www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15744352
"....potentially improving safety as smoking could be a distraction for the driver"
|
Two words are wrong with their statement 'potentially' and 'could'.
For those I read 'clutching at straws'.
Pat
|
"Some states in Canada, the US and Australia, as well as the whole of South Africa, have introduced legislation, but in each case it has been focused on stopping smoking where children are present."
I'm fine with this, henry - and as you know, I puff away like a tugboat!
However, the BMA's stance is the thin edge of the wedge - what next? No smoking within 200 yards of another human being?
No smoking in the privacy of your own home?
|
>> No smoking in the privacy of your own home?
>>
That was mentioned in the radio report I heard.
As a non-smoker I have no objection to anyone else smoking as long as it isn't inflicted on me so the best next step would be no smoking within 20 yards of a building entrance.
And I would never buy a used car which has been smoked in.
|
|
Another law which can be added to the list of either unenforced or unenforceable, even if it is ever enacted!
|
|
If smokers kept the detritus of their activity in the car - doesn't worry me whether people smoke in their cars or not.
|
>> As a non-smoker I have no objection to anyone else smoking as long as it
>> isn't inflicted on me so the best next step would be no smoking within 20
>> yards of a building entrance.
Thats smoking banned in the whole of London then
|
|
I read something about this - an intention to remove the curse of the door cluster smokers (or the "snoutcats" as ISIHAC Christened them) - the law of unintended consequences. Another one is that outside tables are now hogged by smokers....can't win can you.
|
|
They'll be banning people from living in Granite cottages because of the Radon gas next!
|
I've no problem with banning smoking in cars where children are present, but it's really not doing their argument any favours by calling for a complete ban, especially on such a flimsy pretext. However, it would be nice not to have to pass over otherwise perfectly good second hand cars because the interior stinks and the surfaces are all coated with yellow muck.
In a sense, this is all irrelevant anyway, as I think we can all see that we are on the inevitable road to smoking being banned full stop, for anyone, anywhere. Norway is the leader here, with leading politicians openly aiming for zero smokers in the future, partly by encouragement, partly by coercion, until the sale of cigarettes is stopped altogether at some point in a few years time. 99% of nations seem to be heading in the same direction, at varying speeds.
Is this a bad thing? Hmmm..
|
>> No smoking in the privacy of your own home?<<
Isn`t this already in? - I seem to remember that you cannot smoke in your home if you are expecting a "Workman or other business oriented person" to enter your home within 20mins of your last ciggie!?
|
This will be the same BMA whose members killed 400 people due to negligence and coverups in Mid Staffs Hospitals..
You would think they had better things to do... but obviously not.
|
|
BMA members are doctors, surgeons and consultants SFAIK. Most of the avoidable deaths that occurred in Mid-Staffs were down to lack of care and to neglect by nursing staff, in the main. The fact that they occurred is very serious but not down to BMA members to any great extent, I think.
|
>> This will be the same BMA whose members killed 400 people due to negligence and
>> coverups in Mid Staffs Hospitals..
I don't think the responsibilty for that issue rests solely with those represented by the BMA.
|
>> Is this a bad thing? Hmmm..
>>
Prohibition? Sounds good news for nicotine smugglers and gangsters. Perhaps we shall see the emergence of "smoke-easies".
Take taxable trade away from newsagents and tobaconists and hand it over to the black market.
Glamourise smoking?
|
Should smoking be prohibited, I don't *think* we'd see it become a big issue like booze was in the US prohibition era.
For a start, most smokers can't keep their smoking just to evenings, they need to smoke 15-30 ciggies a day, which makes it a very difficult habit to hide from others, especially with the tell-tale signs! I make that one ciggie every 30-60 minutes. Even heroin addicts and hardcore alcoholics can last longer than that between "hits" and therefore keep their activities hidden, to an extent. In other words, you wouldn't see (many) gangsters selling hooky fags, because most decent folk who smoke would be forced to give it up to lead normal lives.
I think I personally lean towards eventually banning smoking, which is ironic, because I'd like to see some other drugs legalised in order to destroy the black market and the organised crime that goes along with it... Plus the taxation benefits, like you say.
Last edited by: oilburner on Wed 16 Nov 11 at 15:40
|
The BMA is a glorified trade union for quacks. It is not compulsory for doctors to join, but it has a very high opinion of itself as an organisation, and treats its non medically qualified staff very badly - I should know, I used to be one of them.
I therefore treat the occasional pronouncements it makes with a healthy pinch of salt.
|
I shall do the same.
I'm sitting here typing with a fag in each hand in protest, same as I always do on National No Smoking Day:)
Pat
|
Smoking is 'stupid' insofar as the health damage is well known and generally accepted to be true yet people persist in smoking.
But then by the same token rock climbing, mountain biking and sailing are also 'stupid' too since they have associated risks (but I enjoy these activities so that's OK then)...
I don't smoke, I don't like the smell (or threatened impact to my health) of second hand smoke and I consider smokers to be in some way deficient insofar as they can't control themselves. As a child my mother used to smoke in the car with us, it made us travel sick and she was too 'stupid' to realise it was her actions that were causing this. Yet she was a well educated intelligent person - go figure....
Such a ban is unenforceable so is a waste of time, however a program of public information might be a good idea ?
I happen to know the strategy director of a large tobacco company who's job it is to expand their market in the newly developing economies (the ones the US, EU and UK owe so much money too). This person is a smoker and a nice decent person IMHO, he seems to be able to live with himself too despite being well aware of the damage the 'product' does - go figure....
|
I wonder if his tobacco company has a strict no smoking policy on site. lol
Quite ironic really if that were the case.
|
A mate used to work for BAT. They had a smoking building with a few non-smoking rooms right up until the ban came in.
They also gave free fags to staff as a perk. One of the more valuable perks these days IMHO. When he left them, I asked if he'd factored that in when considering if his new package was worth it. He hadn't. A bit of mathematics showed that he was actually losing out.....
|
>> The BMA is a glorified trade union for quacks. It is not compulsory for doctors
>> to join, but it has a very high opinion of itself as an organisation, and
>> treats its non medically qualified staff very badly - I should know, I used to
>> be one of them.
>>
>> I therefore treat the occasional pronouncements it makes with a healthy pinch of salt.
>>
Even assuming what you have stated is true, how does that make the BMA's pronouncements invalid?
Last edited by: Duncan on Wed 16 Nov 11 at 22:49
|
|
Not "invalid" - to be viewed with caution and as part of an overall picture.
|
We, on behalf of our daughter, viewed yesterday a perfectly nice little house with a view to her & her husband buying for his eventual end of army service.
As soon as we entered we knew it was a smoker's house, amply confirmed by the yellow tinge to ceilings!
OK - that's not a deal breaker as a full redecoration should solve the problem. (At a considerable cost to be factored in to an offer).
Given equally nice houses at comparable prices, one a smoker's and one a non-smoker's, it's a no-brainer which one to go for, given that no one in our daughter's family smokes.
I do think the problem is more intractable in the case of cars though.
In my motor trade experience, it is nigh on impossible completely to rid a car of the smell of smoke (or just as bad the awful "doggy" smell).
Nowadays I would not entertain a car with lingering smoke or dog smells.
Last edited by: Roger on Thu 17 Nov 11 at 09:44
|
>> In my motor trade experience, it is nigh on impossible completely to rid a car
>> of the smell of smoke
Probably because the previous owner cannot take the furniture and fittings with him, unlike when he sells his house.
|
|
I can understand banning smoking with children in the car.How to enforce this is another matter.I started smoking at the age of twelve chucked it at 27.Let's also ban the chemical rubbish kids get into their food.The fizzy drinks the list is endless.Up to parents or parent to make the decision what is healthy for their children and smoking in front of them is not.
|
I've just checked out the application forms for the BMA. Nowhere does it say that you can't join if you're a smoker, even as a medical student.
And I know a fair few of the latter who do their bit to keep Benson & Hedges in profit.
Hypocrites!
|
>> Hypocrites!
They are just human like everyone else Hogman... when my middle daughter had dangerous whooping cough as a baby, the doctor who came to look at her was smoking as he did so! Time was when they used to prescribe tobacco as a sedative (quite wrongly actually, although the activity seems soothing to addicts like you and me).
Medics today lose no opportunity to put out anti-snout propaganda. They know it makes sense, and so do we. And they don't care about being PsITA about it.
We do though. We find it very annoying.
:o}
|
|
A dropped cigarette in a car causes quite a panic. I can testify to this after lobbing a burning cigarette end back into the passenger footwell of a car whose driver had just flicked it onto the pavement.
|
Smokers are saving us (non-smokers and the country as a whole) a fortune, much as we motorists help support the flagging economy.
Light up, I say.
|
>> Smokers are saving us (non-smokers and the country as a whole) a fortune, much as
>> we motorists help support the flagging economy.
>>
>> Light up, I say.
>>
So they don't clog up the NHS with asthma , cancer and worse? Or are paid sickness benefit?
I am surprised! :-)
|
|
I think we've probably banned enough things for now. It's getting difficult to remember what you're still allowed to do.
|
>> I think we've probably banned enough things for now. It's getting difficult to remember what
>> you're still allowed to do.
Terrible thing early onset Alzheimer's, you have our greatest support and admiration there Humph.
|
>> >>
>> So they don't clog up the NHS with asthma , cancer and worse? Or are
>> paid sickness benefit?
>>
>> I am surprised! :-)
>>
Even the wildest nanny estimates (guesses) put the cost to the NHS of smoking related problems at 5 billion, compared to the tax revenue from tobacco at 11 billion.
And when you consider that alcohol related admissions to casualty make up 75% of all weekend cases, perhaps the gunfire is pointing in the wrong direction...
|
I can also testify to this, having attempted to lob one out the driver's window, only to have the draught at 70(ahem!)mph blow it back in, where it set fire to the rear seat!
All back in the days before flame-retardant upholstry became the norm.
There's nothing quite like being in the outside lane of a busy motorway and seeing flames in the rearview mirror for a brown trousers moment.
|
Ban smoking in cars, says British Medical Associat - Pat
