Smokers should be executed!!

[aviatrix]

Who agrees?

[eveningall]

I don't think anyone should be executed, smoker or not.

[Pink Betty]

smokers should be sidled up to and their smoke inhaled - ex-smoker

[eveningall]

Sept 26, 2008 16:50:56 GMT Pink Betty said:

smokers should be sidled up to and their smoke inhaled - ex-smoker

I have been known to follow smokers walking along the street...inhaling deeply

[gustavski]

Sept 26, 2008 20:03:20 GMT eveningall said:

Sept 26, 2008 16:50:56 GMT Pink Betty said:

smokers should be sidled up to and their smoke inhaled - ex-smoker

I have been known to follow smokers walking along the street...inhaling deeply

My mother who died aged 93 was an avid smoker till she was around 80 or so. She never smoked after that but she would go into ectasy if anyone lit up near her.
Btw my father who also died at 93 three months after mom smoked a pipe with navy shag right up until he died. This is the Tabac that was very dark and had to be rubbed between the palms to make it ready for the pipe. It was sometimes called Twist. smelled bloody awful.

gus

[gustavski]

Castle Reuters - Saturday, September 27 01:20 amLONDON (Reuters) - Gruesome pictures of rotting teeth and throat cancer tumours will appear on all tobacco products in Britain from next month as the government steps up its campaign to encourage the country's 10 million smokers to quit.

(Advertisement)


The images will be printed on the back of cigarette packs to illustrate written health warnings introduced in 2003, the Department of Health said on Saturday.

The photos also include a flaccid cigarette to depict male impotence and a comparison of healthy and tar-filled lungs.

Smoking is Britain's single killer, causing the premature death each year of 87,000 people in England alone.

"These new stark picture warnings emphasise the harsh realities of continuing to smoke," said Liam Donaldson, the government's chief medical officer.

Anti-smoking charity ASH welcomed the move, which follows similar campaigns around the world.

"Sadly, smoking is so addictive that even with these grotesque warnings it won't be enough to stop everybody smoking overnight," said ASH Research Director Amanda Sandford.

"But for those who are motivated to quit it could be the final step they need."

The charity is lobbying the government to go further by putting the photos on the front of packs.

The Department of Health said its hands are tied by the rules of a 2001 European Union directive on tobacco health warnings, which also covers which pictures can be displayed.

But it said it had made representations to the European Commission seeking to increase the size of the pictures as well as placing them on pack fronts.

ASH also wants all commercial branding removed from packs, an initiative currently subject to a government consultation.

Research shows that young people presented with plain tobacco packets found them less attractive, the charity said.

Canada in 2001 was the first country to put photo warnings on cigarette packs.

In Europe, Belgium and Romania have already followed suit, but Britain will be the first in the European Union to put the images on all tobacco products, including hand-rolling tobacco and cigars.

Smoking has been banned in enclosed public spaces across Britain since July 2007.


gus

[Alpha Hooligan]

Fortunately for me, I purchase my tobacco from some dodgy geezer in a shady pub....so, no disgusting piccies on my smokes.


AH

[Ned Long]

I have no complaint about the governments initiative in banning smoking in public places. Seems a sensible idea to me. But what I have always found somewhat hard to understand is the vast difference in approach to the problems caused by smoking when compared to the equally, if not more costly problems caused by alcohol abuse. Most crimes of violence have alcohol at their root. And it costs the NHS alone some 3 billions a year in terms of their impact on a range of hospital services, from accident and emergency to acute admissions. Millions more are also spent tackling alcohol-related crime and disorder , while British industry loses up to £2 billion a year in absences and lost working time due to alcohol.

So on the one hand, smoking is banned, and smokers are treated like lepers, whereas the drinks industry is feted; licensing hours are extended, and the penalties for alcohol abuse are almost non existent. Strange world!

[Daz Madrigal]

Maybe if the smoking lobby tossed Brown a few million they'd be able to advertise their wares more freely and with a few billion...who knows, maybe its enough to repeal the smoking ban in Pubs.

Its the only way to revive the dwindling pub industry.

[sandywinder]

Oct 20, 2008 20:22:34 GMT Ned Long said:

I have no complaint about the governments initiative in banning smoking in public places. Seems a sensible idea to me. But what I have always found somewhat hard to understand is the vast difference in approach to the problems caused by smoking when compared to the equally, if not more costly problems caused by alcohol abuse. Most crimes of violence have alcohol at their root. And it costs the NHS alone some 3 billions a year in terms of their impact on a range of hospital services, from accident and emergency to acute admissions. Millions more are also spent tackling alcohol-related crime and disorder , while British industry loses up to £2 billion a year in absences and lost working time due to alcohol.

So on the one hand, smoking is banned, and smokers are treated like lepers, whereas the drinks industry is feted; licensing hours are extended, and the penalties for alcohol abuse are almost non existent. Strange world!

Quite right nedlong.

[sandywinder]

Oct 21, 2008 12:50:22 GMT Daz Madrigal said:

Maybe if the smoking lobby tossed Brown a few million they'd be able to advertise their wares more freely and with a few billion...who knows, maybe its enough to repeal the smoking ban in Pubs.

Its the only way to revive the dwindling pub industry.

Who cares about the pub industry?

[Daz Madrigal]

Oct 25, 2008 10:55:44 GMT sandywinder said:

Oct 21, 2008 12:50:22 GMT Daz Madrigal said:

Maybe if the smoking lobby tossed Brown a few million they'd be able to advertise their wares more freely and with a few billion...who knows, maybe its enough to repeal the smoking ban in Pubs.

Its the only way to revive the dwindling pub industry.

Who cares about the pub industry?

Thats akin to saying 'who cares about Post Offices being closed?'.

The community cares, thats who! Moreover there are towns and villages who have nothing more than a Pub and a solitary Post Office. When those two go there is nothing left!

[sandywinder]

There are are other places other than pubs for people to meet. Community halls for instance. And you don't need thundering great lorries driving through the village delivering booze to them.

Post offices are different because there is no other option than to go to a bigger town.

[Daz Madrigal]

Oct 25, 2008 12:49:03 GMT sandywinder said:

There are are other places other than pubs for people to meet. Community halls for instance.

Quite so, Uncle Ebenezer.

[merak]

Sept 26, 2008 11:50:18 GMT aviatrix said:

Who agrees?

you probably wouldn't when the penny drops that suddenly 10p in the pound would need to be added to your PAYE to recoup the overnight loss of some £10billion annual revenue to the treasury resulting from nobody smoking.