Roll on the 10th December Smokefree bars

[Hitcher]

This (so far) is a rights issue. Non smokers have rights too! If you would like to argue health issues, the door is open!

Well, yes. This is about rights. The right of smokers to smoke (this practice is not yet illegal, partly for the reasons you articulate) and the right of non-smokers not to smoke.

Another issue is mitigation or removal of a hazard (tobacco smoke) from environments where there are non-smokers present. The Government's response has been to legislate. There are other solutions. Also don't forget that non-smokers aren't all zealots and sometimes actually enjoy being in the presence of smokers indulging in the act.

An inevitable consequence and double-standard of all of this is smokers being condemned as social pariahs -- legally able to smoke (age restrictions noted) but just not able to do it anywhere.

[Jackrat]

Paul ("with the greatest possible respect") I think you are using sophistry to conceal or avoid the underlying issues here.

By the way, I haven't smoked since I left high school, aged 17 (you do the maths).

The Smokefree Environments Act is hypocrisy in a near-pure form. If smoking is so bad for people's heath (and I'm not contesting this for a moment), then the Government should ban the practice entirely. End of story. As a taxpayer I would be more receptive to this than handing over my hard-earned income to the Government to pass (more) dumb laws and to fund endless advertising campaigns trying to convince the unconvinceable to stop the unimaginable.

Even worse is the complicity of the Government in extracting a significant amount of dosh from the tobacco industry to fund "stop smoking" initiatives.

If Governments are sufficiently spineless to ban tobacco products, then they should be brave enough at least to internalise all costs associated with the practice and lay these fairly and orthogonally at the tobacco industry's door.

And the hypocrisy of New Zealanders on this subject is another matter that riles me -- and the inimitable Mr Jackrat. NIMBYism at its finest!

Ok,so what's to stop any public bar owner banning smoking on their own premisis.Why do we need a law for this.
As far as NIMBYisim at it's finest is concerned,I don't see the connection.

[Skyryder]

Are you going to eat Asparigus before you do it?




Skyryder....Ooops

NC30_Chick

Whenever I have raised this issue with smokers no one has ever come up with a debatable answer. Now I agree going over and pissing on someone is going to provoke a reaction. If for no other reason than the law is being broken. But your response to my question is not entirely unexpected. There is no argument for pollutiing other people either way. I will leave you to ponder my original comparison but put another way. Would you sooner have an antiseptic poured over you or would you prefer to inhale a poison.

And please try not and get personal. I can control my bladder very well thank you.

Skyryder

[NC]

Whenever I have raised this issue with smokers no one has ever come up with a debatable answer. Now I agree going over and pissing on someone is going to provoke a reaction. If for no other reason than the law is being broken. But your response to my question is not entirely unexpected. There is no argument for pollutiing other people either way. I will leave you to ponder my original comparison but put another way. Would you sooner have an antiseptic poured over you or would you prefer to inhale a poison.

And please try not and get personal. I can control my bladder very well thank you.

Skyryder

Nope, I was merely taking the piss out of your comment about "pissing on people and their drinks". I thought it was quiet funny, and merely asked if you would indulge in some asparagus to "enhance" the disgusting smell of urine.

If you read back to my very first post, I have no problem with banning cigarette smoking in Pubs, Clubs and Restaurants. I myself hate the smell of cigarette smoke in my hair and in my clothes after a good night out on the town.


And hitting people with personal attacks an't my style..
Ching ching-a-ling

[Jamezo]

Well, yes. This is about rights. The right of smokers to smoke (this practice is not yet illegal, partly for the reasons you articulate) and the right of non-smokers not to smoke.

Another issue is mitigation or removal of a hazard (tobacco smoke) from environments where there are non-smokers present. The Government's response has been to legislate. There are other solutions. Also don't forget that non-smokers aren't all zealots and sometimes actually enjoy being in the presence of smokers indulging in the act.

An inevitable consequence and double-standard of all of this is smokers being condemned as social pariahs -- legally able to smoke (age restrictions noted) but just not able to do it anywhere.

since when did you have the right to smoke? you make like the right to smoke is guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi!

Smoking is most certainly not a right, it is a disgusting personal habit that the non-smoking majority have tolerated in the past, and now do not.

Name another activity that is performed by a minority of the population, demonstratably harms the health other people, costs society megabucks in healthcare costs, and that society hasn't already acted on to impede/eliminate. Can't? Didn't think so.

Nothing personal eh.

[Paul in NZ]

Name another activity that is performed by a minority of the population, demonstratably harms the health other people, costs society megabucks in healthcare costs, and that society hasn't already acted on to impede/eliminate. Can't? Didn't think so.

Nothing personal eh.

Um?

The spreading of superphosphate?

The fast food industry.

The alcohol industry

The P industry

Timber treatment plants

The cosmetics industry

um.. You get the picture....

Paul N

[Hitcher]

since when did you have the right to smoke?

If any activity is not illegal, then people have a right to do it. Whether you agree with it or not. Yes?

And, if you have been following recent posts to this thread, you will have noted that I choose not to smoke.

[Joni]

don't worry man, you are going to get it all back plus more in the form of life support for your decaying carcass.

And while we are not getting personal.... this post absolutely sucks!!! Come on dude... think before you speak/write, and consider that other people dont want to read this kind of thing.

[Jamezo]

Um?

The spreading of superphosphate?

The fast food industry.

The alcohol industry

The P industry

Timber treatment plants

The cosmetics industry

um.. You get the picture....

Paul N

aren't these only affecting the health of the user? unless you count fat people crushing their kids to death and p-heads taking to people with runcible spoons?

the rest of these activities are largely performed by businesses, and while I find them socially irresponsible and believe should be dealt with, the original subject of my discussion was centred on personal activities.

thus I think my point still stands, if something is going on that is to the detriment both to society as a whole, and to the individual, can we reasonably expect our representative government not to take action and stop it?

[Jamezo]

And while we are not getting personal.... this post absolutely sucks!!! Come on dude... think before you speak/write, and consider that other people dont want to read this kind of thing.

sorry if that was found offensive, though surely you cannot deny the raping that one subjects their body to by smoking? you know exactly where that road ends, and it's not pretty.

[Jamezo]

If any activity is not illegal, then people have a right to do it. Whether you agree with it or not. Yes?

And, if you have been following recent posts to this thread, you will have noted that I choose not to smoke.

I use 'you' in a purely general sense, though I confess I assumed you to smoke, based on your debate so far.


Right: Something that is due to a person or governmental body by law, tradition, or nature.

ok, nowhere in NZ law is the ability to smoke guaranteed, so scratch the law front.

it is not in human nature to smoke, indeed it is most abbhorrent, so scratch the nature front.

tradition? NZ culture has always espoused common courtesy, public smoking runs contrary to that. that point might just hold up in the US, where the 'fuck everybody else, I'll do as I please' attitude is alive and well. I sincerely hope NZers continue to generally have respect for the wellbeing of their fellow man.

so, judging from that, I don't think smoking can be classified as a right.

ps. I hope nobody thinks I'm trolling or nuttin, I just enjoy a healthy debate.

[Joni]

sorry if that was found offensive, though surely you cannot deny the raping that one subjects their body to by smoking? you know exactly where that road ends, and it's not pretty.

I hear what you are saying, however each person has the right to decide what they want to do with their lives and their bodies... and at the end of the day that decaying carcass has people who care about them!

[Paul in NZ]

If any activity is not illegal, then people have a right to do it. Whether you agree with it or not. Yes?

Oh come now!

Thats a gross over simplification! It's not illegal to do a lot of things but it is illegal to do them in the wrong place.

You can have sex but not in a public bar! (well not the sort I go to)

You are not allowed to kill people (regretably in some cases) but you are allowed to defend yourself.

Laws are seldom absolutes. I might consider someone blowing smoke in my face a threat to my safety but the court would probably not allow that as a defence if I killed them with a cocktail stick on the spot! Presumeably because the threat was not immeadiate.

The point is, some activities are legal only in designated areas!

I don't see the problem...

Paul N

(actually quite enjoying the joust old bean! Best fun I've had in years)

[Stinger]

since when did you have the right to smoke? you make like the right to smoke is guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi!

Smoking is most certainly not a right, it is a disgusting personal habit that the non-smoking majority have tolerated in the past, and now do not.

Name another activity that is performed by a minority of the population, demonstratably harms the health other people, costs society megabucks in healthcare costs, and that society hasn't already acted on to impede/eliminate. Can't? Didn't think so.

Motorcycling...
Drinking
Asian Driving (not all, I realise...)


One problem that I find with the way that the problem is being dealth with, is the way it tends to concentrate smokers. Like at Auckland Hospital, they decided to make the entire premises "non smoking". Which meant that they removed the little smoking shacks they used to have... and the ashtrays. The net result is that the front entrance is crowded with smokers that everyone has to walk through, you've got elderly patients having to walk right outside (with their drip still attached). Butts lying everywhere. At least when the shacks and ashtrays were out the smokers had a sensible place out of the way of non-smokers so you could choose whether to go near the smoke.

[Jamezo]

o0o0o0oh yeah, seems that everybody has workplace horror stories about having to 'run the gauntlet' at the entranceways...

I think the solution is some kind of head-bubble. the smoker just lights up, then places the airtight bag over their head, just imagine it! they could smoke anywhere and nobody would mind!

they could come in all kinds of zany colours, and be biodegradable, and they could make ones with Disney designs on them for kids!