Lonan3 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 After reading this article http://www.karinya.com/garlic.htm I am convinced that garlic is an evil and dangerous substance. Apart from the fact that it has a thoroughly unpleasant smell that clings to clothes and furnishings, the unthinking and selfish people who breathe garlic fumes everywhere are clearly putting the rest of us at risk from contamination by this horrible stuff. Why, for example, should the rest of have to endure these obnoxious fumes in enclosed places such as pubs and restaurants? Why should the poor people who have to work in these places be forced to endure the stench of it? I know that some of you will suggest that we should simply have separate areas for those who like garlic and those who don't, but this really is a half-hearted solution. In the interests of our health and, perhaps, our sanity, we need a complete ban in all places that are open to the public - NOW! Obviously, the scientific evidence to support such a ban is a bit thin - but no thinner than the evidence about second-hand smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Do you let people smoke in your taxi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Do you let people smoke in your taxi? If they're sober, sitting in the front seat so I can see they're not burning the furniture, and don't mind having the window open to flick the ash out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 If they're sober So what you're saying is, alcohol and cigarettes are a bad mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyconcrete Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Obviously, the scientific evidence to support such a ban is a bit thin - but no thinner than the evidence about second-hand smoking. What's all this lack of evidence about damage from second-hand smoking? There is evidence. Second-hand is just a label suggesting it's someone else's cigarette. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theintelligentthug Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 this is one of those "war-of-attrition" type arguments where people say one thing, someone else disagrees etc etc etc etc. look at the big picture here people. and no im not talking about cancer/emphesema (SP?) etc. im talking about the fact that although governments exist to protect a freedom that is already inherently ours, governments all over the world are seeing it as their duty to take away our freedom and grant it back piece by piece like a dog owner would with treats. its the NWO, im telling you. and no, they arent a rap group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 If they're sober So what you're saying is, alcohol and cigarettes are a bad mix. No. I'm saying drunkenness isn't good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 NWO? Oh no, not those lizards again. They're always messing stuff up. Only Scooby-doo can save us now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theintelligentthug Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 NWO? Oh no, not those lizards again. They're always messing stuff up. Only Scooby-doo can save us now... mr sausages, eh? is that your real name? lemme see some id! like maybe....an ID CARD!!! (yours for a voluntarily mandatory extortionate fee or jail time.) you kinda get my overly paranoid point though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman8180 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 ....blah....blah....blah......I'll look forward to you moving to ban cars from our roads then as well?.....blah....blah....blah Firstly, I'm not banning anything, but we'll put that aside. Secondly, we're talking about banning smoking in enclosed spaces not when they are out in the open. In fact, i'm all for smokers being allowed to smoke in the middle of the road. ......if you choose to go to a pub then you know people are going to smoke there, same as if you choose to work in there. Thankfully though, not for much longer. I know you may not be able to bear it, but it's gonna happen. Then if you choose to go to a pub then you know people are not going to be smoking in there. Freedom of choice, don't ya just love it. And if youre that bothered about second hand smoke, dont you think by telling people not to go down the pub to smoke they'll be smokig at home over their children more?That's a classic! I can see all the bitter smokers now, gathering children from around their neighbourhood and putting them into the middle of the living room, puffing away like mad, chanting "I'll show those bastards, if I can't smoke down the pub, the kids will get it....." Next you will be saying that we should legalise street fighting, so we can reduce the occurrences of domestic violence. It's because of closed minded attitudes like yours.......so having a different opinion means I have a closed mind.....mmmm....okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 you kinda get my overly paranoid point though? Sort of, but really I see it this way: Smoking is an utterly, utterly bizarre thing to do. It's unfortunate that society has become so used to it that people think it's normal and their "right" to do it around other people, even though it's causing harm to them. Now society is starting to come round and see sense, like a drunk man wanking in the corner at a party, who suddenly thinks "hang on, what the fuck am I doing?" Eventually cigarettes will be banned from sale. It's no great loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theintelligentthug Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 true, true. meh, smoking is just the tip of the iceberg. wait til they get on to fatty foods. oh, wait.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
www.theislandinsider.co.uk Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Very odd manxman8180 that you should be telling me people are allowed to have different opinions based on your previous post And it will be all the better for me (a non-smoker) when the pubs become non-smoking, But it doesnt make it right to pass legislation based on opinion and non-proven allegations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iomcombat Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 How about we don't ban smoking but instead we give everyone who doesn't smoke large water pistols to spray on the inconsiderate gits who do. Nothing illegal happens, gradually smokers stop being inconsiderate gits and go smoke in sewers or somewhere else they won't be breathing on me, and until they do we also get water squirting entertainment. Smoking is know to be bad for you. Unless the smoke floating round the air has has all the nasty chemicals somehow magically sucked out of it then it is bad for the rest of us. Gee whiz so the government tries to ban something that is known to be bad for you. If they didn't the same crowd who are objecting to this would be jumping up and down saying " why aren't they doing anything." Frankly some people (and you know who you are) are so paranoid and delusional they think that a. they are always right regardless of the paranoid bollocks they are spouting and b. that everything anyone does in authority is inherently evil. Society as a whole is constantly complaining that gov's etc aren't doing enough, that they are not protecting people from themselves, yet when they try those same people bleat about civil liberties. Pull your heads out of your arses kiddies. If you want a gov that is effective and actually does something to make things better then this is what will happen. Things that are bad for you will get banned. Which is a good thing. Don't whinge like a group of pre-pubescent teens who have been caught having a sneaky fag by their parents. take the opportunity to encourage you to quit and be thankful for it. Alternative is that gradually laws become ineffective and smokers end up annoying people like me on nights out. I can just see it now. Wonder if justifiable self-defence would stand up if I ko'd someone who was blowing smoke on me. Could claim they were trying to kill me with cancer. Or an asthma attack for that matter. PS: smoking ban + increased alco prices= less people smoking so less smoking related illnesses, MUCH lower violent crime rates and a generally a happier population. As an aside my boss said the other day that "sometimes" my emails come across as "agressive". After re-reading this I disagree. I think I just am outspoken and straightforward. And possibly blunt. And maybe a tiny bit agressive. But just a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyconcrete Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 non-proven allegations I dont get it - which non-proven allegations? Smoking is a health risk. Second-hand smoke is a health risk, coupled with the fact cigarettes give off smoke regardless of whether someone is smoking them or not. Health risks have long been known - the problem is people's habits and enjoyment, and the fact by banning smoking in public the government is taking away their liberties (or perceived to be). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.