The following Dodgers have been smited by the JDK for their crimes against Jam:
All the girls! for picking on the JDK and damaging his already delicate self esteem!
The Basserd Who Nicked Copper's Stuff For the offense of nicking Copper's stuff. You are a tw*t, whoever you are and we all hope you get run over by a tram in Nottingham. Or Liverpool. Or whereever else they have trams!
Copper For the crime of playing with her Wii instead of her Jammie pals!
I just can't decide on this issue. I ain't a smoker, so it doesn't bother me if they ban it - but many of my mates are and it's likely to mightily piss em off.
I'm not entirely comfortable with the concept of a nanny state taking responsibility for our health away from us. On the other hand, the ilnesses caused by smoking cost the NHS a few quid every year and it's kinda smelly.
ddvmor wrote: Only if you're prepared to ban burgers as well. Eat 20 of those a day and you'll die quicker than from smoking! I'm on holiday by the way. Har Har Har.
Yeah but you eat 20 burgers and you only hurt yourself, not poison everyone around you into the bargain (unless they follow you into the loo)
__________________
I aint no wide eyed rebel, but I aint no preachers son.
I feel the need to debate this point further, on account of my contactictory nature.
Eat 20 burgers a day, become an enormously fat lardy bloater, ruin the suspension of every car you go in, take up two seats on every bus, get overly sweaty and smelly, stinking out said car and bus (not to mention the lifts), create an overlap problem in the seats in the ciname (yes, I recently had to sit next to the fattest man in the world at the cinema - it wasn't nice) increase the risk of heart attacks, back trouble and so-on, causing a drain on NHS resources.
It may not be poisoning those around you, but it's having a similarly negative effect.
Point is, if you ban smoking, how long will it be before unhealthy eating is banned, then lack of exercise and so-on. How far should the nanny state take it? Should everything remotely bad for us be banned. Red meat? Sweetcorn? Reality TV shows? How about guffing in public?
I think it’s interesting when this topic is brought up how quickly other social issues are presented, over-eating, binge drinking, drugs the list goes on and on.
The fact is that a smoking ban is not designed to protect the health of smokers, it’s to protect the health of workers and non-smokers who have the freedom to breath clean air taken away by the largely selfish acts of (lets face it) drug addicts. Who one the whole are the most selfish people on the planet, I challenge anyone to walk up any city centre street and take more than five steps without walking over discarded cigarette ends or having smoke blown in their face.
Lets face it I know of no pending bill to curb what people eat, the reason is the same as why there is no complete ban on selling cigarettes; as long as people don’t directly harm the health of people who have no choice and only harm themselves then it’s a lifestyle choice and not within the government’s mandate to address whereas protecting workers and non-smokers health in enclosed public places is.
So big you may have problems with fat people but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the smoking ban.
__________________
I aint no wide eyed rebel, but I aint no preachers son.
ddvmor wrote: No no. I have problems with the concept of a nanny state, not fat people.
Then let me ask a question, if your work asked you to work in an area with tripping hazards exposed live electrics and water would you?
If not why not and what legislation would you expect to have to back you up if you refused? Because to me Health and safety at work is about having legislation in place to protect my Health and not just my safety. It's the same with smoking I have no problem with what people shove in their bodies as long as it has ne effect on my Health, and I think this is the spirit of the ban, so a nanny state protecting workers health? -bring it on.
oh Big you enjoying your holiday?
__________________
I aint no wide eyed rebel, but I aint no preachers son.
Tripping hazards? Heh. People should look where they're going. Ever noticed how many people walk around looking everywhere but the direction in which they're walking? Asking for a sprained ankle, they are!
And yeh. My holiday is great. I have sunburn though.
i'm with halo on every thing said so far - the govt hasnt made cigarettes illegal, just poisoning other people and to add my 50cents..
they banned talking on mobiles in cars because something like 20 people died in a year in mobile-phone-using-related accidents ("The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said: "At least 20 people have died on Britain's roads in crashes where mobile phones have been implicated." thank you BBC website) - and i agree with that too.. 1200 people die a year from passive smoking..
They banned it in Minneapolis a few months back. I smoke and it really hasn't bothered me as much as I thought it might... Talk to me again next January.
As a smoker I want smoking banned - it will help my weak mind cut down if not stop.
Since they banned smoking on trains and planes, I now have no problem going the journey without a smoke, I hope the same will be the case when I binge drink and punch policemen
well i'm addicted see (mostly to uk style - extreme makeovers, yeah baby) so, taking into account what santa said, i figured if it got banned i'd get over my addiction