Car smoke ban 'to start in October'

[Bellend Sebastian]

I'm guessing it's OK if all your kids smoke.

Mine get through so many I can't keep up! Nursery have tried everything

[inckley fox]

If it's unhealthy and unnecessary then yeah why not?

Human choice is fine and we should be adult and responsible enough to make the right choices but in the case of smoking, the human race most definitely is not capable of that choice.

There is no good reason on the face of the earth to want to start smoking, there just isnt. A couple of posters said its not been banned because of the revenue it generates and thats probably correct as to why its not been banned.

All the other things you list are unhealthy or dangerous but not unnecessary. Crap food is still food, a fast car is still a car and alcohol in moderation (like Guiness or Red wine) does have certain health benefits. Smoking however benefits nobody. Its bad for you, its bad for the people around you, it stinks and its very expensive nowadays.

Why would anyone want to do it? As an ex smoker, I cant remember why I started but I sure as hell know why I quit.

 

The last time I looked around 80% of the country have decided not to smoke, so I'd say the human race is, as you put it, 'capable of that choice'.

 

And plenty of people who smoke are also quite healthy, just as plenty who don't smoke are not healthy.

 

And reasons for smoking? Of course there are plenty. For a start it's actually something that a great many smokers, and a fair few non-smokers, genuinely enjoy. I'd class that as a good reason for not outrightly banning something.

 

As for the distinctions you draw, I'm still not clear what the benefits of keeping dogs or cats are. The owners like to keep them, that's the sum total of it. And would you ban fast cars? Because there's no need for them to be fast and they are quite dangerous. As for fast foods, no there is absolutely no need for them other than our own enjoyment. You say it's 'still food', but there is plenty of salad out there for us to chomp our way through, it's not like we'd suddenly starve if Burger King didn't exist.

 

There is, literally, no need for it whatsoever. So do we ban it? And the quantity of alcohol which serves a medicinal purpose is, according to scientific estimates, anything between one glass of red wine a day and one glass a year. So why would we ever allow anybody to buy more than a pint or a half bottle? Why not issue tokens like Communist Russia? Or ban its sale and have it available on prescription only?

 

The point is that what we enjoy is not necessarily good for us. We can't, in a 'free' society, be expected to live purely healthy lives.

 

Some things serve no human benefit other than enjoyment, and can be harmful (be they dogs, fast cars, fast food, horror movies, surfing, fireworks, porn, guns or cigarettes) but these things, or at least some of them, are still enjoyed by the vast bulk of the world's population. If we can do our best to see that these things don't hurt the rest of us, be it by legislation on dangerous animals, or on explosives, or on smoking in enclosed spaces, then I see no reason why we should go about eliminating them, or telling people to stop enjoying them because they annoy me / aren't in any way physically beneficial to them.

 

Because even if we did that people would find a way to do the most unhealthy thing of them all - namely lazing about doing absolutely nothing and getting absurdly unhealthy. And how far would you go? Would you fit a treadmill in anyone you consider to be a bit out of shape's front room and tell them they do 5km a day if they don't wish to rot in their own filth?

 

The fact that we don't do these things is what distinguishes us from austere authoritarian regimes. If you start going down that road then it's worth remembering where it ends.

[Hollism]

Fantastic post^

Thracian, I know non-smokers don't really see the appeal to smoking, but that is possibly the most ignorant post in the history of FoxesTalk.

[Harry - LCFC]

I'm surprised people are seriously suggesting banning smoking outright. Come on guys, let people make their own decisions.

 

Torn on whether to ban it when children are in the car though. That behaviour is bordering on child abuse IMO, something you certainly shouldn't have the freedom to engage in.

[AyewJoking]

I hope they dont ban farting in the car.

 

Its wholesome family fun.

[Bert]

I hope they dont ban farting in the car.

Its wholesome family fun.

I'd be on death row

[Thracian]

Fantastic post^

Thracian, I know non-smokers don't really see the appeal to smoking, but that is possibly the most ignorant post in the history of FoxesTalk.

 

Then it fits a good many of the people I'm talking about who don't give a shit where their smoke goes or the way it makes other people feel. Including babies and infant children who aren't in a position to object.    . 

[Collibosher70]

so people that smoke are ignorant ?...i dont smoke near my kids and i try to respect where i do smoke..never mind cant win em all

[Carl the Llama]

Wtf Thrac, I thought you were cool.

[inckley fox]

Then it fits a good many of the people I'm talking about who don't give a shit where their smoke goes or the way it makes other people feel. Including babies and infant children who aren't in a position to object.    . 

 

No, I wasn't criticising the ban. I just said that smoking shouldn't be banned.

[Babylon]

Only if you have a cigarette between your toes.

Ha ha excellent.

[Babylon]

so people that smoke are ignorant ?...i dont smoke near my kids and i try to respect where i do smoke..never mind cant win em all

People in general are... You just notice it more with smokers as they tend to blow their ignorance in your face.