PDA

View Full Version : Smokers.


G-CPTN
21st Apr 2012, 23:58
I regularly and frequently pass by a pub in our village.

Almost every time there is at least one person standing in the street outside smoking.

Now I can understand when a group of people want to have a chat over a cigarette that they are required to step outside, but what motivates single individuals to leave their friends and go and stand alone outside in order to salve their craving for nicotine? Can they not postpone the urge until others feel the urge - or is it perhaps that none of their particular group of friends are smokers so they have to go out alone?

If they were on an aircraft or in a cinema they would have to resist the temptation (or do theatre-goers sneak out during performances for a smoke?).

gingernut
22nd Apr 2012, 00:00
but what motivates single individuals to leave their friends and go and stand alone outside in order to salve their craving for nicotine?

'cos it's flippin' lovely.

mini
22nd Apr 2012, 00:01
If you don't smoke, you don't understand. :ok:

ShyTorque
22nd Apr 2012, 00:03
but what motivates single individuals to leave their friends and go and stand alone outside in order to salve their craving for nicotine?

Addiction.

Pelikal
22nd Apr 2012, 00:14
Yawn, yawn, yawn.

Halfbaked_Boy
22nd Apr 2012, 00:20
Pelikal, are you mad?

*drops all belongings and sprints for cover!!!*

gingernut
22nd Apr 2012, 00:22
Yawn, yawn, yawn.

anyone fancy going outside for a fag?

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 00:35
anyone fancy going outside for a fag?
Now that I can understand as it it a social activity, akin to 'going for drink with friends'.
My query was about lone smokers.

Halfbaked_Boy
22nd Apr 2012, 00:40
G-CPTN,

At the pub quiz on Wednesday, I was one of them.

In between rounds, I had a quick look around me, like the unwritten code, "Ah, anybody else heading off for a quick one?"

Nobody was moving.

I ended up alone...

Worrals in the wilds
22nd Apr 2012, 01:07
Maybe we could have a Smoking Hamsterwheel thread. ;)
Seriously, IMO sometimes it's nice to step outside and get away from a noisy group for a few minutes, whether smoking or not.

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 01:12
I'm not questioning the ethics of smoking, merely the isolation chosen by some when, I presume, there could be others that would be inclined to join them.

A pub is, by its nature, a social gathering (at least it is for most people - there is the odd drinker who chooses to drink alone), but these are not people that I would expect to be loners.

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 02:31
It was answered earlier, the addiction needs to be fed.

Of course, this person may be the only smoker in his group of friends so has to go alone, and you don't know how long he has gone without a tab.

He could be there alone waiting for friends to arrive so nipped out for a quick fix so he could look to see if there's any sign of them.


And then we come to the last reasons. Something may have been said, by some idiot that our smoker doesn't agree with, so he goes for a smoke to take these few minutes to calm down so he doesn't tell that person that he should take his head out of where he thinks the sun shines, therefore avoiding a confrontation which would upset everyone in the bar. Or if his friends are all warbling on about their family life issues ("she's bloody nagging about everything again, blah blah blah") or bloody football, then that could be the perfect time to use the excuse of needing a smoke just so he don't get depressed listening to people whine and drone on about something he has no interest in.


So many reasons, G-CPTN, and many of them can be a reason to "escape" from the bullcrap he hears from others, just for a few minutes.







And, yes, I've seen people sneak out from a movie or show just so they can have a fix. I don't, I can manage to wait. Others can't, same as some people can't stop fuffling around with bags of sweets at the theatre so they piddle off all around them with the noise of the plastic bag.

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 02:34
I should mention that I see as many female lone smokers as male ones, so maybe they get fed up with having to listen to the old man?

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 02:40
Maybe. Who knows. Best ask one sometime and see how long it takes her to tell you to "Eff Off".

jabird
22nd Apr 2012, 02:45
Back before the ban, I used to go outside every now and then for a "fresh
air" break.

So we've just gone full circle. In many ways, the fact you can nip out to an outside zone is quite a good way to give an opportunity to break away from any potential problems.

Also, shouting matches in busy pubs just to get heard above the pap music can get very tedious. I've always suspected a conspiracy to keep everyone's throats as dry as possible in order to sell more beer. My local has the balance about right now - and as an Irish pub, they knew the ban was coming, so they just built a shelter with a foot of air space around each side.

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 02:52
This particular pub has no ground for smokers other than the public footway - there is no shelter possible.

Worrals in the wilds
22nd Apr 2012, 02:59
A bar manager once told me that he kept the music loud because otherwise people talked too much and realized that their friends were boring, particularly if they were drinking a lot :uhoh:. Then they'd either go home or start fighting with them, which were both detrimental to bar sales.

I could never work out if he was serious or not, but he ran some very successful venues.

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 03:05
If you actually listen to some people in bars, Worrals, you'll see that manager is right.


So nipping out for a smoke to avoid the inane drivel being spouted can be a good thing as it lets someone calm down a bit and relax before they go back in and suffer the waffle again. That means happy customers and no confrontations.



And people here have the nerve to rant on about how smokers ain't "socially responsible"................ :E http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/forum/smileyvault-stirthepot.gif

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Apr 2012, 03:16
Nicotine and Heroin, one is legal and one is not, "drug" addicts find that both substances screw the brain and body in the same way:(

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 03:20
I knew it wouldn't be long before the thought police appeared

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Apr 2012, 03:25
I knew it wouldn't be long before the thought police appeared

Am I wrong :p:p:p:p:p:p

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 03:36
yes, if you are comparing the damage from smoking tobacco to the damage caused by heroin

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 03:48
http://www.pprune.org/7148827-post11.html

jabird
22nd Apr 2012, 04:03
Well I'm enjoying my virtual pub where I'm chatting to an old uni friend and we're both enjoying a pint of something.

I can't even remember whether or not he smoked at uni (think he did), and if he does now, that's his business. :D

The joys of the internet! Which is of course harmless, and does not need any health warnings :mad:

Slasher
22nd Apr 2012, 04:13
To answer your original question CPTN the answer is simply
addiction. However - it can also be used as a social break of
convenience (akin to nipping off to the dunny for a pee) if a
group discussion is getting a bit out of hand or personal (or
if its almost your shout!) and as Worrals said, to get from a
noisy rowdy group for a few minutes of relative quiet.

G-CPTN
22nd Apr 2012, 04:20
Many thanks for the replies.

I was curious about the behaviour of outwardly normal-looking people and anxious to avoid a slanging match (as some of the threads on here seem to descend into).

As someone who has avoided addictions it is interesting to see how others have succumbed.

I don't make this comment in judgement, merely out of curiosity.

Slasher
22nd Apr 2012, 04:33
As someone who has avoided addictions

Does that include sex? ;)


Back in the old days when I smoked I never left a full-blooded
pub argument or brawl, preferring to duck out for a quick one
only after the dust had settled.

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 05:28
I was curious about the behaviour of outwardly normal-looking people

Well, you have to define "normal" first, because there's smokers and non-smokers who definitely do not look "normal"!!

As I say, the reasons for nipping out for a quick smoke can be endless, not only restricted to the addiction side of things although that plays a big part. If people are feeling a bit bored, they'll go for a smoke for something to do. If they're not, by playing pool/darts/whatever or watching some sport on TV then they won't. You have the reasons I mentioned earlier like "cooling off" because of something someone is saying, or avoiding the pub bore (usually a non-smoker who thinks the sun shines out his arse), or it could be just an excuse to get away from the whining of the other half.

People are strange critters, and if you watch closely you'll see the same behaviour from non-smokers who will also go outside for a few minutes to, as they say, see what is going on. They use a different excuse, that's all.

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 08:01
A 'smokers hamsterwheel' could be a good idea, actually ;).
And why does it have to smell so disgusting? Mixtures with cannabis (I guess) are a bit better, and some leaf tobacco, or whatever is put into the pipes.
btw, I've managed to reduce smoking before my seminars or classes by sniffing slightly when going into the room and asking casually "Well, how many of you have been smoking, actually?" (and sometimes adding: It's bad for your health, did you know that, which somehow always creates a lively and communicative atmosphere - maybe some smoker could explain, why :E).
They'll smoke after it, I guess, but it's still better during the seminar.

The joys of the internet! Which is of course harmless, and does not need any health warnings
dream on. How internet porn turned my beautiful boy into a hollow, self-hating shell | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2132342/How-internet-porn-turned-beautiful-boy-hollow-self-hating-shell.html) online chatting is said to be as bad. Not to mention checking mail every now and then, or taking a look at your favorite forum first thing in the morning...

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 08:10
A 'smokers hamsterwheel' could be a good idea, actually .

It would be closed within hours.

sitigeltfel
22nd Apr 2012, 09:23
A 'smokers hamsterwheel' could be a good idea, actually.Only if they were made to go outside before posting ;)

Tableview
22nd Apr 2012, 09:31
As a lifelong non-smoker I can only surmise that it's the male equivalent of girls going to the toilet together. Teamtalk?

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Apr 2012, 09:45
yes, if you are comparing the damage from smoking tobacco to the damage caused by heroin

I'm not but you already know that. The OP asked a question and my response was that in exactly the same way as the crack addicts body demands its fix a smokers body demands the nicotine it needs to survive,

Firestorm
22nd Apr 2012, 10:20
Whilst being a lapsed smoker, and mostly in favour of smoke-free pubs and restaurants and so on, there are two things about the smoking ban that cheese me off.

The first is tat smokers now go out of the pub for a puff, but if there is a hint of cold weather or rain then they cower in the doorway so you not only have to squeeze past the smokers, but you have fight through the smokey fug as well. I thin that they should be compelled to go at least 10 feet from the entrance (as they are in many other countries) to a smokers shelter or den or whatever you want to call it.

The second thing is that when there is a hint of warm weather, and it would be nice to go to the pub for dinner to have dinner, and that it would be nice to sit outside to eat all the tables have been commandeered by smokers who seem to show little consideration for those nearby who are eating. I realise that this is very similar to the situation that existed 5 years ago or so in all UK pubs, but I now think that there should smoking and no smoking areas in the outdoor areas too.

Yours sincerely, Firestorm, Grumpy Old... Of Middle England >:-(

hellsbrink
22nd Apr 2012, 11:53
I realise that this is very similar to the situation that existed 5 years ago or so in all UK pubs, but I now think that there should smoking and no smoking areas in the outdoor areas too.

Personally, I would have no issues with that


I'm not but you already know that. The OP asked a question and my response was that in exactly the same way as the crack addicts body demands its fix a smokers body demands the nicotine it needs to survive,

And, again, you show your ignorance as the various posts in the thread show. Most smokers actually have no issues with not smoking for quite a long period, and when kept occupied will not actually smoke. It's NOTHING like the addiction to narcotics like crack, heroin or cocaine (the latter I know very well, and not getting a fix was worse than you could imagine especially compared to nicotine), you don't get the same "urge" to get a fix, you don't have the same "need".

So, unless you have actually been hooked on illicit substance I suggest you shut the hell up because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

B Fraser
22nd Apr 2012, 14:31
A 'smokers hamsterwheel' could be a good idea, actually.

Nope, any amount of exercise would have then coughing and wheezing in no time.

:}

Mr Optimistic
22nd Apr 2012, 14:45
Smoked all my life: guess it is now part of who I am.

Flash2001
22nd Apr 2012, 14:52
In Vancouver and maybe some other places Canada has "Safe ingection sites" where addicts can shoot up with clean needles etc. What do you bet they prohibit smoking?

After an excellent landing etc...

MMArdmore
22nd Apr 2012, 15:08
hmmmmmm non smoker preachers (mormons knocking at your door at 8 in the morning) or reformers ( jehovahs witnesses) just leave others alone!,

I get a god damn lecture if i have a smoke while on the piss....just F off and mind your own shit cause we dont berate you for not joining us......twats

*sorry for my language....but it has to be said....twats

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 15:11
:p - what had to be said? That you enjoy stinking and would like to go on like that?
Well, that's your choice for sure! :cool:

Lemain
22nd Apr 2012, 15:15
So, unless you have actually been hooked on illicit substance I suggest you shut the hell up because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.Why does the drug of addiction have to be illicit? Would legal methadone, morphine or even legal heroin (it is now available) give less insight than the street-scored drug?

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Apr 2012, 15:23
So, unless you have actually been hooked on illicit substance I suggest you shut the hell up because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

I suspect that almost every Dr who treats addicts has never been hooked on an illicit substance either, does that mean they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.....

Smokers continue to smoke because the nicotine addiction makes them do so, people who gather outside pubs come rain or shine are doing so to answer the demands that the nicotine has placed on them.

MMArdmore
22nd Apr 2012, 15:37
I just deleted a post I wrote in retort to certain coments and realised I dont care...

....Opinions are like assholes...everyones got one and they all stink:ok:

jabird
22nd Apr 2012, 15:44
The joys of the internet! Which is of course harmless, and does not need any health warnings - dream on

Probes - it was quite obviously a sarcastic comment, not that replying with a single case from the Daily Mail would have swayed me if I did mean it :mad:

Next time I'll try writing in a sarcastic font for any other yanks on the forum.

There are hidden and obvious dangers in every thing we do. The warnings about smoking couldn't be made more clear. I think we've gone far enough. We have moved from smoking being a habit which also caused significant nuisance and in some cases harm to others to something which should largely be a matter of personal choice.

Mr Optimistic
22nd Apr 2012, 15:50
It's all down to the nasty smell. Seeing as smokers pay more tax and die younger (less pension and no long term care), it would seem to be in a non-smokers interest that as many people smoked as possible. If you disagree about the cost benefits, please remember that even non-smokers die eventually and incur costs; well so I am led to believe.

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 15:55
it was quite obviously a sarcastic comment
ok, jabird, we're even then - the response was 'kinda sarcastic', too :p. (and of course it's more serious than Daily Whatsoever).
It's all down to the nasty smell
agree. Even though there are smells nastier... but still. Agree.

MMArdmore
22nd Apr 2012, 15:59
ha.......unsubscirbed

jabird
22nd Apr 2012, 16:03
Seeing as smokers pay more tax and die younger (less pension and no long term care), it would seem to be in a non-smokers interest that as many people smoked as possible. If you disagree about the cost benefits, please remember that even non-smokers die eventually and incur costs; well so I am led to believe.

I think a Philip Morris executive made that exact claim a few years back.

However, I'm not sure it stands closer scrutiny. If it was true, then so would be the reverse - that we should start putting health warnings on sports equipment and on tracks regularly used by joggers and cyclists, so we can get them to give up their nasty habit that makes them live longer, and incur long term health care costs.

You have to look at healthy life years rather than just life expectancy. Long term chronic illnesses - heart disears, diabetes and so on are much more costly to the government than someone who is merely drawing a pension.

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 16:06
start putting health warnings on sports equipment and on tracks regularly used by joggers and cyclists
:uhoh: - quite a point... a friend of ours got his nose practically wiped away after a nasty fall with his bike some years ago (ALMOST restored by surgeries, but...)
Still, he doesn't stink! :E

jabird
22nd Apr 2012, 16:09
- quite a point... a friend of ours got his nose practically wiped away after a nasty fall with his bike some years ago (ALMOST restored by surgeries, but...)
Still, he doesn't stink!

Probes - read the other thread on cyclists ("contempt").

Really? A cyclist who can go on a long bike ride and not sink? What's the secret?

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 16:10
:D he does not stink when he's not cycling :p.
Besides, that's supposed to be a very male odour (when cycling), so nothing to compare to smoking... :E

Ghost Vector
22nd Apr 2012, 16:20
...beat to quarters....standby to open fire....Steady....Steady....Fire....Fire....Fire....

...come about...Ready the acid bath....target erased from the earth forever...heading


...double the rum rations....

Mr Optimistic
22nd Apr 2012, 17:13
' think a Philip Morris executive made that exact claim a few years back.'

Good, that's two of us right then.

'However, I'm not sure it stands closer scrutiny. If it was true, then so would be the reverse - that we should start putting health warnings on sports equipment and on tracks regularly used by joggers and cyclists, so we can get them to give up their nasty habit that makes them live longer, and incur long term health care costs.'

Exactly: that's why the cost of insuring against old age has gone up and why smokers get a better deal with an impaired life annuity (annuity rates declining...................An annuity is effectively insurance against living too long -which is also why you should seriously consider an escalating or linked one.)

ZOOKER
22nd Apr 2012, 17:34
It always amazes me the number 'food industry professionals' who hang around the rear entrances to restaurants, smoking. Some of them are even in Chef's clothing.

Pelikal
22nd Apr 2012, 17:39
Last night, I watched (again) One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest with Jack Nicholson. I'm convinced that some who are posting here were 'participants'. Now, own up!!!;););)

Tableview
22nd Apr 2012, 17:42
I also watched it (again!) what a brilliant movie. I'd love to say I was in it, but only in spirit!

Mr Optimistic
22nd Apr 2012, 17:46
Blimey, is it that obvious

Davaar
22nd Apr 2012, 17:53
How wearisome is this age of of smoking-intolerance, of car-selfishness when we could savour the joy of the bus, of parking car in an empty spot for a civic toll-ransom, of using cheap energy when civic Fathers (and Mums! How much better if the Mums ran the world, Hey?), etc., etc.

When his family began to arrive my late father quit smoking to cut back on costs. During the war, cigarettes were largely unobtainable, but remained an article in, as it were, charity. Some kind soul gave Dad a twenty of Senior Service which he passed unopened to a smokes-deprived minister of the C. of S.

The recipient thanked him: “You know, Davaar, you are a nice young man; I’d say a VERY nice young man; far TOO nice, indeed, to have fallen victim to this sorry habit of non-smoking that has you in its sad grip”.

I used to give away my monthly allocation of RN Blue Liners. I did from time to time smoke cigars which I enjoyed and still do, when very rarely I indulge (once in the past six months).

I do not recall my father ever inflict teetotal propaganda, nor have I; although others did try to force him and me to “have a glass”.

Now in this fair city the governance uses diesel buses and allows diesel transport and cars.

It forbids any smoking in restaurants or within arrow-shot, just about, of pub verandas (Royal Canadian Legion included). That incommodes me but little, although I sometimes miss the after meal cigar.

Allow black-smoke diesels, forbid the Woodbine? This is not the bullying of a dictatorship or an aristocracy, but of democracy. Thank you President Woodrow Wilson and your War for Democracy. The Democracy of the Busybody. Scarcely a meeting of our Council or higher level of government passes but yet another new initiative is imposed to forbid or enforce yet another evil. Let's think, now: a Carbon Tax! That's it! We'll have a Carbon Tax! “All for your own good!”

Baloney! Or Bologna!

.

Mr Optimistic
22nd Apr 2012, 18:24
Unfortunately science is difficult at school. Having opinions and certainty is easier. Talk a lot a lot and get elected and forget your scientific illiteracy then spout about carbon dioxide when you don't know what a covalent bond is.

Mac the Knife
22nd Apr 2012, 18:41
Hmmm. Not so long ago I invited a most pulchritudinous young lady out to lunch. Knowing her to be a vegetarian I chose a pleasant venue noted for its vegetarian choices. As we perused the menu she asked politely if I could refrain from eating meat, since the sight and odour of it made her ill.

I'd been planning on their renowned Escalope Milanese but the Mediterranean vegetable bake was delicious - we had a very pleasant lunch, happily she was not a teetotaller...

Mac :ok:

Tableview
22nd Apr 2012, 18:52
Dare I suggest that had she been an old dog - hypothetical really as you would not have invited her out had that been the case - you would have tucked into a 300 gram fillet steak at Nelson's Eye without giving a toss about her feelings!

I had a vegetarian g/f once who complained that she couldn't stand the smell of me after I'd eaten meat and even if I showered and brushed everything and everywhere she wouldn't come near me for 24 hours!

TheChitterneFlyer
22nd Apr 2012, 19:23
I'm becoming somewhat tired of the bleatings of non-smokers. I smoke in designated areas and if you, as a non-smoker, happens to be there... tough tits! Go and bleat in someone elses ear about your health being damaged due to passive smoking... find someone else to annoy!

probes
22nd Apr 2012, 19:46
I'm becoming somewhat tired of the bleatings of non-smokers.
isn't it interesting? Why call it 'bleatings'? If you smoke in designated areas, why would it (=bleatings) bother you?

flying lid
22nd Apr 2012, 20:52
The local hospital went 100% smoke free at the end of last year - not just the buildings they were allready non-smoking - the whole site. It is on a main A road just out of town.

Every time I pass I see all sorts of stupid buggers on the pavement beside the main road at the 3 vehicle entrances. I mean all sorts, all puffing away on the weed. Doctors, nurses, office staff, patients in pyjamas, dressing gowns, pregnant women, wheelchairs, some with hospital "equipment" attached !!!. Really is funny, they're there when its freezing, raining, snowing, windy, all sulken faced and puffing away. !!!

Stupid buggers.

Lid

Tableview
22nd Apr 2012, 21:17
No comment

http://pics.myspew.com/var/albums/geek/pregnant-woman-smoking-worried-about-noise.jpg?m=1301362407

Davaar
22nd Apr 2012, 21:19
Every time I pass I see all sorts of stupid buggers on the pavement beside the main road at the 3 vehicle entrances. I mean all sorts, all puffing away on the weed. Doctors, nurses, office staff, patients in pyjamas, dressing gowns, pregnant women, wheelchairs, some with hospital "equipment" attached !!!. Really is funny, they're there when its freezing, raining, snowing, windy, all sulken faced and puffing away. !!!



Couldn't have put it better: .................. the tyranny of Busybody Democracy.

Mac the Knife
22nd Apr 2012, 21:29
"Every time I pass I see all sorts of stupid buggers on the pavement beside the main road at the 3 vehicle entrances. I mean all sorts, all puffing away on the weed. Doctors, nurses, office staff, patients in pyjamas, dressing gowns, pregnant women, wheelchairs, some with hospital "equipment" attached !!!."

Well, YOU may think they're stupid buggers - they obviously don't, but of course you know best.

The abolishment of smoking areas just means that people who want to smoke have to traipse all over the place picking up interesting bugs and bringing 'em back to the ward.

I'd venture that the threat that this poses for infection control is a lot worse than the occasional whiff of 4th hand smoke, but there you are.

Once again, a seemingly good idea turns out to have unforseen consequences.

Sack all staff seen smoking anywhere and discharge all smoking patients on the spot!

Mac :ok:

[Ideology triumphs over practicality]

ShyTorque
22nd Apr 2012, 21:30
So, unless you have actually been hooked on illicit substance I suggest you shut the hell up because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Hellsbrink, as you insist that you do have an idea what you're talking about, what illicit substance are you hooked on? :confused:

SMT Member
22nd Apr 2012, 22:10
I follow the very simple guidelines set forth by my monarch: If there's an ashtray around, I'll smoke. If somebody don't like it, take it up with the people who put the ashtray there.

Funny twist to that story: When HM was on official visit to the US, there was a press conference. The Americans, being good hosts, had placed an ashtray on the table, and HM lit up in full view of umpteen journalists and rolling cameras. The American media people nearly died seeing that, and most of the interview was edited out.

vulcanised
22nd Apr 2012, 22:33
It's more PC hypocrisy of the worst kind.

The overall damage done to people and property by the use of tobacco pales into insignificance when measured against the damage from alcohol.

ZFT
22nd Apr 2012, 22:49
Quote:
I realise that this is very similar to the situation that existed 5 years ago or so in all UK pubs, but I now think that there should smoking and no smoking areas in the outdoor areas too.
Personally, I would have no issues with that

Quite common to find this here in Bangkok

ShyTorque
22nd Apr 2012, 22:54
It's more PC hypocrisy of the worst kind.
The overall damage done to people and property by the use of tobacco pales into insignificance when measured against the damage from alcohol.

I agree. The missus spilled some meths on the coffee table the other day and it took the french polish clean off and stank the house out.

Goodness knows why she still drinks the stuff.

Seldomfitforpurpose
22nd Apr 2012, 23:30
It's more PC hypocrisy of the worst kind.

The overall damage done to people and property by the use of tobacco pales into insignificance when measured against the damage from alcohol.

Very true indeed but it required the current no smoking legislation to bring that about :ok:

Shack37
22nd Apr 2012, 23:43
- quite a point... a friend of ours got his nose practically wiped away after a nasty fall with his bike some years ago (ALMOST restored by surgeries, but...)
Still, he doesn't stink! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/evil.gif

Sounds like he doesn't smell either Probes;)

hellsbrink
23rd Apr 2012, 05:08
If you smoke in designated areas, why would it (=bleatings) bother you?

Because the buggers sit in the smoking area and then complain about the smoke, especially when there's a perfectly good non-smoking area for them?


Hellsbrink, as you insist that you do have an idea what you're talking about, what illicit substance are you hooked on?

Now it's only caffeine and nicotine, but in the past I was hooked on cocaine. I thought that was pretty obvious from my post, if people would actually read it properly.

So, you see, unlike most people here, I am qualified to talk about the differences between needing a nicotine fix and how your body reacts to withdrawal from an illicit substance like cocaine. Can you say that? Can SFFP?

Slasher
23rd Apr 2012, 05:26
Just for 'brink! :)

V_XXkI-8e5M

probes
23rd Apr 2012, 05:31
The overall damage done to people and property by the use of tobacco pales into insignificance when measured against the damage from alcohol.
Hm. It prevents non-smokers getting fresh air (when they are not bleating in the smokers area), so it's not that insignificant, I guess. And while a drunk person may be unpleasant, one does not get passively drunk when close to the person.
One more example from life: the wife of a friend of ours insisted on smoking near the fireplace (which still makes the room stink, although less) and while doing that, announced: I never smoke in MY car, NEVER.

Slasher
23rd Apr 2012, 05:38
And while a drunk person may be unpleasant,

I think you'd find me a very un-unpleasant person when I'm
drunk Probes! :E

...As long as you don't find dribbling and farting and mauling
of breasts too much of a turn off!

Ghost Vector
23rd Apr 2012, 06:43
Anyone caught smoking should be immediately beaten with a Rattan Cane. The creation of Police Caning Crews should be employed for patrolling in search of smokers, where ever they are, as well as cell phone drivers. It’s the least we can do for the poor dear hearts for their own good. Tough love will save millions of lives. They will wail and bellow now but they will certainly thank us in the end.

G&T ice n slice
23rd Apr 2012, 08:13
Yes, an special camps where they can be sent - with arrivals being divvied up into those to be sent immediately to some form of manual labour, and those to be sent to enjoy a quick shower.

Seldomfitforpurpose
23rd Apr 2012, 09:10
One more example from life: the wife of a friend of ours insisted on smoking near the fireplace (which still makes the room stink, although less) and while doing that, announced: I never smoke in MY car, NEVER.

And that nicely sums up so many, but not all of the pre legislation smokers as has been alluded to in many other threads. Absolute discretion when dealing with their own family, friends and property yet displaying a complete disregard for anyone and anything when out in public, never quite understood that mindset at all :confused:

Ghost Vector
23rd Apr 2012, 09:58
Don't be so weak mein heir!

Spare the Rod.....

ExXB
23rd Apr 2012, 10:13
My goodness.

This thread should not be a smoker vs. non-smoker war. The actual issue is not smokers and what they do, or do not do.

The real issue is that we continue to permit and encourage smoking when it is known to cause health problems for both smokers and non-smokers.

In my view we need to do two things:

1) Help current smokers deal with their addiction, and kick the habit.
2) Ban the production and sale of tobacco products worldwide.

Some may argue that this would only force the problem underground encouraging covens of nicotine addicts smoking in basements and out of the public eye.

Well that would be OK with me and would likely mean that there would be few, if any, new smokers. Why would anyone start this habit when the 'cool' factor is absent.

But the most important is to cure smokers of their habit. I smoked for 30 years, or so, and it was very hard to quit. I did manage it eventually but it was difficult on my own - both physically and mentally. Been off 15 years, and I still have an urge from time to time.

Ghost Vector
23rd Apr 2012, 11:10
I think that is pretty much what I was suggesting; A means to an end for the sake of life.

Slasher
23rd Apr 2012, 11:12
But the most important is to cure smokers of their habit.

Why? :confused:

Whether regular smokers give up or not is their business.

Worrals in the wilds
23rd Apr 2012, 11:56
Well that would be OK with me and would likely mean that there would be few, if any, new smokers. Why would anyone start this habit when the 'cool' factor is absent.Hasn't worked for heroin, MDMA, amphetamines, marijuana... All it does is deliver large amounts of money to multinational criminal organizations and local lowlifes who sell unregulated, untested products to anyone who wants them, whatever their age or vulnerability. You think Big Tobacco has no scruples? Take a look at Big Heroin, Big Cocaine and Big Party Drug. Completely immune from government regulation (after all, they're illegal so they mustn't exist) and selling gear to fourteen year olds in a public park near you, along with horse tranquilisers, dog worming tables and arsenic because they're cheaper than MDMA and the dumb kids don't know how to pick the difference.

Nor does the government get any money from the sale of banned drugs, unlike the excise on tobacco and alcohol that go some way towards countering the public health cost.

Cocaine is way cool. So is ice and MDMA, IMHO far cooler than they'd be if you could buy them at the local bottle shop. Amphetamines were legal for years and used by little old ladies, truckies and uni students until they got banned. Then they turned into something Funky. For a certain type of person the illegality is a big part of the cool factor.

Criminalizing narcotics has been an epic fail that has delivered billions of dollars to people with absolutely no scruples, accountability or respect for their consumers. They know full well that their consumers and small time dealers have no-one to turn to because they are also criminals.

Ghost Vector
23rd Apr 2012, 11:59
No slasher we must change this just as we would grab the gun from the hands of someone attempting suicide. What is smoking but slow suicide?

G&T ice n slice
23rd Apr 2012, 12:12
NON SMOKERS =

Left-wing liberal pinko commie huggie-fluffy organic vegan sandal-wearing democrat-voting socialist pro-choice nuclear disarming Brady-act supporting, toy gun banning gender-neutral same-sex marriage supporting interfering busybodies

Did I leave any insults out ?

Pelikal
23rd Apr 2012, 12:14
I think some of you lot should lighten up.

Tableview
23rd Apr 2012, 12:17
NON SMOKERS =

Left-wing liberal pinko commie huggie-fluffy organic vegan sandal-wearing democrat-voting socialist pro-choice nuclear disarming Brady-act supporting, toy gun banning gender-neutral same-sex marriage supporting interfering busybodies

So anyone who doesn't smoke falls into one or more of those categories, in your view?

I hope you never cross my path and no doubt the feeling is mutual! What worries me is that your view is more extreme than those you are purporting to insult, but your statement ends up saying more about you than it does about anyone else.

rennaps
23rd Apr 2012, 12:44
I love Slovakia
You can still smoke in most Pubs and a pint of good Lager beer is 50 cents :ok:

ExXB
23rd Apr 2012, 12:56
Why? :confused:

Whether regular smokers give up or not is their business. Well, to be blunt to cure you of your addiction. Smoking not only sickens you it sickens those around you. If you want to smoke only in your basement - fine, go for it.

But this debate isn't non-smoker vs smoker.

Drug addicts become addicted to the rush or the high that they get from their drugs. I don't think the same is true of smokers. Smoking begins when people do it to be one of the crowd, or to be cool, or to rebel, or to .... If tobacco was only available through pushers I really doubt that anyone would become addicted. Or if they did pick up the habit, would be limited to smoking in somebody's basement.

exeng
23rd Apr 2012, 13:12
If tobacco was only available through pushers I really doubt that anyone would become addicted.

Strange conclusion to come to. People seem to become quite easily addicted to heroin which is generally only available through pushers. And nicotine is very 'addictable' to some folk, it has been said by some to be more 'addictable' than heroine etc.


Regards
Exeng

Worrals in the wilds
23rd Apr 2012, 13:23
Drug addicts become addicted to the rush or the high that they get from their drugs. I don't think the same is true of smokers. There are people who succesfully quit heroin but can't quit smoking. I know two of them from entertainment industry days. I know a few more whose 'drug' habit killed them before the cigarettes did.

I believe you overestimate the high from 'drugs' and underestimate the high from nicotine. How many self confessed illicit drug users do you know?


The reasons you list for starting smoking are very similar to the reasons people list for using illicit narcotics. The cool crowd offer it to you and it's impolite to say no. Whether it's a line, a needle or a cigarette the MO is the same, particularly if a member of the cool crowd is also selling the product. :yuk: That's what prohibition brings.

Fareastdriver
23rd Apr 2012, 13:24
I was on thirty/day for fifty years. Three years ago an chest Xray for an Aus working visa, no problem. Last year another before some knee surgery. The doctor asked me if I smoked and I replied that I used to. We established I was on thirty a day until a year previously and I left him desperately seaching my Xray looking for signs of damage.
Giving up was easy. When I worked overseas cigarettes were peanuts: £8 a carton. On my leave in the UK I would leave the remnants of my last packet and the lighter in the bin at my arrival airport. I would not then touch a cigarette for a month. The reason was that I objected to pay tobacco tax of which half was going to go in the back pockets of benefit scroungers, unmarried mothers, illegal immigrants and asylum seekers. When I finally returned to the UK I stopped, permanently, for the same reason.
Both parents were smokers and both had excellent health records. My father died of advanced prostate cancer at eighty eight and my mother, who looked after herself until ninety two died in a care home at ninety four complaining that they would not let her have a cigarette.
I am in two minds whether to stay in this country or spend the rest of my life in a warmer, less PC environment. The choices are all liberal and cheap as far as smokers are concerned and there is no doubt that I would go back, happily, to thirty/day. Even if the tax is increased in the future I will be happy in the knowledge that the tax thus generated will be used for the country as a whole and not for scroungers. The reason for going to a less PC country is not specificly to take up smoking again but to enjoys the freedoms of lifestyle that have been continuously eroded in the UK during the last two decades.

Seldomfitforpurpose
23rd Apr 2012, 14:18
NON SMOKERS =

Left-wing liberal pinko commie huggie-fluffy organic vegan sandal-wearing democrat-voting socialist pro-choice nuclear disarming Brady-act supporting, toy gun banning gender-neutral same-sex marriage supporting interfering busybodies

Did I leave any insults out ?

Of course one could argue that SMOKERS =

DOHt0KCJx-g&feature=related

how apt that the guy leading is puffing away :p:p:p:p:p

G&T ice n slice
23rd Apr 2012, 14:24
WOW! those are some cute sheep!

Ghost Vector
23rd Apr 2012, 14:44
There is no excuse for smoking. Denial, enjoyment, addiction, or, (and I’m still laughing here), political reasons. Fact is people/populations will eventually be forced to quit. Either by latent courage or government action. No way round it.

Solid Rust Twotter
23rd Apr 2012, 15:11
Non smoker, never smoked and don't give a rancid rodent's rectum what others do as long as it doesn't affect me. If you choose to stink of cigarettes, no problem but don't expect me to hang around with you. By the same token, don't cause me to stink of cigarettes and inhale your second hand smoke. I consider it an attack on my person and will respond accordingly (and have done so).

probes
23rd Apr 2012, 15:38
Isn't it interesting.
The way some smokers get furious when told smoking is bad, just the way some obese people get furious when told they're fat.
Although I do agree that there should be other options than smoking on the street (some claim they want to do it in fresh air, though :E).
And how can it possibly be that some grown-up people just refuse to understand that one would like to get air, not tobacco-smelling something when opening the window?
What they do at home is absolutely their choice and none of the business of mine.
The reason was that I objected to pay tobacco tax of which half was going to go in the back pockets of
Wouldn't it make as much sense to stop paying to tobacco industry? Child labour, pesticides and health hazard for the labour etc.?
Otherwise quite agree with SRT.

CHAIRMAN
23rd Apr 2012, 16:10
Hey Rusty, we must have a lot in common, I've done the same thing to people with bad BO:ok:

Storminnorm
23rd Apr 2012, 16:24
I have a silver sixpenny coin dated something like 1560 'ish.
I quite often berate the image of QE 1 for having encouraged
the importation of the dreaded WEED.
I suppose, at the time, my silver sixpence could have bought me
a year's supply. Alas, alackaday!!!

G&T ice n slice
23rd Apr 2012, 16:38
Here's a little experience

I was up the lake with dog about 7 pm - This is in the 'Western' Lake District so very very isolated (not like the rest of the Lake District which is one big tourist trap)

Been walking for about 2hrs and decided to have a sit-down on a tree-stump, smoke & enjoy view & tranquility whilst dog had a paddle in the lake.

Not been there 2 minutes & up comes family with screaming kids, running about & frightening the dog.

Man of the family comes up to me "excuse me, do you mind not smoking, there are kids around"

I said nothing, just looked at him over the top of my glasses until he went away.

And had a second smoke, even though I didn't actually want one.

I expect they were from Lunnun

rgbrock1
23rd Apr 2012, 16:42
It's all down to the nasty smell

I know of several people who do not smoke and smell nasty.

Ancient Observer
23rd Apr 2012, 16:52
Was this a definition just of of teachers, or all Grauniad readers?

"Left-wing liberal pinko commie huggie-fluffy organic vegan sandal-wearing democrat-voting socialist pro-choice nuclear disarming Brady-act supporting, toy gun banning gender-neutral same-sex marriage supporting interfering busybodies"

Seldomfitforpurpose
23rd Apr 2012, 16:53
I know of several people who do not smoke and smell nasty.

Like wise, and I also know on or two smokers who can smell very nice indeed but sadly the nice smell does not last very long :(

bnt
23rd Apr 2012, 16:56
I've been "over" arguments about smoking for years now. People can get used to anything, then defend what was once crazy as normal - to the point where they see nothing odd about rolling plant leaves in to paper, setting it on fire, and inhaling the smoke directly in to the delicate lining of their lungs. (Isn't "smoke inhalation" something that lands you in hospital?) :hmm:

Slasher
23rd Apr 2012, 17:17
Man of the family comes up to me "excuse me, do you mind
not smoking, there are kids around"

When I smoked it used to piss me off no end when the ciggy
nazis complained though all my smoke was blowin completely
opposite to 'em. It meant they weren't concerned at all about
their health - they just didn't like the sight of it. So I used to
go light up a big fat smelly cigar just to stick it up the bloody
sods. :*

Ancient Observer
23rd Apr 2012, 17:20
I remember being at the HK 7s once, back in the 90s, and even in the Open Air some of the fascist smoking police were active then. Mainly ugly wimmen. I wonder why? Oppressed from childhood?

hellsbrink
23rd Apr 2012, 17:55
Drug addicts become addicted to the rush or the high that they get from their drugs. I don't think the same is true of smokers.

Said it before, will say it again.


Nicotine is classed as the most addictive drug out there, heroin is second followed by caffeine.

What do all 3, bearing in mind that heroin is an opiate and it is the opiate high I mean and not how addictive it is have in common? They all make you feel "good", feel a bit relaxed.

Now, with nicotine, you don't get the extreme high of heroin/opiates but the effect on dopamine, amongst other brain chemicals, is quite marked and is instant. Your brain can like that feeling, and that "pleasure" can overrule the "sense" in you that says "why did you breathe that in? my lungs hate that". That's why you see some teeners actually getting "high" off their smokes, why you see some throwing up after their first puff, others coughing up their lungs after their first puff then immediately taking another one, everyone reacts differently. But if you survive these first few puffs then the addiction is there, unless you can control it (as many do). Unfortunately, many of us are unable to control the addiction (what do you mean, stopping smoking is easy. I've done it dozens of times) so we keep smoking no matter what while we can.

It's all about the dopamine, whether that is from the taste of a fine cigar, or a great cognac, or from the rush from the nicotine playing havoc with our brains, it's what gets us addicted and, to be honest, it can be so damned hard to get off the dreaded weed.

Oh, and put tobacco into the pushers like those who deal illicit drugs and you only make the problem worse by pushing it underground.

What's the solution? I don't think there is one.

Storminnorm
23rd Apr 2012, 18:15
I MUST go for a smoke after that.

hellsbrink
23rd Apr 2012, 18:21
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d42/trubl25/towelie.jpg

rgbrock1
23rd Apr 2012, 18:43
Gee, anyone wanna wager how long this thread will go before it's closed?

Now, off for a quick cig. By myself.

G-CPTN
23rd Apr 2012, 18:58
Yes, it seems to have run its course from the original enquiry to the (inevitable?) slagging between factions.

It was never my intention to inflame emotions . . .

rgbrock1
23rd Apr 2012, 19:06
It may not have been your intention, G-CPTN, but as in politics and religion, smoking stirs up a steady stream of emotions.

Mr Optimistic
24th Apr 2012, 01:03
Perhaps, in the end, when we are all joined together in death, do you think we might all agree that actually it wasn't that important after all?

Ghost Vector
24th Apr 2012, 01:44
Cigarettes kill.
This is not a metaphor, it’s a fact. Running away from this in the name of “personal choice”, or any other reason for that matter, is not acceptable. Basic human caring demands conviction and force of law.

Davaar
24th Apr 2012, 02:02
Basic human caring demands conviction and force of law.

.... and Nanny knows best. If you do what Nanny forbids she will smack! smack! smack! you. It is for your own good. To think for yourself is just not acceptable. And Nanny does not give a monkey's ...... Oooops! ...... about those diesels. She is worried about the planet and man-made global warming.

reynoldsno1
24th Apr 2012, 03:52
NZ guvmint is talking about increasing the price of a pack to $100 (50 quid), but to prevent panic they'll start at $60 and phase in price rises over 5 years.

It'll be cheaper to smoke dope ....

Ghost Vector
24th Apr 2012, 04:03
Nonetheless you will all comply with anti-smoking laws as they progress. Accept your fate. Submit to reason before it's too late. It's only a matter of time anyway. Like it or not, the collective will within a democracy overrides individuality. Consider it a loving embrace from the masses.

probes
24th Apr 2012, 05:09
I reserve the right to choose my poison
Absolutely. Just don't do it under my window, please? :E
And, of course, someone suggested smoking as a guarantee to longevity anyway, based on his and his parents' case.

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 06:23
It was never my intention to inflame emotions . . .

C'mon now CPTN you knew it eventually would! ;)

Anyway you've covered yourself with the statement above, so
no one can blame you for setting up any kindling when mods
start the inevitable bannings.

pvmw
24th Apr 2012, 07:29
As a non-smoker myself, what really nauseates me is the sanctimonious self-righteousness of the anti-smoking brigade.

It must be very hard to go through life with such a feeling of self-important perfection. All those morals to live up to. All that preaching to lesser, more imperfect mortals to do. How do they manage, it must be almost enough to drive them to drink!!!

merlinxx
24th Apr 2012, 07:40
Without all the tax revenue from smokers, how's the Govt gonna finance the NHS:confused:

MagnusP
24th Apr 2012, 08:43
So I used to go light up a big fat smelly cigar just to stick it up the bloody sods.

If it's good enough for Monica . . . .

ExXB
24th Apr 2012, 10:30
I wonder
Without all the tax revenue from smokers, how's the Govt gonna finance the NHS

Glad you are concerned about how the government sticks it to you. Don't worry they will find a way. And if it means I pay more tax than I do today, so be it.

I believe that smokers should be given all the help they can getting over their addictions. I wish I had more help when I quit. But I do know how difficult it is.

Banning sale of tobacco products will definitely change society, hopefully for the better. But we need to discuss this as 'when it will happen' rather than 'if it will happen'.

To Slasher and the others. Wouldn't you like to quit? Really? Don't answer me here, but answer yourself.

rennaps
24th Apr 2012, 10:39
I've finally given up giving up ;)

PukinDog
24th Apr 2012, 10:59
When I drive past a pub and see a lone smoker outside I wonder about all the alcoholics inside who can't bear to put down their drinks long enough to go outside for a smoke.

PukinDog
24th Apr 2012, 11:23
G-CPTN

Yes, it seems to have run its course from the original enquiry to the (inevitable?) slagging between factions.


Well it's a rather odd enquiry if you're looking for motivational issues deeper than "cigarettes are addictive" combined with "the law says you can't smoke inside". In my younger days when I was fully addicted to speed in all forms (the rate, not the drug), was it something to be wondered about anytime I drove the speed limit because I didn't want to get a ticket for speeding?

For all you know that lone smoker doesn't even drink, but just wants to hang out for awhile with his drunk, alcoholic friends who need to frequent an establishment designed to distribute alcohol, another substance that comes with it's own large truckload of social and life-shortening ills. What motivates those inside to spend their lives drinking in a bar?

Davaar
24th Apr 2012, 12:57
Like it or not, the collective will within a democracy overrides individuality. Consider it a loving embrace from the masses

.... the very same justification used for Lynch law, the routine penalty well within my own memory imposed on a male of race "A" (you can supply detail; not too difficult) seen walking in public, and Heaven forbid "hand-in-hand"!, with a female of race "B" (similarly again re detail) in various countries; and for President **s*nh*w*r to send Federal Troops to ensure the admission of a member of race "A" to university; and of course a little earlier for those camps at **schw*tz and B*ls*n and D*ch** for people whom the democratic "loving embrace" really really dislikes just "because" -- Well, just "because"; and at more recent dates for imposing rigid party discipline on legislators to vote down any Bill to restore the "Death Penalty" or to allow referenda to leave political unions that the collective will detests; and so on, and so on. Let's hear it for the collective will.

It's OK, though, when Mr and Mrs Busybody want to ride their hobby-horse and stop me from puffing a cigar every six months; or to put down anti-pest
preparations to allow my lawn to grow (But Hey! It's just fine at golf-courses! Lotsa votes there.).

crippen
24th Apr 2012, 13:01
Just think of the money to be made when they are that expensive!! The Drug Barons must be rubbing there hands with glee!

MagnusP
24th Apr 2012, 13:59
They already are, Crippen. I've seen estimates as high as 40% of rolling tobacco in Scotland being imported fake stuff, full of even more interesting nasties than genuine brands. There's a major criminal operation out there dealing in baccy. I'm fairly sure that will include drug barons diversifying.

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 14:06
ExXB wrote:

To Slasher and the others. Wouldn't you like to quit? Really? Don't answer me here, but answer yourself.

No, I would not like to quit. That's my answer to anyone who asks as well as the answer to myself. I enjoy smoking. Simple as that. If someone has a problem with my smoking, too bad.
It's my life and I'll do what I want with it. And no one will tell me otherwise.

Storminnorm
24th Apr 2012, 14:15
I do think it would probably be better for me to stop,
there's no doubting the fact that smoking isn't good for
you, but i think that it's probably a bit too late by now,
and I have known a couple of chaps that have actually
quit later in life, and promptly died.
Possibly the shock to the system was just too much?

pvmw
24th Apr 2012, 14:33
It's my life and I'll do what I want with it. And no one will tell me otherwise.

:D :D :D :D :D

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 14:49
To Slasher and the others. Wouldn't you like to quit?

RMFP - I inferred I'd already bloody quit. I just refuse to be an
arrogant condescending son of a bitch and join the Antismoking
Nazi Party with its reeducation programs and its superiority of
the non-smoker moralising bullshit. I side with smokers most
of the time - they aren't such damn annoying dicks like most
of those Party members.

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 14:50
Slasher:

Certain members of the Anti-smoking Nazi Party seem to get an obnoxious thrill out of emitting a couple of little coughs (fake ones actually) when passing by a smoker. And then a little wave of the hand in the air to make the smoke go away.

When this happens to me I usually respond along the lines of:
"I can't smoke inside so if you don't like my smoking outside, stay inside."

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 14:56
Yeh I know that rgb - even though they're upwind of all the
smoke.

Hmm...after going through rereading this thread I might take
the habit up again - if only to really piss off and rile the Party
membership whenever I can!

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 15:04
http://billstclair.com/blog/images/smoking-fascism-514x393.jpg

PukinDog
24th Apr 2012, 15:09
Certain members of the Anti-smoking Nazi Party...


They all have deep-seated psychological problems relating to obsession, an imagined self sense of superiority that gives the green light to rudeness, and a disconnect from reality driven by their obsession.

For instance, a smoker could be standing in the filthy dioxin-laced gutter of a slum in Lagos with vehicles belching leaded-petrol fumes 2 feet away minding his own business and an Anti-Smoking Nazi spotting him will push through the crowds and cross the street to declare to him how bad it is to smoke, and then claim an allergy to it.

Storminnorm
24th Apr 2012, 15:11
Never met any of THEM in Lagos.

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 15:13
http://thefullmoxie.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/madmen6-400x281.jpg

There's nothing more incredibly sexy and erotic than a woman
with a cigarette who's slowly undressing you in her mind. :E

Fareastdriver
24th Apr 2012, 15:17
Hmm...after going through rereading this thread I might take
the habit up again -

I have just had a cigar down at the pub. First smoke for three years but I wont be taking it up again.

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 15:41
Oooh yeeh...just been up to the study where I found a pack
of forgotten Marlboros which haven't been touched in a long
long time - like shagging one's favorite big-titted girlfriend
of the past who hasn't aged a single bloody day! :)


Missus came up and gave me a dirty look like this though. :ouch:

http://www.picamatic.com/show/2012/04/24/06/39/8372717_286x450.jpg

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 15:44
Slasher:

Smoking a stale pack of cigarettes is like shagging a long-lost, big-titted girl?!!!!!! I prefer my cigs. fresh. And wimmin' too!!!!!

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 15:47
Ok amend that to "like shagging one's favorite big-titted girlfriend of the past who hasn't aged OR BATHED a single bloody day!"

Bit off-putting but that refreshing feeling certainly outweighed the staleness! :ok:

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th Apr 2012, 15:52
It's my life and I'll do what I want with it. And no one will tell me otherwise.

If you look at it logically no one is telling you how to run your life, all they are doing is telling you how to share your life :ok:

One or two of the usual suspect drama queens imagine all us non smokers want tobacco outlawed and in that you could not be further from the truth.

Smoke as much and as often as you like, all I ask is that I am not required to share your pleasure with you :ok:

hellsbrink
24th Apr 2012, 16:59
But you don't "share" my nicotine habit at all, sffp, so why try to tell ME what to do?

Ghost Vector
24th Apr 2012, 19:23
Because you must be told what to do. You all must be told that you are committing suicide and we don't allow that. This is why laws are changing. Because YOU are irresponsible.

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th Apr 2012, 19:28
But you don't "share" my nicotine habit at all, sffp, so why try to tell ME what to do?

You are correct, I don't share 'your' nicotine habit anymore but sadly there was a time when I had to.

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 19:38
Ghost Vector:

Do fat people need also to be told what to do because they also are committing suicide?

How about mine workers as well? Black lung and all that nastiness?

Who else needs to be told what to do because someone else doesn't agree with what they do?

Slasher? Stop having sex. Too much sex could cause you to have a heart attack. Which is suicidal. So stop. Now.

Ghost Vector
24th Apr 2012, 19:47
No. Just Smokers.

Halfbaked_Boy
24th Apr 2012, 20:22
I can definitely (in my lifetime) see a letter sent out to every registered voter in the UK -

Please select one of the following two options -

1) I do not smoke tobacco, drink alcohol or ingest any illegal non prescribed narcotic. Or words to that effect, etc.

If you have selected option 1, no further action is required - please send to the return address in the provided envelope.

2) I do partake in the ingestion of tobacco, alcohol and/or ingest illegal non prescribed narcotics. etc

If you have selected option 2, you agree to be bound by the agreement in clause 2.35 of the 'Reformation of medical treatment privileges for those who partake in self damaging activites act 2027'. Namely, this acknowledges that you accept full responsibility for any and/or all illnesses (including terminal illnesses) associated with your lifestyle choices, and that you agree to take out and fund private medical insurance and/or healthcare to control any medical problems that may arise due to any of the following 4,565 activites -

Big long list here

Followed by another few thousands clauses...

Would save the NHS a bomb!

Cheers, HBB (a smoker)

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 20:32
Halfbaked:

But what about #3?

3) I eat excessively, often binging on as much junk food as I can fit in my mouth. Cheetos, Doritos, chips (crisps for you folks), cakes, jars of peanut butter, etc. are my preferred foods.
I also readily take part in junk food orgies: a veritable Valhalla of the mouth.

Seldomfitforpurpose
24th Apr 2012, 20:35
I can definitely (in my lifetime) see a letter sent out to every registered voter in the UK -

Please select one of the following two options -

1) I do not smoke tobacco or ingest any illegal non prescribed narcotic. Or words to that effect, etc.

If you have selected option 1, no further action is required - please send to the return address in the provided envelope.

2) I do partake in the ingestion of tobacco and/or ingest illegal non prescribed narcotics. etc

If you have selected option 2, you agree to be bound by the agreement in clause 2.35 of the 'Reformation of medical treatment privileges for those who partake in self damaging activites act 2027'. Namely, this acknowledges that you accept full responsibility for any and/or all illnesses (including terminal illnesses) associated with your lifestyle choices, and that you agree to take out and fund private medical insurance and/or healthcare to control any medical problems that may arise due to any of the following 4,565 activites -

Big long list here

Followed by another few thousands clauses...

Would save the NHS a bomb!

Cheers, HBB (a smoker)

There that looks much better :ok:

Halfbaked_Boy
24th Apr 2012, 20:37
rgbrock1,

Oh no, that would discriminate against fat people, you'd never get it through parliament!

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 20:40
Very true, halfbaked, very true. We must never discriminate against walking whales. That would be highly irregular.

Strike #3 then.

Halfbaked_Boy
24th Apr 2012, 20:41
Anyway, there's no such thing as being fat, there's just 'looking healthy' right? :p

rgbrock1
24th Apr 2012, 20:46
Yes, that is the politically correct form of reference to a human buffalo: looking healthy.

Like these two healthy-looking kids.

http://www.fitsnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/fat-kids.jpg

Halfbaked_Boy
24th Apr 2012, 20:47
"This Coke diet Coke. You no trick me woman..."

Slasher
24th Apr 2012, 20:59
"Hey you get me 'nother burger like that one. I not done finishing shake 'n fries yet!"

Seldomfitforpurpose
25th Apr 2012, 01:28
The second someone mentions smoking in here the usual alcohol/obesity/diesel/drugs mantra gets trotted out................anyone else noticing the outbreak of denial :p:p:p:p:p

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 01:49
Glad to see you've started your own health bandwagon. You are now becoming responsible. You have connected each premise with the key “unhealthy behavior is irresponsible”.

probes
25th Apr 2012, 03:38
Another (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/another-heart-attack-grill-customer-collapses-while-eating-191647836.html)

Vld1977
25th Apr 2012, 03:43
Just one thought: If the anti-smoke laws were really to protect non-smokers, then it would be legal to have proper shelters in the pub gardens so we could smoke without annoying anyone else. The fact that it is illegal to have an enclosed structure for smoking (it has to be 50% open), or that even SMOKING CLUBS are banned without even being given the option to find an alternative, indicates that the law is not designed to protect non-smokers, it is designed to punish smokers. "If you want to smoke, you gotta freeze", that's the spirit of the law.

How on earth would a properly closed shelter in a pub garden where you cannot be served by the staff, and used exclusively for smoking would endanger or annoy a non smoker?

The operator of a well known airport has smoking shelters (4 posts and a ceiling) for staff in the darkest corner of its courtyard. When people complained that they didnt feel safe going there during the nightshift, the authority replied that if they fitted a lightbulb in it, it would be considered a building, and therefore it would be illegal to smoke in there.

I am a smoker and I have never in my life liked anoying anyone else with my smoke. I have always left the room to have a ciggy outside rather than polluting the air with my smoke. But these laws are clearly to persecute and punish the smokers, who now by law have to be seen freezing or getting soaked in the rain, otherwise challenge them because they must be doing illegally. If this was truly a law to protect non smokers, surely there would be licenses for smoking at least in 0,5% of premises in the uk, where we can go on holidays once or twice a year to indulge in our habit, but no, nowhere to escape. We are just being punished.

It looks like as a society, we have managed to, in a matter of five years, ridicule otherwise normal people who happen to smoke, even nursery pupils can now laugh at smokers, insult them and treat them as outcasts. Wake me up when this hypocritical society pur the same effort in ridiculing and marginalising drink driving, racism, sexism, binge drinking or domestic violence. Ah no! It's enough that they are illegal, doesnt matter that they're still widespread and socially acceptable by lots of people.

If the same effort and means used against the smokers were used to pester, outcast and ridicule the people who commit those socially accepted crimes was put into dealing with them, we'd probably live in a better society in a few year's time. But they won't, because smokers abide by the law and smoke outside. Meanwhile, no effort will be put into marginalising youngsters and not-so-young that drive after downing a bottle of vodka. It will still be a badge of honour, like smoking was not so long ago.

It's the hypocrisy, that is getting tiresome.

Good night

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 03:51
Does not matter that laws are fair, only that you obey them. Cheers!

Vld1977
25th Apr 2012, 04:08
From that point of view, people in North Korea, the USSR or nazi Germany are or were living in perfect societies and had nothing to complain about. At the end of the day, they only had to obey the law, be it fair or not. Lol

Anyone remembers a film called "Demolition Man", wiyh Silvester Stallone? It was supposed to be an exaggeration and a mockery of a hypotgetical future society. Not so hypothetical now.

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 04:22
Yes but you don't live in those states therefore we exempt you from their laws. Which I'm sure you appreciate considering the effort and sacrifice.

Vld1977
25th Apr 2012, 04:26
A law must show some balance in real democracy. This one has gone to the extreme.

Vld1977
25th Apr 2012, 04:26
Who are "we", that so kindly exempt me from those laws?

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 04:37
One would hope, however "balance" is not required. Only obeyance.

"We"....? I'm suprised at you.

We whom have elected in majority the representatives that create the law.

Fliegenmong
25th Apr 2012, 04:44
Loved it, except the feeling like shit part, I never get annoyed by other peoples smoke, I much prefer it to people chewing gum, that IS disgusting, especially if they're talking at the same time...

Glad I don't anymore.....but I know all too well how hard it is to stop. I'll likely enjoy a cigar some time in the future, but to look at people smoking I think I can't believe I was once that!! Sister in law gave up before me, off the fags for 5 years, all of a sudden started up again WTF??

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 05:04
Imagine spending your retirement years, (or sooner), dragging around an oxygen bottle.

The "told you so" look on everybody's face you meet.

The fact that everybody gets and dies of emphysema if they don’t die of something else first….which would be merciful by comparison. Sucking as hard as you can, fighting for the next breath from an oxygen mask, eyes bugging out wide open, neck muscles rigid, head raising up with each attempt, lips blue from lack of oxygen even though the oxygen is turned full on. Slowly, days, weeks until your heart gives out or you finally suffocate. They find you dead with your face in grotesque contortion, eyes as large as eggs.

If you had seen what I have seen you would quit no matter how “hard” it seems to you. You would pray God you don’t get emphysema anyway.

hellsbrink
25th Apr 2012, 05:08
You are correct, I don't share 'your' nicotine habit anymore but sadly there was a time when I had to.

And where, exactly, did you share MY nicotine habit? Come on, I want dates and places where you were in the same place as I was when I was smoking..


oops, you can't do that because you're talking out of your arse, again.


Ghost vector

Are you Borg?

Ghost Vector
25th Apr 2012, 05:12
Borg?

No I am not "Borg".

hellsbrink
25th Apr 2012, 05:13
The fact that everybody gets and dies of emphysema if they don’t die of something else first….which would be merciful by comparison. Sucking as hard as you can, fighting for the next breath from an oxygen mask, eyes bugging out wide open, neck muscles rigid, head raising up with each attempt, lips blue from lack of oxygen even though the oxygen is turned full on. Slowly, days, weeks until your heart gives out or you finally suffocate. They find you dead with your face in grotesque contortion, eyes as large as eggs.

And, again, you have proven that you are nothing but a troll with no clue about what you are talking about, an alter ego of another forumer here who just loves to try and stir the pot and cause trouble, a sad little Billy No-Mates whose whole life revolves antagonising people on the internet. How sad, how pathetic.


You should have a smoke and lighten up a bit

Back Pressure
25th Apr 2012, 05:39
Ghost Vector = KAG ??????