- Morning Advertiser >
- Forums >
- News Article Comments >
- Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans
News Article Comments : Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans
- Thread is open
- Report this Thread
- View Article
129 Posts(s) found for this thread: Now displaying page 1 of 13
| Author Name | Opinion | Reply |
|---|---|---|
Albert Crumb 05/03/2007 09:54:32 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans It's pretty obvious that the effect of defiant smokers who stay at home post ban will be to increase the pollution of families. That's not an excuse for the anti-ban brigade to say the ban is wrong. In fact it confirms how deadly passive smoking is and thank God it's out of our pubs in July albeit long overdue.
What the government should now be considering, and Albert is sure they are, is banning smoking in the home! We must protect children from the sins of their smoking fathers and mothers. This post replies to this thread |
|
Alastair Elliott 05/03/2007 10:30:01 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans Albert, as I always said, you would never stop just at an enclosed public smoking ban and that it would go on to something else, you have now just confirmed that by saying that their should be a ban on smoking in the home. How dare you and the likes of ASH even suggest this, its peoples private property so BUTT OUT, this country is going to the dogs and unfortunatly people like you Albert do not help matters, dangers of Secondary smoke as I have said before is still NOT proven. I would like to see how they would try and police a ban on smoking in the home...Democracy is becoming a thing of the past. This post replies to this thread |
|
Loraine McGregor 05/03/2007 10:38:52 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans No Albert - What the government should be considering is a ban on tobacco, full stop. And that comes from a smoker. If smokers cannot buy it then smokers will have to quit or leave the country. If they were to ban tobacco tomorrow, strangely enough, that would make me a lot happier that what they are trying to do now. They are hypocrites in the extreme and even you Alberts must agree with that surely. Then they can carry on banning everything that holds even the most miniscule of risk or danger. Alcohol should go, coffee, fatty foods, bar-b-ques, candles,incense, going out after dark, motorbikes - the list is endless isn't it? But what are they doing to rid the country of hard drug dealers and abusers? Don't see much in the news about that do we? No - they are about to have to foot a huge telephone bill for the snitch line and fork out millions to the undercover smoke spies. Not a lot left in the coffers to tackle the real criminals I suppose.
This post replies to this thread |
|
Alan Thompson 05/03/2007 11:07:59 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans "What the government should be considering is a ban on tobacco, full stop" This post replies to Loraine McGregor > RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans |
|
| Alastair Elliott 05/03/2007 11:16:29 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans And how the hell would they do that when there is 14 million smokers in the country, you cannot just stop people from smoking just like that Alan. This hole debate is getting ludicrus. In that case then the same should be said for Alcohol. This post replies to this thread |
|
| Loraine McGregor 05/03/2007 11:29:34 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans Alastair the issue is not that they care for 14 million people is it? This issue is money! Ban tobacco and the NHS will collapse - the Pharma companies will be incredibly unhappy and think of all those "scientists" and ghost writers on the dole. What would happen to all those cosy government smoking rooms in Europe, USA and Canada that have been nicely hidden away from the public eye? Then, of course, if one country were to do it, the others must follow - just think about the gaziilions of tax revenues lost!! I may be female and blonde (now and again) but even I can understand the reluctance by the Powers of the World, not to go down that road.
This post replies to this thread |
|
| Robert Feal-Martinez 05/03/2007 11:30:20 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans Alan you repeat Loraines comment as though you have achieved, Navana in your quest against F2C. I have consistantly said the only truely moral response to the dangers inherant in smoking and the perceived dangers to passive smoking is to ban tobacco. Loraine is merely reflecting the Moral alternative to smoking bans. But as Alastair says, if you start banning everything that some 'nurd' considers harmful we would all be Vegans, and I do not mean that in any derogatory sense to Vegans, I have friends who live that life style, which is their choice. This post replies to Alan Thompson > RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans |
|
| Alan Thompson 05/03/2007 11:39:22 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans Robert I just copied and pasted it to see what would happen. You must have mystical powers if you can read into that that it was as though I thought I had achieved Nirvana in my quest against F2C. And if you do indeed have these mystical powers, they read me wrong. I wondered if your F2C mates would jump in and lambast me instead of Lorraine, which Alastair did. I don't actually have a quest against F2C, I just don't think you should be allowed free reign to mislead people about your judicial review coming to their rescue in time for 1 July which, in Lorraine's opinion, it won't. Alan This post replies to Robert Feal-Martinez > RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans |
|
| Carlo Rossi 05/03/2007 11:45:36 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans shows what the ban is- an ill thought out pile of ****!! This post replies to Alan Thompson > RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans |
|
| Robert Feal-Martinez 05/03/2007 11:49:24 |
RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans Alan there you go again, 'in loraines view it won't', implying I have said diferently or even intimated it. I have always said that people should prepare for the ban, I have equally always said that the timing of the JR has no relationship to ban start states, and as Loraine explained we are costantly adding to our evidence the JR will happen when we are ready. This post replies to Alan Thompson > RE: Children's smoke exposure increases after pub bans |
|
