Pub landlord gives 2 fingers to the smoking ban

[Ken Davison South Wales]

Oi, Scroaterola...you've attributed someone else's post to me. Do pay attention. Is that why you gave it up, Ken?

 

Strangely enough I started smoking in my mid-twenties and gave it up at thirty one, I was doing a rather physical routine work wise at the time and went back into full training mode.

 

As previously stated started again approx three years ago and not a heavy smoker by any means.

 

I am very lucky I guess as I can take or leave smoking or booze very easily, but I have sat on both sides of the fence, which unlike you gives me a much better insight into both sides of the equation.

 

Does it dull the mind?

 

I have a circle of business friends all in their sixties and very successfully at what they do having made oodles of money over the years

 

I have never done an accurate head count before regarding smokers in the group but I have now and surprise surprise 85% smoke, and another fact is the riches would be your worse nightmare CIGAR SMOKERS

 

Does smoking dull the mind? No you either have or you don't

 

I just hate a self-righteous approach to anything, there is always two side to the coins of life and if people don't realise that they have only lived half a life if you get my drift.

[DavyR]

2. most wood/coal fires don't contain nicotine(a highly toxic and addictive chemical) or the approx 4000 other added chemicals that cigarettes do.

 

Smoke from coal and wood fires, although not as toxic as that from cigarettes, still represents a significant health hazard: http://www.smfrancis.demon.co.uk/airwolvs/

 

Archaeologists generally agree that lung disease was quite common when most of the UK population lived in huts or houses with a central hearth and no chimney.

 

The big London smogs that killed thousands were also largely due to domestic coal burning. Smoke of any kind just ain't good to breath in!

[Leon Roskilly]

We are constantly being bombarded on this thread that smoking will kill YOU

Will it? While I am not denying the fact that smoking has caused deaths, not everybody is affected!

What about the 80/90/100 year olds that have smoked since they were 12 or 13? If it kills YOU and not a percentage, why are these people still alive?

 

 

Kleinbot, if you had to enter one of two rooms, one where someone occasionally died but where you couldn't smoke, the other where (say) 60% die as a consequence of entering that room, mostly after a long painful and life quality limiting illness, and those that didn't driectly die from entering the room would never be as fit and healthy as they were meant to be, but in that room you could smoke.

 

Which of the two rooms would you choose?

 

Because that is the very real choice that smokers make (well apart from going into those rooms!)

 

Yes, there are some 80, 90, 100 year olds that do get through it.

 

But there is a far bigger number of 80, 90 and 100 year olds who are non-smokers than smokers, and there would be considerably more healthy 80, 90, and 100 year olds around if they had never smoked.

 

One of the problems is that smokers know the risk, but deny it, choosing to believe that they will be one of the ones to get away with it.

 

Whereas that is most unlikely.

 

It's not the fact that smoking eventually kills you that should worry you (everyone eventually dies), or that you are likely to die many years before you otherwise would.

 

It's the overall effect on living the remaining years, blighted with the effects on health of smoking that is the real tragedy.

 

Wen you would probably be a fitter, healthier and happier person if you had never put that cigarette to your mouth, or had the perception to see the trap in which you had been ensnared, and the strength to escape before calamity overcomes you.

Edited January 23, 2008 by Leon Roskilly

[snakey1]

Smoke from coal and wood fires, although not as toxic as that from cigarettes, still represents a significant health hazard: http://www.smfrancis.demon.co.uk/airwolvs/

 

Archaeologists generally agree that lung disease was quite common when most of the UK population lived in huts or houses with a central hearth and no chimney.

 

The big London smogs that killed thousands were also largely due to domestic coal burning. Smoke of any kind just ain't good to breath in!

i'm not denying smoke from a coal fire isn't hazardous to the health but it isn't quite as hazardous as cigarette smoke and people generally didn't delibrately go out of their way to inhale said smoke because of the pleasure it gave them, also the smogs of london are now a thing of the past thankfully.

Edited January 23, 2008 by snakey1

[kleinboet]

Leon, that one is a non-starter, that assumes you have a choice - smokers don't!!!!

 

Snakey1 - You are in denial! How do think the authorities define 50%? 1 existing wall, 1 roof, 2 support poles = 50%!!! I don't know when last you were in a pub - you really should go and look!

 

Here's a question for ALL non-smokers - what happens in the SUMMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All the non-smokers wanting to go outside and take their families with them! What happens to the smoking ban then? THEY ARE LEGALLY WHERE THE NON-SMOKERS WANTED THEM TO BE!!!!

[mr motorola]

Leon, that one is a non-starter, that assumes you have a choice - smokers don't!!!!

 

Snakey1 - You are in denial! How do think the authorities define 50%? 1 existing wall, 1 roof, 2 support poles = 50%!!! I don't know when last you were in a pub - you really should go and look!

 

Here's a question for ALL non-smokers - what happens in the SUMMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All the non-smokers wanting to go outside and take their families with them! What happens to the smoking ban then? THEY ARE LEGALLY WHERE THE NON-SMOKERS WANTED THEM TO BE!!!!

Careful Kleinboet , you've nearly hit the nail on the head....

 

Watch out for the others accusing you of making silly scenarios up

 

Come on David Cameron!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[snakey1]

Leon, that one is a non-starter, that assumes you have a choice - smokers don't!!!!

 

Snakey1 - You are in denial! How do think the authorities define 50%? 1 existing wall, 1 roof, 2 support poles = 50%!!! I don't know when last you were in a pub - you really should go and look!

 

Here's a question for ALL non-smokers - what happens in the SUMMER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All the non-smokers wanting to go outside and take their families with them! What happens to the smoking ban then? THEY ARE LEGALLY WHERE THE NON-SMOKERS WANTED THEM TO BE!!!!

Sorry kleinboet i'm not the one in denial, you've gone from no walls now to 1 wall, most of the smoking shelters i've been in have 1 full wall and a least 1 other partial wall. Oh and the last time i was in the pub was monday night and i'll be in one again tonight enjoying a smoke free pint or four thanks for asking.

Edited January 23, 2008 by snakey1

[kleinboet]

Snakey1 - If you can put up a SOLID all-weather roof without support of a retaining wall, you will be rich!!! all the pubs do is put a roof up against the outside pub wall in a (hopefully) secluded area, and put two support poles to hold the other side of the roof!

Edited January 23, 2008 by kleinboet

[snakey1]

Snakey1 - If you can put up a SOLID all-weather roof without support of a retaining wall, you will be rich!!! all the pubs do is put a roof up against the outside pub wall in a (hopefully) secluded area, and put two support poles to hold the other side of the roof!

I'd try going to a better class of pub if i was you then klienboet most of the pubs i go to have smoking shelters with one solid wall and normally 2 partial walls i'm not sure what you mean by a solid all weather roof( I haven't seen any with perforated roofs) but if you want it to be hurricane proof you may be out of luck i'm afraid.

[kleinboet]

When I talk of a allweather roof, it is, basically the same type of roof as is on the pub. none of this corrugated iron nailed to a frame!