La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 This issue has nothing to do with a nanny state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 The SPC's vessels are private property, inside and outside - when you buy a ticket you enter into a contract with them and agree to abide by their conditions of travel. Previously these conditions allowed you to smoke on their premises. Now on 2 out of the 3 vessels you aren't allowed to. It's nothing to do with 'tolerance' or 'rights' - the SPC have the 'right' to specify which parts of their premises (whether enclosed or not) they will allow smoking in. There is no such thing as a 'right to smoke', any more than there is a 'right' to drink alcohol or a 'right' to have sex. I like a drink now and again but generally manage to endure the journey between the little island and the big one without a pint. If you can't face the thought of 3 hours without a cigarette you have got a serious problem. [edit for spelling] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_scrote Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 The SPC's vessels are private property, inside and outside - when you buy a ticket you enter into a contract with them and agree to abide by their conditions of travel. Previously these conditions allowed you to smoke on their premises. Now on 2 out of the 3 vessels you aren't allowed to. It's nothing to do with 'tolerance' or 'rights' - the SPC have the 'right' to specify which parts of their premises (whether enclosed or night) they will allow smoking in. There is no such thing as a 'right to smoke', any more than there is a 'right' to drink alcohol or a 'right' to have sex. I like a drink now and again but generally manage to endure the journey between the little island and the big one without a pint. If you can't face the thought of 3 hours without a cigarette you have got a serious problem. Well said JC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 The SPC's vessels are private property, inside and outside - when you buy a ticket you enter into a contract with them and agree to abide by their conditions of travel. Previously these conditions allowed you to smoke on their premises. Now on 2 out of the 3 vessels you aren't allowed to. It's nothing to do with 'tolerance' or 'rights' - the SPC have the 'right' to specify which parts of their premises (whether enclosed or night) they will allow smoking in. There is no such thing as a 'right to smoke', any more than there is a 'right' to drink alcohol or a 'right' to have sex. I like a drink now and again but generally manage to endure the journey between the little island and the big one without a pint. If you can't face the thought of 3 hours without a cigarette you have got a serious problem. I don't really agree with that line of argument as I thought the argument was not about whether the Steam Packet are allowed to stop smoking on the boat. They may have a right or ability to make such decisions but it doesn't mean they should and it doesn't mean it may be fair. They could declare that everyone on the boat may not bring their own food or drink onto the boat, they may tell everyone that they must remain seated, or many other ridiculous rules. But it doesn't mean it is fair or liked by a significant number of passengers. Smokers can face three hours on the boat without smoking, but they are not used to it and have to ask why it is being introduced IF there are is little chance of non-smokers being subjected to other people's smoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Albert what are you are going on about ?? Mostly stuff that has nothing to do with smoking.... That was my point. John he was talking about principles that be applies to life, they apply in the smoking debate but, he claims, his stance on this issue is based on the same morality as his stance on other issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Albert what are you are going on about ?? Mostly stuff that has nothing to do with smoking.... That was my point. John he was talking about principles that be applies to life, they apply in the smoking debate but, he claims, his stance on this issue is based on the same morality as his stance on other issues. He just lost me with the ridiculousness of trying to compare the persecution off the Jews etc to smoking on the Steam Packet, I just could not seem to find any comparison..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 I don't really agree with that line of argument as I thought the argument was not about whether the Steam Packet are allowed to stop smoking on the boat. They may have a right or ability to make such decisions but it doesn't mean they should and it doesn't mean it may be fair. They could declare that everyone on the boat may not bring their own food or drink onto the boat, they may tell everyone that they must remain seated, or many other ridiculous rules. But it doesn't mean it is fair or liked by a significant number of passengers. Smokers can face three hours on the boat without smoking, but they are not used to it and have to ask why it is being introduced IF there are is little chance of non-smokers being subjected to other people's smoke. Food and drink are necessities of life, as is comfort to a lesser extent. Cigarettes aren't - unless you are addicted to them. But why should the SPC pander to that addiction? What other addictions should they have to allow for? As it is, if you want to go outside on the boat (say for example you were feeling a bit queasy and wanted some fresh air) you have to pass by crowds of addicts, sorry, smokers around the doorways and in the passageways to the bar and it is impossible to not breathe in smoke. Plus the SPC, as mentioned above, have to clean the detritus produced by smokers. If you don't like it, get the Ben instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 With that accomplished, I hereby declare this to be I think the ban has been introduced as the result of some deeply-held religious belief. NOW it's a perfect thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Food and drink are necessities of life, as is comfort to a lesser extent. Cigarettes aren't - unless you are addicted to them. But why should the SPC pander to that addiction? What other addictions should they have to allow for? As it is, if you want to go outside on the boat (say for example you were feeling a bit queasy and wanted some fresh air) you have to pass by crowds of addicts, sorry, smokers around the doorways and in the passageways to the bar and it is impossible to not breathe in smoke. Plus the SPC, as mentioned above, have to clean the detritus produced by smokers. If you don't like it, get the Ben instead. This is what the issue should be about. Like I said, if people are genuinely hit by other people's smoke then something should be done about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 crying little bitch The thing is ... I won't be as I don't smoke... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Yes, I'm back from Friday lunchbreak and not a history lesson in sight. I see that he's still moaning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I don't know Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 If it’s rough the SPCo close the upper deck on the Super Seacat, leaving the smokers in the corridor by the doors to outside, this makes it hard when travelling on rough crossings if you need to get away from the stench of vomit inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavros Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 If it’s rough the SPCo close the upper deck on the Super Seacat, leaving the smokers in the corridor by the doors to outside, this makes it hard when travelling on rough crossings if you need to get away from the stench of vomit inside. Didn't you know that Albert Tatlock has already tried to hide his own inadequacies by changing the whole matter of the thread into the country we want to live in and it now has absolutely nothing to do with the original thread title but more to do with why it appeared in the first place. Now how fucking lame is that argument! ...has everything to do with the country we want to live in, and the fact that such a thread title even appeared in the first instance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimcalagon Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 This is what the issue should be about. Like I said, if people are genuinely hit by other people's smoke then something should be done about it. Something has been done - and now the smokers are whining about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Put that in your pipe and smoke it...and if you don't like it, there's a boat etc. etc. Sorry everybody, couldn't resist it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.