The smoking debate

[jane72]

Just posted this on BBGF in one of the threads on smoking. Thought it might spark a debate here too. It is worded in reply to some anti smoking posts if anyone wonders why it may come across a little heavy in places.
-----------------------------------------------------

I am an ex smoker of nearly 4 years, and as much as I hate the smell of cigarettes (always have) I will stick up for peoples rights, be they smokers or non smokers.

Of course non smokers have the right to go out for an evening and not breath in smoke fumes, but I have to add that I also have the right to walk down the street and not breath in car fumes, but it's something I just have to put up with because I know people have the right to drive a car. And those fumes cause more damage to the environment AND peoples health that cigarette smoke.

Not saying that you should just 'put up with it' just saying that the attitude of non smokers is sometimes a little self righteous. Ok so you have the right to clean air (and so you should) but do not disregard the rights of the smoker

Smokers also have the right to smoke, but It also annoys me that some smokers also have this same self righteous attitude. 'I will smoke where ever I like and don't care if a non smoker is present or not' It's just wrong!!! I do, however, understand completely the NEED to smoke. non smokers who have never smoked just do not understand how potent that urge to smoke is and just how this addiction really takes over your life. If I hadn't been a smoker I doubt I would understand either. It's not like craving a chocolate bar, you don't break down in tears searching dustbins for a lick of a kitkat wrapper. Smokers will though, just for one puff of a half decent looking dog end. That’s how it affects you.

Why on earth can't smokers have their own places to eat and socialise. What the hell difference does it make to the non smoker? Non smokers would have the CHOICE to enter those establishments or not. What choice does will a smoker have after the ban comes in? Not a lot, so why does a non smokers needs take precedent over a smokers. Last time I looked cigarettes were legal to buy and actually, smokers pay for the vast majority of health care that smokers need via that really rather hefty tax they pay on each packet of cigarettes. Ban cigarettes and the first thing the government would cut back on would be public spending, directly affecting health care budgets across all services not just the smoking related ones. They rely on that revenue.

In short what I am saying is as long as the non smokers have access to smoke free environments, what difference to YOU does it make to you whether smoking is banned in ALL public places or not?

[julian]

It depends on if the ban is imposed solely for the benefit of non-smokers or if the intention is to help reduce the incentive to become smokers or increase the incentive to stop smoking.

Personally I am not in favour of people having the right to self-destructive behaviour, anyway. There is certainly plenty of self-destructive behaviour that people don't have a right to and smoking is only absent from the list because its usage is so widespread and commonplace.

Whether it's their right or not or whether they can help it or not the fact is that people would be better off in a lot of ways if they didn't smoke and any measures that can help reduce the number of smokers in society are a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Not just for those of us who risk the dangers of secondary smoking but also for the smokers themselves.

Regards

Julian

[jane72]

THat would depend on your definition of self destructive behaviour?

People risk their lives daily base jumping, dare devil stunts, or even in the sad outcome of Steve Irwin, conservation. Safety procedures are of course adheared to, but the risk is still very real. And smoking is not self destructing, it has an increased risk of diseases that would exist whether smoking was common place or not, attached to it. It's not an 'if you smoke you will, if you do not you won't scenario'

But as I say that's debatable, and is only my opinion of that definition.

Even as a deterant the smoking ban simply doesn't work. Yes you will see some people giving up because of it, but equaly there will be people who will become defiant and carry on smoking in spite of the ban. THe ban angers me so much I have talked about starting again. Obviously I will not do that, but you can bet if I though of it others will and actually do it.

As I said, what difference does it make to a non smoker if some bars and resteraunts allow smoking? as long as there is a huge choice of smoke free bars and resteraunts to use if you do not wish to go home smelling of cigarette smoke.

The choice lies with both camps then. And If a smoker chooses to risk their life by smoking who are we to say they cannot. There are plenty of other common place things we do which harm more than just an individuals personal health.

[brockolly]

if they had their own places to eat ad socialise the people who work there will still have to inhale the smoke, so its not only for the non smoking public its for the staff at these places as well who will be far more subjected to it. smokers are free to go outside and smoke just as car fumes can fill the air outside, so its not really the same thing, the ban has already been in place in scotland for some time, and it hasnt made that much of a difference, i think its just media scaremongering saying it won't work. as i recall more people were in pubs after the ban, although i may be wrong, but i seem to remember hearing that somewhere. i wouldnt worry about it anyway

[jane72]

Yes, but staff would also have that choice. I'm sure smoking staff would rather work in the smokinh bars, and the non smoking staff the smoke free ones.

I've heard of many bars in Ireland being empty on the inside but packed on the outside (where they can smoke)

I just don't subscribe to sensorship in any form. Educations and example are the only things that will deter youngsters from smoking. Scaremongering and smoking bans will not do it.

although I do think there are fine lines between education and scaremongering and you cannot put a preachy 'spin' on it all.

[lynw1]

I do smoke, I am not happy about it as I would like to give up. The problem with banning smoking in public places is that it does not encourage anyone to give up. I agree that non smokers should be able to go to a smoke free bar/restautrant if they choose. I will also go to these places, if they have a smoking area I will use it, if they don't I will go outside after my meal etc.

I don't want to push my smoking on to any one else, but the more pressure they put on us by banning it, the more I want to do it, as it increases my stress levels. In my work place they have banned smoking on the premises, which is a good thing. BUT, because we have to go outside we have to take time off of our flexi sheets to do so. That is OK if you beleive that smokers waste company time by going for a f*g. The reality is that there are as many non smokers who waste as much time by chatting, going for coffee, surfing the internet etc, but they do not take any time for this.

My point is that having a go at us all the time is not going to make a jot of difference to my chances of giving up. Only some help to deal with the addiction etc.

[remaha]

Agree with you jane72, all the more so because I still smoke.

However, I actually quite enjoy being a smoker these days. I prefer having to go outside rather than being cooped up in a 10' x 8' smoking room with no air con.

It's amazing how smokers just strike up conversations with each other these days while hanging around outside offices. You get to meet new people, hear all the latests gossip and have a good moan while you're about it.

[jane72]

remaha said:

Agree with you jane72, all the more so because I still smoke.

However, I actually quite enjoy being a smoker these days. I prefer having to go outside rather than being cooped up in a 10' x 8' smoking room with no air con.

It's amazing how smokers just strike up conversations with each other these days while hanging around outside offices. You get to meet new people, hear all the latests gossip and have a good moan while you're about it.

Ah, that's interesting. I can see a good old gossip around the drain pipe instead of around the water cooler catching on

[lynw1]

remaha said:

Agree with you jane72, all the more so because I still smoke.

However, I actually quite enjoy being a smoker these days. I prefer having to go outside rather than being cooped up in a 10' x 8' smoking room with no air con.

It's amazing how smokers just strike up conversations with each other these days while hanging around outside offices. You get to meet new people, hear all the latests gossip and have a good moan while you're about it.

That's true, I have spoken to loads of people and got some interesting stories/info and sometimes advice. It is not quite so easy when it is pouring with rain, windy and freezing cold though!

[6alives]

There was a lot of controversy over here in Ireland before the smoking ban was introduced and as an ex smoker (and a very rarely casual/over a drink present smoker) I was and am glad at the ban. There was much hype that no-one wold go to the pubs any more!! (I mean we are Irish we HAVE a reputation to uphold!!!) That proved to be unfounded and the pubs have had to provide outdoor smoking areas, most provide outdoor patio heaters too!! Smokers have said that they have cut down cos they cant smoke freely and that has to be a positive. And from another point you dont come home stinking of cigarette smoke and can wear the same jeans the next day another positive!! As with anything new it takes time to get used to the new law and if the Irish can do it and uphold it ANYONE can!!!

AND the smoking AREA has become a MAJOR pick up joint cos you are only gonna get chatted up by a fellow smoker!!!
(for all you singletons out there)