 |
|
|
#71
18-01-2008, 03:10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
i think some of the places that are being talked about being restricted is ludicrous but i do steadfastly believe that all indoor public places should be non-smoking 
|
|
#72
18-01-2008, 03:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Government/civil places I cannot argue with but when these restrictions are being placed on a privately owned business then it seems to me that "freedom of choice" has disappeared and "Big Brother" is dictating how people live their lives. It is not against the law for me to smoke in a house I have bought but it is now "illegal" for me to allow smoking in a business that I have paid for.
__________________
Member of Phuket Hash House Harriers
|
|
#73
18-01-2008, 03:30
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
why cant you look at it as they are protecting non-smokers from an unhealthy situation that they do not choose to bring upon themselves people have brought up obesity and other examples but all of those unhealthy situations are things that people have chose to partake in. a non-smokers has not chosen to have cigaretter smoke enter his lungs or ruin the taste of their food or make their clothes smell maybe i would be seeing this different if i was a smoker, but i cant see how it is nothing more than protecting non-smokers rather than Big Brother or imposing their will
|
|
#74
18-01-2008, 03:34
|
||||
|
||||
|
What about our little Thai girls that have to breathe that shit 7 nights a week? Don't you care about them? Isn't it enough that they have to drink every night and freeze their little bums off in the air con?
__________________
i'm lost my mobile, lady boy take my mobile. i can't connect u
|
|
#75
18-01-2008, 03:45
|
||||
|
||||
|
This debate is going to run and run 55555
Good stuff and valid points raised by everyone.
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Granddad Not screaming in fear like his passengers
|
|
#76
18-01-2008, 03:50
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think what Mike is saying is that even a business he owns cannot allow smoking within the building, even if every single employee was a smoker, and no visitors were allowed to enter.
__________________
I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my Granddad Not screaming in fear like his passengers
|
|
#77
18-01-2008, 04:08
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
A non smoker can choose whether to go into a bar or restaurant , no one forces them. Pollution from cars affects my health , I do not choose to breath in their fumes , but would it be acceptable for me (a pedestrian) to expect all cars to be banned . If a signpost says "Danger Minefield" , and you choose to walk through that area then you are accepting the risk involved , no one is forcing you to do it. Similarly , if a bar has a sign at the entrance saying "Smoking Permitted" no one forces a non smoker to go in. It is all about freedom of choice , how would you feel if your government decided that you could not keep guns (which you bought legally) in premises that you legally owned. Some would argue that they were just "protecting" the non gun owners but many more would say it was "Big Brother" imposing his will.
__________________
Member of Phuket Hash House Harriers
|
|
#78
18-01-2008, 04:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
We will just wait and see how this will be enforced. Open bar, its that a public space or not? I didnt see much enforcement of the old rule either, and I doubt this will happen this time either.
But one regular guy to Phuket told me he considering going to Cuba from now on, on his holiday he want to feel free and enjoy his cigar. Personally, I doubt much will changes.
|
|
#79
18-01-2008, 04:39
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
It’s the best law and in fact only law that has ever been passed in my lifetime that has made an actual (direct) difference to my life. no more having to get my jacket dry cleaned every time I wore it out to somewhere nice, your hair does not smell when you go to bed and you are not breathing in other peoples filth all night (I have mild asthma so its defiantly not good air for me). It’s so good Thailand caught on Although I don’t see too much point in it where you have wide open air bars, like the ones near patong gym for example (will the law apply there?). all you have to do is move yourself away from the person smoking by 2 or 3 feet and there’s no issue…
|
|
#80
18-01-2008, 07:51
|
||||
|
||||
|
the law is al about money.....it's to stop employees suing their employers for unsafe work environments and fair enough IMHO
Even Thailand has caught up with Occ Health + Safety legislation.....they have been dragged into it kicking and screaming by their western trading partners.....it was inevitable but I bet like all Occ Health + safety issues in LOS....there will be only lip service paid to these new laws
__________________
 ....but of course I was verey verey draaank at the taaame!!!
|
|
#81
18-01-2008, 07:51
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think they should also consider banning perfume and cologne, you can smell some of these people 5 min after they pass you not to mention it can trigger migraines for some people.
I am American I can not be responsible for my own actions or make my own chioces..........I must obey my corporate masters oh sorry I meant Goverment! 
|
|
#83
18-01-2008, 09:24
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think I am one of the few that side with the smokers. I kicked the habit years ago and certainly prefer a smoke-free environment, but I also belive smokers have rights.
As I see it the one and only thing for the government needs to consider here is health ... nothing else. So where health is not an issue or where people have a choice the government should stay out. Personally I have some doubts in the health effect of second hand smoke, in particular where the area is well ventilated. I have spent most of my working career being involved with atmospheric conditions / hazards and too often is a nusance/displeasure confused with a hazard. Actually visa versa too. There is no doubt that smoke is full of hazardous substances, however, the dilution effect is often much too great to have a health effect. BTW volume for volume a fart is more toxic than cigarete smoke ... just seeing if we can find something else to officially ban. Public buildings / transportation / work places, etc. I fully support smoking bans in these areas as those who are there really do not have a choice. In reading this thread (an another going on on a different board), I think most agree. You either allow or don't allow. An argument could be made that a company full of smokers would not favor hiring a non-smoker for obvious reasons and consequently no more equal employment oportunities. Outdoor areas Anyone who subscribe to the notion that smoking should be banned in outdoor areas most be out of their minds. There is no way second hand smoke in such settings can be harmful. Detectable yes, but not harmful. The dilution factor is simply way too high. Restaurants / Bars As far as it concerns customers, I fully subscribe to the fact that they have a choice. Each customer choose whether they want to go there of not ... always. Unfortunately, I made an argument against my personal opinion above. A bar or restaurant is also a work place, hence those who work there should have the same right to a smoke free environment as those in an office. Strangely, however, that is rarely the argument that is being made.
__________________
|
|
#84
18-01-2008, 13:34
|
||||
|
||||
|
Whatever happened to just dealing with it?
|
|
#85
18-01-2008, 16:55
|
||||
|
||||
What about my Beagles???
Last year I invested heavily in a Beagle breeding farm in England.I make a lot of money selling Beagles to cigarette companies to give them 60 fags a day.
 What is going to happen to my business if they want no more Beagles.The country is going to the dogs. 
__________________
 If you can't take a joke you shouldn't have joined up!!! 
|
|
#86
18-01-2008, 17:06
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
He he, this is so going to work in Thailand where the laws are very clear, the laws very consistently and justly enforced, and nobody able to bribe anybody due to the high integrity of everyone involved! Personally, I think this is just a law that will go into effect and be applied only to tourist zones so Thailand looks progressive in the eyes of the Farang world.
|
|
#87
18-01-2008, 21:01
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#88
18-01-2008, 21:37
|
||||
|
||||
|
Post #83 of MrDK more or less states how I feel about it. Basically, I am a light smoker of small cigars. I can honestly state that I do bear in mind what people in my direct environment have to say. If it is allowed to smoke somewhere I smoke, but if not then it is no drama.
I do however really hate non-smokers as are described in Tonybinak's post #87. Very often people who have stopped smoking are the worst. Even if they think they smell cigarette smoke they freak out, but 5 minutes later they stand at a pedestrian crossing waiting to go to the other side of the street and not minding what kind of rubbish they inhale then. That makes makes this whole situation quite hypocritical in my opinion, especially by the non-smokers. Although not all smokers are that considerate as well. It all has to do with respect for somebody else's feelings. I agree with certain places which are smoke free and respect that, but in case it is possible, there must be seperated places for smokers and non-smokers. That is my € 0.02
__________________
 Operation SnowGirl will continue 
|
|
#89
18-01-2008, 22:07
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Slightly OT but recently one of the big supermarket chains in the UK was in the newspapers because........'some' of their Muslim check-out staff refused to "handle" any alcoholic products. If a customer had a bottle of wine in their shopping the cashier would wait till another (non muslim) staff member was available to deal with the alcohol !!! How far will this go , vegetarian check-out staff refusing to handle any meat products , Hindu staff refusing to handle beef products. There have also been cases of people joining the army (not conscripted) and then refusing to fight in certain countries !!! The point of this post , no one has "forced" these people to take these jobs , they knew what would be expected from them when they applied for these positions and yet once given the job they then use "equal opportunity" or "discrimination" laws to force their employer to treat "them" differentley from other employees.
__________________
Member of Phuket Hash House Harriers
|
|
#90
18-01-2008, 22:33
|
||||
|
||||
|
well, obviously i am not a big fan of smokers
when i was working in NYC, i actualyl switched assistants because mine was a smoker he reeked like cigarette smoke and took all these breaks, which i think is sort of ridiculous also
|
|
#91
19-01-2008, 00:06
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
There are hundreds of jobs that fall in to classes where certain people either cannot or will not accept the duties. This may be for physical, religious or even health reasons. Some people cannot work in certain environments for any of these reasons and since the environment cannot be changed it becomes a choice to work there or not. As an example, in the US the beer brewery industry has an exemption for exposure to CO2 (carbon dioxide) for certain tasks because it is the nature of the job ... and we can't stop making beers. Employees are informed about the potential exposures and have a choice whether they want to work there or not. This all boils down to feasibility. It is feasible to "engineer" or tobacco smoke from a work place, whereas it is not feasible to engineer out alcohol products from a supermarket. Back to smoking in bars ... it gets my vote, jut don't blow it right in my face.
__________________
|
|
#92
19-01-2008, 00:21
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Why can't you stop making beers if the process is harmful/dangerous to the employees health ????? Also , I've 'highlighted' your remark about "potential exposure and employees choice" , and that was the exact point I made in an earlier post. Quote:
|