Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK politics - Hamsterwheel

Old 7th Jul 2010, 16:13
  #1521 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The Luberon
Age: 68
Posts: 913
Here are some of the 4000 toxins/poisons found in tobacco and the smoke it produces.

Ammonia: Household cleaner
Angelica root extract: Known to cause cancer in animals
Arsenic: Used in rat poisons
Benzene: Used in making dyes, synthetic rubber
Butane: Gas; used in lighter fluid
Carbon monoxide: Poisonous gas
Cadmium: Used in batteries
Cyanide: Deadly poison
DDT: A banned insecticide
Ethyl Furoate: Causes liver damage in animals
Lead: Poisonous in high doses
Formaldehiyde: Used to preserve dead specimens
Methoprene: Insecticide
Megastigmatrienone: Chemical naturally found in grapefruit juice
Maltitol: Sweetener for diabetics
Napthalene: Ingredient in mothballs
Methyl isocyanate: Its accidental release killed 2000 people in Bhopal, India in 1984
Polonium: Cancer-causing radioactive element


If as an employer, I allowed my staff or any member of the public to be exposed to any of the above, I would be hauled through the courts.
Smokers feel that they have the right to do this under the banner of "freedom of choice". Addiction masquerading as principle, selfish and destructive.
sitigeltfel is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2010, 16:20
  #1522 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Round of applause for the Stig, outstanding post which sums the whole sorry subject up
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 7th Jul 2010, 23:07
  #1523 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
If as an employer, I allowed my staff or any member of the public to be exposed to any of the above, I would be hauled through the courts.
Smokers feel that they have the right to do this under the banner of "freedom of choice". Addiction masquerading as principle, selfish and destructive.
Smoking transgressions, if I may call them that, are dealt with by fines (eg smoking in a smoke free area 30) whether you need to be hauled through the courts to come up with the money would be a matter for you.

And if as an employer you "allowed your staff" to do handstands on the balcony because they enjoyed it, or to use a work based gymnasium where, apart from the (perceived) health benefits and despite any precautions, there was still also a defined statistical probability of periodic injuries or fatalities, or if you allowed corporate adventure outings, paintballing, canoeing trips etc simply because it was something the staff enjoyed and had voluntarily requested, but which placed them at a theoretical risk should you also be hauled through the courts?

Freedom of choice to plot one's own demise for one's own enjoyment (and under the circumstances I described where no risk need be present to people who do not wish to participate) is not yet against the law.

I am "addicted" to flying, motorcycling, driving and all manner of behaviour which potentially presents a risk to innocent bystanders. I think all human activity with any risk element should be banned, or maybe I could just get a life instead
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 09:58
  #1524 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edinburgh and 3C
Age: 68
Posts: 195
no risk need be present to people who do not wish to participate
What about staff? Cleaners? Delivery workers? The Postie? How can you be sure they wish to participate if they HAVE to, rather than choose to, enter the pub?
MagnusP is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:30
  #1525 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
What about staff? Cleaners? Delivery workers? The Postie? How can you be sure they wish to participate if they HAVE to, rather than choose to, enter the pub?
They do not HAVE to. They may enter the pub but by law cannot be forced to mingle with the smoking plebs who inhabit the entirely self contained smokers pit (a dedicated enclosed smokers room) while it is in use.
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:32
  #1526 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by MagnusP View Post
What about staff? Cleaners? Delivery workers? The Postie? How can you be sure they wish to participate if they HAVE to, rather than choose to, enter the pub?
Magnus,

The one thing you will never ever be able to convince a smoker of is that their habit is completly unsociable. It's because of that fact, and the very valid points you make that legislation HAD to be introduced and is why the smoking ban is a good law
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:38
  #1527 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by flybymike View Post
They do not HAVE to. They may enter the pub but by law cannot be forced to mingle with the smoking plebs who inhabit the entirely self contained smokers pit (a dedicated enclosed smokers room) while it is in use.
Lovely idea but pubs, like most of the service industry, are currently struggling because we are in a recession so the cost of what you propose simply does not make any business sense.

What does make business sense is for the smoker to refrain whilst indoors and then step outside when the withdrawal symptoms become too hard to cope with.

None of this is rocket science
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:45
  #1528 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Magnus,

The one thing you will never ever be able to convince a smoker of is that their habit is completly unsociable. It's because of that fact, and the very valid points you make that legislation HAD to be introduced and is why the smoking ban is a good law
Indeed, but as I remarked earlier, I am not a smoker , just someone who believes in people being allowed to choose their own destinies, where this does not conflict with the interests ( and not the personal prejudices) of others.
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:46
  #1529 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edinburgh and 3C
Age: 68
Posts: 195
My prejudice is based on a dislike for smoke on my clothes and that is non-enforceable as far as I am concerned.

My interests are best served by not inhaling a complex cocktail of toxins and that, I believe, should be enforceable.

Who is to clean this sanctum sanctorum, empty the glasses or service the extractor fan, wash the tar off the walls and ceiling before redecoration?
MagnusP is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 11:57
  #1530 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Perhaps the same people who who clean the Sh1t out of the sewers, or maybe no one should ever be exposed to anything remotely distasteful ever..
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 13:51
  #1531 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edinburgh and 3C
Age: 68
Posts: 195
Oh, come off it. People who work in sewers or whatever are afforded, by their employer and by law, protection against hazards they may encounter; you know, face masks, protective clothing, goggles, gloves &c. Are you suggesting all bar staff could get the equivalent before they went in to be kippered while collecting glasses?

Your use of "distasteful" is disingenuous, by the way. We're discussing hazardous, not distasteful.

someone who believes in people being allowed to choose their own destinies, where this does not conflict with the interests ( and not the personal prejudices) of others.
Indeed. I choose to go for a pint without inhaling toxins. Smokers may find clean air distasteful (remember preferences?), but they can hardly claim that it's a major hazard. My pint may adversely impact upon my health but, as I will not drive after a drink, does not adversely impact upon the health of others. Can you claim that about tobacco?
MagnusP is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 14:45
  #1532 (permalink)  
Just another erk
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 73
Posts: 280
Blue Diamond,
How about repealing the law against dying in the Houses of Parliament? And how many of you have broken Cromwell's law against eating mince pies on Christmas Day? The books must be full of this ancient rubbish ... like people in Chester being able to shoot Welshmen but it must be within the city walls and it must be after midnight. Oh ... and you have to use a crossbow!
Have to agree with you on these, but we must keep the one about, its legal to shot a Scotsman in York as long as he is carrying a bow, I'm trying to arrange an archery contest their and inviting G Brown.
ArthurR is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 14:59
  #1533 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 62
Posts: 1,941
Originally Posted by flybymike View Post
Indeed, but as I remarked earlier, I am not a smoker , just someone who believes in people being allowed to choose their own destinies, where this does not conflict with the interests ( and not the personal prejudices) of others.
I am more than a little bemused by what you are trying to say. To the best of my knowledge a smokers right to smoke their way to the destiny of their choice has not been changed in any way shape or form.

All that's been changed is a smokers right to inflict their habit on those around them, unless of course I am missing something here

Before the smoking ban came about, in very simplistic terms smokers had two very simple choices.

1. They could enter any premises that allowed smoking and without giving any consideration or thought to those around them they could light up and pander to their addiction.

2. They could enter any premises that allowed smoking and prior to lighting up consider the damage that smoking causes to property, consider the effect that their smoke had on others clothing, hair etc, consider the possibility that secondary smoking could have very serious consequences for the health of non smokers and arrive at the obvious conclusion that going outside for a tab was the right and proper thing to do.

Because choice 2 was not the popular option we now have legislation to make it so, as I previously said none of this is rocket science
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 16:51
  #1534 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 52
Posts: 794
Of course, the upside of the smoking ban in the UK and Holland means we smokers get to enjoy or smokes in the sun on a terrace or in a beer garden whilst all the whiny anti-tobacco nazis are stuck inside because of the smoking!!!

After all, you can't stop us smoking outside so you either suffer having the person a couple of feet away from you chugging on a nice cigar or you get your whiny inside away from it.

I'm doing that right now and thoroughly enjoying it, but without the whining as the Belgian population has more manners and decorum than others so do not stoop to such a low level as some in the UK.
hellsbrink is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 16:56
  #1535 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Before the smoking ban came about, in very simplistic terms smokers had two very simple choices.

1. They could enter any premises that allowed smoking and without giving any consideration or thought to those around them they could light up and pander to their addiction.

2. They could enter any premises that allowed smoking and prior to lighting up consider the damage that smoking causes to property, consider the effect that their smoke had on others clothing, hair etc, consider the possibility that secondary smoking could have very serious consequences for the health of non smokers and arrive at the obvious conclusion that going outside for a tab was the right and proper thing to do.
And as I said from the outset I have no objection to those who do not wish to be near smokers ( I certainly don't) I simply point out that the legislation could have been drafted to afford more fairness to both smokers and non smokers, such that we non smokers could all get in and out of the pub/restaurant/workplace without having to wade through the tab ends and plebs at the doorway blowing their fogs of smoke all over us.
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 17:06
  #1536 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Of course, the upside of the smoking ban in the UK and Holland means we smokers get to enjoy or smokes in the sun on a terrace or in a beer garden whilst all the whiny anti-tobacco nazis are stuck inside because of the smoking!!!
Alas during the winter you are consigned to the rain and howling gales...
flybymike is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 17:44
  #1537 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 52
Posts: 794
Maybe you are, FBM, but some of us have enough sense to stay inside in weather like that. And when it's merely cold, with snow on the ground and a beautiful blue sky, some of us will be puffing away in the beer garden/terrace enjoying the joys of winter (sometimes still wearing shorts, tshirt and sandals provided it is above -6C, but I digress) whilst the rest of you are sitting inside grumbling about the small matter of people being allowed to smoke!

On a more serious note, I feel the solution over here is the best one. A bar serves food = smoking ban UNLESS they pay to have a smoke room with proper extraction installed. Otherwise smoking is allowed IF the owner wishes it to be. It's then up to the individual to decide whether they frequent a place which allows smoking, and that is the thing that people seem to forget, CHOICE. I do not impose MY wishes or beliefs on you, and I see no reason why you should impose your wishes and beliefs on me.

Oh, as far as the smell goes, you should really have a good sniff of your clothes after being out in a big city or, indeed, standing in the queue in a chip shop. You stink, but nobody here is advocating banning traffic (health reasons due to the exhaust fumes) or chip shops (smell), are they. So maybe someone can RATIONALLY explain why one strong odour is better than another, because the most common wibblish regarding tobacco smoke is the smell. Oh, and nobody said you HAD to go to a pub and bother everyone else whith your whining either, but then you wouldn't be able to control the lives of others no matter what they, or the law at the time, said.
hellsbrink is offline  
Old 8th Jul 2010, 22:37
  #1538 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
On a more serious note, I feel the solution over here is the best one. A bar serves food = smoking ban UNLESS they pay to have a smoke room with proper extraction installed. Otherwise smoking is allowed IF the owner wishes it to be. It's then up to the individual to decide whether they frequent a place which allows smoking, and that is the thing that people seem to forget, CHOICE. I do not impose MY wishes or beliefs on you, and I see no reason why you should impose your wishes and beliefs on me.
Couldn't agree more, and exactly how I said the legislation should have been drafted in the first place.

Now we just need to do something about these unprincipled addicted private pilots who go around polluting the atmosphere with lead and carbon dioxide for their own selfish pleasure purposes and with no consideration for others.
flybymike is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2010, 07:54
  #1539 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edinburgh and 3C
Age: 68
Posts: 195
whiny anti-tobacco nazis
Oh, dear; someone's argument clearly going down the pan. I am not anti-tobacco, I'm anti-the-impact-tobacco-has-on-me. Different. See?

People who work in sewers or whatever are afforded, by their employer and by law, protection against hazards they may encounter; you know, face masks, protective clothing, goggles, gloves &c. Are you suggesting all bar staff could get the equivalent before they went in to be kippered while collecting glasses?
Still waiting.
MagnusP is offline  
Old 9th Jul 2010, 12:13
  #1540 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
The tragic cases of bar staff killed by contaminated beer glasses used to fill the newspapers on a daily basis. Only today I read of a decorator who keeled over and died whilst stripping wallpaper. I am relieved this is no longer occurring and that they now all finally enjoy the same level of safety as sewer workers.

I am bored with all this now. All of us non smokers have won the day. I am a convert to our intolerance of others. I promise to shoot all smokers on sight, give no credence to pleas of unfairness, and that I will forever more continue to be a non smoker.

Must go now, just off to pollute the atmosphere with some avgas 100LL lead and C02. Don your protective equipment folks.
flybymike is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.