Smoking In Public

[gaz_k]

What's the bloody country comin to......
Pizza Hut have announced that from today it is not allowed to smoke in there.
like to see how much business they start to loose at lunch time wen ppl just pop in for a quick bite with work mates..... everyone to burger king i think.

and dropping fag butts is classed as droppin litter... well where are you supposed to put them if you not allowed to put them in a bin... there are not enough fag bin things about.....

what next, bloody banning swearing in pubs?! its a working mans privilage to have a few pints n fags after a day at work.... pfft!

[Skweeky]

To be honest, I smoke myself, but I hate it when other people smoke when I'm still eating. ButI also admit that there's nothing like a nice cigarette after a good meal. Maybe restaurants should just install some sort of smoking room.

[Miyake]

yeah your right. its stupid, weatherspoons banned all swearing a couple of months ago.

:lol: :lol: smoking while typing this :lol: :lol:

[clocker]

I gather that you all are not Americans.

Smokers have been treated as pariahs over here for years now.

Some cities ( Boulder ) have banned smoking in public anywhere within the city limits. They recently denied a liquor license to a cigar bar because they had no "non-smoking area".

The irony completely escaped them.

[gaz_k]

and pepole say that america is the land of the free?

from what i heard there quite a lot you not allowed to do...

[Nimdock]

Very glad they did.

[ang3968]

Have to say, our government (Queensland, Australia) banned smoking in any pubs/clubs during meal times about 18 months ago.... the people were not happy, and neither were the staff. We have to tell all customers not to smoke and if we don't we can get a $1500 fine.. and the hotel can get a fine for that amount too while the smoker gets a $300 fine..... go figure

[3rd gen noob]

smoking in public is disgusting and should be banned everywhere.

i have nothing against those who smoke in their own houses, however, smoking in public is something which should not be tolerated

passive smoking is a proven killer. if smokers want to kill themselves, go ahead, but they should not be allowed to kill others

[ang3968]

There aren't many places in Australia you can smoke nowdays... it has been banned from all shopping malls and nearly every office building. I have no problems either way... smoke or don't... inside or out... but I do object to receiving a fine 5 times the amount of the smoker. It's not always easy to tell someone who has been drinking they cannot smoke in that area of a local pub while meals are being served, alcohol and smokes go hand in hand and most non-smokers accept smokers in pubs.

[gaz_k]

yeah, sumplaces it should be banned if the premisies ar enot big enought to provide no smokin areas.

but smoking should not be banned in a pub or shopping centre, it isn't where i live, most shpping centres provide ash trays so at leat the butts can go in a tray.

but to bann in a pub is daft, it is just what happens in a pub. men go there for a couple of pints n talk about how shit their football team as been doin.

the offices i have worked in only bann smokin between 9-5, after 5 everyone just spaks up, if you dont like it, you can go home cos it after 5.

[3rd gen noob]

smoking in public kills passive smokers

there is evidence (look at the high profile death of roy castle)

it's all very well for smokers, cos you are already killing yourself, but putting others lifes in danger is so selfish it's unbelievable

[Nimdock]

I agree 137% with 3rd gen noob

[titey]

Business establishments have the right to ban smoking within their own walls if they wish -
http://members.roadfly.com/tite-wad/space.gif - I just won't patronize them anymore if they do.

However, noob's suggestion that I only be allowed to smoke within the confines of my own home is just ridiculous.

http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey@18 August 2003 - 16:15
However, noob's suggestion that I only be allowed to smoke within the confines of my own home is just ridiculous.

http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/smokeing.gif
i don't see why it's ridiculous...only common sense

passive smoking is a proven killer...it doesn't kill very quickly, but it does kill

so if you allow that logic, i must be allowed to come and punch every smoker in public i see once every 5 minutes

after a few years, they'll all be dead from brain damage and my mission will be done

p.s. i know my example is very stupid, but the sentiment is there

[titey]

If I wish to smoke a cigarette while waking down the street, my "second hand smoke" is so diffused it poses far less threat to passers-by than the exhaust fumes of automobiles.

Perhaps people should only be allowed to drive their cars within the confines of their own homes? :blink:

[lynx]

I think smoking in areas where people are eating is extremely anti-social, and I can understand such restrictions. However, I can also understand that some people like to have a cigarette with there drink (I always used to).

I do not think it is the business of government to decide where a privately owned business should allow smoking, with the exception of eating areas. Equally, I believe that businesses have a duty to make their smoking policy clear so that both smokers and non-smokers have a choice whether to frequent that establishment. Once decided, that policy should be STRICTLY adhered to.

Of course, the problem comes when all establishments in an area decide on the same policy leaving those seeking the opposite policy without any choice, but in a reasonably large area the number of places choosing either a total ban or total smoking areas, or some sort of mix should balance itself to the proportion having a preference.

Re passive smoking: If you don't want to have someone's smoke, don't frequent the places that allow smoking, if it really is that big an issue the places which allow smoking will go out of business. But you don't have a right to force your own restrictions on everyone else.

Edit: @titey: BEEP BEEP ;)

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 16:28
Re passive smoking: If you don't want to have someone's smoke, don't frequent the places that allow smoking, if it really is that big an issue the places which allow smoking will go out of business. But you don't have a right to force your own restrictions on everyone else.
passive smoking is pollution

pollution should not be allowed...

[gaz_k]

i know yeah
what about alcohol abuse
it is still so easy for 14 yr olds to go out on a friday nite n get smashed on white lightening and other high strength drinks (for them) but nothing is done about that... cos again, its a good tax income for the government.
it not the government banning smokin, just various local councils or businesses.
passive smokin only really has any main threat if in small confined areas, walking down the street aint gonna make much difference.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey@18 August 2003 - 16:26
If I wish to smoke a cigarette while waking down the street, my "second hand smoke" is so diffused it poses far less threat to passers-by than the exhaust fumes of automobiles.

Perhaps people should only be allowed to drive their cars within the confines of their own homes? :blink:
and that's where you're wrong...

exhaust fumes contain a lot less damaging chemicals than cigarette smoke does

ok, so the volumes are higher, however, the force which cars propel exhaust fumes means they disperse qwuicker

[lynx]

@ 3GN: then kindly get that gas guzzling monster off the road.
I take it you haven't seen the smog over London, NewYork, Los Angeles etc. Oh, of course, it is tobacco smoke.

[gaz_k]

hey, the exhaust fumes can't be that good considering there a big hole up in the ozone.
if they not a problem why is your company car tax worked out from the value of you car and the amount of co2 emmisions it gives out?

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 16:34
@ 3GN: then kindly get that gas guzzling monster off the road.
I take it you haven't seen the smog over London, NewYork, Los Angeles etc. Oh, of course, it is tobacco smoke.
if you refer to the car in my sig, it's on a private track (the nordschleife to be exact)

if you refer to the car i drive, then it's a 1.4 litre ford escort...hardly a gas guzzler

also, pollution isn't only caused by cars...industry as well

[3rd gen noob]

co2 doesn't attack the ozone layer

a well-tuned car doesn't do any appreciable damage to the ozone layer (even in high numbers)

[lynx]

On a private track ? That doesn't stop it producing polution.

But isn't that just like a private business ? Your convoluted logic amazes me.

Edit: typo

[titey]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 10:30
pollution should not be allowed...
http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/badair.gif

When you fart, your ass expells methane...

Methane is a pollutant...

Your ass should not be allowed.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 16:48
On a private track ? That doesn't stop it producing polution.

But isn't that just like a private business ? Your convoluted logic amazes me.

Edit: typo
the nordschleife is surrounded by trees..therefore the cars are "feeding" the trees

also, the nordschleife is private land, so if you can smoke in your own house, you can drive on your own track...

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey@18 August 2003 - 16:58
When you fart, your ass expells methane...

Methane is a pollutant...

Your ass should not be allowed.
cows produce more methane than humans...therefore we should exterminate all cows

<_<

[gaz_k]

isn&#39;t carbon dioxide a cause of acid rain and a green house gas?
there fore it does effect the ozone

and yes a well tuned car gives of a lot more:
it has an engine which goes to higher revs than most
those revs are mainted at high levels for longer
most will be bigger than your 1400 escort and so make more
they have a different configuration, for example most normal carboretors will do 50:50 mix fuel to air, race cars have a higher mix of fuel n less air
most race cars wont have a catalytic converter as they slow aair flow from engine and thus hinder performance

all this leads to higher co2 emmisions mate.
and i did not say about your car, i stated company cars on a whole.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by gaz_k@18 August 2003 - 17:00
isn&#39;t carbon dioxide a cause of acid rain and a green house gas?
there fore it does effect the ozone

and yes a well tuned car gives of a lot more:
it has an engine which goes to higher revs than most
those revs are mainted at high levels for longer
most will be bigger than your 1400 escort and so make more
they have a different configuration, for example most normal carboretors will do 50:50 mix fuel to air, race cars have a higher mix of fuel n less air
most race cars wont have a catalytic converter as they slow aair flow from engine and thus hinder performance

all this leads to higher co2 emmisions mate.
and i did not say about your car, i stated company cars on a whole.
the ozone layer is a thin layer of ozone (funny that), which is 03 (3 atoms of oxygen per molecule)

co2 doesn&#39;t attack the ozone layer, therefore cars don&#39;t depreciate the ozone layer directly.
although some cars do produce quantities of sulphur dioxide which does do damage, however a well-tuned car doesn&#39;t produce high volumes of this

p.s. by a well-tuned car i&#39;m not talking about a ned in a little nova with a big exhaust, i&#39;m talking about one which has regular services and is running in good shape.

p.p.s just because someone has a modified car doesn&#39;t mean they drive it at higher revs, therefore modifying your car doesn&#39;t necessarily cause mroe harm to environment...

edit: whilst driving in los angeles, a porsche 911 turbo (993 or 996) gives off cleaner air than it takes in

[titey]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 11:00
cows produce more methane than humans...therefore we should exterminate all cows <_<
According to your premise - YES. ;)

You made the blanket statement that "pollution should not be allowed".

[Mr. Mulder]

I don&#39;t smoke (well, not tobacco anyway) but I also don&#39;t care if other people do or don&#39;t in restraints. It&#39;s up to them, not some fat arse politician or the NHS. What&#39;s even more stupid is that Weatherspoons has banned drinking in the afternoon. With it being the only licensed venue in my local area where the fuck are people gonna get there daily does of vitamin beer? :angry:

[bigboab]

What About Carbon Monoxide poisoning. I believe that is what cars expel, hence the use for some suicides. Carbon Monoxide inhalation mimics a lot of known diseases lika Asthma, Empthysema and is probably costing governments more than the damage caused by smoking. If you think it does not cause any damage, take a walk along a country lane and witness the foliage killed by exhaust fumes.
Fifty years ago the road side was covered in various wild fruits. NOT ANYMORE&#33;

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey+18 August 2003 - 17:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (titey @ 18 August 2003 - 17:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 11:00
cows produce more methane than humans...therefore we should exterminate all cows&nbsp; <_<
According to your premise - YES. ;)

You made the blanket statement that "pollution should not be allowed". [/b][/quote]
stabbed with my own sword...how humiliating

:lol:

[Mr. Mulder]

restraints

That should be "restaurants" :rolleyes:

[Mr. Mulder]

restraints

That should be "restaurants" :rolleyes:

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by bigboab@18 August 2003 - 17:08
What About Carbon Monoxide poisoning. I believe that is what cars expel, hence the use for some suicides. Carbon Monoxide inhalation mimics a lot of known diseases lika Asthma, Empthysema and is probably costing governments more than the damage caused by smoking. If you think it does not cause any damage, take a walk along a country lane and witness the foliage killed by exhaust fumes.
Fifty years ago the road side was covered in various wild fruits. NOT ANYMORE&#33;
it&#39;s been very hard to kill yourself with car exhaust fumes since the event of catalytic converters

it&#39;s much like trying to kill yourself by sticking your head in a gas oven...the gas these days isn&#39;t poisonous (except from asphyxiation)

[titey]

Originally posted by __eric__@18 August 2003 - 11:10

restraints

That should be "restaurants" :rolleyes:
Oh, I just thought you were kinky. http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/shutup3.gif

[titey]

And... as usual... this board hates me&#33; :(

Or perhaps it&#39;s that the board likes me so much that it wants me to post even more than I do now. :rolleyes:

[titey]

http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/suck_kr.gif

[titey]

http://www.ml20.nowinbeta.org/suck_kr.gif

[Wolfmight]

.. you dare put your life in the hands of a cigeratte.
I never want to start smoken em.. when u do, you feel as if it&#39;s your own air and you will suficate without em...when they are the ones killing you

[lynx]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+18 August 2003 - 16:58--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 18 August 2003 - 16:58)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@18 August 2003 - 16:48
On a private track ? That doesn&#39;t stop it producing polution.

But isn&#39;t that just like a private business ? Your convoluted logic amazes me.

Edit: typo
the nordschleife is surrounded by trees..therefore the cars are "feeding" the trees

also, the nordschleife is private land, so if you can smoke in your own house, you can drive on your own track... [/b][/quote]
Or smoke in a bar ?
Or are you trying to tell me that the public do not visit nordschleife ?
And they don&#39;t have Cat&#39;s so they will be pumping out all sorts of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, sulphur dioxide, etc.

As for a Porsche in LA outputting cleaner air than it takes in, I think that is extremely unlikely, but even if it is true it is the exception rather than the rule, and there aren&#39;t that many Porsche&#39;s in LA, the rest of the pollution comes from the other 99.999% of the vehicles.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 17:29
And they don&#39;t have Cat&#39;s so they will be pumping out all sorts of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, sulphur dioxide, etc.
erm...how do you know that?
isn&#39;t it possible that the cars have cats in place?
(a lot of them actually do)

my point was simply that people who smoke kill people with passvie smoking

also, it could be argued that people who drive cars are doing so for a purpose (to get from a to b or whatever), whereas people who smoke do so only for &#39;enjoyment&#39;

[lynx]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+18 August 2003 - 17:32--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 18 August 2003 - 17:32)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@18 August 2003 - 17:29
And they don&#39;t have Cat&#39;s so they will be pumping out all sorts of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, sulphur dioxide, etc.
erm...how do you know that?
isn&#39;t it possible that the cars have cats in place?
(a lot of them actually do)

my point was simply that people who smoke kill people with passvie smoking

also, it could be argued that people who drive cars are doing so for a purpose (to get from a to b or whatever), whereas people who smoke do so only for &#39;enjoyment&#39; [/b][/quote]
With the exception of a few cars which are also road going vehicles, track cars do not use cats because of the performance drop.

We all understood your point very well, what we don&#39;t accept is your right to enforce your restrictions on the rest of us. We have (by and large) accepted that owners of private premises should have the choice to restrict smoking either in part or totally, but surely that should be their choice, and if it conflicts with your desire for a smoke free atmosphere no one will enforce your presence. Why should the preference of others be restricted by your choice ?

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 18:07
With the exception of a few cars which are also road going vehicles, track cars do not use cats because of the performance drop.

We all understood your point very well, what we don&#39;t accept is your right to enforce your restrictions on the rest of us. We have (by and large) accepted that owners of private premises should have the choice to restrict smoking either in part or totally, but surely that should be their choice, and if it conflicts with your desire for a smoke free atmosphere no one will enforce your presence. Why should the preference of others be restricted by your choice ?
the car shown runs with a cat

also, i have the right to my opinion, you have the right to kill me with second hand smoke

doesn&#39;t that seem a little unfair?

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by lynx@18 August 2003 - 18:07
With the exception of a few cars which are also road going vehicles, track cars do not use cats because of the performance drop.

We all understood your point very well, what we don&#39;t accept is your right to enforce your restrictions on the rest of us. We have (by and large) accepted that owners of private premises should have the choice to restrict smoking either in part or totally, but surely that should be their choice, and if it conflicts with your desire for a smoke free atmosphere no one will enforce your presence. Why should the preference of others be restricted by your choice ?
the car shown runs with a cat

also, i have the right to my opinion, you have the right to kill me with second hand smoke

doesn&#39;t that seem a little unfair?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by gaz_k@18 August 2003 - 13:38
What&#39;s the bloody country comin to......
Pizza Hut have announced that from today it is not allowed to smoke in there.

and dropping fag butts is classed as droppin litter... well where are you supposed to put them if you not allowed to put them in a bin... there are not enough fag bin things about.....

what next, bloody banning swearing in pubs?&#33;&nbsp;

I love the mentality here.
When I go rafting, do I throw my empty beer cans into the river because the state of Texas has not installed trash cans every 20 feet along the river for my convenience.
No, I actually bring a gargage bag I can attach to the raft and take responsibility for my litter. Imagine that&#33;.


How long have cigarettes been around, how hard can it be to figure out how to extinguish them and store the butts? What is wrong with carrying an empty metal bandaid tin to store them in. Oh, I forget, smoking has the image of being cool, not cool at all to attempt to be considerate.
I really enjoy you smokers who take full advantage of stoplights to empty your ashtrays onto the road. Is there some kind of mental disconnect that makes you unaware that "butts" are trash?


As for restaurants, why should I be limited in where I want to eat because you can&#39;t control your need to smoke. Smoke not only dampens the sense of taste but also stinks up clothing. In my line of work it would be highly inappropriate to see customers while reeking of smoke. I do not infringe on your enjoyment of your meal, so why should you be allowed to do this to me? Smoke outside or in your car (if it is cold).
I would prefer that people smoke outside, rather than indoors where children and others are more likely irritated by the smoke.
As for bars, what the hell, it&#39;s only a couple of hours, I&#39;m going to stink of alcohol anyway. Besides it help filters out the chicks I don&#39;t want to waste my time on. Have you ever kissed a girl who smokes? I would imagine the taste gives feces a run for it&#39;s money.



I largely agree with noob3g, but I think he takes it a little far, most likely because he was being ganged up on.

As for pollution, the exhaust generated by cars in transit is the price we pay for the convenience. What, however, is the point in driving a car around a track for 500 mile? Seems not only pointless, but a little ridiculous given present problem with fossil fuels.

[titey]

Originally posted by hobbes+18 August 2003 - 20:04--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes &#064; 18 August 2003 - 20:04)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>As for restaurants, why should I be limited in where I want to eat because you can&#39;t control your need to smoke. Smoke not only dampens the sense of taste but also stinks up clothing. In my line of work it would be highly inappropriate to see customers while reeking of smoke. I do not infringe on your enjoyment of your meal, so why should you be allowed to do this to me? Smoke outside or in your car (if it is cold).[/b]
Why should business establishments cater only to your wishes and ban smoking?
It should be up to the business itself whether or not to allow smoking.
I choose which places to patronize by their smoking policy - why can&#39;t you?



Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 20:04
I largely agree with noob3g, but I think he takes it a little far, most likely because he was being ganged up on.
How was he being "ganged up on" when he posted this:<!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 08:53
smoking in public is disgusting and should be banned everywhere.

i have nothing against those who smoke in their own houses, however, smoking in public is something which should not be tolerated

passive smoking is a proven killer. if smokers want to kill themselves, go ahead, but they should not be allowed to kill others[/quote]
That was his first post in this thread - no one had had a chance to "gang up on him" and he was already off the deep end. :rolleyes:

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey+19 August 2003 - 03:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (titey @ 19 August 2003 - 03:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> How was he being "ganged up on" when he posted this:<!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 08:53
smoking in public is disgusting and should be banned everywhere.

i have nothing against those who smoke in their own houses, however, smoking in public is something which should not be tolerated

passive smoking is a proven killer. if smokers want to kill themselves, go ahead, but they should not be allowed to kill others
That was his first post in this thread - no one had had a chance to "gang up on him" and he was already off the deep end. :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]
i&#39;m not hugely bothered about debating as a minority...i was solely stating my views

[titey]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@18 August 2003 - 21:05
i&#39;m not hugely bothered about debating as a minority...i was solely stating my views
http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/thumb.gif As you should.

I just wanted to point out that you weren&#39;t "ganged up on" before you began posting your insane suggestions. :P

[hobbes]

Originally posted by titey+19 August 2003 - 03:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (titey &#064; 19 August 2003 - 03:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@18 August 2003 - 20:04
As for restaurants, why should I be limited in where I want to eat because you can&#39;t control your need to smoke. Smoke not only dampens the sense of taste but also stinks up clothing. In my line of work it would be highly inappropriate to see customers while reeking of smoke. I do not infringe on your enjoyment of your meal, so why should you be allowed to do this to me? Smoke outside or in your car (if it is cold).
Why should business establishments cater only to your wishes and ban smoking?
It should be up to the business itself whether or not to allow smoking.
I choose which places to patronize by their smoking policy - why can&#39;t you?[/b][/quote]

What you do in your home is your business. What you do in public affects the people around you.

I think with Pizza Hut banning smoking, it means that people have spoken up and declared it an unwanted intrusion on their lunch. I tend to chose my eating establishments on the quality of the food. Smoking has nothing to do with eating. It is like deciding on a restaurant due to the color of its sign. Neither has any bearing on what makes a restaurant enjoyable, it&#39;s the food baby.

When I drink alcohol, I do not pour it on you. Why should you get to stink up my clothes with smoke? You want to wash my jacket for me?

I agree with the premise that an establishment should have the right to decide this and I believe they are by banning smoking.

I tend you enjoy farting through a megaphone at meals end, you want to deal with that? You tend to think that since smoking has traditionally been allowed that is ok to blow noxious smoke over someone while they eat. How could you be so uncaring of others.

[titey]

Originally posted by hobbes+18 August 2003 - 21:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes &#064; 18 August 2003 - 21:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What you do in your home is your business.&nbsp; What you do in public affects the people around you.[/b]
Yes, and the people who eat in the same restaurants as I do choose to do so. No one forces them to eat there.


Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 21:21
I think with Pizza Hut banning smoking, it means that people have spoken up and declared it an unwanted intrusion on their lunch.&nbsp; I tend to chose my eating establishments on the quality of the food.&nbsp; Smoking has nothing to do with eating.&nbsp; It is like deciding on a restaurant due to the color of its sign. Neither has any bearing on what makes a restaurant enjoyable, it&#39;s the food baby.
As I said, if the establishment decides they don&#39;t want to allow smoking - fine - I won&#39;t go there. And if dining out were entirely about the food, then why do restaurants seem intent on providing music, artwork, etc., etc.? Seems to be an attempt to create... I dunno... an "experience". After eating, Having a cup of coffee or a beer while smoking and chatting are an enjoyable part of the experience as well.


Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 21:21
When I drink alcohol, I do not pour it on you.&nbsp; Why should you get to stink up my clothes with smoke?&nbsp; You want to wash my jacket for me?
I don&#39;t blow my smoke on you either. Why are you sitting in the smoking section anyway?


Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 21:21
I agree with the premise that an establishment should have the right to decide this and I believe they are by banning smoking.
Fine - just don&#39;t whine about those who don&#39;t.


Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 21:21
I tend you enjoy farting through a megaphone at meals end
No, I don&#39;t tend to do that... I don&#39;t even own a megaphone.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@18 August 2003 - 21:21
You tend to think that since smoking has traditionally been allowed that is ok to blow noxious smoke over someone while they eat.&nbsp; How could you be so uncaring of others.[/quote]
I wait till the other people in my party are finished eating before lighting up. And I don&#39;t blow smoke in anyone&#39;s direction. If my exhaled smoke wafts around the room, then so be it... that&#39;s why it&#39;s called the smoking section.

[clocker]

Geez Hobbes.

That&#39;s a megaphone in your pocket?

All this time I thought you were just glad to see me.

[hobbes]

Yeah, it just doesn&#39;t stay there, otherwise there would be no problem. If I were to visit restaurants with smoking sections that did not permeate the room, I would not be here complaining.

If you like to go somewhere because the bathroom has brass knobs, that is your issue. Restaurants that can&#39;t cut the mustard with quality food, tend to distract with gimmicks. I&#39;m not into that, as I am not mesmerized by baubles and lights.

I would encourage you to go to the "bar" for your post-repast contemplation, although Denny&#39;s doesn&#39;t have the best selection of beer.

I simply want to eat without someone intruding upon my repast. Is that so wrong, for the love of God, is that so wrong&#33;

Titey, are we the only ones here? The silence is deafening.

[hobbes]

I guess it all boils down to courtesy. I would not go out to a public place and perform an act that would degrade the experience for other paying customers, simply for my own selfish pleasure. Why do you want to numb my taste buds and ruin my meal?

It seems a bit paternalistic that places actually have to tell you not to do things that bother other patrons. Seems you could figure this out on your own an act accordingly. This is why I don&#39;t take off my pants and sit around in my boxers (or titey whities) after a good meal.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by clocker@19 August 2003 - 04:03
Geez Hobbes.

That&#39;s a megaphone in your pocket?

All this time I thought you were just glad to see me.
At most fine restaurants you can order a megaphone "a la carte".

What is in my pocket is another matter.

[Powdered Water]

I for one think smoking your pubes is a bad idea.

[titey]

Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 22:17
This is why I don&#39;t take off my pants and sit around in my boxers (or titey whities) after a good meal.
:blink: You mean you wear PANTS when you go out to eat?

Damn, you are a gentleman then&#33; http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/LOL.gif

[MagicNakor]

Smoking&#39;s been banned in all public establishments (inside malls, diners, etc.) for a few years now here. At first the smokers raised a big hue and cry about how the laws were infringing on their "right" to smoke. But the smoking population is a minority, and while not all of the smokers are happy about it, they all&#39;ve accepted it. The workers at bars and restaurants are much happier; they don&#39;t have to be exposed to vast clouds of smoke day after day. Plus the experience is so much nicer now that the air isn&#39;t blue and the food doesn&#39;t taste like smoke.

:ninja:

[titey]

Originally posted by Powdered Water@18 August 2003 - 22:22
I for one think smoking your pubes is a bad idea.
Having someone else smoke your pubes is a bit painful as well. >_<

(Eh lilmiss?)

[tkc204]

Im not a smoke but i think its gay... they should allow ppl to smoke.. wat happen to it being a free country, Resturants are places u go to have good time and have a smoke a drinke...etc. Ban on Smoking is the stupidiest thing ive ever heard. They should just ban us from breathing...

[hobbes]

Originally posted by tkc204@19 August 2003 - 04:30
Im not a smoke but i think its gay... they should allow ppl to smoke.. wat happen to it being a free country, Resturants are places u go to have good time and have a smoke a drinke...etc. Ban on Smoking is the stupidiest thing ive ever heard. They should just ban us from breathing...
No, not everyone, probably just you. Your post is one I think we will all cherish and deeply contemplate, save for a few correctly spelled words. But accidents will happen.

[titey]

Originally posted by tkc204@18 August 2003 - 22:30
wat happen to it being a free country
:huh: Exactly which country are you referring to?

Surely you&#39;re aware that there are members from many countries here. <_<

[Powdered Water]

Originally posted by titey+19 August 2003 - 03:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (titey @ 19 August 2003 - 03:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-tkc204@18 August 2003 - 22:30
wat happen to it being a free country
:huh: Exactly which country are you referring to?

Surely you&#39;re aware that there are members from many countries here. <_< [/b][/quote]
Ziiiiiing that&#39;s my man titey with another win&#33;&#33;&#33;

[hobbes]

I largely agree with noob3g, but I think he takes it a little far, most likely because he was being ganged up on.

As for pollution, the exhaust generated by cars in transit is the price we pay for the convenience.&nbsp; What, however, is the point in driving a car around a track for 500 mile?&nbsp; Seems not only pointless, but a little ridiculous given present problem with fossil fuels.
3rd, you didn&#39;t comment on this point. How do you justify driving in a circle?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Powdered Water+19 August 2003 - 04:40--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Powdered Water @ 19 August 2003 - 04:40)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by titey@19 August 2003 - 03:34
<!--QuoteBegin-tkc204@18 August 2003 - 22:30
wat happen to it being a free country
:huh: Exactly which country are you referring to?

Surely you&#39;re aware that there are members from many countries here. <_<
Ziiiiiing that&#39;s my man titey with another win&#33;&#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
Oh, come on&#33; Mine was a lot funnier.

[Powdered Water]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 03:42


I largely agree with noob3g, but I think he takes it a little far, most likely because he was being ganged up on.

As for pollution, the exhaust generated by cars in transit is the price we pay for the convenience. What, however, is the point in driving a car around a track for 500 mile? Seems not only pointless, but a little ridiculous given present problem with fossil fuels.
3rd, you didn&#39;t comment on this point. How do you justify driving in a circle?
True I had not seen yours before I posted... Props to ya, :D

[titey]

http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/ROFL.gif

[hobbes]

Originally posted by titey@19 August 2003 - 04:54
http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/ROFL.gif
Fine, now I&#39;m trumped by an emoticon I cannot match.

/me sulks off

It may be movie time, again.


Lo there do I see my father. Lo there do I see my mother, my sister and my brothers. Lo there do I see the line of my people, back to the beginning.

Lo they do call to me. They bid me take my place among them, in the halls of Valhalla, where the brave shall live.... Forever&#33;


The 13th Warrior- check it out&#33;

[titey]

http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/clap.gif

[Powdered Water]

Your tone is Quasi-facetious but what you do not realize is that now all restaurants are Taco Bell.

[titey]

http://members.roadfly.com/sheringham/TacoBell.gif

[hobbes]

Originally posted by titey@19 August 2003 - 16:26
http://members.roadfly.com/sheringham/TacoBell.gif
Oh, the new grilled stuft burrito. So that&#39;s what they actually mean by "stuft".

[insanebassman]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+18 August 2003 - 09:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 18 August 2003 - 09:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-titey@18 August 2003 - 16:58
When you fart, your ass expells methane...

Methane is a pollutant...

Your ass should not be allowed.
cows produce more methane than humans...therefore we should exterminate all cows

<_< [/b][/quote]
I am exterminating cows... oe Burger, Jacket and pair of boots at a time...

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 04:42


I largely agree with noob3g, but I think he takes it a little far, most likely because he was being ganged up on.

As for pollution, the exhaust generated by cars in transit is the price we pay for the convenience.&nbsp; What, however, is the point in driving a car around a track for 500 mile?&nbsp; Seems not only pointless, but a little ridiculous given present problem with fossil fuels.
3rd, you didn&#39;t comment on this point. How do you justify driving in a circle?
sorry for the delay in reply...i&#39;ve been asleep/forum been down...

firstly, not all tracks are circles :P

secondly, i have no way to justify people wanting to drive cars for entertainment

also, the current problem with fossil fuels isn&#39;t really as bad as some have made out and has been excarbated by a vertain rather large country...:P

[titey]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob@19 August 2003 - 13:35
excarbated
You don&#39;t need carburetors when you have fuel injection. :P

[insanebassman]

Originally posted by hobbes@18 August 2003 - 19:21

Why should business establishments cater only to your wishes and ban smoking?
It should be up to the business itself whether or not to allow smoking.
I choose which places to patronize by their smoking policy - why can&#39;t you?

What you do in your home is your business. What you do in public affects the people around you.

I think with Pizza Hut banning smoking, it means that people have spoken up and declared it an unwanted intrusion on their lunch. I tend to chose my eating establishments on the quality of the food. Smoking has nothing to do with eating. It is like deciding on a restaurant due to the color of its sign. Neither has any bearing on what makes a restaurant enjoyable, it&#39;s the food baby.

When I drink alcohol, I do not pour it on you. Why should you get to stink up my clothes with smoke? You want to wash my jacket for me?

I agree with the premise that an establishment should have the right to decide this and I believe they are by banning smoking.

I tend you enjoy farting through a megaphone at meals end, you want to deal with that? You tend to think that since smoking has traditionally been allowed that is ok to blow noxious smoke over someone while they eat. How could you be so uncaring of others. [/quote]
I quit smoking the day I found out I was to be a father. That being said,I think banning public smoking is wrong. Law should not dictate wether or not I give a shit about your proximity when I light up (were I to smoke again) You can ask me politly to move (as in a park or sidewalk) or you can walk away. Entertainment and eating establishments should be allowed to set thier own standards, as long as a reasonable seperation between smokers and non-smokers. But dictating behavior based on coerced politeness? HA&#33; I have every right to start out my day as an ass as I have the right to start my day as a polite guy. When I smoked, I took into account wether or not I offended while doing so. That was me going out of my way to be nice to my companions. When I was in the smoking section of a restauraunt(sp?) I lit up at will, and did not give it a second thought. That is why I was there, good food and an environment in which I felt completely comfortable. Since I quit smoking, I eat in the non-smoking area. If someone offends me with thier smoke, I move or ask them to move politely.(when I am not in a designated smoking area) I do not think the government should dictate thier right to offend or not.

And if you are really concerned with dying slowly due to toxin intake, check your foods. Look at labels and methods of preparation. That shit fucks you up much more than second hand smoke ever will. Do a little research on some of those ingredients they call "preservatives" and such. Look at how there is an allowable level of arsenic in the water. (among other things) Want to be paranoid about death and poison, go no further than what you allow into your kitchen. I do and that is how I got healthier. I happily eat meat, but make sure you know what you are getting there too. Life is a gamble and you are not guaranteed happiness. Do not whine for a "leader" to dictate hapiness for you. Find it YOPURSELF. And stop whining about other people&#39;s habits.

(Only portions of this statement are in response to the quoted part)

Smoke &#39;em if you got &#39;em&#33;

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by titey+19 August 2003 - 19:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (titey @ 19 August 2003 - 19:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-3rd gen noob@19 August 2003 - 13:35
excarbated
You don&#39;t need carburetors when you have fuel injection. :P [/b][/quote]
carbs can give more performance though...:P

[hobbes]

Originally posted by insanebassman@19 August 2003 - 19:53






I quit smoking the day I found out I was to be a father. That being said,I think banning public smoking is wrong. Law should not dictate wether or not I give a shit about your proximity when I light up (were I to smoke again) You can ask me politly to move (as in a park or sidewalk) or you can walk away. Entertainment and eating establishments should be allowed to set thier own standards, as long as a reasonable seperation between smokers and non-smokers. But dictating behavior based on coerced politeness? HA&#33; I have every right to start out my day as an ass as I have the right to start my day as a polite guy. When I smoked, I took into account wether or not I offended while doing so. That was me going out of my way to be nice to my companions. When I was in the smoking section of a restauraunt(sp?) I lit up at will, and did not give it a second thought. That is why I was there, good food and an environment in which I felt completely comfortable. Since I quit smoking, I eat in the non-smoking area. If someone offends me with thier smoke, I move or ask them to move politely.(when I am not in a designated smoking area) I do not think the government should dictate thier right to offend or not.






There is no law, this was an independent decision made by Pizza Hut. Did I miss something?

As I posted before, the concept that smoking areas are actually distinct from non-smoking areas, is equivalent to covering your eyes and pretending that the person one table over no longer exists.

No one would complain about smoking in restaurants if there were actually a real separation between smoking/nonsmoking. Just because I don&#39;t smoke, doesn&#39;t make me some high ground moral man. Usually I am too drunk to be understood by said offending smoker.

I just want to go to a restaurant to eat, not start a confrontation or bother anyone else. And I don&#39;t want to have my clothes smell like shit when I get home. I&#39;m a pretty simple guy.

[MediaSlayer]

fyi: I second hand smoke two packs a day :o

[insanebassman]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 12:13
[QUOTE]



There is no law, this was an independent decision made by Pizza Hut. Did I miss something?

-----------------------------------------------------------
I just want to go to a restaurant to eat, not start a confrontation or bother anyone else. And I don&#39;t want to have my clothes smell like shit when I get home. I&#39;m a pretty simple guy.
to the first part I quoted, I mentioned this was not just in response to you...

---------------------------------------------------------------

to the second part, I really can not blame ya. I am not fond of the smell anymore either.... but I still support people and establishment rights to choose.

[titey]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 14:13
As I posted before, the concept that smoking areas are actually distinct from non-smoking areas, is equivalent to covering your eyes and pretending that the person one table over no longer exists.
But I enjoy playing peek-a-boo with the other people in the restaurant. http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/ohno.gif

[Ron]

I have a bar, and at least 90% of my customers smoke.
Haven&#39;t had one girl to work here that didn&#39;t either.
Should I ban smoking too, and go bankrupt?
I read somewhere that Holland was thinking about banning smoking in all pubs, restaurants, etc., but that it might cause the loss of 50.000 jobs&#33;&#33;&#33;
Every country makes BILLIONS of &#036; on taxes on tobacco every year. If we all stopped smoking, healthcare would cease to exist due to a lack of money.
No more F1 either btw. Gone.
Hell, it&#39;s not even unimaginable that the economy would crumble.
Might as well ban alcohol too. That kills a lot of innocent people too, due to alcohol influenced driving.
No more alcohol and tobacco in the shops, the mob will have a field day there. :D
Millions of people unemployed all overthe world. They won&#39;t have the money anymore to spend on other luxury items, so we&#39;d get an avalanche effect that would make even more millions unemployed, probably a lot of anti tobacco supporters.
Tell the farmersto stop using fertilizers and pest control products whle you&#39;re at it, they poison my food&#33;&#33;
What&#39;s that?
The crops would be decimated?
Who cares?
I want pure, unpoisoned products on my plate&#33;
No more antibiotics either. They kill your immunity against bacteria. Let&#39;s get rid of them. No more pharmaceutical industry. Another couple of million unemployeds. Who cares?
Cars kill too. Ban &#39;em&#33;
Guns? Ban &#39;em&#33;
:rolleyes:

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by Ron@19 August 2003 - 20:34
No more F1 either btw. Gone.
wrong

there is a ban on tobacco advertising on a few of the current races already

if no races had tobacco advertising, f1 would continue

[Ron]

Wrong.
Belgium put a ban on tobacco ads, an there was no more F1.
So we changed the law again, and now it&#39;s back.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by Ron@19 August 2003 - 20:40
Wrong.
Belgium put a ban on tobacco ads, an there was no more F1.
So we changed the law again, and now it&#39;s back.
belgium wasn&#39;t banned for tobacco ads, it was safety reasons...

what about magny cours?
it has no tobacco sponsoring and the race is still there...:P

[Ron]

For how long?
How long will certain race tracks survive without that income?
And why do people think that it will stop people stop from smoking?

[Ron]

BTW, I (and a lot of people) still think the F1 was taken from us because of the ad ban.
Safety reasons were just an escape route.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 20:13
There is no law, this was an independent decision made by Pizza Hut. Did I miss something?...
Likely that was in response to me; it actually is a law passed through by the WCB. And the damn law went through so many revisions it&#39;s confusing. ;) But here it is, from the WCB:




What does the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation require for controlling environmental tobacco smoke in hospitality establishments as of May 1, 2002?

The Regulation requires employers in public entertainment facilities to control workers&#39; exposure to environmental tobacco smoke through one of the following options:

- Prohibiting smoking at the worksite
- Restricting smoking to a designated smoking area such as a safe outdoor location, or a designated smoking room (DSR) that is structurally separate from other areas

Under the revised Regulation, workers in the hospitality industry have the right to choose whether to enter a designated smoking room and may not be discriminated against for choosing not to enter a designated smoking room. Where workers do choose to enter the designated smoking room, the Regulation requires there be only intermittent exposure – not to exceed 20% of their work period.

What options are available for an employer who chooses to allow smoking at the workplace?

There are a number of ways hospitality employers can comply with the ETS requirements to manage workers&#39; exposure. Smoking can occur in:

A separately ventilated, structurally separated room which workers may choose to enter for a period of time not to exceed 20% of their work period. Entry must be intermittent.
Patios or outdoor areas that have free movement of air. This usually means an area with a floor, a roof, and obstructions on no more than two sides. Adjacent buildings and objects must be taken into consideration. Smoke should not enter the indoor work area. Employers are responsible for demonstrating that ETS does not accumulate.


That&#39;s the most recent version of it; the original was passed back in 98.

:ninja:

[Ron]

Smoking is also prohibited on most airlines.
Do we really need a nervous pilot, dying for a smoke at the helm of a plane carrying hundreds of people? :ph34r:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Ron@19 August 2003 - 21:00
Smoking is also prohibited on most airlines.
Do we really need a nervous pilot, dying for a smoke at the helm of a plane carrying hundreds of people? :ph34r:
Specious Ron.

Pilots are isolated from the cabin and do not infringe upon the passengers. He only has to deal with the co-pilot and they can smoke together.

I like to drink, but I don&#39;t let that interfere with my job. It is bonus for a job well done. I guess if you are so addicted to your drug that you can&#39;t focus on the job at hand, maybe you would be better off bagging groceries than being entrusted to the safety of 100&#39;s of passengers.

Please, give me a non-drug addicted pilot.


PS: as the thread runs long and you have not the time to read it all, I have already stated that bars should remain "smoking". Don&#39;t like it, but I am willing to compromise.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by insanebassman@19 August 2003 - 20:17

[QUOTE]



There is no law, this was an independent decision made by Pizza Hut. Did I miss something?

-----------------------------------------------------------
I just want to go to a restaurant to eat, not start a confrontation or bother anyone else. And I don&#39;t want to have my clothes smell like shit when I get home. I&#39;m a pretty simple guy.
to the first part I quoted, I mentioned this was not just in response to you...

---------------------------------------------------------------

to the second part, I really can not blame ya. I am not fond of the smell anymore either.... but I still support people and establishment rights to choose.
Sorry Bassman,

I thought I removed the parts of your post that were directed elsewhere and commented on the points you directed at me.

Guess I didn&#39;t quite get it right.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 21:20
I like to drink, but I don&#39;t let that interfere with my job. ...
Unlike pilots... ;)

:ninja:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by MagicNakor+19 August 2003 - 21:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MagicNakor @ 19 August 2003 - 21:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@19 August 2003 - 21:20
I like to drink, but I don&#39;t let that interfere with my job.&nbsp; ...
Unlike pilots... ;)

:ninja: [/b][/quote]
touche :lol:

[Ron]

Well, while nicotine is poisonous, it still has a lot of good sides too.
Hell, the only unhealthy thing about it (besides an overdose) is that one has to smoke it.
To use your &#39;work&#39; example, nicotine greatly increases the concentration.
Which, in my book, is a good thing for a pilot. ;)

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Ron@19 August 2003 - 21:36
Well, while nicotine is poisonous, it still has a lot of good sides too.
Hell, the only unhealthy thing about it (besides an overdose) is that one has to smoke it.
To use your &#39;work&#39; example, nicotine greatly increases the concentration.
Which, in my book, is a good thing for a pilot. ;)
Coffee- less stinky, less addictive

[titey]

Originally posted by hobbes@19 August 2003 - 15:42
Coffee- less stinky, less addictive
I know far more caffeine addicts than I do smokers&#33; http://www.piczonline.com/client/titey/nerves.gif

[Jay]

s owhats more addictive, nicotine or caffeine

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by Jay@19 August 2003 - 23:44
s owhats more addictive, nicotine or caffeine
i&#39;d guess nicotine...however, heroin is probably more addictive than both of these put together...

[ang3968]

I think it depends on the person... not the substance as to how addictive something can be... and yes heroin is very addictive but in a controlled environment not as harmful as smokes or alcohol... (harmful to the persons own body that is)

[gaz_k]

if you wanna smoke, you shouldnt be penalised for it, you already are enough in the amount of tax. it may be seen as a bad habit but hey, fuck it&#33;

[elmos_on_fire]

Ron sorry bout .... in da club. dont take me seriously just quitin smokin. its killin me an im all snappy tom.

i&#39;d guess nicotine...however, heroin is probably more addictive than both of these put together...

nope the scientist in aus said nicotine is more addictive then herion. an more so now cause of the new chemicals they put in it to increase the dependence on it.

[gaz_k]

i dont think nicotine is as addictive as smack.
i mean, you dont see all these clinics and rehab centres for poeple who chain a few fags.
ciggarettes dont get you to go out n mug ppl n rob n steel n cause crime just to buy another packet of fags like herion does.
they not as addictive cos the not the same emotinos, have you ever actually witnessed sumone shooting up or just in ecstacy wen they have taken it?
herion is more of a way of living, it is what your life revolves around, fags are just there to make life seem easier.

[elmos_on_fire]

rite u r gaz k, but thats cause the herion users r lookin for that first high so they r emotionally unstable allready. as in low self of steem. so it makes them feel betta. smokes is somthin thats wierd. im goin of them at the moment an the doc said i was sufferin withdrawal symptoms thats y i was so angery an fightin people for no reason. maybe i have a addictive cycle but im goin crazy not havin a smoke.

[elmos_on_fire]

i reckon they should have re-hab for smokers.

[gaz_k]

you dont have to be emotinoally unstable to try smack... just curious.
why did you start smokin in the first place, not becuase you unstable *you may be now after quittin) but cos you were curious.
same with smack... it mite have just been smokin it to star with, maybe cos u in a room with a load of people on it anyway, n u want to know what it feels like that makes you look so relaxed n orgamsic like they do, then maybe after that you go onto injectin....

[elmos_on_fire]

true gaz just that the only people i know who do herion r streeters. i sold me mums smokes for food (cause she only bought food for herself) an i was curious too lol. ur right. curiosity killed the cat though. lol im gonna die&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; no just goin crazy here.

[Ron]

Come to think of it, how much does a pack of cigs cost where you guys live?
Let&#39;s take Marlboro, that&#39;s a pretty worldwide known brand.
Over here, it costs €3.65, but they&#39;re planning on increasing that price before the end of the year.

About the addictiveness (is that a real world?) of smack and nicotine....isn&#39;t sex even more addictive? :blink:
I mean, everybody does it/wants it over and over again. There&#39;s no stopping it. People pay good money to get it. Some even kill for it. I think we&#39;re just waiting for the government to tax us on that too. :D

[gaz_k]

yeah, or set up taxing on wanking and have to make tax declarations and donations they could be known as wank banks.

20 malrboro lights cos £4.65 where i live, prob cost more down near london.
on a night out the fags in the machines in pubs n clubs are normall £4.80 - £5.50 for 16. so yeah bit pf a rip off.

but i agree the sex n wanking is addictive..

[Keikan]

Originally posted by Skweeky@18 August 2003 - 05:41
To be honest, I smoke myself, but I hate it when other people smoke when I&#39;m still eating. ButI also admit that there&#39;s nothing like a nice cigarette after a good meal. Maybe restaurants should just install some sort of smoking room.
Air sealed

[elmos_on_fire]

lol tax sex. dont buy marlbros but a cheaper brand horizons r bout &#036;18 for pack of 50. dont know if its dear here or what.

[gaz_k]

cheap fags = cheap taste n smell.

i not heard of horizon although we do have cheap ones such as richmond n mayfair.... they pretty shit and shit for skinning up with. cant beat marlboro lights of benson and hedges.

[elmos_on_fire]

its bout a buck or 2 cheaper but the real cheap ones&#33; YUKKKY there bloody crap, like the kings somthin. but longbeach is good. i started on horizons then went to longbeach then horizons. ive tried marlbros but there 12&#39;s taste like herbal dog crap&#33; the 8&#39;s or 4&#39;s or good, carnt remeber witch one.

[gaz_k]

what do you mean by the numbers mate?
how many are in a pack?
dont get wot u mean mate

[JONNO_CELEBS]

I&#39;ll have 10 No.10&#39;s please :D

Showing your naivety now Gay_K.......errrr......sorry.....Gaz_k :P


Jonno B)

[elmos_on_fire]

no in aus by that we mean the millagrams of nico in them. but most say mild, supa mild, an so on. 12&#39;s r mild dont know the rest