MPs to vote on 'full smoking ban' today (England)

What do you think the outcome of todays vote should be?

  • Total Ban

    Votes: 30 62.5%

  • Partial Ban

    Votes: 9 18.8%

  • No Change

    Votes: 9 18.8%
  • Total voters
    48
oh, the joy of a fifty year lifespan cut short by an agonising and painfuly slow death at the hands of a cancer...

...I think i'll stick to Tea & Crumpets, thank you very much :|
 
They taste of AWESOME, perhaps?

I think I'll stick to cigars, anyways :D

-Angry Lawyer
 
Freedom's a difficult concept; I don't expect most people to understand it.
 
You b***ard :p

J/K, share the <3 (But keep the tobacco :D)
 
Damn straight I'm keeping the tobbaco. Have you seen the cost of a good fat cuban cigar?

-Angry Lawyer
 
People should be allowed to smoke if they want to, they are stupid to do so in my opinion (in my fact?)
If a club dosn't want people to smoke that's fine, they enforce it themselves.

I believe in true freedom.
 
short recoil said:
People should be allowed to smoke if they want to, they are stupid to do so in my opinion (in my fact?)
If a club dosn't want people to smoke that's fine, they enforce it themselves.

I believe in true freedom.
Click to expand...
but then they exclude a large audience, making it silly to do so.
 
Solaris said:
but then they exclude a large audience, making it silly to do so.
Click to expand...

They're still allowed to, and it's not silly at all. It's amusing how you think it's silly for a private owner to make a nonsmoking rule, but perfectly acceptable for the government to do the same thing.
 
What the hell? Since when does allowing smokers go and block out non-smokers?

It's discrimination against a minority.

-Angry Lawyer
 
Nat Turner said:
Freedom's a difficult concept; I don't expect most people to understand it.
Click to expand...

Equally so with responsibility and consideration. It's only because so many people lack these things nowadays that governments have to intervene.
It's entirely because people are unable to act with consideration, common sense and self control that we are getting towards a nanny state.
With freedom comes responsbility, they are ying and yang and either means nothing without the other. When individuals don't excercise responsibilty, freedom is diminished. That is unfortunately what is happening now, at least in law.

Angry Lawyer said:
It's discrimination against a minority
Click to expand...

Ha, I love this, it's so ridiculous it's actually funny because it shows how desperate smokers are to justify inflicting their bizarre freedoms on other people.
It's not discrimination, because it effects smokers and non-smokers in the same way - neither smokers or non-smokers are allowed to smoke in pubs, but it's only smokers who would be bothered.
And to equate smokers to other minorities such as people who are different by ethnicity, sexuality, disability etc is actually offensive, for at least two reasons: smokers choose to put make themselves part of the minority by choosing to smoke; the activities of no other minority effects other people.

I don't actually see what point you're trying to make by saying it's discrimination against a minority - would it be more acceptable to you if the majority of people were smokers and the discrimination was against the majority of the population? What is your point by saying this?
 
pomegranate said:
Equally so with responsibility and consideration. It's only because so many people lack these things nowadays that governments have to intervene.
It's entirely because people are unable to act with consideration, common sense and self control that we are getting towards a nanny state.
With freedom comes responsbility, they are ying and yang and either means nothing without the other. When individuals don't excercise responsibilty, freedom is diminished. That is unfortunately what is happening now, at least in law.
Click to expand...

That's extremely fascist if you support this. Just letting you know.
 
Nat Turner said:
That's extremely fascist if you support this. Just letting you know.
Click to expand...

No, that's just your opinion, not fact. Bear in mind that what I said I mean within the context of a functioning developed society, not neccessarily applicable to all possible social models.

Angry Lawyer said:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Satire
Click to expand...

If you're trying to make me look like an ass for not picking up on your supposed satire, then you = fail, because the discrimination argument is commonly used by the pro-public smoking lobby.
 
I agree that people don't know their responsibilities to society. They know their rights however, and quite often step over the mark, abusing other people's rights.
 
But consider this:

Because I smoke on occasion, does that make me any less of a human being?

So think, peoples, before you paint smokers with your broad brush of HATEHATEHATE.

-Angry Lawyer
 
Then I'll never come back ;(

On a more serious note, some people have problems that really shouldn't be trivialised by such curt posts.

-Angry Lawyer
 
Nope, sober as a judge. Maybe slightly dazed from injuries though. Don't ask.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top