Nanny state

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Thu 28 Jun, 2007 11:56 pm

LMAO!!

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Fri 29 Jun, 2007 7:09 pm

On signs...

I would love to have a "No mobile phones, please!" sign in my gallery. Those bl@@dy ringtones....

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 12:26 am

Smokers - hmmmph!!

I'm all for this smoking ban - in fact I think they should all be herded into a spaceship and sent to a planet where it does not matter because of all the pollution in the atmosphere and all the chemicals that the people consume daily in their food. ........

Grahame Case · Post by **Grahame Case** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 10:47 am

we've had the no smoking ban for sometime now, and i must say it is excellent, clean air in pubs and restaurants means you can actually taste the food, not someones second hand smoke.

Seems to me that England always seems to be slow on the uptake of this sort of stuff.

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 4:35 pm

As one of those dreadful people-wot-smoke, I fully appreciate the unpleasantness of the habit - for smoker and non-smoker alike - and I'm completely supportive of the rights of non-smokers to have environments where they feel comfortable and are not exposed to unnecessary health risks. Indeed, I work as best I can in my own home to minimise any discomfort for non-smoking visitors. I've done my time standing around in the cold and wet when working at client premises, with good grace.

That said, I do have an issue about lack of choice. I miss having "the pint and the fag" in a pleasant hostelry. In an allegedly democratic society, surely there should be a place where a proprietor can choose to offer his premises as "smoking" or "non-smoking" and let customers decide where to place their patronage (tricky in a village situation, perhaps).

Only my opinion, but I really consider anti-smoking legislation to be highly discriminatory, anti-competitive, and hypocritical on the part of the legislators. Take cig packet labelling about the potential health effects. To be more egalitarian, surely pint glasses should be labelled with equivalent messages about cirrhosis, pancreatitis, and alcolhol-induced violent behaviour.

(Rapidly taking head down below parapet....

)

Dermot · Post by **Dermot** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 5:03 pm

Áine

Remember that it is smoking in the work place that is banned in Ireland..........not smoking it’s self....

Sometimes even the self employed have to be protected from themselves .........a small builder close to where I am used to works for him self .................had scant regard for building site laws while working on his own property on an development for his profit job.............he did not use the properly prescribed safety equipment whilst working at a height .............fell and is now permanently invalided ........nor had he the correct workers protection insurance ..................he is now on full time invalidity support from the government ...........who is paying..............you and I as tax payers ............if that guy had more respect for him self and what some people describe as the nanny state laws you and I would not now be supporting him.....

You can sit and have a fag and a drink in your own home..........why should you be allowed foster danger on other........even if some miss guided publican felt it was OK........there were many attempts in this country to get the message across over the years about the danger of smoking to the smoker themselves and others.........smokers had every chance in the world to work something out that was acceptable to all...........they did not...........so the government was left with no choice but to intercede..........the smoking ban is about safety in the work place........

Post by **John** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 6:53 pm

But it is the daft side of the nanny state that gets me going.

Such as when a beautiful church which has stood for centuries, in which nobody has ever smoked, or even thought about smoking, now has to be defaced with totally redundant no smoking signs.

I heard that a clergyman was making a stand against this nonsense by refusing to display them. Never heard any follow up though.

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 6:56 pm

Hi Dermot,

Please accept my comments below as being completely respectful of the views you expressed in your earlier post. I am not in any way trying to be contentious or obtuse in any of my responses. For me, this is a civil liberties issue as much as anything, and my comments are intended in that spirit. I hope you and other members of the forum will take them as such. I have no wish to offend.

Dermot wrote: Remember that it is smoking in the work place that is banned in Ireland..........not smoking it’s self....

I am fully aware of that, Dermot, and have voiced no objection to its prinicple.

Dermot wrote:You can sit and have a fag and a drink in your own home..........why should you be allowed foster danger on other

In the social scenario I envisaged (should have clarified further - mea culpa) was one where the publican and his staff all smoke, and where people who choose to smoke could go to socialise. Ergo the majority, if not all, present would be consenting smokers, and consequently accepting of "the danger of smoking to the smoker themselves." The establishment would advertise the fact that smoking was permitted on the premises. The smokers, be they misguided or not - are already making an informed choice about the risks.The only possibility of non-smokers being endangered in such a scenario would be if they consciously chose to enter such an establishment knowing that there will be second-hand smoke present. They could just as easily choose not to go in, and to avoid any risks.

Dermot wrote:something acceptable to all...........

What views or ideas do others have for 'acceptable' social solutions for smokers? Or am I a complete 'voice in the wilderness'?

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 6:59 pm

John wrote:...the daft side of the nanny state ... ... ...totally redundant no smoking signs.

Hear, hear, John! It's insane. Committees can be very silly entities...

Post by **prospero** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 8:41 pm

It's a funny thing but I seem to remember similiar indignation when the wearing of seat belts in cars became compulsory. Prior to that I never wore a seatbelt. Nowadays I wouldn't dream of not belting up.

If times didn't change we would still be shoving small boys up chimneys with a dustpan and brush.

Spit · Post by **Spit** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 8:49 pm

prospero wrote:If times didn't change we would still be shoving small boys up chimneys with a dustpan and brush.

Have they stopped that in England then?

Roboframer · Post by **Roboframer** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 9:03 pm

These days they shove small boys between window bars to rob the small change in your till and your charity box. Don't ask!

Hey - this is the most popular topic ever on 'After hours' - even after you take off Moglet's 10 posts to date!

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 9:26 pm

Miaoooww, Robo!!

Post by **John** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 9:43 pm

prospero wrote:Prior to that I never wore a seatbelt. Nowadays I wouldn't dream of not belting up.

Glad to see that that campaign worked. For me it almost had the opposite effect. I always wore a seatbelt, and even had them fitted to my car long before they were compulsory.

I kind of resented being forced to do something that otherwise I would have done quite willingly. If you see what I mean?

Post by **prospero** » Sat 30 Jun, 2007 11:47 pm

Whatever else the powers that be decide to ban, you can still have a bloody good moan.

foxyframer · Post by **foxyframer** » Tue 03 Jul, 2007 7:19 am

Many shops yesterday have not followed government guidelines. Mandatory window stickers are not in situ.

Our local city council have in their infinate wisdom seen fit to place no-smoking stickers on all the bus shelters. Surely these do not constitute public enclosed spaces, being open to elements from most sides.

I remember going back to the eighties, signs were put up declaring the city was a nuclear free zone.

These were on the outskirts of all major roads. Local government waste of taxpayers' money. Stayed up for about eighteen months, then removed. Another tosspot idea from the councillors.

WelshFramer · Post by **WelshFramer** » Tue 03 Jul, 2007 9:14 am

John wrote:We recently had to put up a no smoking sign.

The fact that nobody has ever smoked in our shop is of no consequence . The sign is everything, it MUST be displayed. And there are harsh penalties for those who do not conform.

I don't know what the English signing regulations say but the Welsh ones seem to allow a lot of scope for creativity -- framed cross-stitch signs would probably look very nice in a church (or chapel) and would seem to conform to the regulations so long as they are a specified minimum size.

Post by **prospero** » Tue 03 Jul, 2007 9:22 am

No sticker in my window.

I have never officially been informed that I have to have one. I await the day when some tit with a clipboard comes in to admonish me for this crime.

kev@frames · Post by **kev@frames** » Tue 03 Jul, 2007 2:52 pm

whats the point of compulsory no smoking signs in public places?

the law's the law. its been publiscised widely enough. we just end up with so many BS notices all over the place.

they dont put up "no burgling" signs..... or "no stealing cars" signs on every lamp post - although admittedly the penalties for those crimes are less than they are for smoking.

its spitting in public they want to ban. thats my pet hate.

Tom at work reckons in due course we'll have to have a dedicated pork-scratchings room, because they are bad for you too.

This moulding might contain nuts....

Moglet · Post by **Moglet** » Tue 03 Jul, 2007 6:08 pm

foxyframer wrote:Our local city council have ... seen fit to place no-smoking stickers on all the bus shelters. Surely these do not constitute public enclosed spaces, being open to elements from most sides.

Maybe they're trying to convince John Cleese to return from the states. That is beyond silly.