Netherlands overturns draconian smoking ban

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R0BB13G

Smokers should be shot....

in reality - I love the ban and if this happened here I would be EXTREMELY infuriated. Smokers are inconsiderate, unhealthy *****. Idc, I don't want their disgusting toxic 2nd-hand smoke anywhere near me. The ban is for the good of the people.

If you wanna **** up your lungs, heart & more, increase the chances of cancer & heart disease and basically destroy your health, go outside and do it, at least then you won't be affecting anyone else's health at the same time. Idc if you don't want to if you're willing enough to destroy your health for a drug then surely it's only a minor interference to go outside? I ain't breathing in your **** thanks.

As you can tell, I feel VERY strongly about this. Smokers disgust me.

---

Agree with every word :)

lol non smokers i can understand why you wouldn't want to breathe in second hand smoke (or even just smell if it you're more than 3 metres away....) but you have just as much rights as a smoker does. ultimately i think it's up to the owner of the premises

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cocaine

lol non smokers i can understand why you wouldn't want to breathe in second hand smoke (or even just smell if it you're more than 3 metres away....) but you have just as much rights as a smoker does. ultimately i think it's up to the owner of the premises

---

Smokers lose their rights when they light up their first ciggarette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by immense

uk laws aren't bad on this. must places have heated outside areas anyway so yah. i like it the way it is. it's sooo weird in spain everyone smoking in bars

---

Whatever happened to freedom of choice?

Would you like the state telling you what to do in your own bedroom for example?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nixt

http://www.publications.parliament.u...07061114000542

---

My bad, I read that it was still in place. Even so, 3 years it took them to ban it for themselves? one rule for us, another for them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R0BB13G

Smokers should be shot....

in reality - I love the ban and if this happened here I would be EXTREMELY infuriated. Smokers are inconsiderate, unhealthy *****. Idc, I don't want their disgusting toxic 2nd-hand smoke anywhere near me. The ban is for the good of the people.

If you wanna **** up your lungs, heart & more, increase the chances of cancer & heart disease and basically destroy your health, go outside and do it, at least then you won't be affecting anyone else's health at the same time. Idc if you don't want to if you're willing enough to destroy your health for a drug then surely it's only a minor interference to go outside? I ain't breathing in your **** thanks.

As you can tell, I feel VERY strongly about this. Smokers disgust me.

---

How about this then, say i'm disgusted by drinking. I don't like the smell, sight or affects of drinking. I want to go to a restaurant, lets ban drinking in all restaurants/places where food is served - do you see my point now? i'm telling you what you can and cannot do just because I don't like it.

Then again a more personal question to yourself would be, do you eat fatty/salty foods such as McDonalds, do you drink? - barely a difference. If anything alcohol is worse because it has more severe effects on your person such as losing control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Whatever happened to freedom of choice?

Would you like the state telling you what to do in your own bedroom for example?



My bad, I read that it was still in place. Even so, 3 years it took them to ban it for themselves? one rule for us, another for them.



How about this then, say i'm disgusted by drinking. I don't like the smell, sight or affects of drinking. I want to go to a restaurant, lets ban drinking in all restaurants/places where food is served - do you see my point now? i'm telling you what you can and cannot do just because I don't like it.

Then again a more personal question to yourself would be, do you eat fatty/salty foods such as McDonalds, do you drink? - barely a difference. If anything alcohol is worse because it has more severe effects on your person such as losing control.

---

Smoking & Drinking are nothing like each other. Smoking not only affects your health, but the others around you from second hand smoke. Drinking doesn't DIRECTLY. Smoking is also never safe, whereas drinking in small amounts is.

And yes I eat McDonalds sometimes & I have had a drink in the past, but in moderation, those things are fine, and can actually be good for you. Whereas ANY smoking, 1 a day even, is bad for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

How about this then, say i'm disgusted by drinking. I don't like the smell, sight or affects of drinking. I want to go to a restaurant, lets ban drinking in all restaurants/places where food is served - do you see my point now? i'm telling you what you can and cannot do just because I don't like it.

Then again a more personal question to yourself would be, do you eat fatty/salty foods such as McDonalds, do you drink? - barely a difference. If anything alcohol is worse because it has more severe effects on your person such as losing control.

---

the key difference here is that you have no right not to be offended by someone's actions, yet you do have a right not to be harmed by someone else's actions. smokers at restaurants/bars/clubs can choose to smoke outside briefly and then return, thus not hurting anyone. drinkers can drink with non-drinkers and not harm anyone else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R0BB13G

Smoking & Drinking are nothing like each other. Smoking not only affects your health, but the others around you from second hand smoke. Drinking doesn't DIRECTLY. Smoking is also never safe, whereas drinking in small amounts is.

And yes I eat McDonalds sometimes & I have had a drink in the past, but in moderation, those things are fine, and can actually be good for you. Whereas ANY smoking, 1 a day even, is bad for you.

---

Smoking is safe, I believe alcohol kills brain cells anyway does it not?

Nothing is 'safe' - everything you consume will affect you in someway or other, smoking has been made to look more dangerous than it actually is compared to drinking. Smoking (unlike drinking and drugs in general) doesn't change you - drinking and drugs can make you 'lose' yourself whereas smoking doesn't have that affect.

Smoking in moderation can be fine, it calms a lot of people down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alexxxxx

the key difference here is that you have no right not to be offended by someone's actions, yet you do have a right not to be harmed by someone else's actions. smokers at restaurants/bars/clubs can choose to smoke outside briefly and then return, thus not hurting anyone. drinkers can drink with non-drinkers and not harm anyone else.

---

Harmed? you are harmed by many things in someway or other. It would be like somebody who is allergic to pollen demanding that the local flower display at the park is uprooted because it has a negative affect on them.

If you do not like smoke and feel it has a great effect on you, then you could simply go to a pub where smoking is not allowed. You know, freedom of choice without state/busybody interference as the video shows?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Smoking is safe, I believe alcohol kills brain cells anyway does it not?

Nothing is 'safe' - everything you consume will affect you in someway or other, smoking has been made to look more dangerous than it actually is compared to drinking. Smoking (unlike drinking and drugs in general) doesn't change you - drinking and drugs can make you 'lose' yourself whereas smoking doesn't have that affect.

Smoking in moderation can be fine, it calms a lot of people down.



Harmed? you are harmed by many things in someway or other. It would be like somebody who is allergic to pollen demanding that the local flower display at the park is uprooted because it has a negative affect on them.

If you do not like smoke and feel it has a great effect on you, then you could simply go to a pub where smoking is not allowed. You know, freedom of choice without state/busybody interference as the video shows?

---

But smoking affects other people - drinking doesn't.

Second hand smoke - when consumed often - has the same affect as smoking. So if you go down the pub every Friday after work and people are smoking, the second hand smoke builds up, and has the same affect as smoking a few every Friday. But going down the pub and drinking doesn't have that affect at all.

Basically...for drinking, only the one who's drinking is affected. Smoking - people are around them are affected. I don't want to be inhaling rat poison, tar and more disgusting things thanks. Keep that for yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by R0BB13G

But smoking affects other people - drinking doesn't.

Second hand smoke - when consumed often - has the same affect as smoking. So if you go down the pub every Friday after work and people are smoking, the second hand smoke builds up, and has the same affect as smoking a few every Friday. But going down the pub and drinking doesn't have that affect at all.

Basically...for drinking, only the one who's drinking is affected. Smoking - people are around them are affected. I don't want to be inhaling rat poison, tar and more disgusting things thanks. Keep that for yourself.

---

But you are fine with consuming various salts, food dyes, pesticides, herbicides, fats and alcoholic beverages?

In the other thread concerning fireworks you agree with me - well this is my point again. What is the problem with allowing freedom of choice? you would have the very simple choice of; you can either go into a non-smoking pub/bar or a smoking pub/bar - smokers would also have that choice.

Can you not make your own decisions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

But you are fine with consuming various salts, food dyes, pesticides, herbicides, fats and alcoholic beverages?

In the other thread concerning fireworks you agree with me - well this is my point again. What is the problem with allowing freedom of choice? you would have the very simple choice of; you can either go into a non-smoking pub/bar or a smoking pub/bar - smokers would also have that choice.

Can you not make your own decisions?

---

Of course I can, and I agree with you in that thread because you are right - people buy pets in the knowledge that for a few days a year fireworks will go off and make them nervous/scared. If they're not prepared to put up with that then they shouldn't buy them.

But back on topic; the things you listed (fatty foods, alcohol ect.) do not affect anyone except the consumer. Whereas smoking does. The smoke when they are not inhaling drifts throughout the pub/restaurant and is inhaled by other people who are then affected by it. Regular pub visitors who don't smoke may get signs of smoker - for example the smokers cough, due to large amounts of inhaled second-hand smoke. With drinking/fatty foods that doesn't happen.

That's why - smoking affects other people's health without their consent and it shouldn't be allowed to happen. Imo; smoking should be banned completely but that won't happen because the Government makes too much tax from it.