Declan Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I'm on patches (nictone not HRT) - actually less bad than I thought. It's not the same fix as smoking though, it is a gradual release of the drug (including at night) whereas smoking is immediate - hit..hit...hit as and when you smoke. Then there is the habitual aspect if your morning routine is to have a cigarette before leaving the house or immediately after a meal, then you are reminded at these occasions that something is missing, even if you don't actually need one. But, I made the decision to quit, and was able to plan the right conditions for me. I'd have found it nigh on impossible if I was compelled and surrounded by other people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarahc Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 You would if you had no access to cigarettes. Sounds like a great way to give up to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Well evidently, but I would find it difficult, and be narky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 What a load of tosh, of course criminals are responsible for crime, there are plenty of hard up people who don't resort to crime. Also if they can be prevented from obtaining drugs in prison it may cure their habit, as for thieves not belonging in prison, bollocks they steal they get punished and in my eyes that means keeping them away from the law abiding public until they can keep their thieving sticky little hands to themselves. As for caring about their hardship......nope sorry I though for 1.4 seconds and decided your right they don't have enough so lets take away the TV in each cell in the new prison and turn off the heating along with cutting the menu choice and making them work harder I didn't say that people who commit crimes of property are NOT responsible, but that responsibiltiy does not lie wholly with them. And I do think it wrong that people steal from others, very wrong. But it seems to me that the incidence of property crime indicates that it is largely a reflection of deprivation. Imprisoning them WILL cure their habit if no drugs could get in, but wait until they get out of prison where the same restrictions do not apply. And thieves should be punished, I quite agree. But I don't see how removing people from society teaches them a lesson and makes them better people when they get out. They are not in prison for all eternity (not that they should be) so will come out at some point. Making them have a really hard time in prison may lead to a greater deterrent effect, but I think this doubtful. But prisons are so expensive to run as well. Are there not other ways to punish and teach lessons. Bleeding heart liberal clap trap. I don't think is bleeding heart stuff. I don't think anti-social crime should be tolerated at all but with property crime it appears to me that the problem lies with porperty ownership. Specifically, anti-social crime should be punished but the way to do it would not seem to be prisons. Simply because that is the conventional means of dealing with people breaking the law doesn't mean it is a good system. personally don't smoke and detest the putrid stinking fumes thats emitted from people smoking cigarettes.That said, what is it about smoking that smokers enjoy? http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/healthyli...ydopeoplesmoke/ After reading the above, I could see why the prisoners would miss it (to some degree anyway), but doesn't patches or whatever they're getting free, work? If they're getting the same nicotine fix as that of smoking, what is the difference? I would appreciate an ex smoker or a person who's on patches to explain the difference, as at the moment, I'm pretty ignorant of those who smoke. It still won't change my mind, but at least you can say I've heard from both sides. I am a smoker, not an ex-. The difference is that a cigarette will give a nicotine 'hit' all at once. Nicotine replacement treatments only give small amounts over a long period. So you don't get the cravings but you don't get the 'hit'. And yes, smoking is horrible, need to give them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 What a load of tosh, of course criminals are responsible for crime, there are plenty of hard up people who don't resort to crime. Also if they can be prevented from obtaining drugs in prison it may cure their habit, as for thieves not belonging in prison, bollocks they steal they get punished and in my eyes that means keeping them away from the law abiding public until they can keep their thieving sticky little hands to themselves. As for caring about their hardship......nope sorry I though for 1.4 seconds and decided your right they don't have enough so lets take away the TV in each cell in the new prison and turn off the heating along with cutting the menu choice and making them work harder I didn't say that people who commit crimes of property are NOT responsible, but that responsibiltiy does not lie wholly with them. And I do think it wrong that people steal from others, very wrong. But it seems to me that the incidence of property crime indicates that it is largely a reflection of deprivation. Imprisoning them WILL cure their habit if no drugs could get in, but wait until they get out of prison where the same restrictions do not apply. And thieves should be punished, I quite agree. But I don't see how removing people from society teaches them a lesson and makes them better people when they get out. They are not in prison for all eternity (not that they should be) so will come out at some point. Making them have a really hard time in prison may lead to a greater deterrent effect, but I think this doubtful. But prisons are so expensive to run as well. Are there not other ways to punish and teach lessons. Bleeding heart liberal clap trap. I don't think is bleeding heart stuff. I don't think anti-social crime should be tolerated at all but with property crime it appears to me that the problem lies with porperty ownership. Specifically, anti-social crime should be punished but the way to do it would not seem to be prisons. Simply because that is the conventional means of dealing with people breaking the law doesn't mean it is a good system. personally don't smoke and detest the putrid stinking fumes thats emitted from people smoking cigarettes.That said, what is it about smoking that smokers enjoy? http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/healthyli...ydopeoplesmoke/ After reading the above, I could see why the prisoners would miss it (to some degree anyway), but doesn't patches or whatever they're getting free, work? If they're getting the same nicotine fix as that of smoking, what is the difference? I would appreciate an ex smoker or a person who's on patches to explain the difference, as at the moment, I'm pretty ignorant of those who smoke. It still won't change my mind, but at least you can say I've heard from both sides. I am a smoker, not an ex-. The difference is that a cigarette will give a nicotine 'hit' all at once. Nicotine replacement treatments only give small amounts over a long period. So you don't get the cravings but you don't get the 'hit'. And yes, smoking is horrible, need to give them up. The website below is interesting http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/Five-inmate...e-of.4045234.jp The website above gives the following quote. The Isle of Man prison smoking ban hunger strike story, with tobacco going for as much as heroin, exposes nicotine dependency's grip and depth. Having recently completed presenting 63 nicotine cessation seminars in 28 South Carolina prisons that went tobacco-free, I assure you, seeing hard drugs or sex traded to feed addiction to smoking or chewing nicotine is not unusual. Housing all death row inmates, my very first prison experience was at our state's most secure institution. I'll never forget standing before 600 angry, defiant looking faces whose attendance, based upon pre-policy change canteen tobacco purchase records, was mandatory. It was as though their eyes and minds were blaming me for having taken away their cigarettes and oral tobacco. But I felt born for the moment and I wasn't there to candy-coat the situation. I was there to get them to look even closer at what they were seeing, to remind them who they were, true drug addicts in every sense. It was my job to destroy their nicotine illusions, a laundry list of rationalizations, to counter a lifetime of tobacco industry pleasure and flavor marketing, to teach them how adolescent nicotine use had damaged serotonin pathways and the ability of the rational thinking mind to arrest impulsiveness. The most rewarding educational experiences of my life, within two hours most were applauding. The world's addiction experts are nearing consensus, that nicotine addiction is on a par with heroin. If true, we need to think outside the box. If legal, would it make sense to allow heroin to be marketed in front of young, immature and easily swayed minds? Shouldn't merchants be compelled to pick one or the other, the store marketing of nicotine products, or allowing children and teens inside as customers? If we won't defend them, then who? JOHN R. POLTO, Nicotine Cessation Educator, 1325 Pherigo Street, Mount Pleasant, SC USA 29464 So it seems that all the smokers have been taken for a ride and maybe they should be thinking of a law suit. With reference to the hunger strike, IMO, they should stick to it rigidly if they believe it is what they personally want to do for themselves and not pressurized/bullied by anyone else. I understand that there is a complaints procedure in the prison and therefore ask, have they tried this avenue? Anyway, who am I to intervene in their human rights and if they feel starving will justify their cause, good luck to them, although I feel it will be pointless in the end. edited: re website info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ando Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 There are several problems with this ban in my view. From what I believe it has not been possible to ban smoking in prisoners cells in the UK as the cell is classed as the prisoners home and comes under the human rights act. (Perhaps the IOM would have done well to consider this, they are going to look a little foolish if this ban has to be reversed!) Tobacco products are in a unique position of being a highly addictive drug but a legal one. The comparison to alcohol really cannot be made. Although both legal nicotine is vastly more addictive. Until proven guilty the person is innocent and yet now there right to smoke even outside has been removed. The action of a government for its people perhaps! Its not just non-smokers that pay taxes in fact smokers pay a lot more tax than non-smokers and yet the non-smokers are all for ban it, ban it even outside. What this really means is the person who is a smoker has more punishment for been in jail than the non-smoker, seem fair! The non smoking ban in general is making second class citizens of smokers, had it been any other group, race, religion, sex etc there would be outcry. As for the belief as stated in the information about smoking that “ventilation is not an option as there are no safe limits to tobacco smoke exposure” this I find amazing. After all there are safe exposure limits to virtually everything else, radiation for example. Are people really expected to believe this? If tobacco is of such a danger why not ban the product completely and have done with it? I am sure all the non-smokers would not mind a vast increase in tax and NI contributions to fill the void left by the non-sale of tobacco products to prevent the economic collapse of the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Smoking should never be banned altogether as it has two great benefits to society Taxes on tobacco raise millions for the treasury that non-smokers don't have to pay Lung cancer kills thousands of people, several years before they would have died naturally saving millions in pension payments Many prison inmates live on benefits (our taxes) when not locked up, should we really be helping them to live longer ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ando Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Well it’s a real problem then, and goes something like this We ban smoking in public areas, a lot of people give up, the income to the treasury drops, taxes go up to make up for the loss, people live longer putting more strain on the NHS, taxes go up again to pay for this, pensions are reduced or abolished for everyone, non and ex-smokers are happy now!!!! Do those on benefits not deserve to live as long as those who are not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeky boy Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Well it’s a real problem then, and goes something like this We ban smoking in public areas, a lot of people give up, the income to the treasury drops, taxes go up to make up for the loss, people live longer putting more strain on the NHS, taxes go up again to pay for this, pensions are reduced or abolished for everyone, non and ex-smokers are happy now!!!! Do those on benefits not deserve to live as long as those who are not! Not if I have to work an extra five years to keep the fuckers they don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_pele_ Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 There are several problems with this ban in my view. From what I believe it has not been possible to ban smoking in prisoners cells in the UK as the cell is classed as the prisoners home and comes under the human rights act. (Perhaps the IOM would have done well to consider this, they are going to look a little foolish if this ban has to be reversed!) Tobacco products are in a unique position of being a highly addictive drug but a legal one. The comparison to alcohol really cannot be made. Although both legal nicotine is vastly more addictive. Until proven guilty the person is innocent and yet now there right to smoke even outside has been removed. The action of a government for its people perhaps! Its not just non-smokers that pay taxes in fact smokers pay a lot more tax than non-smokers and yet the non-smokers are all for ban it, ban it even outside. What this really means is the person who is a smoker has more punishment for been in jail than the non-smoker, seem fair! The non smoking ban in general is making second class citizens of smokers, had it been any other group, race, religion, sex etc there would be outcry. As for the belief as stated in the information about smoking that “ventilation is not an option as there are no safe limits to tobacco smoke exposure” this I find amazing. After all there are safe exposure limits to virtually everything else, radiation for example. Are people really expected to believe this? If tobacco is of such a danger why not ban the product completely and have done with it? I am sure all the non-smokers would not mind a vast increase in tax and NI contributions to fill the void left by the non-sale of tobacco products to prevent the economic collapse of the country. I disagree totally Ando and it looks like we're going to be at loggerheads for many days yet and if that doesn't work, you can continue PM-ing me until I fall asleep. Oh, Just to let you know, I'm trying to work out who you are and I've started a little program (well, not that little) looking for similar words and phrases that might match existing posts of forum members and I'll see if it works You are obviously in favour of nicotine, the affects of nicotine and strongly believe in assisting the prisoners, am I right? (The more words the better) Lets start with part of your quote "the cell is classed as the prisoners home". Do they want to live there? Don't you think that they're there because they have been put there for offending against the system or have been placed there because they cannot be trusted to be out in the society Quote "Tobacco products are in a unique position of being a highly addictive drug but a legal one. The comparison to alcohol really cannot be made. Although both legal nicotine is vastly more addictive" I fully agree with you on this and you probably haven't had chance to read what Manxy wrote or the site shown Quote "Until proven guilty the person is innocent and yet now there right to smoke even outside has been removed. The action of a government for its people perhaps!" The people working in the prison are under the same restrictions and applies to them also. Are they guilty? NEXT! Quote "Its not just non-smokers that pay taxes in fact smokers pay a lot more tax than non-smokers and yet the non-smokers are all for ban it, ban it even outside." You're up against a tidal wave here and I would gladly sue others if smoking was detrimental to my health, which it is. I must read up on this Quote "What this really means is the person who is a smoker has more punishment for been in jail than the non-smoker, seem fair!" Good to see you're showing signs of progress, keep it up and we'll make something out of you yet (keep writing, the more you right the better my programme works) Quote "As for the belief as stated in the information about smoking that “ventilation is not an option as there are no safe limits to tobacco smoke exposure” this I find amazing. After all there are safe exposure limits to virtually everything else, radiation for example. Are people really expected to believe this?" You were doing so well and many people would happily accept this. Quote "If tobacco is of such a danger why not ban the product completely and have done with it? I am sure all the non-smokers would not mind a vast increase in tax and NI contributions to fill the void left by the non-sale of tobacco products to prevent the economic collapse of the country." Now here you have a good argument and I won't knock you at all for this, as this would be better addressed by those who take the money. Over to you Newbie, lets have a good chat in public. This is between me and her/him/it (keep writing) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_pele_ Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 You know it's coming Nigeria sues over child smokers http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7083202.stm Mississippi state sues tobacco companies http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/6942/1455 "Suing the Smoker Next Door" http://www.overlawyered.com/2008/02/suing-...-next-door.html Florida Smokers Dont Miss Your Opportunity To Claim Your Share of the Engle Trust Fund http://www.floridasmokers.com/ Sue the smoker is getting closer and the Government are showing a clean pair of heels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I miss smoking loads, 4 weeks since I stopped and its a bit boring, I feel horribly wholesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_pele_ Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 You know it's coming Nigeria sues over child smokers http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7083202.stm Mississippi state sues tobacco companies http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/308/6942/1455 "Suing the Smoker Next Door" http://www.overlawyered.com/2008/02/suing-...-next-door.html Florida Smokers Dont Miss Your Opportunity To Claim Your Share of the Engle Trust Fund http://www.floridasmokers.com/ Sue the smoker is getting closer and the Government are showing a clean pair of heels. I'm actually sorry that this has all come about 'thebees' if smoking wasn't hazardous to peoples health, then fair play, go for it. I still dislike the smell of snogging someone who smokes, or smelling a person who walks past, but then it would only be like someone with BO. It's the harmful affects that makes me a little anti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_pele_ Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I miss smoking loads, 4 weeks since I stopped and its a bit boring, I feel horribly wholesome. Having read what people go through and yet will never be able to fully understand the need, I applaud you 'thebees' and others like you, who have the willpower to succeed. I sincerely mean that and wish you and others, the very best of good fortunes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ando Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 @ Cheeky boy LMFAO “fair play” @ Pele You can start/run all the programs you want this is my first posts to these forums. “the cell is classed as the prisoners home” Well I no they didn’t buy it or even rent it for that matter but if that’s the understanding of the human rights court then who are we to argue. Makes you question why the UK didn’t ban smoking in prison cells? I haven’t read what manxy wrote sorry new here. “The people working in the prison are under the same restrictions and applies to them also, are they guilty NEXT. I didn’t realise the staff of the prison were locked in for there shift, not able to smoke outside at all!! Not able to smoke on there break or go out for dinner. Not able to go “home” and smoke. That’s a new one on me! And yet the person awaiting trial is a innocent as them! Sue the government they allow the products to be sold. And with a “ no safe limit” a one part per 100 billion must be dangerous! Those that take the money are those that the people put into power, perhaps you should have a owrd with your MHK and ask for a total ban! Oh and it’s a him J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.