like or dislike, and we've all currently got the ability of free choice. If you are literally forced to share "air" with someone that is smoking, then you have a very valid point for creating a complaint, but I can't think of any times I am personally forced to sit with smokers.
I will go on further and say that smokers have long since had their amenities closed off to them one-by-one, such as as they couldn't smoke in shops, cinemas, public transport, offices, etc. They have generally (there's always a prat in every camp) taken this onboard and abided by the rules. But to impose a ban on all public smoking is tantamount to dictatorship and removes the rights of the people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| JT wrote: |
On the point of smoking dulling the sense of smell. I know two top class perfumiers who smoke a lot and their sense of smell is razor sharp.
The world renown accounts they produce for is proof of this..
But I agree smoking is a bad habit and I am entirely for smoke-free zones in public places |
Not quite on topic.... but one thing I have never really understood is people who smoke heavily then insist on trying to mask the smell with aftershave/perfume.... Ive never met a smoker who suceeded in hiding the smell!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
LOL! I know somebody that does that... with very cheap perfume... it's just plain awful!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Markos,
| Quote: |
I can't think of any times I am personally forced to sit with smokers.
|
| Quote: |
such as as they couldn't smoke in shops, cinemas, public transport, offices, etc.
|
Those are excellent examples of where you were once forced to share air with smokers. As smoke is the imposition (not unadulterated air being the imposition, as you seem to be suggesting), a smoke-free option must first be provided. You seem to be suggesting that the right of smokers to smoke is pre-eminent to the right of the general public not to have the smell and potential risk of smoke imposed upon them. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
they can ban smoking in all buildings as far as i am concerned.. i much prefer to go outside for a crafty smoke..
but if they ever ban it on the chairlift then im gonna have a proper sulk up! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
The south of Ireland has been No-Smoking for two years now
One strange and previously unconsidered side effect of the smoking ban is that the night clubs honk to the high heavens
Previously, You could smell the standard smoke tinged with stale booze, now you smell really strong stale booze, farts, arm-pits etc. It has been so noticeable, that a whole industry has grown up around carpet cleaning, deodourising and ventilation in many pubs and clubs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
| slikedges wrote: |
Markos,
| Quote: |
I can't think of any times I am personally forced to sit with smokers.
|
| Quote: |
such as as they couldn't smoke in shops, cinemas, public transport, offices, etc.
|
Those are excellent examples of where you were once forced to share air with smokers. |
Err... yes... but your point is?
| slikedges wrote: |
| You seem to be suggesting that the right of smokers to smoke is pre-eminent to the right of the general public not to have the smell and potential risk of smoke imposed upon them. |
Rubbish. I am doing nothing of the sort.
I am all for, in fact I positively insist, that there is option for me as a non-smoker to be able to eat, drink, travel, dance, sit etc in a smoke free zone. But equally, I am not going to position myself above smokers and feel that I have more rights than they do. This is a free country, and I feel it should remain so. Ostracising (spelling!?!) sections of society to the point where they are denied their amenities is completely against the very heart of democratic beliefs.
If a bar/train/club/bus is full of smokers I will either not go in, or move on to the next one. If all the bars/trains/clubs/buses are allowing smoking then it is stopping me having the freedom of choosing a non-smoking environment and I have a valid case for wanting a smoke-free whatever. It does not give me good reason to request a total smoking-ban in all environments that I may be likely to visit.
If I had to make my viewpoint easier to understand, in a single sentence, it would be that I prefer equal rights and in this case that means smokers should have as many pleasant smoking-friendly places as non-smokers have non-smoking places. If that constitutes "the right of smokers to smoke is pre-eminent to the right of the general public" then that is so, but it doesn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
The flaw in this argument is that we cannot extend equal rights to those that harm others. Try applying your logic to paedophiles and see how it looks! not so good eh!
I'm quite happy for smokers to be provided for away from the rest of the public so they can only harm themselves. What is the problem with this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Very true Chris Bish... smoking's a bit different from paedophilia, but also true it does cause harm to others. I get your point though 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Personally, I intensely dislike it when I'm walking along the street and I get a lungful of some other pedestrian's second hand smoke.
Anybody ever read the Michael Frayn piece that begins "Excuse me, but do you mind if I spit...."?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Acacia wrote: |
Personally, I intensely dislike it when I'm walking along the street and I get a lungful of some other pedestrian's second hand smoke.
Anybody ever read the Michael Frayn piece that begins "Excuse me, but do you mind if I spit...."? |
I find it horrid too.... the problem is that the smoke gets everywhere, it doesnt take someone to blow smoke at you, even if they are careful, you still end up having to smell it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree, along with the smells eminating from the factories - I think its a cat food one or something near us, also that fishy smell they put on the fields.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
And my point is that if it was as harmful as cigarette smoke you would be protected from it by Health and safety law. We are talking about the great plague of the 21st century here, not a bad odour. Smoking is our equivalent of TB and leprosy in previous times. In 20 years time we will think of our smelly bars and pubs as just as disgusting as sewage thrown in the streets in Shakespeare's day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not pro-smoking!!!
Get off me!
I'm just saying that smokers deserve to be treated a little bit better than they are getting!
If it was as simple as saying "All people who breath in smoke will die from it" then it would a clear cut and obvious task to irradicate it. We don't ban cars simply because they could cause deaths, but lets try and minimise the exposure and thus the risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
It's good to debate with someone who understands the rational! Thanks for some interesting contributions.
i have very good friends who smoke and do feel sorry for them. It does ruin lives. I know one who is unable to fly because they cannot endure flight time without feeding thier addiction. I also have a wife who will cough until she is sick after an evening in those friends' company and who experiences terrible discomfort with her contact lenses in smoke. I doubt whether smokers realise how much discomfort they cause. You really notice it when you take your new-born baby into a smoky room. As a parent you are horrified at the damage those brand new pink lungs are taking.
I really like the "death room" idea. Make them available to smokers in places where smoking is allowed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
I love the debating, not so keen on being bashed though!!!
Nobody understands the addiction other than a smoker, it is the most illogical sensation that one can endure. I can only align it to feeling "hungry" when your body tells you it wants another cigarette.
I can honestly look back and say I loved smoking, but I totally without doubt wish I'd never picked one up in the first place. I've asked myself a million times why I did. And I've not got a clue. It was 2 years in September I gave up, and the desire to smoke hasn't gone away. Fortunately I am quite strong willed and even at the weakest moments, (i.e. 1am in some apres ski bar!) I stop myself having that odd cigar, etc.
Towards the latter part of my regular smoking time I was made to feel dirty, lower class, unintelligent, unemployable and like scum. It didn't make me want to give up, that's an issue far closer to home, but I began to have a taste of what it might be like to endure racism. The press and the TV media had by that time rallied up a loathsome character of smokers and I lost count of the insensitive people who liked to draw similarities to kissing ashtrays, etc.
I doubt there's a smoker (still) alive who wishes to bring discomfort to others, but they need support to accept the damage it's causing themselves, not to be fed to the lions for something that gripped them long before it was considered un-socialable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm in total agreement with Markos.
We should all remember that smoking was once fashionable and a social norm. The main thing that should be concentrated on now is to discourage the current generation teenagers from taking up smoking in the first place, unfortunately, the way we're doing things now seems to be causing a few of them to take it up, as they think they're being "rebellious".
I'm a non-smoker by the way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
One can agree with both Markos, and RichardB, 's points, but the fact remains that many places are denied to those who suffer from smoke. My wife and I cannot endure smoky places, yet love pubs and socialising. One smoker makes these places intolerable to us. A rare treat is a smoke-free pub (there is one in Shrewsbury). We also belong to a cricket club that amazingly permits smoking.
The idea that what was socially acceptable should be tolerated today doesn't add up. Slavery and the subjugation of women as domestic slaves, even racism, were social norms quite recently. Few would subscribe to tolerating them today.
Do you have any views on copyright BTW? (sorry, in-joke!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Has anyone noticed that employer are able to refuse someone a job simply on the basis of whether they smoke? As a perhaps obvious example, the WHO either does or plans to run an entirely smoke free ship....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
its going one way and one way only.. smoking will be banned from all indoor public places at some stage.. no employer can expect any member of staff to endure a smoke filled atmosphere for say 6 hours a shift in a bar.. as smoking becomes less common indoors it get more noticable and less acceptable.. trust me i love the occasional fag, but i will only smoke one outdoors..
in a bar that has 50 per cent smokers after the intial yuk you dont notice it.. but with one or two smokers it really stands out.. and as mentioned earlier can you imagine smoking on a plane now or on a train.. smoking indoors in public places is finished.. and why anyone would want to go to smoking room is beyond me, unless they want a ciggy without having to buy one!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
buns,
The Who? Do the remaining 2 smoke? Thought they all gave up all that sort of proper rock'n'roll excess ages ago...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I'm a smoking doctor. I smoke about every two to three weeks when I go out. In the past I've been on twenty to thirty a day. There's a lot of nonsense talked about the addictiveness of smoking, it is mostly psychological, that is, it's a habit, much like chewing your nails or picking your nose. Yes they are addictive, but all you get when you withdraw is a little jittery, and maybe a few sleepless nights, easily put up with, if you're properly motivated, as shown by all those who give up or cut down drastically when they have children.
"Smoker's rights" are a nonsense, started by ASH (who are funded by whom?), to try and continue the promotion of smoking. It's quite easy, if you want to smoke, do it where you're not causing any measure of harm to other people. For all those who supposedly can't stop smoking for long enough, perhaps not being able to go out in public would give them the motivation they need to stop. After all, that's all they need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Quote: |
a smoke filled atmosphere for say 6 hours a shift in a bar
|
The average working week for a pub company Manager is a 48 hour working week.
In a survey of Hospitality staff carried out by the trade magazine Hotel and Caterer 92% said that they wanted smoking in their places of work banned, and 85% were worried about their own health and the effects of passive smoking.
A total ban is the only way to go in bars. If smoking is banned in bars that serve food, does the smoking ban finish when last orders for food are taken? If no food is being served can one smoke? If I order a packet of crisps does all smoking have to stop. Who is going to 'Police' this ban?
Under current Law beer is a foodstuff and therefore all bars serve food.
and yes I work in a bar!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Kramer wrote:
| Quote: |
I'm a smoking doctor
|
.....and he wonders why his love life is so desperate!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please, all of you non-smokers who want to ban a perfectly legal activity on private property for no other reason than you don't like it, stop taking the stupid pills. You cannot look at the issue of smoking in isolation, to be consistent you must look at the principle. That is, pubs and restaurants are private property. They are private property just as much as your own home is. When you enter a pub or restaurant you do not do so as of right, you only do so because the owner allows you to be there and may eject you only because the premises are their private property.
If you think it's acceptable for the state to ban a perfectly legal activity in a pub or bar then you must also accept that the state is entitled to ban you from a perfectly legal activity in your own home, whether that's smoking or anything else. If you think that's right then may you live in interesting times. If you cannot accept that the state may ban you from any legal activity in your own home then you simply cannot accept that the state can ban smoking in a pub or restaurant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kramer,
| Quote: |
I'm a smoking doctor. I smoke about every two to three weeks when I go out.
|
Give up the weed, get the girl, live happily ever after
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Well done the Swiss!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As we all tend to ski in europe we will have to put up with the continentals more easy going attitudes when it comes to smoking .They certainly wont be banning it in france/spain in the near future,its the first thing I notice whilst waiting to pick up the baggage at european airports 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
