Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support Fans Focus by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Smoking Ban

David Holden

By David Holden
in Ebbsfleet United Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

Stu B Newbie

Stu B

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: UP FLEET
they should put the price of fags up to 10 quid a pack ban it from every where and anyone caught smoking should be banged up and have the key thrown away.....barrrrrrrrrrrrrr humbug


One of my lecturers at uni went off on a rant and said if he had his way he'd line up 10% of the smokers and shoot them. Then a month later he'd do the same,and so on and so on until they realised they should stop or get shot. "Interesting" gentleman..!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stu M Newbie

Stu M

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: American FLEET FAN No1
When they have banned smoking, what next, ban drinking? That costs the Health Service Millions as well. Close all pubs? They tried that here once before.
Ban all non-professional Sports, they cost Millions to the Health Service for injuries.
Where does it end, or the people stand up for their shrinking rights?


I think it ends long before that little list, AFF. I think the people who are shouting "it's a breach of my civil liberties" are the natural successors to those banging on about "political correctness gone mad"...

Can't say I've noticed a significant erosion of my civil liberties in the last 25 years, except of course for those areas that the Daily Mail tells me they've been breached... wink
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DA11 Newbie

DA11

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: Stu M
Originally Posted By: American FLEET FAN No1
Just another wedge against personal freedoms...


Depends on how you're defining personal freedoms though, AFF. Heard someone on the telly point out that it was once a personal freedom to chuck your sh!t out of a top-floor window and shout 'gardez-loo' to passers-by below until that was outlawed by the government.


We still do that in Perry street. When was that banned then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DA11 Newbie

DA11

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: Stu B


One of my lecturers at uni went off on a rant and said if he had his way he'd line up 10% of the smokers and shoot them. Then a month later he'd do the same,and so on and so on until they realised they should stop or get shot. "Interesting" gentleman..!


Now that is a waste of taxpayers money when lecturers talk bollox like that. I bet he's got a beard, wears sandals and socks and likes to wear laytex pants whilst stroking himself listening to Britney Spears. [****!!****].
Link to comment
Share on other sites
American FLEET FAN No1 Newbie

American FLEET FAN No1

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: DA11
Originally Posted By: Stu M
Originally Posted By: American FLEET FAN No1
Just another wedge against personal freedoms...


Depends on how you're defining personal freedoms though, AFF. Heard someone on the telly point out that it was once a personal freedom to chuck your sh!t out of a top-floor window and shout 'gardez-loo' to passers-by below until that was outlawed by the government.


We still do that in Perry street. When was that banned then?



National Sport down the Dickens, I hear! blush
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KShep Newbie

KShep

Posted
Posted

The main difference is both of them in a social context. Social drinking involves one or two pints in an afternoon (Yes I know Hirsty will argue this wink )- that level of drinking really doesn't do the people around the drinker any damage at all. You could argue drink driving does damage, but is that the fault of alcohol, or the driver's irresponsiblity and naivety in driving when they know they shouldn't?

 

If you smoke socially however, let's say four cigarettes at Stonebridge Road from 2pm to 5pm. The social smoking will do a lot more damage to the surrounding people than a couple of pints will, the four fags will do more damage in the short and long term than the two Strongbows will. Obviously when drinking is stepped up then it becomes a problem but in the 'social' aspect, you can't really compare the two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stu M Newbie

Stu M

Posted
Posted

Plus drink-driving / fighting involves intent on the drinkers' part... passive smoking doesn't. You could say knives are dangerous, but only if the person wielding them is an idiot.

 

A smoker doesn't have to be an idiot to breathe fumes over people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American FLEET FAN No1 Newbie

American FLEET FAN No1

Posted
Posted

What??????????? There are social smokers who only have the occasional cigarette, there are social drinkers too.

Drunk drivers wouldn't be drunk if they couldn't get drink.

Chain smokers wouldn't smoke if they couldn't get cigarettes.

So there is no difference at all!

Both cause damage either to themselves or others.......... No difference at all!

 

 

I don't argue, that drunk driving does damage............I know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KShep Newbie

KShep

Posted
Posted
Originally Posted By: American FLEET FAN No1
What??????????? There are social smokers who only have the occasional cigarette, there are social drinkers too.
Drunk drivers wouldn't be drunk if they couldn't get drink.
Chain smokers wouldn't smoke if they couldn't get cigarettes.
So there is no difference at all!
Both cause damage either to themselves or others.......... No difference at all!


I don't argue, that drunk driving does damage............I know!


AFF, the point I was making is that, that one cigarette does more damage to the surrounding people than that one drink does!

Drink-driving does cause damage, obviously that's indesputable. The difference is though, when you smoke a cigarette in a public place, you don't really spare a thought for the health of those around you, but when you drink, it is accepted that you don't drive. The idiot who decides to drive after three pints does so not because of his desire to have a drink, but his foolishness in thinking 'he'll be alright'.

I don't know how well it follows, but I'm basically saying that, unlike the social cigarette, the social drink does no-one damage unless combined with the selfishness of a very low minority who decide to drive after drinking.

The smoker doesn't usually make the choice to stop passive smoking, yet 99% of drinkers make the choice to not let their drink affect others, by not driving. That's why the two are totally different.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...