[Archived] July 1st

[American]

At least there is some fairness, stopping idiots from using mobile s in cars.Why should peoples lives be endangered by these idiots

Last I read, car stereos and billboards (people fiddling with the radio and reading the billboards) cause more accidents than cell phones. Shall we ban those as well?

[thenodrog]

Last I read, car stereos and billboards (people fiddling with the radio and reading the billboards) cause more accidents than cell phones. Shall we ban those as well?

Car stereos? Definitely.

[Alan75]

Car stereos? Definitely.

Especially those with more speakers, than a wembley concert.

[American]

I was listening to some rap music the other day... Not like I had a choice, it was coming from a Jeep 5 miles away.

[thenodrog]

I was listening to some rap music the other day... Not like I had a choice, it was coming from a Jeep 5 miles away.

Pure ignorance..... especially when they have the windows down! More invasive and aggravating by far than someone smoking nearby imo.

[ABBEY]

I was listening to some rap music the other day... Not like I had a choice, it was coming from a Jeep 5 miles away.

you should of parked next to me you could have listened to ozzy or crue

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

I took some heroin about 20 years ago.

I hope you didn't share any dirty needles....

You manage to make it sound wonderfully innocent Colin - like somebody saying: "I took some herbal tea 20 years ago" or "I took an extra slice of cake 20 years ago" or "I took an extra spoonful of sugar in my coffee 20 years ago".

Anyway, despite being a potentially lethal Class A drug, as you rightly say taking heroin doesn't have that much relevance to the current smoking debate. So apologies for my facetious comments and I hope I haven't come across as being too snidey.

As a non-smoker myself, I welcome the cleaner air in pubs and restaurants - but there does seem to be a touch of hypocrisy from New Labour in the way they have drafted the new law. The Government say that the smoking ban will protect employees from second-hand smoke, but not all employess will be protected from the effects. Prison officers, hotel maids and those who work in hospices and care homes will still have to put up with passive smoking.

The message from the Government seems to be: "We want to protect you from passive smoking, but if you're a prison officer, hotel maid or work in a care home, then tough luck. You just have to like it and lump it or get another job."

Clearly the rights of prisoners are being put ahead of the rights of prison officers. I suppose if smoking was banned in prisons, we'd have a rash of rapists, murderers and burglars taking their case to the European Court of Human Rights for denying them the right to smoke - in the same way that prisoners forced to go "cold turkey" to stop taking drugs were awarded tens of thousands of pounds in compensation for breaching their "rights".

In terms of smoking, why should the rights of criminals be put ahead of the prison officers' rights ?

On the postitive side of the smoking ban, the Mayor of New York claims that spending in bars and restaurants rose in the year after the smoking ban came into effect and the city now has around 200,000 fewer smokers than it did before. I'm not sure what will happen to some of Holland's notorious "coffee shops" when the Dutch Government bans indoor public smoking next year. For years the liberal Dutch have tolerated smoking cannabis in cafes - but maybe druggies will have to enjoy their spliffs on the pavement now.

The singer Joe Jackson, who had hits like "Steppin' Out" and "It's Different For Girls" has been a vocal critic of the ban, and although I don't agree with his views, he's put forward an interesting case on his website. Jackson claims that the risks from passive smoking has been exaggerated and that the multi-billion pound pharmaceutical industry helps to fund the World Health Organisation. According to Jackson, this is a conflict of interest because smokers are being specifically targeted for pharmaceutical nicotine products.

LINK TO JACKSON'S CASE HERE

[colin]

One question that I always think is relevent in this situation Colin. Why did you?

Because it was there. Try it, do it, experience it.

It was like getting to the top of Sca Fell on my birthday.

It was like lying down in a field with a seven year old daughter and making daisy chains while the fluffy white clouds skipped across a sky of blue and the world could never ever get better no matter how long you lived.

It was like doing the washing up whilst listening to "The Clash."

So there you go. Question answered?

BTW: n Cracking article for you here Theno

redheads bit back

[colin]

I hope you didn't share any dirty needles....

You manage to make it sound wonderfully innocent Colin - like somebody saying: "I took some herbal tea 20 years ago" or "I took an extra slice of cake 20 years ago" or "I took an extra spoonful of sugar in my coffee 20 years ago".

Anyway, despite being a potentially lethal Class A drug, as you rightly say taking heroin doesn't have that much relevance to the current smoking debate. So apologies for my facetious comments and I hope I haven't come across as being too snidey.

No problems mate, Been there, done it, luckily got out of it. It was "wonderfully inocent." I took some heroin 20 years ago.

Possibly best to let it go now, no point in raking it up anymore eh?

Cheers

Colin

[thenodrog]

Because it was there. Try it, do it, experience it.

It was like getting to the top of Sca Fell on my birthday.

It was like lying down in a field with a seven year old daughter and making daisy chains while the fluffy white clouds skipped across a sky of blue and the world could never ever get better no matter how long you lived.

It was like doing the washing up whilst listening to "The Clash."

So there you go. Question answered?

Partly...... So in that case why did you stop Colin?

[blue phil]

Pip,

I took some heroin about 20 years ago .

I'm not sure why it bothers you in 2007, & why on earth you think it is relevant to a debate on smoking is beyond me.

It's just that I don't like dead-heads who "experiment" with drugs . Particularly when they later start preaching to the rest of us about the (non existent) dangers of passive smoking and how it should be banned for the good of our health ....

Cheers .

Phil.

[colin]

Phil,

No need to refer to me as a "dead head." I can spell "dichotomy," "hypocrite," and "non sequitur" as well as the the next man.

I'm not "preaching" about the dangers of passive smoking. I'm just putting my opinion across like everyone else on here. I'm not sure why my taking heroin 20 years ago disqualifies me from having an opinion on smoking 20 years later. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

Theno: I stopped using heroin because I knew it was very addictive and that I would be stupid to continue to use it. That OK?

Over to you two to continue your posts. Is this a thread about smoking ?

Cheers, just got to put this tourniquet on. Tighten it up a bit. Ooooooh that feels good, got to go and rob a pensioner now. There's a Muslim family not far away.....

Colin

[thenodrog]

Theno: I stopped using heroin because I knew it was very addictive and that I would be stupid to continue to use it. That OK?

Partly Colin ..... So errrr.....just run it past me again why you started in the first place.

btw nice how I resisted using this don't you think?

[blue phil]

Cheers, just got to put this tourniquet on. Tighten it up a bit. Ooooooh that feels good, got to go and rob a pensioner now. There's a Muslim family not far away.....

Colin

Unfortunately there's always a Muslim family not far away , Col.......we'll agree on that .

Anyway , glad to see you finally grew up and realised the stupidity of hard drugs . Much safer to stick to a nice cup of tea ............

Although if you use a microwave to boil the water maybe not ......

Cheers .

Philip .

[Billy Castell]

I admit my previous posts on this thread have been from the perspective of someone who has never done any drugs apart from cannabis twice, but I have a question. Does stuff like heroin and crack get you the first time you use it, or can you have a go say once every two months and not get addicted?

I guess I've never gone for drugs because my dad was a youth worker, and he banned my sisters and I from having those acid house smiley face badges everyone else had in the late 80's. So I've never fancied doing drugs properly.

[blue phil]

Some drugs are instantly addictive (crack I believe) ; others might take a bit of perseverance (heroin) . Some they say are not addictive at all (cocaine) . All are harmful to a lesser or greater degree if used regularly .

Obviously as a non user I'm not an expert . I have sympathy for those brought up in the sink estates who get involved - today's society deals them a sh!tty hand from the word go .

For those who get involved from a nice , cushy backgrounds then they get what they deserve . Just victims of social Darwinism I'm afraid ......

[Billy Castell]

I think I'd be a right aggressive t__t if I did cocaine or stuff like that. And God knows what I'd start seeing if I took the halucenigenic stuff. I'd probably be chased out my house by various aliens and monsters from TV.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Landlord from Lancashire becomes the first to be prosecuted for allowing smokers to light up

In Scotland, where the smoking ban came in earlier than England, enforcers issued 25 fixed penalty notices to premises and 385 penalty notices to individuals between 26th March and 31st December 2006, according to data by ASH Scotland.

Environmental health officers, who are allowed to enter premises under cover, don't have to immediately identify themselves to people when they go into premises. They can film and photograph people to gather evidence.

Of the typical £5.50 cost of a packet of 20 cigarettes, the Treasury takes around £4.10 and makes about £8bn a year from smokers. It's estimated that it costs the NHS around £1.5bn a year to treat smokers who've become ill from their habit, meaning that the Treasury has a surplus of about £6.5bn a year from smoking.

Facts and figures related to smoking

[blue phil]

Environmental health officers, who are allowed to enter premises under cover, don't have to immediately identify themselves to people when they go into premises. They can film and photograph people to gather evidence.

What a way to make a living eh ?

Reminds me of the Stasi regime in East Germany .

[philipl]

Reminds me of the Stasi regime in East Germany .

Talking ###### as usual.

Have you ever met anyone who really lived through being on the wrong end of the Stasi or their equivalent elsewhere?

Good to see Weatherspoons reported an increase in pub turnover following the ban's introduction.

[thenodrog]

Why such aggression?

[adopted scouser]

Why such aggression?

Paying too much attention to your posts !

[blue phil]

Talking ###### as usual.

Very eloquent ....

[[email protected]]

Some drugs are instantly addictive (crack I believe) ; others might take a bit of perseverance (heroin) . Some they say are not addictive at all (cocaine) . All are harmful to a lesser or greater degree if used regularly .

Obviously as a non user I'm not an expert . I have sympathy for those brought up in the sink estates who get involved - today's society deals them a sh!tty hand from the word go .

For those who get involved from a nice , cushy backgrounds then they get what they deserve . Just victims of social Darwinism I'm afraid ......

And theres the crux of it. You post regularly on threads such as this, religion and drug issues, yet you quite clearly know the square route of F all.

FYI, crack is not 'instantly addictive'. Smack even less so, as many first time users do little more than throw up violently.

Until you have half a clue, please refrain from commenting further on such issues. Its people like yourself offering out such BS which causes half the problems in the first place.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

And theres the crux of it. You post regularly on threads such as this, religion and drug issues, yet you quite clearly know the square route of F all.

FYI, crack is not 'instantly addictive'. Smack even less so, as many first time users do little more than throw up violently.

Until you have half a clue, please refrain from commenting further on such issues. Its people like yourself offering out such BS which causes half the problems in the first place.

So by gaging that rsponse you are (have been) a drug user?