Smoking...

[Zulu]

and Douglas corporation now going to ban smoking outdoors !

(at their childrens play areas)

 

 

No surprise there, if they can make it illegal to sit or stand on a stone wall god knows what else will be outlawed. Pillocks.

 

Their latest idea is:-

 

Douglas Council wants to remove half the lifebuoys on Douglas promenade.

 

The local authority doesn’t think the buoys between the War Memorial and Summerland are necessary.

[triskelion]

And are they?

[Slim]

And are they?

 

Yes, they're essential for interval training.

[Last Ten]

You can already see the news headlines if someone dies due to drowning where these buoys should have been!

 

Hope whoever suggested this can live with their decision.

 

LT

[invader]

And what gives you the right to be your brother's keeper? You'd be better off minding your own business. This interference in other people's lives is what makes modern life increasingly intolerable.

Councillor Steven Pitts who is pushing this idea Quote ' Because of a couple of complaints' is the bright spark who wanted to put nappies on the horse tram horses, what a silly arse. Then he banned dogs from parks penalising the responsible owners and not dealing with the minority of irresponsible Pratt's . I was beginning to think he had problems with what comes out of bottoms now he is starting to get a problems with what comes out of the other end! Could free speech be next in the Soviet Republic of Douglas , mind you that might of already of happened cameras every where next will be G4S men watching your every move.

For goodness sake sort out the bad arses who are wrecking Douglas with there yobbish behaviour and let the majority of responsible people who do not shove their smoking habit in other peoples faces enjoy there legal habit. If they are serious just get on with it and ban smoking . They won't do it because of the tax they screw out of the smokers. All of you who say Ban this Ban that will find one day that these liberal fascists will ban something you enjoy doing. And guess what these forums might be well up the list. Then you will moan because there will be a screen with Comrade Pitts mug on and there won't be a damm thing you can do about it. From an ex smoker.

[Albert Tatlock]

All of you who say Ban this Ban that will find one day that these liberal fascists will ban something you enjoy doing.

I agreed with most of your post - but I think you must have surely meant illiberal fascists?

[triskelion]

All of you who say Ban this Ban that will find one day that these liberal fascists will ban something you enjoy doing.

I agreed with most of your post - but I think you must have surely meant illiberal fascists?

I'd be interested in hearing an argument in favour of smoking that isn't solely based on some rather indistinct ideas about liberty, or the vacuous idea that 'if smoking is banned, it could be anything that they ban next;' as if smoking is a right akin to assembly, speech or movement.

[In fact . . .]

If you want to smoke, do so. In your own home.

[Theodolite]

is the bright spark who wanted to put nappies on the horse tram horses, what a silly arse.

To be fair, I'm not sure if he was the councillor pushing the idea, which in any case is quite a good one. They aren't nappies as such but collectors which are positioned to collector the droppings.

[Slim]

I wonder what the effect of a 'please don't smoke' sign in kids parks would be vs a smoking ban?

 

 

 

 

[Albert Tatlock]

All of you who say Ban this Ban that will find one day that these liberal fascists will ban something you enjoy doing.

I agreed with most of your post - but I think you must have surely meant illiberal fascists?

I'd be interested in hearing an argument in favour of smoking that isn't solely based on some rather indistinct ideas about liberty, or the vacuous idea that 'if smoking is banned, it could be anything that they ban next;' as if smoking is a right akin to assembly, speech or movement.

Well it is a right akin to assembly. It's a legal activity, yet a group of smokers cannot run their own club.A business man cannot open, say, two bars where one is smoking and the other isn't and let the market for a perfectly legal activity run its course, with staff that smoke staffing the smoking bar. This is all about health fascism and nanny knows best, nothing more. To pretend it isn't is naïve.You can see the thin end of the wedge at work even in this thread - the next idea bubbling away - of banning smoking in sight of children.

[thebees]

Oh no....slim.....this is happening too often. I have to agree with you. I have been ranting recently about all the prohibition going on, why not ask politely? Never mind SKATING IS PROHIBITED, how about please may you not skate here? thanks x, works for me

[Declan]

I wonder what the effect of a 'please don't smoke' sign in kids parks would be vs a smoking ban?

 

Because the people smoking next to the swings probably won't take any notice of a request. So the Corpy will use it as an excuse to pass a by-law, which will cover all parks not just playparks except a small section of Noble's which won't be the dog walking section in case the dogs inhale smoke or the smokers stand in shit.

 

But if people used common sense this wouldn't be an issue. I used to smoke and it was easy to avoid annoying others outdoors.

[Slim]

Declan, I agree that's probably how it will go. But people who ignore a "Please don't" sign will probably ignore a "banned" sign, so the net effect could be the same. Tax and education seem to be the most effective ways to reduce smoking. The kids who's parents smoke will be used to seeing smokers at home, so not sure if this makes any difference at all?

Well it is a right akin to assembly. It's a legal activity, yet a group of smokers cannot run their own club.A business man cannot open, say, two bars where one is smoking and the other isn't and let the market for a perfectly legal activity run its course, with staff that smoke staffing the smoking bar. This is all about health fascism and nanny knows best, nothing more. To pretend it isn't is naïve.You can see the thin end of the wedge at work even in this thread - the next idea bubbling away - of banning smoking in sight of children.

 

It's not, it's the thick end of the wedge. Smoking is in decline, it's working, which is good news. The legal complications have made some of the measures less than ideal, having to use employment law makes it difficult to extend the ban to protect those most now at risk, children in the home.

 

It isn't about health fascism, nanny knows best, there's much more to it than that, and only a selfish idiot would think otherwise.

[loaf]

It's funny there's a mention of the horse trams because, like smoking, it's really only allowed to continue with any degree of freedom because of "grandad rights". We know in our heart-of-hearts that its days are numbered. If someone today were to have the brightspark idea of sticking an unprotected, panicy, congestion-causing, poo-generating horse-driven tramway in the middle of a busy road nowadays they'd be laughed at. At best you could call smoking a bad idea that you wouldn't exactly promote if you had your time again.

 

What is plainly evident is that tobacco companies do most of its customer recruiting amongst children who are then set up with a habit for life. Children are enticed into it arguably because of the only enticing feature of smoking - its image.

 

It seems a morally safe decision to gradually reduce smoking to a legally permitted activity but confine it to people's private property. Do what you like as long as you don't do it in the streets and scare the horses, so to speak.