TOT Smoking Ban 2007

On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , says...
In article ,
Jim Mason wrote:
So I have to emigrate because of a bunch of Nazis stopping me and
millions of other people from doing something just because they don't
happen to like it?

Nobody is stopping you do anything - they are merely moving you to a
place where you can smoke without interfering with non-smokers air.

But they're not - that's the whole point. Unless you mean outside
somewhere. Pubs aren't allowed to set aside a special room for smokers -
or even it seems a covered area outside.

They are allowed a covered outside area in Scotland.

I think it depends on how covered.

--
David Taylor

On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , davidt-
says...
On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , [email protected] says...

So I have to emigrate because of a bunch of Nazis stopping me and millions
of other people from doing something just because they don't happen to like
it?

Nobody is stopping you do anything - they are merely moving you to a place
where you can smoke without interfering with non-smokers air. Not a lot to
ask it it? Or are you just being selfish?

I don't think its selfish to think that an appropriate solution would
be "smoking" and "non-smoking" areas, rather than banning all indoors
"smoking" areas.

Ideally yes but in reality it is unworkable.

So the selfish non-smokers get their way?

--
David Taylor

David Taylor wrote:
On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , davidt-
says...
On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason
wrote:
In article , [email protected]
says...

So I have to emigrate because of a bunch of Nazis stopping me and
millions of other people from doing something just because they
don't happen to like it?

Nobody is stopping you do anything - they are merely moving you to
a place where you can smoke without interfering with non-smokers
air. Not a lot to ask it it? Or are you just being selfish?

I don't think its selfish to think that an appropriate solution
would
be "smoking" and "non-smoking" areas, rather than banning all
indoors "smoking" areas.

Ideally yes but in reality it is unworkable.

So the selfish non-smokers get their way?

Well the selfish smokers have had their way long enough.

On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , davidt-
says...
On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , says...
In article ,
Jim Mason wrote:
So I have to emigrate because of a bunch of Nazis stopping me and
millions of other people from doing something just because they don't
happen to like it?

Nobody is stopping you do anything - they are merely moving you to a
place where you can smoke without interfering with non-smokers air.

But they're not - that's the whole point. Unless you mean outside
somewhere. Pubs aren't allowed to set aside a special room for smokers -
or even it seems a covered area outside.

They are allowed a covered outside area in Scotland.

I think it depends on how covered.

It depends on how many sides not how it is covered.

How many sides does an umbrella have?

How many sides does a tipi have?

What percentage (vertically) of the height of the area must be covered
to count as a "side"?

AFAICT, it's an ambiguous mess, and covering the roof doesn't much help
with the horizontal rain that Scotland gets most of the time.

--
David Taylor

On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:
In article , davidt-
says...
On 2007-04-12, Jim Mason wrote:

It depends on how many sides not how it is covered.

How many sides does an umbrella have?

How many sides does a tipi have?

What percentage (vertically) of the height of the area must be covered
to count as a "side"?

AFAICT, it's an ambiguous mess, and covering the roof doesn't much help
with the horizontal rain that Scotland gets most of the time.

I believe it must only be enclosed on three sides.Currently typing this
outside in glorious 19C sunshine in central Scotland.

Sure, but there's no need for an covered outdoor area in glorious sunshine.

--
David Taylor

Zathras wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:02:08 GMT, "DAB is the Betamax of digital
radio" [email protected] wrote:

It's not good when inhaled in the concentrations that smokers inhale
it at.
Non-smokers do not inhale smoke with anything close to the
concentrations
that smokers inhale.

I suspect you're ill equipped to cope with this


I'm hardly lacking in the qualification department, old son.


but here goes
(again)..sensitivity to different concentrations of smoke varies
depending on the person.

Since you're an expert on the safety of passive smoking, what caused
Roy Castle's lung cancer and subsequent death if passive smoking
cannot kill?


My dad died of lung cancer, and he didn't smoke, and he didn't go to the pub
much. So don't fking tell me that Roy Castle definitely died of passive
smoking, okay?

The BMJ has said there's no "definitive" link between passive smoking and
death. Stick to the facts, not wishful thinking.

As for the rest of yours and all the other anti-smoker nonsense, I'm ducking
out of this thread because I've got other and better things to do, and
arguing about it with selfish anti-smokers won't actually change anything
anyway - you've got your way.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

In article ,
DAB is the Betamax of digital radio [email protected] wrote:
Zathras wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:02:08 GMT, "DAB is the Betamax of digital
radio" [email protected] wrote:

It's not good when inhaled in the concentrations that smokers inhale
it at.
Non-smokers do not inhale smoke with anything close to the
concentrations
that smokers inhale.

I suspect you're ill equipped to cope with this


I'm hardly lacking in the qualification department, old son.


but here goes
(again)..sensitivity to different concentrations of smoke varies
depending on the person.

Since you're an expert on the safety of passive smoking, what caused
Roy Castle's lung cancer and subsequent death if passive smoking
cannot kill?


My dad died of lung cancer, and he didn't smoke,

and my father smoked heavily and died at 89 of prostate cancer. Which
proves nothing.

--
From KT24 - in "Leafy Surrey"

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.11

charles wrote:
In article ,
DAB is the Betamax of digital radio [email protected] wrote:
Zathras wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:02:08 GMT, "DAB is the Betamax of digital
radio" [email protected] wrote:

It's not good when inhaled in the concentrations that smokers
inhale it at.
Non-smokers do not inhale smoke with anything close to the
concentrations
that smokers inhale.

I suspect you're ill equipped to cope with this


I'm hardly lacking in the qualification department, old son.


but here goes
(again)..sensitivity to different concentrations of smoke varies
depending on the person.

Since you're an expert on the safety of passive smoking, what caused
Roy Castle's lung cancer and subsequent death if passive smoking
cannot kill?


My dad died of lung cancer, and he didn't smoke,

and my father smoked heavily and died at 89 of prostate cancer. Which
proves nothing.


The point I was replying to was the assertion that Roy Castle died of lung
cancer due to passive smoking. The point I was making was that people that
die of lung cancer did not necessarily die due to passive smoking or even
smoking.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php

On Thu, 12 Apr 2007 10:24:01 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

I'd suggest then you avoid everything which in rare cases can cause
death. Could be nuts, wheat, milk etc. And obviously your relatives.

Well, if they come to my house they smoke outside (due to young kids).
If we go to theirs, we pick a nice day and stay in their garden.
However their health is packing up and he keeps having to get
substantial body parts cut away so they're not quite so *nice* to
visit these days. It's quite cheery when the kids say.."why are you
always sitting Uncle?" and he says "well they cut off my last leg so
that's all I can do now".

I've not read anyone here who doesn't respect the views of non smokers to
live and work in a smoke free environment. But that is a different matter
from banning it totally from all pubs and clubs, etc.

No it's not. These are workplaces for some - that's the whole point.

Since so many reckon smoke stops them going to pubs and the majority
don't smoke we'll expect pubs to enjoy somewhat of a resurgence after the
ban?

My experience is that the numbers appear to be similar to before.
Unfortunately, smokers do appear to drink more than non-smokers so the
Pub trade *is* seeing a down turn. Some of that was happening anyway
due to booze cruises and people drinking at home due to high pub
prices relative to cheap imported alcohol.

--
Z

Alan wrote:
In message , Bill Wright
wrote
To the chief protagonists (you know who you are)

I can only assume that you haven't got television sets, because I
don't think it would be possible to sleep, watch TV, and send so
many messages in one day.


For some it's a full time job, sponsored by the cigarette industry.


I wish.


--
Steve - www.digitalradiotech.co.uk - Digital Radio News & Info

Find the cheapest Freeview & DAB prices:
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/fr..._receivers.php
http://www.digitalradiotech.co.uk/dab/dab_radios.php