Cyprus Eastern Forum Archive


This is a text archive version of our main content. To view the full site with more information, features, formatting and images please click here.

>> Eastern Cyprus Forum Archive Index

View The Full Original Topic: Countdown to smoking ban


>> Have YOUR say - Post A Reply To This Topic

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • cansweet wrote:
    • MCM Carrington wrote:
      WOW!! But Carol, you didn't give it long, you posted at 1 32 am! couldn't have been much of a party, we were still hooping it up at 4.30! just had a paracetam
      ol sandwich :oops:

    Tut Tut,
    I see you expect everyone to follow your way to have a party. Ours started at 9pm, no hooping, some glasses of wine, fabulous food, great conversation, good fun, finished up at aprox 1am. Felt great this morning, had breakfast with the same friends who stayed over.
    Live your own egotistic life MCM, but hold off on trying to be sarcastic, it does no one any favours. Maybe a humble apology to Carol, will get you off on the right foot for 2010. I can imagine other people at your 4.30am sojourn, having numerous paracetamols, having listened to you all night. Happy New Year.

Ouch!! :lol: :lol: :lol:



Posted By: LynSab

http://famagusta-gazette.com/default.asp?smenu=69&sdetail=9970
FAMAGUSTA GAZETTE 08.DEC.09
On 1 January, Cyprus will become the latest European country to ban smokers from public places.
Smoking is currently banned in all public places including entertainment venues, government buildings and on public transport, but has yet to be enforced by authorities.
It is also banned in private cars carrying passengers under 16, but remains regulated in workplaces.
As of next month the police have said they are ready to implement the new law.
An information campaign to tell the public just what they can and cannot do has been published, with reminders to business leaders and those in the hospitality sectors that the ban will be enforced.
Smokers will be allowed one last puff on New Years Eve, when police said they will NOT be looking for offenders.
- Copyright © Famagusta Gazette 2009
Well its going to cause a few upsets but it,ll be a bumpy ride I imagine :roll:
Has anyone seen the info campaign yet?
One or two countries are starting to revoke the ban
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2009/nov/29/world-lens-zagreb-ballet-smoking

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

I back the Cypriots to follow the Balkans. The tourist, bar, cafe sector, is already in decline. If people are not allowed to smoke inside when it is cold outside, the smokers simply won't go out and they are probably in the majority of people who go to these places. When businesses are closing for the winter in ever increasing numbers, the Cypriots will follow the Balkans. Trust me. I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment. The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course. Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    I back the Cypriots to follow the Balkans. The tourist, bar, cafe sector, is already in decline. If people are not allowed to smoke inside when it is cold outside, the smokers simply won't go out and they are probably in the majority of people who go to these places. When businesses are closing for the winter in ever increasing numbers, the Cypriots will follow the Balkans.
    Trust me.
    I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
    The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
    Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

May I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave some months ago!
:wink: :wink: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      I back the Cypriots to follow the Balkans. The tourist, bar, cafe sector, is already in decline. If people are not allowed to smoke inside when it is cold outside, the smokers simply won't go out and they are probably in the majority of people who go to these places. When businesses are closing for the winter in ever increasing numbers, the Cypriots will follow the Balkans.
      Trust me.
      I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
      The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
      Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

    May I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave some months ago!
    :wink: :wink: :lol: :lol:

You may......... :roll:

Posted By: Kwacka

Time to move on - the time for discussion has gone; the law has been passed and will come into force on Jan 1st. Whether individuals will want to risk a fine of up to €2000, and whether bar owners will decide to also risk the same fine by allowing them to smoke only time will tell.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

I think Spain have got the balance right, and Cyprus should follow suit, business's should have the choice to allow smoking or not, or a smoking area, then people can choose whether to use these places, or go to a place where there is no smoking, otherwise tourism will gointo further decline. However, I agree that the Cypriots will rebel, and do precisely what they like.

Posted By: cypruslover

Sounds a daft question I know but will the ban extend to beaches. I am a light smoker and I hope a considerate one and I do enjoy my cigarette and frappe on the beach.





Posted By: cansweet

In the future,if staff from those establishments develop cancer or smoke related illnesses, they can sue the owners, that is the big legal elephant in the room. Also, not all people visiting those places are smokers, and don't wish smoke, or it's smells invading their space. They said in Ireland that it wouldn't work, well it has, with almost 100% compliance rates. Non smokers were very fast in alerting the relevant authorities if people were smoking, and that put an end to it. Ok, trade went down in those places, but everyone now agrees it was a small price to pay for fresh air. Thankfully it also got me off the dreaded cancer sticks, now when i get near someone who smokes, i can't believe how terrible i smelt.

Posted By: Kwacka

  • cypruslover wrote:
    Sounds a daft question I know but will the ban extend to beaches. I am a light smoker and I hope a considerate one and I do enjoy my cigarette and frappe on the beach.

Beaches and all other open spaces are not covered under the law.

Posted By: 404

Bring on smirting I say :D :D :D
Best thing they ever did in the UK- I can't wait!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smirting

Posted By: geof j

Ban smoking on beaches i say! half way thru the summer its like walking thru an ashtray cos too many smokers stub out in the sand. :x

Posted By: contrarymary

Luckily I dont smoke anymore, I quit when I had my stroke but I dont think it is fair on smokers that they have to go out in the cold and wet.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    I think Spain have got the balance right, and Cyprus should follow suit, business's should have the choice to allow smoking or not, or a smoking area, then people can choose whether to use these places, or go to a place where there is no smoking, otherwise tourism will gointo further decline. However, I agree that the Cypriots will rebel, and do precisely what they like.

Fat too pragmatic for most nations to adopt. Employees of smoking establishments also have the choice whether to work there or not. Surprising as it may be to the H&Safety gestapo supporters, many workers would choose to work in the smoking bars because they enjoy a smoke with a drink themselves.

Posted By: LynSab

Glad to see that we are not going down the path of smokers or non smokers :roll: :roll: Thankyou all for your restraint. I would just ask what people feel will happen with this ban in Cyprus say six months later? I notice Greece start the ban on the same date. The ban in the Netherlands stops tobacco smoking indoors but not marijuana which now has to be smoked 'pure' indoors without tobacco :roll:



Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • LynSab wrote:
    Glad to see that we are not going down the path of smokers or non smokers :roll: :roll: Thankyou all for your restraint.
    I would just ask what people feel will happen with this ban in Cyprus say six months later?
    I notice Greece start the ban on the same date.
    The ban in the Netherlands stops tobacco smoking indoors but not marijuana which now has to be smoked 'pure' indoors without tobacco :roll:

:lol: Trust the Dutch to come up with that one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, can just see the enforcers ripping joints apart to search for tobacco ! :lol:

Posted By: DAC

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:

    I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
    The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
    Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

You must be kidding, allow people to make their own decisions....? You're having a laugh mate..!
The Blanket smoking ban in the UK is systematically killing the Pub Trade, It's killing the Bingo Trade and it's also causing long term Health and Social issues amongst the ever expanding population. The government will never admit it and, I dare say that they will have to pay one of their multi-million pound group of advisor's to see it, but in the next 10-20 years the problems are going to become obvious.
Young Children don't have a choice about where their parents, relatives and friends smoke.
Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends gambling on-line.
Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends drinking heavily in the home.
Young Children will grow up in a house hold where all of the above are seen as normal.
Young Children will grow up seeing their parents, relatives and friends do all of these things. They will not only be subjected to excessive passive smoking, but they will also be subjected to the harm that excessive indulgence of drinking and gambling does and more to the point, they will not know any different and will think that such activity is perfectly normal.
Whereas, had a more balanced approach have been taken, the people that used to go the Pub, Bingo or Bookies would have carried out their activities within the confines of those premises and would therefore not be subjecting their children to it as they will be at home.
Adults have a choice, young Children don't.

Posted By: PepsiCan

  • LynSab wrote:
    Glad to see that we are not going down the path of smokers or non smokers :roll: :roll: Thankyou all for your restraint.
    I would just ask what people feel will happen with this ban in Cyprus say six months later?
    I notice Greece start the ban on the same date.
    The ban in the Netherlands stops tobacco smoking indoors but not marijuana which now has to be smoked 'pure' indoors without tobacco :roll:

I don't know where you got this information but I lived in Amsterdam till 6 months ago and it is not true. The coffee shop needs to have a provision in place that allows staff to work without them getting into touch with second hand smoke. So, many now have special smoking rooms and the bar area is cornered off from the rest of the building, just as is the case for regular bars/cafes.
The smoking law is wishy washy though because it does not fine the person who lights the cigar/cigarette, but only fines the owner of the establishment.

Posted By: Deanna

Ah, but Dave you don't see the long-term plan; there will be cctv in your home, linked to government officials, and 'smoke detector' will no longer be a gadget on the ceiling to keep you safe!

Posted By: DAC

  • Deanna wrote:
    and 'smoke detector' will no longer be a gadget on the ceiling to keep you safe!

That won't be required. The chip that was inserted into the back of your neck at birth will detect the carbon from the cigarette as soon as you inhale. Plus, once you've drunk your daily allowance of alcoholic units the drinks cabinet will automatically lock.
All in the name of Counter Terrorism of course.


Posted By: Richard.G

  • DAC wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:

      I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
      The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
      Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

    You must be kidding, allow people to make their own decisions....? You're having a laugh mate..!
    The Blanket smoking ban in the UK is systematically killing the Pub Trade, It's killing the Bingo Trade and it's also causing long term Health and Social issues amongst the ever expanding population. The government will never admit it and, I dare say that they will have to pay one of their multi-million pound group of advisor's to see it, but in the next 10-20 years the problems are going to become obvious.
    Young Children don't have a choice about where their parents, relatives and friends smoke.
    Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends gambling on-line.
    Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends drinking heavily in the home.
    Young Children will grow up in a house hold where all of the above are seen as normal.
    Young Children will grow up seeing their parents, relatives and friends do all of these things. They will not only be subjected to excessive passive smoking, but they will also be subjected to the harm that excessive indulgence of drinking and gambling does and more to the point, they will not know any different and will think that such activity is perfectly normal.
    Whereas, had a more balanced approach have been taken, the people that used to go the Pub, Bingo or Bookies would have carried out their activities within the confines of those premises and would therefore not be subjecting their children to it as they will be at home.
    Adults have a choice, young Children don't.

I'm reminded of an item I once happened to see (why I don't know because I don't watch it) on The Jeremy Kyle Show. It was a mother who was telling her daughter of her relief at finding out she hadn't got lung cancer after all but had ONLY got to have her leg amputated because of her smoking habit. :lol:
The most amusing part of the item was that she just didn't see why her daughter wasn't as pleased as she was.

Posted By: pcmike

Hello, I'm sure some pubs are finding it hard to adapt, but all pubs near me are busier than ever, with couples, families, groups, old people, all enjoying good pub food with a drink. I now spend more on food/drink because I'm there with my family than I would have had I been on my own drinking in a smoky atmosphere that i never liked. Once the eaters have left, the pubs are still busy with people drinking. Mike



Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:

      I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
      The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
      Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

    You must be kidding, allow people to make their own decisions....? You're having a laugh mate..!
    The Blanket smoking ban in the UK is systematically killing the Pub Trade, It's killing the Bingo Trade and it's also causing long term Health and Social issues amongst the ever expanding population. The government will never admit it and, I dare say that they will have to pay one of their multi-million pound group of advisor's to see it, but in the next 10-20 years the problems are going to become obvious.
    Young Children don't have a choice about where their parents, relatives and friends smoke.
    Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends gambling on-line.
    Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends drinking heavily in the home.
    Young Children will grow up in a house hold where all of the above are seen as normal.
    Young Children will grow up seeing their parents, relatives and friends do all of these things. They will not only be subjected to excessive passive smoking, but they will also be subjected to the harm that excessive indulgence of drinking and gambling does and more to the point, they will not know any different and will think that such activity is perfectly normal.
    Whereas, had a more balanced approach have been taken, the people that used to go the Pub, Bingo or Bookies would have carried out their activities within the confines of those premises and would therefore not be subjecting their children to it as they will be at home.
    Adults have a choice, young Children don't.

Dave, I've always admired how you've managed to put your own spin and interpretation on so many subjects but this one tops the lot!!!!!!!!!!!!
:shock: :roll:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Smoking bars and non smoking bars. Is that too difficult a concept for anyone to grasp and implement ? If the governments' don't want people smoking, ban tobacco........................ ahhh but tobacco is a nice little tax earner. And before anyone mentions the burden on the health services, how about banning cream cakes etc. as obesity is a bigger problem.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • DAC wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:

        I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
        The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
        Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

      You must be kidding, allow people to make their own decisions....? You're having a laugh mate..!
      The Blanket smoking ban in the UK is systematically killing the Pub Trade, It's killing the Bingo Trade and it's also causing long term Health and Social issues amongst the ever expanding population. The government will never admit it and, I dare say that they will have to pay one of their multi-million pound group of advisor's to see it, but in the next 10-20 years the problems are going to become obvious.
      Young Children don't have a choice about where their parents, relatives and friends smoke.
      Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends gambling on-line.
      Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends drinking heavily in the home.
      Young Children will grow up in a house hold where all of the above are seen as normal.
      Young Children will grow up seeing their parents, relatives and friends do all of these things. They will not only be subjected to excessive passive smoking, but they will also be subjected to the harm that excessive indulgence of drinking and gambling does and more to the point, they will not know any different and will think that such activity is perfectly normal.
      Whereas, had a more balanced approach have been taken, the people that used to go the Pub, Bingo or Bookies would have carried out their activities within the confines of those premises and would therefore not be subjecting their children to it as they will be at home.
      Adults have a choice, young Children don't.

    Dave, I've always admired how you've managed to put your own spin and interpretation on so many subjects but this one tops the lot!!!!!!!!!!!!
    :shock: :roll:

It does make sense though, doesn't it Woodie ?

Posted By: Deanna

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Smoking bars and non smoking bars. Is that too difficult a concept for anyone to grasp and implement ? If the governments' don't want people smoking, ban tobacco........................ ahhh but tobacco is a nice little tax earner.
    And before anyone mentions the burden on the health services, how about banning cream cakes etc. as obesity is a bigger problem.

.......and alcohol?

Posted By: pav

    Quote:
  • Glad to see that we are not going down the path of smokers or non smokers Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Thankyou all for your restraint.

oh yes they are :D
    Quote:
  • Smoking bars and non smoking bars. Is that too difficult a concept for anyone to grasp and implement

it has been right up until jan 1 2010 and maybe even beyond :!:
paul

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • DAC wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:

        I do agree with smoking bans in enclosed public places but private businesses should have the right to decide one way or the other and clearly display their status as a smoking or non smoking establishment.
        The H&S Gestapo won't like it of course.
        Once the Cypriots see the ban is hitting them in the pocket they will rebel, that's if they take much notice in the first place.

      You must be kidding, allow people to make their own decisions....? You're having a laugh mate..!
      The Blanket smoking ban in the UK is systematically killing the Pub Trade, It's killing the Bingo Trade and it's also causing long term Health and Social issues amongst the ever expanding population. The government will never admit it and, I dare say that they will have to pay one of their multi-million pound group of advisor's to see it, but in the next 10-20 years the problems are going to become obvious.
      Young Children don't have a choice about where their parents, relatives and friends smoke.
      Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends gambling on-line.
      Young Children will grow up watching their parents, relatives and friends drinking heavily in the home.
      Young Children will grow up in a house hold where all of the above are seen as normal.
      Young Children will grow up seeing their parents, relatives and friends do all of these things. They will not only be subjected to excessive passive smoking, but they will also be subjected to the harm that excessive indulgence of drinking and gambling does and more to the point, they will not know any different and will think that such activity is perfectly normal.
      Whereas, had a more balanced approach have been taken, the people that used to go the Pub, Bingo or Bookies would have carried out their activities within the confines of those premises and would therefore not be subjecting their children to it as they will be at home.
      Adults have a choice, young Children don't.

    Dave, I've always admired how you've managed to put your own spin and interpretation on so many subjects but this one tops the lot!!!!!!!!!!!!
    :shock: :roll:

Woody,
I don't smoke, neither does the Boss and neither do any of my friends. So in all honesty, I really couldn't give a sh-t for people not being able to smoke in pubs etc. etc. etc. My beef lays with the serious issues that were completely overlooked or ignored by the political Puppets whose strings are tugged by the faceless Bureaucrats at the EU HQ .
All that I was highlighting was that a Knee-Jerk Blanket ban that was all done with the best intentions is actually doing more damage than good. Had a little bit of thought process gone in to the whole saga then a more balanced outcome could have been had.
Local Councils should have the authority and power to issue a certain amount of Licences to Pubs etc etc that are for Smoking and Non-Smoking establishments. Licensees should then have to decide which route that want to take and then implement any requirements that are needed to meet the criteria (Obviously a criteria that doesn't exists as like I mentioned earlier, no thought process went into it).
What makes me sick is when you see the selfish adult in their car puffing away on a fag completely and selfishly oblivious to harm that they are doing to little Junior that's strapped in the back seat.
Like I said, when it comes to whether or not to go into a particular establishment, all adults have a choice, Children don't. So if suggesting that out political master are incompetent and merely bow to everything that's thrown at them from Europe, if that's classed as spin, then we as a country are truly f-cked as it obviously means that the majority of the population lack the brain capacity to see reason.
The Meek are truly getting ready to strike and claim their Inheritance...!

Posted By: LynSab

  • PepsiCan wrote:
    • LynSab wrote:
      Glad to see that we are not going down the path of smokers or non smokers :roll: :roll: Thankyou all for your restraint.
      I would just ask what people feel will happen with this ban in Cyprus say six months later?
      I notice Greece start the ban on the same date.
      The ban in the Netherlands stops tobacco smoking indoors but not marijuana which now has to be smoked 'pure' indoors without tobacco :roll:

    I don't know where you got this information but I lived in Amsterdam till 6 months ago and it is not true. The coffee shop needs to have a provision in place that allows staff to work without them getting into touch with second hand smoke. So, many now have special smoking rooms and the bar area is cornered off from the rest of the building, just as is the case for regular bars/cafes.
    The smoking law is wishy washy though because it does not fine the person who lights the cigar/cigarette, but only fines the owner of the establishment.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,559030,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7482571.stm
Smoking pot or hashish in a coffee shop remains technically legal for personal use (is,nt it illegal to sell it?)it just must,nt have tobacco in it. :roll: :roll:



Posted By: Deanna

Well said Dave; if 'they' want us to behave intelligently, then treat us as if we are. Otherwise they can't blame us for thinking it's all part of the 'New World Order'.

Posted By: Richard.G

I agree in part with what you're saying Dave but the people who smoke in the car when their kids are in it will be the same ones who have always smoked in their homes and probably, in the case of women, who have smoked throughout pregnancy so the small amount of time that they would have spent in the pubs that they now spend at home won't make an awful lot of difference to the kids. As a generalisation, which everything can only ever be without statistics, I find smokers pretty selfish in their attitudes anyway. They don't consider themselves to be littering the paths/beaches/wherever with their fag ends because they don't consider it litter. They just chuck them away as a matter of course.

Posted By: DAC

  • Richard.G wrote:
    I agree in part with what you're saying Dave but the people who smoke in the car when their kids are in it will be the same ones who have always smoked in their homes and probably, in the case of women, who have smoked throughout pregnancy so the small amount of time that they would have spent in the pubs that they now spend at home won't make an awful lot of difference to the kids.

Kind of my point really.
They saw fit to ban smoking in pubs, a place where traditionally people have chosen to go to socialise, drink and for those that do, smoke. But they never saw fit or gave any thought or any reason to ban people from smoking in a car when there is a child in it.
A simple, although admittedly costly, rejuvenation of the Lounge and the Bar along with air extractors in the Bar (smoking room) would have probably sufficed to give people enough choice as to whether they can go and burst into flames in the bar, or alternatively, enjoy a fume free environment over a meal with the family in the Lounge .

Posted By: Richard.G

Smoking by drivers should be banned anyway using the same logic that using a mobile is, particularly if a driver is alone. It is surely physically impossible to light up and keep your hands on the wheel and the mind concentrated at the same time.

Posted By: DAC

  • Richard.G wrote:
    Smoking by drivers should be banned anyway using the same logic that using a mobile is, particularly if a driver is alone.

I think that it possibly is. :?: :?:
But that doesn't stop Waynetta in the passenger seat from saying 'I am Having a Fag'

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Richard.G

I think it probably is depending on the mood of the copper. I think I'm right in thinking someone was done for eating an apple of chocolate bar but I don't think it's actually enforced as a law.

Posted By: Steve - SJD

I refer you all to the following previous threads where this has been discussed at length (probably by many of the same contributors to this thread) http://easterncyprus.com/viewtopic.php?t=21654 http://easterncyprus.com/viewtopic.php?t=18111 http://easterncyprus.com/viewtopic.php?t=18320 http://easterncyprus.com/viewtopic.php?t=12643 Nothings changed as I doubt anyones position has. Cheers Steve





Posted By: Kwacka

But, without enforcement by law, how do you stop those who arrogance demands that they should be able to do what ever they want and sod everybody else; they don't care about their own health, why should they care about others? BTW, as I said before, why the discussion? the law is in action from January 1st. Why not talk about how the drink-driving laws infringe an individuals' right to have a drink and get into their car and drive home? It makes as much sense.

Posted By: Richard.G

Sometimes drivers don't need to have been drinking smoking or anything else, they just seem to forget what they're driving. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/8407988.stm

Posted By: DAC

  • Kwacka wrote:

    BTW, as I said before, why the discussion? the law is in action from January 1st.

I know what you're saying, but laws can be changed, altered and amended, they're not set in concrete. It's against the law to NOT wear a helmet on a motor bike, need I say more...?

Posted By: crissbroon

I saw on the news this morning that more people were using mobiles while driving. They said that "experts" reckoned that 25% of accidents could be contributed to distracted drivers. e,g mobiles, smoking, radio, CD players etc. I wonder what the other 75% were doing. Too busy looking around to find someone to complain about maybe? Just a thought.

Posted By: cansweet

My 12 year old has been looking at this forum with me, i made no comment to her. Her comment on having read it was, "Gee Dad, are these real people". Need i say more.

Posted By: sunnysuzie

Going off thread but picking up on something from Dac's thread, I know a 16 year old lad that died recently on his moped, no helmet, thrown off and fatally injured. What a waste of life. Personally I feel the authorities would be much better placed clamping down on the youngsters that are getting killed on the roads, rather than enforcing a smoking ban. I think the first is a priority. I will probably get shot down in flames for this, but my opinion! Sue

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • cansweet wrote:
    My 12 year old has been looking at this forum with me, i made no comment to her. Her comment on having read it was, "Gee Dad, are these real people". Need i say more.

Like father, like daughter :roll:

Posted By: Deanna

Agree with you Susie; far too many young lives lost needlessly on the roads; policing plus educations needs a stronger focus.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Kwacka wrote:
    But, without enforcement by law, how do you stop those who arrogance demands that they should be able to do what ever they want and sod everybody else; they don't care about their own health, why should they care about others?

Kwacka, by your comment you seem to infer that some smokers are selfish. Well, let's look at the evidence!
As you say, there are many smokers who care little about how their actions affect those around them. They are happy to pollute the atmosphere and allow their smoke to drift over other peoples food, in their eyes, contaminate their clothes and certainly giving no thought to the "passive smoking" effect on the victims!
Smokers, through their careless discarding of their still lit debris have been responsible for countless fires and resulting deaths, notably at King Cross Station and Bradford City Football Ground!
And what is their response? They whinge that they now have to step outside for a few minutes to indulge their addiction!!
"Selfish" doesn't even come close!

Posted By: Astra

  • sunnysuzie wrote:
    Going off thread but picking up on something from Dac's thread, I know a 16 year old lad that died recently on his moped, no helmet, thrown off and fatally injured. What a waste of life.
    Personally I feel the authorities would be much better placed clamping down on the youngsters that are getting killed on the roads, rather than enforcing a smoking ban. I think the first is a priority.
    I will probably get shot down in flames for this, but my opinion!
    Sue

Really ?
http://www.inforesearchlab.com/smokingdeaths.chtml

Posted By: sunnysuzie

And your point is?? You don't care about the thousands of young lives that are lost on the roads here every day?

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • sunnysuzie wrote:
    And your point is?? You don't care about the thousands of young lives that are lost on the roads here every day?

Would that be a slight exaggeration?

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

Just returned from watching West Ham suffer a rare (!) defeat at a local bar/restaurant and thought I'd share with you what a senior member of staff told me. He said that come January they would NOT allow smoking in any of their inside areas. He added that they had been visited by members of the constabulary (I've always said what a fine body of men they are) and informed that not only will the anti smoking law be vigourously enforced but that more officers will be employed to ensure this happens! He also said that the police had contacted all the bars and warned them that many officers would be in plain clothes masquerading as customers to catch out the law breakers! Apparently each offence will occur a fine of 2000 Euros for the perpertrator AND the bar. He thought this would become a great source of revenue for the Government (and in these time they obviously need it!) and be easy money for them. So for those contributors (can't remember who they were!) who so confidently predicted that nothing here would change, I suggest you think again. Am I crowing? ........... You bet I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted By: cansweet

oops

Posted By: cansweet

Rumour has it that all smokers will have to bring their own seats when travelling on public transport, hairdressers will not groom their hair, dry cleaners will not allow their garments to contaminate normal peoples clothing, accomodation will not be given in hotels, guesthouses, undertakers will refuse to handle their bodies, dentists and docters will not treat them, and all food will refuse to let itself be eaten. I'm thinking of going back on the fags, just see from the above what you could save, maybe even afford a 2nd packet, wow!!

Posted By: alan99

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    Just returned from watching West Ham suffer a rare (!) defeat at a local bar/restaurant and thought I'd share with you what a senior member of staff told me.
    He said that come January they would NOT allow smoking in any of their inside areas. He added that they had been visited by members of the constabulary (I've always said what a fine body of men they are) and informed that not only will the anti smoking law be vigourously enforced but that more officers will be employed to ensure this happens!
    He also said that the police had contacted all the bars and warned them that many officers would be in plain clothes masquerading as customers to catch out the law breakers!
    Apparently each offence will occur a fine of 2000 Euros for the perpertrator AND the bar.
    He thought this would become a great source of revenue for the Government (and in these time they obviously need it!) and be easy money for them.
    So for those contributors (can't remember who they were!) who so confidently predicted that nothing here would change, I suggest you think again.
    Am I crowing? ........... You bet I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wonder if we can expect if there will be many policemen working in plain clothes in the bars during the World Cup? Just after the final whistle can we expect a rash of red cards , I mean summonses. "A sucessful evening Sarge , we have staked out the suspect premises for the last 90 minutes and collared a load of suspects " :lol: :lol:
Alan

Posted By: PatCon

  • contrarymary wrote:
    Luckily I dont smoke anymore, I quit when I had my stroke but I dont think it is fair on smokers that they have to go out in the cold and wet.

... according to the motto: I had my stroke, so they're entitled to theirs :roll:

Posted By: Kwacka

  • cansweet wrote:
    Rumour has it that all smokers will have to bring their own seats when travelling on public transport, hairdressers will not groom their hair, dry cleaners will not allow their garments to contaminate normal peoples clothing, accomodation will not be given in hotels, guesthouses, undertakers will refuse to handle their bodies, dentists and docters will not treat them, and all food will refuse to let itself be eaten. I'm thinking of going back on the fags, just see from the above what you could save, maybe even afford a 2nd packet, wow!!

'The Register' reports that some folk have had repairs to their Apple Macs refused as they are contaminated with a bio-hazard (nicotine is one of the most toxic poisons known to man), and a commentator stated that Time Computers used to do the same in the UK.
And if you think they're going over the top, here's a photo of a smokers computer:


Posted By: Deanna

In the Mail today........... http://www.cyprus-mail.com/features/days-tick-away-smoking-ban

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    Just returned from watching West Ham suffer a rare (!) defeat at a local bar/restaurant and thought I'd share with you what a senior member of staff told me.
    He said that come January they would NOT allow smoking in any of their inside areas. He added that they had been visited by members of the constabulary (I've always said what a fine body of men they are) and informed that not only will the anti smoking law be vigourously enforced but that more officers will be employed to ensure this happens!
    He also said that the police had contacted all the bars and warned them that many officers would be in plain clothes masquerading as customers to catch out the law breakers!
    Apparently each offence will occur a fine of 2000 Euros for the perpertrator AND the bar.
    He thought this would become a great source of revenue for the Government (and in these time they obviously need it!) and be easy money for them.
    So for those contributors (can't remember who they were!) who so confidently predicted that nothing here would change, I suggest you think again.
    Am I crowing? ........... You bet I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Better get looking at relocating somewhere in the the Far East hadn't I ? :wink:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Well, think it's a case of 'let's wait and see'.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Time to find a bar with friends in the right places :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Time to find a bar with friends in the right places :lol:

What place in the the Far East would that be then? :lol:
Btw, how did the weekend at Palm Beach go?

Posted By: larnacawoman

I don´t really have any opinions about smokers vs non-smokers, I was a smoker myself for quite a few years until I quit last year. But based on my own experience from when smoking in restaurants, bars etc became banned in Sweden, yes it did take some getting used to as a smoker but I could always see why they banned it, after all noone else asked for my smoke and I could always understand if it bothered some. All of us smokers got quite used to the ban after a while, no probs really. It is a funny sight walking in Stockholm wintertime though, no matter how cold, there will always be a few brave souls sitting outside cafes with blankets around them, having their coffee, smoking away and pretend that it isn´t freezing :D

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      Time to find a bar with friends in the right places :lol:

    What place in the the Far East would that be then? :lol:
    Btw, how did the weekend at Palm Beach go?

Only joking Woodie. Not ready for extreme measures yet. The short break was enjoyable. I've posted a little report in the tourism section.

Posted By: kipper889

There are plusses to being a smoker in non-smoking establishments. I went for a very nice meal this weekend with some friends, I was the only smoker and left them on two occasions to go outside to the heated outside area for a cigarrette. Both times I met and chatted to other smokers (total strangers) while we were enjoying our fix. It's amazing how fast you can talk when you only have 10 minutes. I came away quite glad that I am a smoker, that few minutes added even more to the enjoyment of my evening. On the other hand even if you are a non smoker, when you find yourself in a group of people that you are getting bored with or don't seem to have anything in common with, go out into the smoking area, you are bound to find someone interesting there. I love the smoking ban now!!

Posted By: Astra

  • kipper889 wrote:
    There are plusses to being a smoker in non-smoking establishments.
    I went for a very nice meal this weekend with some friends, I was the only smoker and left them on two occasions to go outside to the heated outside area for a cigarrette. Both times I met and chatted to other smokers (total strangers) while we were enjoying our fix. It's amazing how fast you can talk when you only have 10 minutes. I came away quite glad that I am a smoker, that few minutes added even more to the enjoyment of my evening.

Good, don't give a second thought to the fact that those few minutes just shortened your life.
    Quote:
  • On the other hand even if you are a non smoker, when you find yourself in a group of people that you are getting bored with or don't seem to have anything in common with, go out into the smoking area, you are bound to find someone interesting there.
    I love the smoking ban now!!

Now, the tobacco companies will love that, "Bored with your friends, look up some smokers, they are much more interesting people "
I love the smoking ban too, it keeps people like you outside and I can enjoy my meal in peace, in relatively clean air.
Everybody is happy :D :D :D

Posted By: annforbes

I expect there will be some disappointed tourists who arrive after 1st Jan next year as I have met a few who like coming here because they can smoke in the pubs etc. Is anyone interested in stopping smoking? My last job for the nhs was to help people who really wanted to quit. We didn't 'preach' or tell people not to smoke - thats up to the individual. If anyone is tired of smoking, I would be pleased to help.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

That's a very nice offer Anne. As a smoker, a happy one, I admit to re-thinking my trip to Cyprus in March. I don't mind refraining in Restaraunts, but I did enjoy sitting at the bar with a fag in one hand and a drink in the other, as I would imagine all smoking holiday makers would, it's like removing the shackles of the nanny state. This is another reason for people to go to Turkey, as i think half of the UK did last year anyway. There will be many business owners biting their nails as it is without this. There's a thought for someone to start up, sell e-fags! get a little stand on the main strip of Protaras, and instead of face painting, or tatoos, sell e-fags! you can charge premium prices, holiday makers will pay it so they can really enjoy their holiday, I would.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    That's a very nice offer Anne. As a smoker, a happy one, I admit to re-thinking my trip to Cyprus in March. I don't mind refraining in Restaraunts, but I did enjoy sitting at the bar with a fag in one hand and a drink in the other, as I would imagine all smoking holiday makers would, it's like removing the shackles of the nanny state. This is another reason for people to go to Turkey, as i think half of the UK did last year anyway. There will be many business owners biting their nails as it is without this.
    There's a thought for someone to start up, sell e-fags! get a little stand on the main strip of Protaras, and instead of face painting, or tatoos, sell e-fags! you can charge premium prices, holiday makers will pay it so they can really enjoy their holiday, I would.

Turkey also have a smoking ban coming in.
Shame that addicts cannot enjoy life without their fix.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Smoke Menthol! then you won't smell. Or, the E-Fag, I don't smell, nor do my clothes. :D Hattie,Your post is verging on a personal attack to all smokers, yes it's an addiction, you can become addicted to many things though, the list is long, it includes chocolate, food, clothes, holidays, cleaning, washing etc etc, are these people all selfish? Turkey gone 'no smoking'? Hmm, we have friends who were there in October, and smoked everywhere? but then we will see what is hapeining in Cyprus this October lol.

Posted By: Richard.G

Sorry that ban in Turkey is already in: Turkey brought into effect a ban on smoking in bars, cafes and restaurants on July 19 2009, extending a ban issued in May 2008 on smoking in offices, public transport, shopping malls, schools, hospitals and other public places. The ban brings Turkey into line with most European Union states, but while Turkey is an aspirant EU member, it says that the ban is being imposed for health reasons. Turkey’s health minister Recep Akdag said that the May 2008 ban brought down smoking by seven per cent, and he hopes that the extension of the prohibition will mean that fewer people will smoke. "We are working to protect our future, to save our youth," the BBC quoted Akdag as saying. International news agencies said that the ban had the full backing of prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has a strong distaste for smoking. The ban, in a country where smoking traditionally has been ubiquitous and is famed for its tobacco, sparked ire among owners of restaurants and bars. http://sofiaecho.com/2009/07/19/757785_turkey-bans-smoking-in-bars-cafes-and-restaurants

Posted By: journeyman

Dont see what the problem his, we only come out during the warmer months and plenty of places to eat and smoke at the same time legally.

Posted By: Hattie

    Quote:
  • Shame that addicts cannot enjoy life without their fix.

Unfortunately Richard, smokers rarely seem to see themselves as addicts yet some that I know are the first to 'have a go' at drug addicts when they (the drug addicts) are actually doing their best to be clean. I was talking to a smoker today and he admitted that he had 'refrained' for a year, he can't say he stopped because he didn't. It's a bit like AA, you can't say you've stopped until the day you die without ever having another cigarette, he was shocked to realise just what smokers actually smell like to non-smokers. It doesn't matter how many times they bathe - they still smell of stale cigarettes - they just don't realise it because their taste buds and sense of smell have been virtually killed by a weed.

I was brought up in a family of smokers and I cannot tolerate the smell - many of my family died of smoking related illness e.g. coronary thrombosis, throat cancer, lung cancer and various other cancers.
I love the way smokers 'have a go' at non-smokers simply because we want to breathe clean air - I've often threatened to take my favourite perfume and squirt it around a smoker and ask them how they like having something they don't want thrust on them - I won't repeat their language, funny how their attitudes change isn't it? :shock: :roll:
We've had to put up with smokers and their selfishness for years - well, it's our turn now! :wink:

Posted By: journeyman

    Quote:
  • We've had to put up with smokers and their selfishness for years - well, it's our turn now!
Bring it on Hattie, :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

My fag money is still on the Cypriots after the initial fun and games. When the bars are empty and the owners are being hit in the pocket, the Cypriot mentality will take over. The H&S Gestapo and their supporters had better flood the bars etc with their custom or there won't be many left :lol

Posted By: evo

The unfortunate thing is when the Cypriots have a bad year they increase their prices. Once the smoking ban comes in drink prices will probably double. All the non smokers who reckon they will go to the pub now its fresh air(like they said they would in the uk and didnt,hence all the pubs closing)can pay the new inflated prices. It probably won't be long before the bar owners decide to take the risk in order to get their punters back. As for ladies perfume,save me from Avon.It makes me choke more although give me nice memories of my granny. Steve.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Good for you Paul! the only thing is though, it's not going to stop you smoking, it's an alternative to 'normal' fags where you can't smoke, for instance, I use it when the grandkids are around. All the best.

Posted By: Hattie

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Smoke Menthol! then you won't smell. Or, the E-Fag, I don't smell, nor do my clothes. :D Hattie,Your post is verging on a personal attack to all smokers, yes it's an addiction, you can become addicted to many things though, the list is long, it includes chocolate, food, clothes, holidays, cleaning, washing etc etc, are these people all selfish?
    Turkey gone 'no smoking'? Hmm, we have friends who were there in October, and smoked everywhere? but then we will see what is hapeining in Cyprus this October lol.

Sorry MCM - I'm not making any personal attack at all. I can smell cigarette smoke on every smoker I come into contact with - in fact I have surprised many when I've commented. Smokers just don't realise what it is like until they actually stop smoking and can smell it on other smokers.
Yes, there may be other addictions - but chocolate, food, clothes, holidays, cleaning, washing etc. don't affect the health of others like smoking does, but addicts will never agree there is a problem.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Hattie wrote:
    • MCM Carrington wrote:
      Smoke Menthol! then you won't smell. Or, the E-Fag, I don't smell, nor do my clothes. :D Hattie,Your post is verging on a personal attack to all smokers, yes it's an addiction, you can become addicted to many things though, the list is long, it includes chocolate, food, clothes, holidays, cleaning, washing etc etc, are these people all selfish?
      Turkey gone 'no smoking'? Hmm, we have friends who were there in October, and smoked everywhere? but then we will see what is hapeining in Cyprus this October lol.

    Sorry MCM - I'm not making any personal attack at all. I can smell cigarette smoke on every smoker I come into contact with - in fact I have surprised many when I've commented. Smokers just don't realise what it is like until they actually stop smoking and can smell it on other smokers.
    Yes, there may be other addictions - but chocolate, food, clothes, holidays, cleaning, washing etc. don't affect the health of others like smoking does, but addicts will never agree there is a problem.

You are making personal attacks on smokers and the law makers are doing it too. Why they cannot allow bars and restaurants to make up their own minds whether to be smoking or non smoking is beyond me.Please explain why private businesses should not be permitted to provide a facility for smokers, where non smokers are fully aware of what they are walking into and can exercise their right of choice ?
What will actually happen in Cyprus remains to be seen.
As for being able to 'smell' a smoker, so what ? There are many people who smell of other things !

Posted By: pav

isnt it strange that the us/we/them now want/need/demand a choice when right up until the ban is enforced the only choice for non smokers is dont come in if you dont like the smokey smelly carciogenic atmosphere you can always stay at home or go to a non smoking establishment of which there are ermmmm none!!!!! remember smokers you do have a ckoice...you can... 1) stay away from non smoking premises/areas there are plenty of places you can visit where you can light up or... 2) dont light up!!!!!. how difficult is that. dont worry about the wind and the rain and the cold it cant be too bad cos all the non smokers have managed to get through it right up until enforcement :) paul.........

Posted By: crissbroon

    Quote:

  • You are making personal attacks on smokers and the law makers are doing it too. Why they cannot allow bars and restaurants to make up their own minds whether to be smoking or non smoking is beyond me.Please explain why private businesses should not be permitted to provide a facility for smokers, where non smokers are fully aware of what they are walking into and can exercise their right of choice ?
    What will actually happen in Cyprus remains to be seen.
    As for being able to 'smell' a smoker, so what ? There are many people who smell of other things !

You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
You never get a straight answer from anyone.
IMHO it,s not about smokers or non smokers rights, otherwise the option you illustrate would be the perfectly logical answer.
Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
Otherwise they would just be as happy to have smoking and non smoking venues and exercise their choice accordingly.
What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.
But I suppose goverments know very well that small minded people are easily distracted from these issues if you give them a wee bit of encouragement and a nudge in the right direction.

Posted By: Deanna

Funny isn't it; whichever race, colour or creed you are, it seems there is an inherant need to have a 'bad guy' who you can blame for making your life less good than it should be. It starts in childhood; remember the films with the 'good' and 'bad' guys, beit cowboys and indians, or - later - aliens invading from space. As nations we used to be suspicious of others of different skin hue. For the last twenty years - in the UK anyway - the socially bad people have been smokers; these days also 'bad' people are the obese. It does give a convenient smokescreen between the masses and the really bad guys at the top, who are manipulating all our lives to make them more stressful; means we are so busy concentrating on our individual problems that we leave the manipulators alone. This, of course. is my very own, cynical perspective which is not based on any scientific fact but merely a lifetime of observation. I therefore do not expect anyone to share it.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Oh I can share that Dee, your quite right. Chrisbroon, so are you!

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • crissbroon wrote:
      Quote:

    • 1)You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
      You never get a straight answer from anyone.
      2)Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
      3)What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.

    1) What "straight" answer do you want apart from what the majority keep telling you "We dont like the effect other peoples smoke has on us!"
    2)"Small minded people"? What's so small minded about wishing to breathe fresh air and to go home without our eyes streaming and smelling like an ash tray?
    "Suddenly feeling empowered"? What the hell does that mean? "Oh my God I now feel so important 'cos people will no longer be bloing smoke over my dinner!!?" - get real!
    3)Yet another strange piece of reasoning, what are you saying, "Don't stop anything that's bad as there is always something else that will get you"? Still, pleased it makes you laugh!
    I also note that none of the smoking advocates responded to my earlier posting re all the deaths that smokers have been responsible for by the discarding of their still lit debris!!
    And Andrew, please change the record about "Health & Safety Gestapo."
    It didn't mean anything when you first said it and has gained nothing by constant repitition!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • crissbroon wrote:
        Quote:

      • 1)You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
        You never get a straight answer from anyone.
        2)Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
        3)What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.

      1) What "straight" answer do you want apart from what the majority keep telling you "We dont like the effect other peoples smoke has on us!"
      2)"Small minded people"? What's so small minded about wishing to breathe fresh air and to go home without our eyes streaming and smelling like an ash tray?
      "Suddenly feeling empowered"? What the hell does that mean? "Oh my God I now feel so important 'cos people will no longer be bloing smoke over my dinner!!?" - get real!
      3)Yet another strange piece of reasoning, what are you saying, "Don't stop anything that's bad as there is always something else that will get you"? Still, pleased it makes you laugh!
      I also note that none of the smoking advocates responded to my earlier posting re all the deaths that smokers have been responsible for by the discarding of their still lit debris!!
      And Andrew, please change the record about "Health & Safety Gestapo."
      It didn't mean anything when you first said it and has gained nothing by constant repitition!

    As the posters above have pointed out, there is room for everyone Woodie. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
    And I enjoy using the Health & Safety Gestapo bit because it is closer to the truth than most realise and it annoys you ! :lol:
    You can barely break wind in the UK these days without someone waving a risk assessment in your face or demanding to see your CRB check.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

As the posters above have pointed out, there is room for everyone Woodie. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. And I enjoy using the Health & Safety Gestapo bit because it is closer to the truth than most realise and it annoys you ! You can barely break wind in the UK these days without someone waving a risk assessment in your face or demanding to see your CRB check :D :D :D And so true!

Posted By: Hattie

All smokers should take time out to wonder why the NHS thinks it would be a better idea for them to be 'smoke free' - many children are hostages to their parents addiction. http://smokefree.nhs.uk/why-go-smokefree/ As for the CRB checks, I find it odd anyone thinks they are NOT a good idea. I want my grandchildren safe from monsters and if anyone refuses to have the CRB check done then I don't want them anywhere near ANY children. I've heard the phrase 'if you have nothing to hide it shouldn't worry you' about the ID cards yet, it appears when it comes to children, many people couldn't care less!! As for me making 'personal attacks' on smokers - I have put up with being the 'victim' of the disgusting habit of smokers for many years, often asking smokers politely to refrain from smoking when I am in their company - did they take notice............NO!! We, the non-smokers who take care of our health, are now being considered by the law - and it is about time.

Posted By: Deanna

Hattie, if my children were still of pirmary age I would be grossly offended at having to undergo a police-check in order to attend their Nativity Play! Now I am a grandmother, and i would still take exception.
I agree with checks for people working with children; as a teacher I had the check - no problem.
But sending a message to children that their friends' parents may be nasty people wanting to harm them; what sort of message is that sending out.
Over The Top.
Even had a (male)friend say he walked past a little girl who was alone in the street, because he was frightened someone might think he was a paedo if he tried to help her
What sort of a world is this? Bloody horrifying, that's what.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • Deanna wrote:
    Hattie, if my children were still of pirmary age I would be grossly offended at having to undergo a police-check in order to attend their Nativity Play! Now I am a grandmother, and i would still take exception.
    I agree with checks for people working with children; as a teacher I had the check - no problem.
    But sending a message to children that their friends' parents may be nasty people wanting to harm them; what sort of message is that sending out.
    Over The Top.
    Even had a (male)friend say he walked past a little girl who was alone in the street, because he was frightened someone might think he was a paedo if he tried to help her
    What sort of a world is this? Bloody horrifying, that's what.

But isn't most abuse carried out by a family member or friend anyway?

Posted By: crissbroon

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • crissbroon wrote:
        Quote:

      • 1)You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
        You never get a straight answer from anyone.
        2)Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
        3)What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.

      Woodrow says 1)
      What "straight" answer do you want apart from what the majority keep telling you "We dont like the effect other peoples smoke has on us!"
      2)"Small minded people"? What's so small minded about wishing to breathe fresh air and to go home without our eyes streaming and smelling like an ash tray?
      "Suddenly feeling empowered"? What the hell does that mean? "Oh my God I now feel so important 'cos people will no longer be bloing smoke over my dinner!!?" - get real!
      3)Yet another strange piece of reasoning, what are you saying, "Don't stop anything that's bad as there is always something else that will get you"? Still, pleased it makes you laugh!
      I also note that none of the smoking advocates responded to my earlier posting re all the deaths that smokers have been responsible for by the discarding of their still lit debris!!
      And Andrew, please change the record about "Health & Safety Gestapo."
      It didn't mean anything when you first said it and has gained nothing by constant repitition!

    What straight answer?
    Why will they not allow bars that choose to be "smoking" and bars that choose to be no "smoking" giving people their choice of venue. After all, if your right and the majority of people do,nt like smoke then your pub will be full and my pub will be empty.
    You would have no need to put up with the horrors of being near a smoker.
    "Suddenly feeling empowered"?
    Yes, people suddenly now think it OK to verbally and openly insult smokers with comments like "selfish", "smelly" "ignorant" as they believe that the government is behind them in that view and they can say what they like.
    I think that's why word "Gestapo" may indeed spring to mind here.
    "Strange piece of reasoning"
    Why is it strange? The world is full of government led projects that have collateral damage regarding those unfortunate to be close to them. The more they can convince the public that its them "pesky smokers" that are the problem the more people wil let them alone to get on with it.

Posted By: Richard.G

Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet? And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

Posted By: crissbroon

  • Richard.G wrote:
    Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet?
    And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

If you hate smokers that much I,m surprised you get close enough to them that you can smell their breath.
Do'nt you see how you are portraying yourself as an ignorant, unpleasant bigot with a post like this?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D Crissbroon, I don't have to say anything , you are doing it all for me! Seriously though, there's no need to bandy names around, like smelly and bad breath, it's very insulting, and smokers are not alone with bad breath anyway. so keep it real. I have freinds who are non-smokers, they invite me into their homes, and promptly pass me an ashtray,( I would never light up in a non-smokers home unless they insist) these are real friends, they know i don't enjoy a drink without me fag. They insist my smoking doesn't bother them in the least, and I believe them, as i don't see them rushing to open a window, or spray smelly stuff around me. so you see, there are some non-smokers who don't think like others. 'Friends' who invite me to their homes for a drink, then ask me to smoke outside? fine, I respect their wishes and just don't visit them lol.

Posted By: Steve - SJD

Hi All, I bet if I went back and looked over the other 2 trillion smoking/ban smoking threads the arguments would be the same. (maybe even by the same people :D ) This law is coming in and it's simple really - vote with your feet - if you are a smoker and don't fancy going outside a bar in the winter then stay where you can smoke. That said I don't expect that there will be much room left in bars with all the non smokers now being able to enjoy a smoke free environment. Judging by the comments on this thread and others the bars will be packed :wink: Look folks no one is going to change their views on this one - smokers and non smokers are both set in their ways and hold strong beliefs on the subject. Will things change as far as bars are concerned? We won't have long to wait to see. Cheers Steve

Posted By: Hattie

  • Deanna wrote:
    Hattie, if my children were still of pirmary age I would be grossly offended at having to undergo a police-check in order to attend their Nativity Play! Now I am a grandmother, and i would still take exception.
    I agree with checks for people working with children; as a teacher I had the check - no problem.
    But sending a message to children that their friends' parents may be nasty people wanting to harm them; what sort of message is that sending out.
    Over The Top.
    Even had a (male)friend say he walked past a little girl who was alone in the street, because he was frightened someone might think he was a paedo if he tried to help her
    What sort of a world is this? Bloody horrifying, that's what.

Deanna, I have had CRB checks too, I was working with primary school children, I also have grandchildren. I have no problem whatsoever with having another CRB check if it is necessary. Surely it is better to have anyone who has access to children checked out - too many of our young are attacked and they are defenceless without the law. I don't think it is over the top at all, and yes, Richard G. most abuse IS carried out by people the children already know, especially family members.

Posted By: johnrose

Old gag from TV, anyone remember it? Two people in a restraunt, one a smoker and one a non-smoker Smoker "Do you mind if I smoke" Non-smoker "Do you mind if I s*"t on your plate"

Posted By: lethargicinlarnaca

  • johnrose wrote:
    Old gag from TV, anyone remember it?
    Two people in a restraunt, one a smoker and one a non-smoker
    Smoker "Do you mind if I smoke"
    Non-smoker "Do you mind if I s*"t on your plate"

Stop messing around and get on with those studies :roll:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Hattie wrote:
    • Deanna wrote:
      Hattie, if my children were still of pirmary age I would be grossly offended at having to undergo a police-check in order to attend their Nativity Play! Now I am a grandmother, and i would still take exception.
      I agree with checks for people working with children; as a teacher I had the check - no problem.
      But sending a message to children that their friends' parents may be nasty people wanting to harm them; what sort of message is that sending out.
      Over The Top.
      Even had a (male)friend say he walked past a little girl who was alone in the street, because he was frightened someone might think he was a paedo if he tried to help her
      What sort of a world is this? Bloody horrifying, that's what.

    Deanna, I have had CRB checks too, I was working with primary school children, I also have grandchildren. I have no problem whatsoever with having another CRB check if it is necessary. Surely it is better to have anyone who has access to children checked out - too many of our young are attacked and they are defenceless without the law. I don't think it is over the top at all, and yes, Richard G. most abuse IS carried out by people the children already know, especially family members.

And, is a CRB check, sometimes carried out via a cheap overseas agency, going to make much difference ?
The UK government has recently shelved plans to insist that millions of people who volunteer their services to local authorities and charities should be CRB checked because many would refuse.
When I retired from teaching and was asked if I'd do some supply work, I was told that I'd need to pay for another check ! Then I was told I'd have to be checked again to work with children at a local sports club. Suffice to say, I decided to put my feet and fingers up to the Nanny State.
There always have been and always will be those who prey on children and other people.I do appreciate the need to be vigilant but this is now getting ridiculous.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • crissbroon wrote:
    • Richard.G wrote:
      Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet?
      And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

    If you hate smokers that much I,m surprised you get close enough to them that you can smell their breath.
    Do'nt you see how you are portraying yourself as an ignorant, unpleasant bigot with a post like this?

I don't hate anybody but no, I wouldn't usually get very close to a smoker as I do find it very unpleasant.
I have, unfortunately, in my younger days got close enough to kiss a woman who was a smoker and it was pretty nasty.
The OH's mate recently had a date with a man she's now been seeing for 4 months. The first time she got in his car and closed the door she said "Oh you smoke". He gave up that night from smoking 40 a day. I guess he decided that she was a bit more attractive to him than the fag. Mind you, he was also a heavy drinker and cut that down too and has lost over 2 stone in those 4 months. Guess she's been pretty good for his health and his sex life. :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Richard.G wrote:
    • crissbroon wrote:
      • Richard.G wrote:
        Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet?
        And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

      If you hate smokers that much I,m surprised you get close enough to them that you can smell their breath.
      Do'nt you see how you are portraying yourself as an ignorant, unpleasant bigot with a post like this?

    I don't hate anybody but no, I wouldn't usually get very close to a smoker as I do find it very unpleasant.
    I have, unfortunately, in my younger days got close enough to kiss a woman who was a smoker and it was pretty nasty.
    The OH's mate recently had a date with a man she's now been seeing for 4 months. The first time she got in his car and closed the door she said "Oh you smoke". He gave up that night from smoking 40 a day. I guess he decided that she was a bit more attractive to him than the fag. Mind you, he was also a heavy drinker and cut that down too and has lost over 2 stone in those 4 months. Guess she's been pretty good for his health and his sex life. :lol:

I bet he misses his post coital ciggy :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • crissbroon wrote:
          Quote:

        • 1)You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
          You never get a straight answer from anyone.
          2)Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
          3)What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.

        1) What "straight" answer do you want apart from what the majority keep telling you "We dont like the effect other peoples smoke has on us!"
        2)"Small minded people"? What's so small minded about wishing to breathe fresh air and to go home without our eyes streaming and smelling like an ash tray?
        "Suddenly feeling empowered"? What the hell does that mean? "Oh my God I now feel so important 'cos people will no longer be bloing smoke over my dinner!!?" - get real!
        3)Yet another strange piece of reasoning, what are you saying, "Don't stop anything that's bad as there is always something else that will get you"? Still, pleased it makes you laugh!
        I also note that none of the smoking advocates responded to my earlier posting re all the deaths that smokers have been responsible for by the discarding of their still lit debris!!
        And Andrew, please change the record about "Health & Safety Gestapo."
        It didn't mean anything when you first said it and has gained nothing by constant repitition!

      As the posters above have pointed out, there is room for everyone Woodie. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
      And I enjoy using the Health & Safety Gestapo bit because it is closer to the truth than most realise and it annoys you ! :lol:
      You can barely break wind in the UK these days without someone waving a risk assessment in your face or demanding to see your CRB check.

    Andrew, you know how much I enjoy our banter :wink: and I truly laughed out loud at the "and it annoys you!" quote!
    However, if I may paraphrase, our mutual friend, Dennis Healey's reposte to Geoffrey Howe "Being wound up by Andrew Brooks is like being savaged by a dead sheep!"
    :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        • crissbroon wrote:
            Quote:

          • 1)You are wasting your time asking that very straight forward question Andrew.
            You never get a straight answer from anyone.
            2)Its more about small minded people suddenly feeling empowered (by apparent government backing) to impose their will on others whom they are prejudiced against.
            3)What makes me laugh is that they make such a fuss about cigarette smoke but appear oblivious to the thousands of carcogenic in the air they breathe everyday, which should make passive smoking the least of their worries. Deisel fumes, chemical plants, nuclear plants, electricity generators etc, etc.

          1) What "straight" answer do you want apart from what the majority keep telling you "We dont like the effect other peoples smoke has on us!"
          2)"Small minded people"? What's so small minded about wishing to breathe fresh air and to go home without our eyes streaming and smelling like an ash tray?
          "Suddenly feeling empowered"? What the hell does that mean? "Oh my God I now feel so important 'cos people will no longer be bloing smoke over my dinner!!?" - get real!
          3)Yet another strange piece of reasoning, what are you saying, "Don't stop anything that's bad as there is always something else that will get you"? Still, pleased it makes you laugh!
          I also note that none of the smoking advocates responded to my earlier posting re all the deaths that smokers have been responsible for by the discarding of their still lit debris!!
          And Andrew, please change the record about "Health & Safety Gestapo."
          It didn't mean anything when you first said it and has gained nothing by constant repitition!

        As the posters above have pointed out, there is room for everyone Woodie. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
        And I enjoy using the Health & Safety Gestapo bit because it is closer to the truth than most realise and it annoys you ! :lol:
        You can barely break wind in the UK these days without someone waving a risk assessment in your face or demanding to see your CRB check.

      Andrew, you know how much I enjoy our banter :wink: and I truly laughed out loud at the "and it annoys you!" quote!
      However, if I may paraphrase, our mutual friend, Dennis Healey's reposte to Geoffrey Howe "Being wound up by Andrew Brooks is like being savaged by a dead sheep!"
      :lol: :lol:

    You know me so well Woodie :lol:
    Must dash. Off to the pub for a pint or two , some friendly banter and a smoke. By the time I get back from the UK , the gestapo will be patrolling the streets of Larnaca. I'll have to take to the hills and then drink and drive ! Can't bloody win ! :lol:

Posted By: Richard.G

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Richard.G wrote:
      • crissbroon wrote:
        • Richard.G wrote:
          Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet?
          And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

        If you hate smokers that much I,m surprised you get close enough to them that you can smell their breath.
        Do'nt you see how you are portraying yourself as an ignorant, unpleasant bigot with a post like this?

      I don't hate anybody but no, I wouldn't usually get very close to a smoker as I do find it very unpleasant.
      I have, unfortunately, in my younger days got close enough to kiss a woman who was a smoker and it was pretty nasty.
      The OH's mate recently had a date with a man she's now been seeing for 4 months. The first time she got in his car and closed the door she said "Oh you smoke". He gave up that night from smoking 40 a day. I guess he decided that she was a bit more attractive to him than the fag. Mind you, he was also a heavy drinker and cut that down too and has lost over 2 stone in those 4 months. Guess she's been pretty good for his health and his sex life. :lol:

    I bet he misses his post coital ciggy :lol:

Obviously wasn't getting the action to be able to enjoy the post coital though. :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Richard.G wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Richard.G wrote:
        • crissbroon wrote:
          • Richard.G wrote:
            Don't you think non-smokers have always found smokers smelly, ignorant and selfish it's just that everything in life is a bit more open these days with the advent of the internet?
            And any smoker who thinks they don't have bad breath must be delusional.

          If you hate smokers that much I,m surprised you get close enough to them that you can smell their breath.
          Do'nt you see how you are portraying yourself as an ignorant, unpleasant bigot with a post like this?

        I don't hate anybody but no, I wouldn't usually get very close to a smoker as I do find it very unpleasant.
        I have, unfortunately, in my younger days got close enough to kiss a woman who was a smoker and it was pretty nasty.
        The OH's mate recently had a date with a man she's now been seeing for 4 months. The first time she got in his car and closed the door she said "Oh you smoke". He gave up that night from smoking 40 a day. I guess he decided that she was a bit more attractive to him than the fag. Mind you, he was also a heavy drinker and cut that down too and has lost over 2 stone in those 4 months. Guess she's been pretty good for his health and his sex life. :lol:

      I bet he misses his post coital ciggy :lol:

    Obviously wasn't getting the action to be able to enjoy the post coital though. :lol:

I don't have that problem Dickie :wink: mind you I do shower and powder up frequently :lol:
Don't pubs stink of BO in the UK these days ?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Yes they do Andrew, they smell awfull, the smoke must have been covering up a multitude!

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Yes they do Andrew, they smell awfull, the smoke must have been covering up a multitude!

Perhaps you just don't recognise the smell of cleanliness, so choked up are your lungs and passages. :lol:
You ought to try those clubs where people just wear lingerie or a towel and they have a pool and jacuzzi :lol: :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D Wahtever do you mean Richard :oops:

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    :D Wahtever do you mean Richard :oops:

Well I'm not very sure, but when the OH dragged me to one I thought it was a gym at first with all sorts of weird bits of equipment. I didn't want to show anyone up with my fine physique though so we left.

Posted By: cansweet

Warnings that remind smokers of the fatal consequences of their habit may actually make them smoke, according to new research. The study by psychologists from the United States, Switzerland and Germany, found that warnings were used by some smokers as a way to cope with the inevitability of death. Advice unrelated to death, such as "smoking makes you unattractive" or "smoking brings you and the people around you severe damage", were more effective in changing smokers' attitudes towards their habit, the research said. Impress This was especially the case in people who smoked to boost their self-esteem, such as youth who took up the habit to impress or fit in with their peers and others who thought smoking increased their social value, the researchers said. "In general, when smokers are faced with death-related anti-smoking messages on cigarette packs, they produce active coping attempts as reflected in their willingness to continue the risky smoking behaviour," the study said. "To succeed with anti-smoking messages on cigarette packs one has to take into account that considering their death may make people smoke." The study was based on 39 psychology students, aged between 17 and 41, who said they were smokers. Participants filled in a questionnaire to determine how much their smoking was based on self-esteem and were then shown cigarette packs with different warnings on them. Then, following a 15-minute delay, the participants were asked more questions about their smoking behaviour that included if they intended to quit. "One the one hand, death-related warnings were not effective and even ironically caused more positive smoking attitudes among smokers who based their self-esteem on smoking," the study said. Reduced "On the other hand, warning messages that were unrelated to death effectively reduced smoking attitudes the more recipients based their self-esteem on smoking." The researchers said this finding can be explained by the fact that warnings such as "smoking makes you unattractive" may be particularly threatening to people who believe that smoking makes them feel valued by others or boosts their self-image. Hope this can help some of the smokers here.

Posted By: Richard.G

Having bits chopped off their bodies doesn't seem to be much of an incentive to give up if the number being wheeled out from the cardio-vascular wards for a fag is anything to go by.

Posted By: LynSab

As Steve has already said this thread has 'gawn off' and was supposed to be about peoples thoughts on the smoking ban being FULLY implemented in Cyprus and its repercussions or smooth transition. Instead those that will, have used it to stand on their own soapboxes, why I don,t know as smoking is banned in most sensible countries now. Generally smokers I believe conform to the ban very well in fact, and in most countries has been hugely successful, non smokers now flood these places instead, so what are we all whittering about :roll: :roll: Oh well Merry Christmas!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • LynSab wrote:
    As Steve has already said this thread has 'gawn off' and was supposed to be about peoples thoughts on the smoking ban being FULLY implemented in Cyprus and its repercussions or smooth transition.
    Instead those that will, have used it to stand on their own soapboxes, why I don,t know as smoking is banned in most sensible countries now. Generally smokers I believe conform to the ban very well in fact, and in most countries has been hugely successful, non smokers now flood these places instead, so what are we all whittering about :roll: :roll:
    Oh well Merry Christmas!

Most sensible countries :lol:
Why don't they ban tobacco altogether then and while they're at it how about alcohol, cream cakes,fast food ? I know, I know, you don't have to inhale other people's alcohol or cream cakes etc. and you wouldn't have to smoke passively if there were smoking and no smoking establishments either.................... we will see.
Merry Christmas to you too.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Lyn, Places being flooded by non-smokers? :D dream on. Anyway, i have now come to the conclusion there won't be a problem having a fag in a Cypriot Pub next year, having given considerable thought to how Cypriots regard the law. :D

Posted By: Richard.G

MCM you don't even really have to give considerable thought to how most Cypriots regard the law. Most of the time they just totally disregard it. Won't affect us because we're not winter visitors. Whilst there disregard for the law may be not be too serious in many instances it can be very damaging in others. I don't think they'll be ending up in the European Courts on this one.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Lyn, Places being flooded by non-smokers? :D dream on. Anyway, i have now come to the conclusion there won't be a problem having a fag in a Cypriot Pub next year, having given considerable thought to how Cypriots regard the law. :D

I think there will be hell to pay for a while when some establishments get heavy fines[ cos the authorities need the money] while others, with friends in the right places will carry on untouched.
Why the hell can't one, so called civilised country, allow the right of choice to private businesses ?

Posted By: DAC

They should just introduce a Draconian measure and those that are openly breaking the law by smoking inside, and therefore endangering other people's lives, should just be Shot-on-sight. That'd get the message out... :shock:

Posted By: DAC

:D Please don't take that seriously..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • DAC wrote:
    They should just introduce a Draconian measure and those that are openly breaking the law by smoking inside, and therefore endangering other people's lives, should just be Shot-on-sight. That'd get the message out... :shock:

:bsmile: They might get one of the innocent but obese non smokers crowding around the bar stuffing their faces with crisps and swilling creamy coffee.
"Poor bar stewards didn't have a chance, they couldn't move quickly enough and were caught in the crossfire." :wink:
"Meanwhile the real villains disappeared out the back door in a cloud of smoke !" :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D :D :D

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • DAC wrote:
      They should just introduce a Draconian measure and those that are openly breaking the law by smoking inside, and therefore endangering other people's lives, should just be Shot-on-sight. That'd get the message out... :shock:

    :bsmile: They might get one of the innocent but obese non smokers crowding around the bar stuffing their faces with crisps and swilling creamy coffee.
    :lol:

You had to get one more dig at me didn't you Andrew?!!!!!!!!!!!!
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: cansweet

Goverment are to open a new chimney manufacturing plant in Cyprus. All smokers can make appointments to have flues fitted to their heads. Some people are expected to have problems getting their heads round this way of thinking, and in that case, an exhaust pipe can be fitted to an appropriate part of their anatomy.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • DAC wrote:
        They should just introduce a Draconian measure and those that are openly breaking the law by smoking inside, and therefore endangering other people's lives, should just be Shot-on-sight. That'd get the message out... :shock:

      :bsmile: They might get one of the innocent but obese non smokers crowding around the bar stuffing their faces with crisps and swilling creamy coffee.
      :lol:

    You had to get one more dig at me didn't you Andrew?!!!!!!!!!!!!
    :lol: :lol: :lol:

Love you too Woodie :oops: Have a good Christmas. I'm going back to England. Smoking outside in the cold and damp :(
Hey Cansweet ! Can I have a go with your smart uniform and shiny jackboots when you've finished with them ? :wink:

Posted By: journeyman

Andrew, Do you think they will get one to filter out peoples farts... :lol: , you will be lucky coming back to the UK it's been said that your Top man Mandleson by all accounts stopped the Gestapo from passing a law to stop people from smoking out side of Pubs... :roll: Cheers

Posted By: cansweet

Andrew, i'm afraid you will have to be nicer to me, before i can lend you my uniform and booties. Saying that, i think i notice a softening in your attitude of late. :P Tell you what though, those nice shiny boots, i'm thinking of a nice soft part of your anatomy that i could attach them to. :P :P

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • cansweet wrote:
    Andrew,
    i'm afraid you will have to be nicer to me, before i can lend you my uniform and booties. Saying that, i think i notice a softening in your attitude of late. :P
    Tell you what though, those nice shiny boots, i'm thinking of a nice soft part of your anatomy that i could attach them to. :P :P

:lol: Reminds me of an old Ben Elton routine when he was talking about bouncers and having to be 'dressed smart' to get into nightclubs.
hope this is allowed............ " The bouncers in their smart suits, letting the pretty girls in for nothing, turning others away for no real reason etc. Hitler is next in the queue. Nice uniform and shiny boots. Come on in say the bouncers. Next in the queue is Jesus. Eff off Jesus , no sandals !
You know while they call the bow ties on the bouncers 'dickie bows' ?
Cos they're wrapped round pricks !" :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D :D :D Just spotted this.

Posted By: mouse

Just came back from the Arab Emirates, including Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Fujayrah, Muscat and Bahrain, Smoking is banned in all enclosed Public Places, and in all establishments it clearly states it is an offense to smoke and a minimum fine of 200 Dihrems for thase offenders. I did not ask what the fine was for the Est. owners. Apparantly they had signs up for months before it came into force warning and advising the public that it will be enforced. There has been no problem or unrest and everyone now accepts the law. If the Arabs can do it surely the Cypriots can.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • mouse wrote:
    Just came back from the Arab Emirates, including Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Fujayrah, Muscat and Bahrain, Smoking is banned in all enclosed Public Places, and in all establishments it clearly states it is an offense to smoke and a minimum fine of 200 Dihrems for thase offenders. I did not ask what the fine was for the Est. owners. Apparantly they had signs up for months before it came into force warning and advising the public that it will be enforced. There has been no problem or unrest and everyone now accepts the law. If the Arabs can do it surely the Cypriots can.

Just like they accept other 'laws' ?

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      Just came back from the Arab Emirates, including Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Fujayrah, Muscat and Bahrain, Smoking is banned in all enclosed Public Places, and in all establishments it clearly states it is an offense to smoke and a minimum fine of 200 Dihrems for thase offenders. I did not ask what the fine was for the Est. owners. Apparantly they had signs up for months before it came into force warning and advising the public that it will be enforced. There has been no problem or unrest and everyone now accepts the law. If the Arabs can do it surely the Cypriots can.

    Just like they accept other 'laws' ?

Will do if they are hit in the pocket. A few phone calls here and there. :twisted:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

We went to a small, rather ethnic restaurant in Xylafagou last week which we hadn't visited for some time for the reason it could get very smokey! In fact on the previous occasion we had noticed that they had put "No Smoking" signs up - and two diners were smoking beneath one of them! The owner of the establishment came along and he too was smoking! Somebody commented about the signs and he laughed "It is the law that we put them up!!" Anyway, on this visit, the owner was still puffing away as was another diner. The owner said to him "After January the 1st we will all have to go outside to smoke." For those that said it wouldn't happen in Cyprus; STOP PRESS It's going to happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hallelujah!

Posted By: Deanna

So we'll go outside; no problem - in fact already do!

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Deanna wrote:
    So we'll go outside; no problem - in fact already do!

Then what has all the fuss been about?

Posted By: Deanna

Don't know. Do you?

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Deanna wrote:
    Don't know. Do you?

Actually, yes!
It has been that a fair number of your smoking friends have whinged that they shouldn't have to go outside for a fag but should be allowed to continue inflicting their odious habit on others!!

Posted By: evo

For Gods sake give it a rest!

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • evo wrote:
    For Gods sake give it a rest!

If you're not interested nobody is forcing you to read - let alone respond!!

Posted By: Deanna

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Deanna wrote:
      Don't know. Do you?

    Actually, yes!
    It has been that a fair number of your smoking friends have whinged that they shouldn't have to go outside for a fag but should be allowed to continue inflicting their odious habit on others!!

So now you will have to find another way of being nasty to people who don't live the same way as you. But I don't suppose you will find that too difficult.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D :D :D One to you Deanna! Now then, to-morrow, i want to know how many places are up-holding the law, should be interesting.

Posted By: chuckie

Worked at the O'zone. The ashtrays were taken away at 11.45 and at midnight all the smokers trooped outside for their cough drops. And no, us non-smokers didn't follow them! So well done those smokers who are upholding the law. Carol

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Deanna wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Deanna wrote:
        Don't know. Do you?

      Actually, yes!
      It has been that a fair number of your smoking friends have whinged that they shouldn't have to go outside for a fag but should be allowed to continue inflicting their odious habit on others!!

    So now you will have to find another way of being nasty to people who don't live the same way as you. But I don't suppose you will find that too difficult.

Oh, that hurt! :roll: :roll:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

WOW!! But Carol, you didn't give it long, you posted at 1 32 am! couldn't have been much of a party, we were still hooping it up at 4.30! just had a paracetamol sandwich :oops:

Posted By: chuckie

Are you feeling better now MCM? Carol

Posted By: cansweet

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    WOW!! But Carol, you didn't give it long, you posted at 1 32 am! couldn't have been much of a party, we were still hooping it up at 4.30! just had a paracetam
    ol sandwich :oops:

Tut Tut,
I see you expect everyone to follow your way to have a party. Ours started at 9pm, no hooping, some glasses of wine, fabulous food, great conversation, good fun, finished up at aprox 1am. Felt great this morning, had breakfast with the same friends who stayed over.
Live your own egotistic life MCM, but hold off on trying to be sarcastic, it does no one any favours. Maybe a humble apology to Carol, will get you off on the right foot for 2010. I can imagine other people at your 4.30am sojourn, having numerous paracetamols, having listened to you all night. Happy New Year.

Posted By: evo

Went to the local last night.Nice to see people enjoying a pint and a ciggie.No problems.In fact the band made a very amusing comment which met a loud cheer.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Cansweet, One of my New Year resolutions is to be less tollerant of Axxxxxxxs like you! so take this, Sounds like my life is way less boring than yours, go get a life! Carol, hope you realise I wasn't being sarcastic, of course you do, and yeas feel much better now thanks. So Cyprus is still smoking? :D

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Cansweet, One of my New Year resolutions is to be less tollerant of Axxxxxxxs like you! so take this, Sounds like my life is way less boring than yours, go get a life!

:lol: So the Paracetamols didn't work then, MCM!! :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D It was yesterday I had the paracetamol, didn't need any to-day. I'm thinking it's always good to get back to normal after New Year fun, so having a nice quiet night in to-night, and catch up with the soaps :oops:

Posted By: mouse

  • evo wrote:
    Went to the local last night.Nice to see people enjoying a pint and a ciggie.No problems.In fact the band made a very amusing comment which met a loud cheer.

Needs a phone call!! :twisted:

Posted By: fettler

We were in the Wooden Crest tonight - no smoking anywhere inside. No visible problems. What is Cyprus going to do with several million used ashtrays? Cheers Alex

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • fettler wrote:
    We were in the Wooden Crest tonight - no smoking anywhere inside.
    No visible problems.
    What is Cyprus going to do with several million used ashtrays?
    Cheers
    Alex

Put them on the seats to make the empty establishments look busy ?

Posted By: MrsBouvier

I have been to Kennedy's pub, Corner Pin and the Pig and Whistle in Kapparis since the ban came in (I'm not an alcoholic honestly!) and all three are now non smoking establishments, with people going outside to smoke....not a problem...remind me who said it would be!? I don't think empty seats will be an issue either as for about 9 months of the year most people, smokers or not, choose to sit outside anyway...In my opinion I don't think Cyprus will be hit in the same way the UK pubs have with the smoking ban due simply to the climate. Having been very ill with flu just before Christmas I stopped smoking and have not started again, my husband also gave up for New Year and I think this time with the help of the smoking ban...he might just stick to it :D ....that is until maybe the hot weather starts again :cry:

Posted By: fettler

Nice one Andrew! Just think - if all the surplus ashtrays were thrown into the sea, the sea-level would rise. That's another group happy! Cheers Alex

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Well done Marge! Were these places you mention 'English' places? In any case, having just been reading all the cases in the CPAG web-site, and what goes on in the courts, I think Cyprus will be smoking for a long time to come!

Posted By: Astra

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well done Marge! Were these places you mention 'English' places? In any case, having just been reading all the cases in the CPAG web-site, and what goes on in the courts, I think Cyprus will be smoking for a long time to come!

Have been aware for years that there are some "British" places in the area but were not aware they were "English", don't frequent them but am grateful for the information.

Posted By: MrsBouvier

I think the corner pin is English/British run/owned(?). I am almost certain that the pig and whistle is owned by Cypriot but run by Engish...but stand to be corrected on that one. Kennedy's pub is owned by Cypriot and run by a Cypriot man and Irish woman.

Posted By: Astra

  • MrsBouvier wrote:
    I think the corner pin is English/British run/owned(?).
    I am almost certain that the pig and whistle is owned by Cypriot but run by Engish...but stand to be corrected on that one.
    Kennedy's pub is owned by Cypriot and run by a Cypriot man and Irish woman.

Guess you made my point Marge, albeit inadvertently, many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.
:D

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • Astra wrote:
    • MrsBouvier wrote:
      I think the corner pin is English/British run/owned(?).
      I am almost certain that the pig and whistle is owned by Cypriot but run by Engish...but stand to be corrected on that one.
      Kennedy's pub is owned by Cypriot and run by a Cypriot man and Irish woman.

    Guess you made my point Marge, albeit inadvertently, many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.
    :D

Astra - I see the point you are trying to make but don't think it has much relevance to this thread other than pulling people up on their mistakes...I just don't see it is necessary, its like pointing out spelling mistakes. I am sure if people stopped and thought about what they wrote first they would agree with you...
Being Irish myself I would not be so sensitive to jump on someone if they classed me as British, English whatever....the point people are trying to make 9 times out of 10 on this forum is the person/people they are talking about is non Cypriot and with "English" being their first language....maybe they mean English speaking...rather than English...
  • Astra wrote:
    many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.

Oh and by the way...British does not mean Irish it means Northern Irish...I am from the republic of Ireland so calling me British would technically be incorrect...but I wouldn't normally bother to be so petty as to point it out! :roll: :lol:

Posted By: cansweet

  • Astra wrote:
    • MrsBouvier wrote:
      I think the corner pin is English/British run/owned(?).
      I am almost certain that the pig and whistle is owned by Cypriot but run by Engish...but stand to be corrected on that one.
      Kennedy's pub is owned by Cypriot and run by a Cypriot man and Irish woman.

    Guess you made my point Marge, albeit inadvertently, many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.
    Astra,
    just to make you aware of the fact, that however many of you think that being british can mean Irish. Believe me, being british, most definitely does not mean us "Irish". We few Irish in the world are very proud to be IRISH, not british, as i'm sure the english are proud to be english, scots the same, ditto the welsh etc. Thanks for the history lesson though.

Posted By: fettler

Well said, Marge - you would waste an awful lot of energy if you got upset every time you heard somebody mention "Southern Ireland". That bugs the dickens out of me, and I'm not Irish. Cheers Alex

Posted By: Astra

  • MrsBouvier wrote:
    • Astra wrote:
      • MrsBouvier wrote:
        I think the corner pin is English/British run/owned(?).
        I am almost certain that the pig and whistle is owned by Cypriot but run by Engish...but stand to be corrected on that one.
        Kennedy's pub is owned by Cypriot and run by a Cypriot man and Irish woman.

      Guess you made my point Marge, albeit inadvertently, many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.

      Astra - I see the point you are trying to make but don't think it has much relevance to this thread other than pulling people up on their mistakes...I just don't see it is necessary, its like pointing out spelling mistakes. I am sure if people stopped and thought about what they wrote first they would agree with you...
      Being Irish myself I would not be so sensitive to jump on someone if they classed me as British, English whatever....the point people are trying to make 9 times out of 10 on this forum is the person/people they are talking about is non Cypriot and with "English" being their first language....maybe they mean English speaking...rather than English...
      • Astra wrote:
        many of us on the forum are aware that British can mean Scots, Irish, Welsh and English, sadly some English people seem to think that British means English, fortunately, it does not.

      Oh and by the way...British does not mean Irish it means Northern Irish...I am from the republic of Ireland so calling me British would technically be incorrect...but I wouldn't normally bother to be so petty as to point it out! :roll: :lol:

    Marge,
    you see the point I'm trying to make but, in your opinion, it has no relevance to this thread, in your own words though, you say :
    I am sure if people stopped and thought about what they wrote first they would agree with you...] You contradict yourself in your own post.
    I am really at a loss for words, I am a Scot and proud to be so, if you are ambivalent about your nationality then that is up to you,if you see that mistaking a nationalilty is akin to a spelling mistake then I find it very strange, but more than that, you seem to see yourself as a spokesperson for the majority here, not unusual these days on this site, if people mean English then they can say so, if they mean British then they can say so, if they mean Cypriot or non Cypriot then they can say so, it's not difficult, they do not need you to interpret for them I'm sure.
    Instead of trying to be the voice of the majority, why not just give your opinion and let others answer for themselves..................

Posted By: Astra

  • MrsBouvier wrote:

Oh and by the way...British does not mean Irish it means Northern Irish...I am from the republic of Ireland so calling me British would technically be incorrect...but I wouldn't normally bother to be so petty as to point it out! :roll: :lol:
But you did just point it out.........................
Am I the only one who detects some inconsistency here ?
:shock: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Posted By: evo

LOL. As usual you try to stir it up Astra and you fell flat and you don't like it. Its all swings and roundabouts. Take it on the chin like a man. PMSL. Laters. Steve.

Posted By: Astra

  • evo wrote:
    LOL.
    As usual you try to stir it up Astra and you fell flat and you don't like it.
    Its all swings and roundabouts.
    Take it on the chin like a man.
    PMSL.
    Laters.
    Steve.

Guess you have some gender problems Steve, Astra, a man, explains a lot I guess........................
Much laters..................
P.S. if she is wearing a skirt.............................here is a clue, probably not a man. You can probably buy a book, it may help, they do pictures too.
:shock:

Posted By: badger

I,m sure i am not the only one to detect a pain in the arse. GO MARGE GO, and good luck with the smoking , tell homer to hang in there. Phil & Shirley

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • Astra wrote:
    • MrsBouvier wrote:

    Oh and by the way...British does not mean Irish it means Northern Irish...I am from the republic of Ireland so calling me British would technically be incorrect...but I wouldn't normally bother to be so petty as to point it out! :roll: :lol:
    But you did just point it out.........................
    Am I the only one who detects some inconsistency here ?
    :shock: :roll: :roll: :roll:
I pointed it out as you were throwing your toys out if the pram about others and so I thought I would remind you that you are not yourself 100% perfect (you also have spelling mistakes - see we are all human!)...you know what they say about people in glass houses :lol:
  • Astra wrote:
    Marge,
    you see the point I'm trying to make but, in your opinion, it has no relevance to this thread, in your own words though, you say :
    I am sure if people stopped and thought about what they wrote first they would agree with you...] You contradict yourself in your own post.
    I am really at a loss for words, I am a Scot and proud to be so, if you are ambivalent about your nationality then that is up to you,if you see that mistaking a nationalilty is akin to a spelling mistake then I find it very strange, but more than that, you seem to see yourself as a spokesperson for the majority here, not unusual these days on this site, if people mean English then they can say so, if they mean British then they can say so, if they mean Cypriot or non Cypriot then they can say so, it's not difficult, they do not need you to interpret for them I'm sure.
    Instead of trying to be the voice of the majority, why not just give your opinion and let others answer for themselves..................

I don't think I am contradicting myself, what I said in my post is why bother picking on people, when in fact they were probably generalising anyway (i.e. saying English when they meant English speaking)...its pointless....read between the lines Astra!
As for being "a spokesperson for the majority"....are you living in cloud cuckoo land?...have you read any of my other posts.....although the title sounds a bit grand I am far from it....I almost always mention somewhere my posts "in my own opinion". I am afraid you are barking up the wrong tree here Astra - you have made me chuckle though - thanks!!
I am sure people do not need me to interpret for them as much as they do not need a school teacher to wag their finger at them when they make a mistake....please tell me what it is like to be perfect...I would love to know :lol: :lol: :lol:
Far from being ambivalent about my nationality... I am simply comfortable with who I am, where I come from and do not feel the need to shout about it, we are all the same underneath.
Anyway - now we are all "European" who cares...

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • Astra wrote:
    • evo wrote:
      LOL.
      As usual you try to stir it up Astra and you fell flat and you don't like it.
      Its all swings and roundabouts.
      Take it on the chin like a man.
      PMSL.
      Laters.
      Steve.

    Guess you have some gender problems Steve, Astra, a man, explains a lot I guess........................
    Much laters..................
    P.S. if she is wearing a skirt.............................here is a clue, probably not a man. You can probably buy a book, it may help, they do pictures too.
    :shock:

You have completely lost me now...anyone else follow?...can you interpret for me! I think you may be going a little crazy...

Posted By: evo

Astra. I don't know your sex.How would i? Take it on the chin like a man is just an expression. But again,you have to be pedantic. Its every time with you. Unfortunately turning everything in a war of words. That must be some size chip you got there. Can you manage to even turn your head? Steve.

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well done Marge! Were these places you mention 'English' places? In any case, having just been reading all the cases in the CPAG web-site, and what goes on in the courts, I think Cyprus will be smoking for a long time to come!

MCM - perhaps you could enlighten our friend Astra as to why you called these places "English"...I note the use of quotation marks....far be it for me to be the voice of the majority...lets hear from the horses mouth :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D So Sorry! I have never come across a Scottish Bar in Cyprus, I know there are Irish one's. Anyway, I didn't mean anything by 'English' what I should have said was 'Non-Cypriot' so I stand corrected. :oops:

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    :D So Sorry! I have never come across a Scottish Bar in Cyprus, I know there are Irish one's. Anyway, I didn't mean anything by 'English' what I should have said was 'Non-Cypriot' so I stand corrected. :oops:

So my interpretation was right...I knew exactly what you meant!
Thanks for clearing this up :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

And did those feet, in ancient times, walk upon England's pastures green............. Ah that feels better. Love the insecurity of those who claim to be Celts. How many know their true ancestry ?

Posted By: MrsBouvier

Great, now thats all cleared up lets get back on topic!
Its day 4 of non smoking hubby...
Apparently once you stop smoking you can expect:
In 20 minutes your blood pressure will drop back down to normal. In 8 hours the carbon monoxide (a toxic gas) levels in your blood stream will drop by half, and oxygen levels will return to normal. In 48 hours your chance of having a heart attack will have decreased. All nicotine will have left your body. Your sense of taste and smell will return to a normal level. In 72 hours your bronchial tubes will relax, and your energy levels will increase. In 2 weeks your circulation will increase, and it will continue to improve for the next 10 weeks. In three to nine months coughs, wheezing and breathing problems will dissipate as your lung capacity improves by 10%. In 1 year your risk of having a heart attack will have dropped by half. In 5 years your risk of having a stroke returns to that of a non-smoker. In 10 years your risk of lung cancer will have returned to that of a non-smoker. In 15 years your risk of heart attack will have returned to that of a non-smoker.
All of which makes for positive and encouraging reading! I don't think he is sleeping too well...but it will all be worth it in the long run!


Posted By: MCM Carrington

No Marge! you are not allowed to make me start thinking of not smoking! that was below the belt :( Lol, who am I kidding, i'll just light up now.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ? Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most. Watch this space.....................................

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
    Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
    Watch this space.....................................

I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • MrsBouvier wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
      Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
      Watch this space.....................................

    I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

Have you been inside many bars/tavernas in the winter months ?
A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers. I drove past my local last night and it was empty, except for the Cypriot owner standing outside smoking, or fuming more like!
I agree that it's not much of an an issue most of the year but I also believe that a lot of foreign tourists still come here because they can still enjoy a drink and a smoke at the bar. The impact will be considerable IMO and those with influence, will agitate to safeguard their businesses.
Only time will tell.
Someone was telling me that they actually have smoking and non smoking bars in Greece, which is an obvious and fair solution.
Trouble is, the H&S Gestapo don't do obvious and fair................ yet.

Posted By: MrsBouvier

Andrew - I know what you are saying and had the smoking ban come in at any other time of the year I might agree fully but do you not think that the 8 days after new year are ALWAYS quiet? My parents ran a pub in the centre of Cambridge in the UK for about 20 years or so and New Year is the deadest time for publicans smoking ban or no smoking ban... You might well be right and the ban might well hit tourism and have an effect on the pub trade but all I am saying is it is very early days to be basing it on numbers in the pubs right now.

Posted By: evo

There was a meeting yesterday attended by Cyprus club and bar owners.They are considering a complete island club close down.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

I know what you mean Mrs B . However, my perception of the Cypriot mentality tells me that the ban will not survive in its current form.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • MrsBouvier wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
        Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
        Watch this space.....................................

      I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

    Have you been inside many bars/tavernas in the winter months ?
    A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers. I drove past my local last night and it was empty, except for the Cypriot owner standing outside smoking, or fuming more like!
    I agree that it's not much of an an issue most of the year but I also believe that a lot of foreign tourists still come here because they can still enjoy a drink and a smoke at the bar. The impact will be considerable IMO and those with influence, will agitate to safeguard their businesses.
    Only time will tell.
    Someone was telling me that they actually have smoking and non smoking bars in Greece, which is an obvious and fair solution.
    Trouble is, the H&S Gestapo don't do obvious and fair................ yet.

Okay Andrew, let's look at your option of letting the owners/market decide on the no smoking issue. How would it work, both in Cyprus and the UK?
If as you say "A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers" then that would tend to indicate that "a fairly high percentage" of owners would choose to allow smoking in their establishment. And if you were totally correct that smoking bars are so commercially successful then very few, if any, would prohibit it! The outcome would be that, as before, non-smokers would have little or no option other than stay at home or be forced to breathe other peoples smoke whilst enjoying a drink and, worse, a meal!
In the UK where there are a number of small villages with only one pub, if that pub decided to allow smoking inside what choice, again, would the abstainers have?
So, whilst in theory your proposal seems reasonable - and personally I have no problem with smokers exhaling their fumes via every orifice in their body, just as long as they don't do so over me - it would appear that in practice it would not be feasable.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • MrsBouvier wrote:
        • Andrew Brooks wrote:
          Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
          Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
          Watch this space.....................................

        I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

      Have you been inside many bars/tavernas in the winter months ?
      A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers. I drove past my local last night and it was empty, except for the Cypriot owner standing outside smoking, or fuming more like!
      I agree that it's not much of an an issue most of the year but I also believe that a lot of foreign tourists still come here because they can still enjoy a drink and a smoke at the bar. The impact will be considerable IMO and those with influence, will agitate to safeguard their businesses.
      Only time will tell.
      Someone was telling me that they actually have smoking and non smoking bars in Greece, which is an obvious and fair solution.
      Trouble is, the H&S Gestapo don't do obvious and fair................ yet.

    Okay Andrew, let's look at your option of letting the owners/market decide on the no smoking issue. How would it work, both in Cyprus and the UK?
    If as you say "A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers" then that would tend to indicate that "a fairly high percentage" of owners would choose to allow smoking in their establishment. And if you were totally correct that smoking bars are so commercially successful then very few, if any, would prohibit it! The outcome would be that, as before, non-smokers would have little or no option other than stay at home or be forced to breathe other peoples smoke whilst enjoying a drink and, worse, a meal!
    In the UK where there are a number of small villages with only one pub, if that pub decided to allow smoking inside what choice, again, would the abstainers have?
    So, whilst in theory your proposal seems reasonable - and personally I have no problem with smokers exhaling their fumes via every orifice in their body, just as long as they don't do so over me - it would appear that in practice it would not be feasable.

Valid points Woodie and unfortunately I haven't the time to think up an appropriate answer......................... there has to be one though !
Having been for a walk with the dog by the salt lake, I now have possible alternatives. One pub villages should be non smoking but neighbouring village pubs which do allow smoking should be encouraged to provide bus transport and vice versa. This already happens in some of the more off the beaten track establishments and would encourage more people to frequent these places ,as the drink driving element would also be removed. Most country pubs, with good reputations for beer and food would probably buy in if they could see that a mini bus full of diners/drinkers would more than compensate for the running costs.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Well I feel sorry for that Bar owner standing outside his empty Pub fuming as Marge said. Are things not bad enough for him? what a damn shame. :evil:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well I feel sorry for that Bar owner standing outside his empty Pub fuming as Marge said. Are things not bad enough for him? what a damn shame. :evil:

What about feeling sorry for all the people over the years who have been subjected to the effects of other people smoking - many of whom have died as a result!
BTW what Marge actually said was that pubs are always quiet at this time of year irrespective of any smoking ban!
:evil: :evil:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Woody, The non-smokers kept going into these Pubs didn't they? but of course anyone who has died from passive smoking, then I do feel sorry for them. There is no point in getting bak into smokers V non-smokers, it will go round in circles, what we are talikng about is the Smoking Ban, and if it is happening? seems it is, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

Posted By: oldsten

Read this ; harleyrider1978 JAN 03 • SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor...thats right water...you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off....... Thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves, the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made..thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........IN 1993 EPA decided to change the listing of shs to a carcinogen for political reasons ......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals measured in picograms so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it. If the same standards to make shs/ets a carcinogen were applied to a glass of tap water, certain foods and most other things in the natural environment they would also be carcinogens. The failure of the EPA to use the dose makes the poison chart in this political decision makes their entire claim a moot point. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science..What OSHA should be doing is applying the general duty clause and set indoor standards where limits of safe levels are set. But dog gone it,thats why OSHA didnt set a standard because there was just nothing in shs/ets that could be deemed harmful to humans. So it was left as it was a simple class 3 irritant. Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057 concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers..... meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study: Submit your opinion on this story Name: Email: Opinion: (5,000 characters) Publish My Opinion Security Code Security Code

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • oldsten wrote:
    Read this ;
    harleyrider1978
    JAN 03 • SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE
    Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor...thats right water...you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......
    Thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves, the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made..thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........IN 1993 EPA decided to change the listing of shs to a carcinogen for political reasons ......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals measured in picograms so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it.
    If the same standards to make shs/ets a carcinogen were applied to a glass of tap water, certain foods and most other things in the natural environment they would also be carcinogens. The failure of the EPA to use the dose makes the poison chart in this political decision makes their entire claim a moot point.
    However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science..What OSHA should be doing is applying the general duty clause and set indoor standards where limits of safe levels are set. But dog gone it,thats why OSHA didnt set a standard because there was just nothing in shs/ets that could be deemed harmful to humans. So it was left as it was a simple class 3 irritant.
    Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at:
    http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057
    concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers.....
    meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:



    Submit your opinion on this story

    Name:

    Email:

    Opinion: (5,000 characters)

    Publish My Opinion

    Security Code

    Security Code

Tell that to all the relatives of the people who, it has been proved by medical science, have contracted diseases and died due to passive smoking, most notably Roy Castle!
I suspect you will be still be able to find, somewhere, a study that "prooves" that cigarette smoking is not harmful to even someone on 60 a day - no doubt funded by the Tobacco industry!
And I suppose those hundreds of people who burnt to death at Kings Cross Station and Bradford City Football Ground in fires started by discarded lit cigarette ends are also a figment of the imagination!!!
:evil: :evil:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Woody, The non-smokers kept going into these Pubs didn't they? but of course anyone who has died from passive smoking, then I do feel sorry for them. There is no point in getting bak into smokers V non-smokers, it will go round in circles, what we are talikng about is the Smoking Ban, and if it is happening? seems it is, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

I never entered a pub that was very smokey and frequently turned away at the door!
Sometimes, after entering a "clean" enviroment, smoke would "creep" up on us - and then it was too late, our clothes would be reeking!
If one wanted to socialise at all then you would have to put up with a certain amount of smoke because the alternative was, as I previously mentioned, to stay at home!
So, if non-smokers could patronise establishments where they knew they would endure a certain amount of discomfort, why are the smokers incapable of doing that? Not very loyal to their watering holes are they?
As for not holding my breath - fortunately that's something I don't have to do in pubs and restaurants anymore!!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

Posted By: AskCy

LIES, DAMN LIES and STATISTICS !
You can make stats tell you anything you want, and thats what happens time and time again.... Unfortunately we are spoon fed this rubbish and far too many people take it in !
Take a look at 100 people in hospital with "smoking related" diseases and ask how many smoke ? How many live with a smoker ? How many work in a smokey enviroment.
Suppose they are all non-smokers does that prove that some sort of passive smoking is to blame ?
Then suppose 50% of them live with smokers does that mean 50% have been caused by partners passive smoking or does it mean you can just get smoking related disease with or without smoking/passive smoking?
Statistically speaking you could say "its a 50/50 percent chance you could get a smoking related disease without passive smoking so passive smoking isn't to blame" or you could say that out of 100 people 50% of them contracted smoking related illness from living with smokers"
which answer do you want?... Smokers obviously won't want blaming for causing illness in others so it a smoker is heading the studies I wonder which results they will publish?
Again suppose they do the same study and 70% of the people surveyed actually got ill and lived with a smoker that would say a large percentage of people living with smokers got smoking related illnesses.
If you don't want a scary fact like that releasing into the general public (I mean which government has actually wanted to cut all that tax they get by having everyone stop smoking?) you need to manipulate that statistics to show something more in your favour... How ?.. Well its much easier than you might think...
The first and easiest way is to just look at your data and pic the section of it where most of the people didn't get problems (ie the 30% of them in this case) then narrow your result down to say "out of a survey of 30 people none of them had a smoking related illness even when living with a smoking partner".... (there is an advert of tv for something like facecream or hair something... and it says something like 95% of people surveyed... but at the bottom of the screen it says from a study of 76 people...,who would do a study of 76 people and not 100 ?)
(ps the second way would be to keep asking more and more people until you got a section of 100 people where it fitted the answer you wanted..)
They other thing statistics dont show are other factors...
My partner smokes but not in the house, not in the car, not anywhere that it makes me breath her smoke (she stands at the door and so does anyone else who comes to our house and wants to smoke!). So although a tick box would say
do you live with a smoker [ ]
do you have a smoking related illness yourself [ ]
I'd have to say yes I do and no I don't... hey presto a vote for passive smoking not causing illness..
Again you could get someone who answers the same questions as above
with NO I don't live with a smoker
and YES I do have a smoking related illness, this seeming to suggest that you can get illness that is attributed to smoking even when you don't smoke and don't breathe in other peoples smoke.
however maybe if the questions also included -
Do you or have you ever travelled on trains/buses where people are smoking [ ]
Does your work take you to places where people are smoking [ ]
Did your parents smoke while you were growing up [ ]
Does your work mate / lift to work smoke in the car [ ]
Do you wait to go into work in the morning where other people are smoking [ ]
Do you go in smokey bars / pubs / restaurants [ ]
Does anyone else come to your house that smokes [ ]
then maybe the results would show that that person has actually been in contact with a smoker/smokers and that might then point the illness back at being passive smoking related....
stats... I hate them !

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

OK Andrew.
So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
:lol: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

    OK Andrew.
    So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
    :lol: :lol:

:lol: Nice try Woodie.
Don't think I ever said that it wouldn't happen though ? I did predict that it probably wouldn't last in its current form.
It's not all over til the fat lady sings and I still have faith in the Cypriot way ! :lol:
Suppose I'll have to nip over to the TRNC more often until a more pragmatic service is resumed but that's another story :wink:
You off to the pub today to enjoy the clean air and keep the local businessmen happy ? I'm off to the pub in a while, I'm so addicted to the weed and so not up for standing in the cold, that I'll only go on warm days in daylight hours until the heat returns :lol:
Had to laugh at some locals shivering in the outside section of our local souvlaki place last night. How long will they put up with this ?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Woody, Round in circles!! keep it friendly!! would you walk up to a smoker and say to his face,'you make my clothes reek' NO, so don't vent your anger here, and don't judge smokers here either, or we might start calling you a boring fart!! Oh btw, smoke menthol, nothing reeks. :D or the e-fag.

Posted By: Kwacka

  • oldsten wrote:
    Read this ;
    harleyrider1978
    JAN 03 • SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE

After reading this I did ask if 'harleyrider1978' was a member of one of the groups funded by the tobacco companies to search the press for tobacco-related stories.
He has appeared in numeorus posts, with several different styles, punctuation, all citing false 'research' that supports smoking.

Posted By: Kwacka

  • AskCy wrote:
    LIES, DAMN LIES and STATISTICS !
    You can make stats tell you anything you want, and thats what happens time and time again.... Unfortunately we are spoon fed this rubbish and far too many people take it in !
    stats... I hate them !

You've highlighted some of the significant problems that researchers are obliged to identify and question when carrying out research (and for which the main study in 'harleyrider's" rubbish is pulled apart).
A study into the effects of second-hand smoke would be obliged to find a group who have all experiences that were broadly similar, and questions similar to yours will be asked identifying groups, and as part of the research.
Statisticians would tend to say something like 'the study suggests that there is an increased probability of sudden infant death syndrome in infants if one or both parents smoke' which would be reported in the press as 'research proves that second-hand smoke causes SIDS".
Statistics are used to find the probability of two events being related - NEVER proved (despite the quote from Twain or Disraeli).

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

      OK Andrew.
      So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
      :lol: :lol:

    :lol: Nice try Woodie.
    Don't think I ever said that it wouldn't happen though ?

Oh, Andrew, Andrew! I think the tobacco might have done something detrimental to your powers of recall!
May I remind you of some of your outpourings on this subject last year, and I quote;
10/3/09 #101 "Cyprus will never fully implement this crazy EU dictate. It will be a dark day in paradise before these people tell the Cypriots what to do. Let's face it, it just ain't gonna happen."
10/3/09 #122 "The Cypriots WILL NOT bow down to this dictate. Smoking WILL continue in bars and restaurants ......."
11/3/09 #132 "If you 'know Cyprus and Cypriots' you will accept that they will not change any time soon."
12/3/09 #146 "You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think a blanket ban will ever be adhered to on this particular island."
Although in the last quote you were partly right - blankets haven't been banned! :wink:
MCM, hope that my continuing to post facts doesn't make me too much of a "boring fart" and that you will not let that deter you from carrying on spouting your nonsense. Trust that's friendly enough!

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well I feel sorry for that Bar owner standing outside his empty Pub fuming as Marge said. Are things not bad enough for him? what a damn shame. :evil:

Not me, it was Andrew who said this.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Sorry Marge :oops: Woody, there is no hope for you :roll:

Posted By: mouse

  • evo wrote:
    There was a meeting yesterday attended by Cyprus club and bar owners.They are considering a complete island club close down.

Its called shooting oneself in the foot!!!!.

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • MrsBouvier wrote:
          • Andrew Brooks wrote:
            Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
            Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
            Watch this space.....................................

          I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

        Have you been inside many bars/tavernas in the winter months ?
        A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers. I drove past my local last night and it was empty, except for the Cypriot owner standing outside smoking, or fuming more like!
        I agree that it's not much of an an issue most of the year but I also believe that a lot of foreign tourists still come here because they can still enjoy a drink and a smoke at the bar. The impact will be considerable IMO and those with influence, will agitate to safeguard their businesses.
        Only time will tell.
        Someone was telling me that they actually have smoking and non smoking bars in Greece, which is an obvious and fair solution.
        Trouble is, the H&S Gestapo don't do obvious and fair................ yet.

      Okay Andrew, let's look at your option of letting the owners/market decide on the no smoking issue. How would it work, both in Cyprus and the UK?
      If as you say "A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers" then that would tend to indicate that "a fairly high percentage" of owners would choose to allow smoking in their establishment. And if you were totally correct that smoking bars are so commercially successful then very few, if any, would prohibit it! The outcome would be that, as before, non-smokers would have little or no option other than stay at home or be forced to breathe other peoples smoke whilst enjoying a drink and, worse, a meal!
      In the UK where there are a number of small villages with only one pub, if that pub decided to allow smoking inside what choice, again, would the abstainers have?
      So, whilst in theory your proposal seems reasonable - and personally I have no problem with smokers exhaling their fumes via every orifice in their body, just as long as they don't do so over me - it would appear that in practice it would not be feasable.

    Valid points Woodie and unfortunately I haven't the time to think up an appropriate answer......................... there has to be one though !
    Having been for a walk with the dog by the salt lake, I now have possible alternatives. One pub villages should be non smoking but neighbouring village pubs which do allow smoking should be encouraged to provide bus transport and vice versa. This already happens in some of the more off the beaten track establishments and would encourage more people to frequent these places ,as the drink driving element would also be removed. Most country pubs, with good reputations for beer and food would probably buy in if they could see that a mini bus full of diners/drinkers would more than compensate for the running costs.

Cluthing at straws Andrew. :)

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • MrsBouvier wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        Well the smoking ban is here and being applied, as far as I can see. Who would risk a 2k fine ?
        Conversely, I'm hearing talk of crisis meetings already, as predicted, as the ban begins to hit bar owners where it hurts most.
        Watch this space.....................................

      I really think Cyprus won't be hit like the UK was as most of the year everyone sits outside anyway...why are they holding crisis meetings after just 8 days and historically these are the quietest days for any pub trade regardless....especially during/following a recession - maybe it's panic?!

    Have you been inside many bars/tavernas in the winter months ?
    A fairly high percentage of the owners/staff/punters would appear to be smokers. I drove past my local last night and it was empty, except for the Cypriot owner standing outside smoking, or fuming more like!
    I agree that it's not much of an an issue most of the year but I also believe that a lot of foreign tourists still come here because they can still enjoy a drink and a smoke at the bar. The impact will be considerable IMO and those with influence, will agitate to safeguard their businesses.
    Only time will tell.
    Someone was telling me that they actually have smoking and non smoking bars in Greece, which is an obvious and fair solution.
    Trouble is, the H&S Gestapo don't do obvious and fair................ yet.

Hi Andrew
What makes you think people come to Cyprus so they can still smoke in bars. As approximately 75% of holiday makers who come to Cyprus are Non - Smokers surely that means they would prefer smoke free bars and Restaurants.
Also as Cyprus has been struggling more than other Med countries who have had a non-Smoking ban in force for some time it would also suggest by your logic that people prefer non-smoking destinations. All that would do is make the CTO think the only problem Cyprus has is the smoking ban. ( Blinkers)

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        • Andrew Brooks wrote:
          Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

        OK Andrew.
        So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
        :lol: :lol:

      :lol: Nice try Woodie.
      Don't think I ever said that it wouldn't happen though ?

    Oh, Andrew, Andrew! I think the tobacco might have done something detrimental to your powers of recall!
    May I remind you of some of your outpourings on this subject last year, and I quote;
    10/3/09 #101 "Cyprus will never fully implement this crazy EU dictate. It will be a dark day in paradise before these people tell the Cypriots what to do. Let's face it, it just ain't gonna happen."
    10/3/09 #122 "The Cypriots WILL NOT bow down to this dictate. Smoking WILL continue in bars and restaurants ......."
    11/3/09 #132 "If you 'know Cyprus and Cypriots' you will accept that they will not change any time soon."
    12/3/09 #146 "You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think a blanket ban will ever be adhered to on this particular island."
    Although in the last quote you were partly right - blankets haven't been banned! :wink:
    MCM, hope that my continuing to post facts doesn't make me too much of a "boring fart" and that you will not let that deter you from carrying on spouting your nonsense. Trust that's friendly enough!

:lol: :oops: Well I clearly wasn't aware of the facts regarding potential fines etc. back in March, so grudging compliance is to be expected initially. I still believe that this is only the beginning. If I'm wrong, I'm off ! :lol:
Anyone got any ideas which countries are not ruled by the H&S Gestapo ?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Mouse, That's what they will blame lack of tourism this year! I was wondering what would get the blame lol.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
          • Andrew Brooks wrote:
            Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

          OK Andrew.
          So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
          :lol: :lol:

        :lol: Nice try Woodie.
        Don't think I ever said that it wouldn't happen though ?

      Oh, Andrew, Andrew! I think the tobacco might have done something detrimental to your powers of recall!
      May I remind you of some of your outpourings on this subject last year, and I quote;
      10/3/09 #101 "Cyprus will never fully implement this crazy EU dictate. It will be a dark day in paradise before these people tell the Cypriots what to do. Let's face it, it just ain't gonna happen."
      10/3/09 #122 "The Cypriots WILL NOT bow down to this dictate. Smoking WILL continue in bars and restaurants ......."
      11/3/09 #132 "If you 'know Cyprus and Cypriots' you will accept that they will not change any time soon."
      12/3/09 #146 "You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think a blanket ban will ever be adhered to on this particular island."
      Although in the last quote you were partly right - blankets haven't been banned! :wink:
      MCM, hope that my continuing to post facts doesn't make me too much of a "boring fart" and that you will not let that deter you from carrying on spouting your nonsense. Trust that's friendly enough!

    :lol: :oops: Well I clearly wasn't aware of the facts regarding potential fines etc. back in March, so grudging compliance is to be expected initially. I still believe that this is only the beginning. If I'm wrong, I'm off ! :lol:
    Anyone got any ideas which countries are not ruled by the H&S Gestapo ?

And I bet you didn't think that anybody would be boring and sad enough to go back through the archives to dig out your quotes - but, hey here I am!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Woody, Round in circles!! keep it friendly!! would you walk up to a smoker and say to his face,'you make my clothes reek' NO, so don't vent your anger here, and don't judge smokers here either, or we might start calling you a boring fart!! Oh btw, smoke menthol, nothing reeks. :D or the e-fag.

To answer your question MCM, no I wouldn't do that - that would be rude!
However, if there was a discussion going on (you know, as in a forum) between smokers and non, in which I was involved, then I would feel free to add my views which would be exactly the same as I've stated on these pages!
Hope that clarifies matters!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • MCM Carrington wrote:
      Woody, Round in circles!! keep it friendly!! would you walk up to a smoker and say to his face,'you make my clothes reek' NO, so don't vent your anger here, and don't judge smokers here either, or we might start calling you a boring fart!! Oh btw, smoke menthol, nothing reeks. :D or the e-fag.

    To answer your question MCM, no I wouldn't do that - that would be rude!
    However, if there was a discussion going on (you know, as in a forum) between smokers and non, in which I was involved, then I would feel free to add my views which would be exactly the same as I've stated on these pages!
    Hope that clarifies matters!

I admire a man who says what he means and means what he says !
We must have a beer or two together when the weather improves. I promise to sit downwind Woodie as I'm a considerate stinker :wink:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • MCM Carrington wrote:
        Woody, Round in circles!! keep it friendly!! would you walk up to a smoker and say to his face,'you make my clothes reek' NO, so don't vent your anger here, and don't judge smokers here either, or we might start calling you a boring fart!! Oh btw, smoke menthol, nothing reeks. :D or the e-fag.

      To answer your question MCM, no I wouldn't do that - that would be rude!
      However, if there was a discussion going on (you know, as in a forum) between smokers and non, in which I was involved, then I would feel free to add my views which would be exactly the same as I've stated on these pages!
      Hope that clarifies matters!

    I admire a man who says what he means and means what he says !
    We must have a beer or two together when the weather improves. I promise to sit downwind Woodie as I'm a considerate stinker :wink:

You may have a date, Andrew. Although I think we should agree not to discuss a certain subject over the beers! :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        • MCM Carrington wrote:
          Woody, Round in circles!! keep it friendly!! would you walk up to a smoker and say to his face,'you make my clothes reek' NO, so don't vent your anger here, and don't judge smokers here either, or we might start calling you a boring fart!! Oh btw, smoke menthol, nothing reeks. :D or the e-fag.

        To answer your question MCM, no I wouldn't do that - that would be rude!
        However, if there was a discussion going on (you know, as in a forum) between smokers and non, in which I was involved, then I would feel free to add my views which would be exactly the same as I've stated on these pages!
        Hope that clarifies matters!

      I admire a man who says what he means and means what he says !
      We must have a beer or two together when the weather improves. I promise to sit downwind Woodie as I'm a considerate stinker :wink:

    You may have a date, Andrew. Although I think we should agree not to discuss a certain subject over the beers! :wink:

Agreed. I don't want you producing archived evidence again :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
          • Andrew Brooks wrote:
            Light up Woodie :oops: I mean lighten up :lol:

          OK Andrew.
          So, on a lighter note, would you like Ketchup or Mayonaisse on that hat of yours you were going to eat if the Smoking Ban ever materialised in Cyprus?
          :lol: :lol:

        :lol: Nice try Woodie.
        Don't think I ever said that it wouldn't happen though ?

      Oh, Andrew, Andrew! I think the tobacco might have done something detrimental to your powers of recall!
      May I remind you of some of your outpourings on this subject last year, and I quote;
      10/3/09 #101 "Cyprus will never fully implement this crazy EU dictate. It will be a dark day in paradise before these people tell the Cypriots what to do. Let's face it, it just ain't gonna happen."
      10/3/09 #122 "The Cypriots WILL NOT bow down to this dictate. Smoking WILL continue in bars and restaurants ......."
      11/3/09 #132 "If you 'know Cyprus and Cypriots' you will accept that they will not change any time soon."
      12/3/09 #146 "You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think a blanket ban will ever be adhered to on this particular island."
      Although in the last quote you were partly right - blankets haven't been banned! :wink:
      MCM, hope that my continuing to post facts doesn't make me too much of a "boring fart" and that you will not let that deter you from carrying on spouting your nonsense. Trust that's friendly enough!

    :lol: :oops: Well I clearly wasn't aware of the facts regarding potential fines etc. back in March, so grudging compliance is to be expected initially. I still believe that this is only the beginning. If I'm wrong, I'm off ! :lol:
    Anyone got any ideas which countries are not ruled by the H&S Gestapo ?

Not many :lol: even most Arab states are have now banned the smelly things in public places. It looks like the dog is wagging the tail at long last in most of the civalised world. :D

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Have you ever considered emigrating Mouse ?

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Have you ever considered emigrating Mouse ?

Don't need to now!!! :lol:
On the serious side there are a countries who don't have as you say H&S Gestapo!!, you could try Afhghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Somalia. But give me the good old H & S Gestapo anytime. :twisted: :lol:

Posted By: rockjock

On the subject of the original post I have noted that the Cypriot establishments are in general ignoring the ban but Brit owned/managed seem to be observing the rules. RJ

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Once the ash[I mean dust] has settled and it will take some time, we should have a better idea of what the eventual outcomes will be.
The ban has just begun and the possible fines are large.
We shall see.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • mouse wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      Have you ever considered emigrating Mouse ?

    Don't need to now!!! :lol:
    On the serious side there are a countries who don't have as you say H&S Gestapo!!, you could try Afhghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Somalia. But give me the good old H & S Gestapo anytime. :twisted: :lol:

Mouse, you may have stumbled on a great opportunity for the CTO, namely organising tours from Cyprus to all of the places you mentioned. Because, if it's true -as Andrew suggests- that the island attracts smokers by the bucket load then, as they can no longer smoke inside on these shores, it would be a great compromise for them to be able to shoot off for a few days break to get away from the draconian dictates of the "Gestapo."
After all, I'm confident the intrepid and dedicated smoker would not allow small obstacles like warfare, pestilence and State terrorism to stand in the way of their enjoyment of the weed. Such dangers would obviously be as nothing compared to the indignity and inconvenience of having to step outside to smoke in the cruel Cypriot air!
:wink: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

If the ban here has not been adjusted in favour of smokers within a year from now, I will take both of you Puritans out for a meal and suffer !

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    If the ban here has not been adjusted in favour of smokers within a year from now, I will take both of you Puritans out for a meal and suffer !

I have printed this out Andrew - well, it will save me having to search through the archives in a years time! :wink:

Posted By: mouse

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        Have you ever considered emigrating Mouse ?

      Don't need to now!!! :lol:
      On the serious side there are a countries who don't have as you say H&S Gestapo!!, you could try Afhghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwe, North Korea and Somalia. But give me the good old H & S Gestapo anytime. :twisted: :lol:

    Mouse, you may have stumbled on a great opportunity for the CTO, namely organising tours from Cyprus to all of the places you mentioned. Because, if it's true -as Andrew suggests- that the island attracts smokers by the bucket load then, as they can no longer smoke inside on these shores, it would be a great compromise for them to be able to shoot off for a few days break to get away from the draconian dictates of the "Gestapo."
    After all, I'm confident the intrepid and dedicated smoker would not allow small obstacles like warfare, pestilence and State terrorism to stand in the way of their enjoyment of the weed. Such dangers would obviously be as nothing compared to the indignity and inconvenience of having to step outside to smoke in the cruel Cypriot air!
    :wink: :lol:

Hi Woody,
Great idea, I use to be a travel agent, perhaps i could help Andrew and his smokers on there way ( or one way) :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • rockjock wrote:
    On the subject of the original post I have noted that the Cypriot establishments are in general ignoring the ban but Brit owned/managed seem to be observing the rules.
    RJ

From what i have seen and heard even the Cypriots are abiding by the new law. If there are bars not abiding by the new regulations then to be fair to those that are!! a phone call to the authorities i think would be in order.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • mouse wrote:
    • rockjock wrote:
      On the subject of the original post I have noted that the Cypriot establishments are in general ignoring the ban but Brit owned/managed seem to be observing the rules.
      RJ

    From what i have seen and heard even the Cypriots are abiding by the new law. If there are bars not abiding by the new regulations then to be fair to those that are!! a phone call to the authorities i think would be in order.

Creep. I'm retracting my invite to this person Woodie. You can bring the other half instead.

Posted By: Cardiff lad

I popped into a bar earlier and it was empty, not one person in there. The large smoking area outside though was jam packed. Makes you think really.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Cardiff lad wrote:
    I popped into a bar earlier and it was empty, not one person in there. The large smoking area outside though was jam packed.
    Makes you think really.

Yea, makes me think the ban is working!! :wink:

Posted By: evo

Also unfortunately while the masses gather outside they are not consuming theirs drinks.My local looked very strange as the tables were littered with drinks and personnel belongs.Not a sole in sight. This will cause a massive downturn as fewer drinks are consumed. And of course all the non smokers were there to support their local pub NOT! Use it or lose it or everyone will lose out.

Posted By: Cardiff lad

No it makes you think where are these people the ban is meant to be benefitting.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Also the atmosphere will be gone. Such a shame a middle ground could not be found Oh :shock: I'm a poet and didn't know it!

Posted By: LynSab

  • Cardiff lad wrote:
    No it makes you think where are these people the ban is meant to be benefitting.

True Ian
Can,t find a link as yet but just watched a bbc news interview with some Finnish people in Finland :roll: my brightness astounds me! who have been asked what they think about Govt proposals to ban smoking ALTOGETHER. If they do others will follow, then we will all be healthy wealthy and bright once again :D Or will we?
One says he will leave the country, another says rightly that she believes the govt are looking after her future health. Hmmm will they get rid of the cars then too, and of course alcohol, and ALL fast and ready foods, processed and some frozen foods, dodgy additives and colours, any pollutents in the air, never allow odd ways to grow and force meat and food, take down all pylons and mobile masts etc etc etc. One third of all cancers are smoke related we need answers for what causes the others don,t we?
I have no issues with the smoking ban at all BUT I will never rest easy seeing these lovely old Cypriot men in my village for instance having to sit outside in the cold to smoke in cafes that only they attend daily, but bless em they are, thats what I like about smokers on the whole they do what is asked of them.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • LynSab wrote:
    • Cardiff lad wrote:
      No it makes you think where are these people the ban is meant to be benefitting.

    True Ian
    Can,t find a link as yet but just watched a bbc news interview with some Finnish people in Finland :roll: my brightness astounds me! who have been asked what they think about Govt proposals to ban smoking ALTOGETHER. If they do others will follow, then we will all be healthy wealthy and bright once again :D Or will we?
    One says he will leave the country, another says rightly that she believes the govt are looking after her future health. Hmmm will they get rid of the cars then too, and of course alcohol, and ALL fast and ready foods, processed and some frozen foods, dodgy additives and colours, any pollutents in the air, never allow odd ways to grow and force meat and food, take down all pylons and mobile masts etc etc etc. One third of all cancers are smoke related we need answers for what causes the others don,t we?
    I have no issues with the smoking ban at all BUT I will never rest easy seeing these lovely old Cypriot men in my village for instance having to sit outside in the cold to smoke in cafes that only they attend daily, but bless em they are, thats what I like about smokers on the whole they do what is asked of them.

It won't last. Pressure will build both socially and economically and by the end of next winter there will be changes to the law.
You can copy this too Woodie :lol:
ps even talking about banning smoking altogether shows just how out of control the H&S Gestapo have become.Governments would be crippled by the loss of tax revenue brought in by tobacco. Something has to give soon.
The whole thing has become a bloody joke. We can poison ourselves any other way we like, we can, by and large, pollute the planet any way we like but we can't allow people to have a smoke and a drink in designated smoking bars.
Come on Cyprus I know you can end this madness !

Posted By: Kwacka

  • LynSab wrote:
    thats what I like about smokers on the whole they do what is asked of them.

:shock:
Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

Posted By: cansweet

Iv'e just come from a service at the crematorium, and my friend with me lit up outside afterwards, only to be told there is no smoking allowed. I'm puzzled!! I think he's going to go back inside, and see will they allow it there, shouldn't be a problem i think? The funny thing is, we buried a friend who never smoked, or drank alcohol, but died of stomach cancer, fit as a fiddle up to last november, makes you wonder why we squabble so much. 57 is too young, i think i'll go back on the weeds.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Kwacka wrote:
    • LynSab wrote:
      thats what I like about smokers on the whole they do what is asked of them.

    :shock:
    Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

Probably an accurate assessment Kwacka but the H&S Gestapo would still have pushed for a total ban.

Posted By: Kwacka

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Kwacka wrote:

      Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

    Probably an accurate assessment Kwacka but the H&S Gestapo would still have pushed for a total ban.

I've often wondered - why 'gestapo'?
Surely the opposite - they're more concerned with prolonging life, preventing injury, etc. - isn't this the opposite of what the gestapo did?

Posted By: LynSab

  • Kwacka wrote:
    • LynSab wrote:
      thats what I like about smokers on the whole they do what is asked of them.

    :shock:
    Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

Maybe I should have said generally in Europe smokers have complied once a ban is introduced in some areas 97% hence my comment, I really can,t speak for Cyprus as we are only a couple of weeks in :wink: But as there are already laws for many things here i.e helmet wearing, animal welfare laws, seat belts etc all which have been ignored in the main, why will this one be different do you think?
I have though seen many elderly men comply, outside the cafe,s a Cypriot tradition wrapped up in their coats, its quite refreshing but will it last.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Kwacka wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Kwacka wrote:

        Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

      Probably an accurate assessment Kwacka but the H&S Gestapo would still have pushed for a total ban.

    I've often wondered - why 'gestapo'?
    Surely the opposite - they're more concerned with prolonging life, preventing injury, etc. - isn't this the opposite of what the gestapo did?

'Gestapo' because they seem to have become a law unto themselves......... and it irritates Woodie ! :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • evo wrote:
    Also unfortunately while the masses gather outside they are not consuming theirs drinks.My local looked very strange as the tables were littered with drinks and personnel belongs.Not a sole in sight.
    This will cause a massive downturn as fewer drinks are consumed.
    And of course all the non smokers were there to support their local pub NOT!
    Use it or lose it or everyone will lose out.

This post and that of Cardiff Lad has got me somewhat confused!
All other opponents of the ban have stated that smokers would now stay away from pubs because they could no longer smoke inside, and this would even lead to many places closing down!
Yet here we have the "masses" gathered outside (shame the walk left them so feeble they weren't strong enough to carry their drinks with them!!) and in Cardiff Lad's pub "The large smoking area outside though was jam packed."
So come on you advocates of reversing the ban, at least get your strategy right! Are the pubs going to close because smokers are boycotting them, or are smokers still going in their droves but just a little peeved that they can no longer inflict their habit on the rest of us!
And on that point, the beauty of a smoke free pub is that one can now enter such an enviroment, at any time one chooses, without coming back out with (and I may have mentioned this before) eyes streaming and clothes reeking!
It does not mean that to be worthy of this(!) the non-smoker must show their gratitude by spending every spare minute of the day there! :roll:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Kwacka wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • Kwacka wrote:

          Cyprus has no smoking laws since the early 1990s (the strongest in Europe when they were introduced) & it's because smokers didn't do what was asked of them (re comments here in the past about people sitting under 'no smoking' signs with a fag on the go) that the law had to be strengthened with a reasonable level of deterrence to oblige them to comply.

        Probably an accurate assessment Kwacka but the H&S Gestapo would still have pushed for a total ban.

      I've often wondered - why 'gestapo'?
      Surely the opposite - they're more concerned with prolonging life, preventing injury, etc. - isn't this the opposite of what the gestapo did?

    'Gestapo' because they seem to have become a law unto themselves......... and it irritates Woodie ! :lol:

Not any more Andrew mate, I've got used to it.
In fact I now take it as term of endearment!! :wink:

Posted By: evo

The point i was making was the pubs will suffer as less drinks are consumed.No one is taking their cold drinks outside to hold in their cold hands while they smoke in the cold. I also think no one is peeved as the social intercourse that people are having by being outside,made to feel like school children smoking behind the bike sheds,it all seems quite amusing to all concerned.I have already made new Cypriot friends. I'm looking forward to a more hectic social life now. I also felt very sorry for the old boys when i passed through Liopetri in the early evening the other day.I hope none of them fall off the perch through getting cold.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • evo wrote:
    The point i was making was the pubs will suffer as less drinks are consumed.No one is taking their cold drinks outside to hold in their cold hands while they smoke in the cold.

Sorry, I was forgetting the amount of snow and frost we've suffered in Cprus lately! :roll:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: pav

cold hands in cyprus temps - poor circulation - possible cause smoking?. you can always try gloves and if you head and ears get cold there are hats and scarves 8) paul

Posted By: evo

So when you walk down to the pub in January do you go in a t shirt.No you wear a coat and other things to keep you warm.When you are at the pub in the lovely warm conditions do you take your coat off....er yes. You would never see this because you are not there are you. So everytime you pop out do you put theses clothes on to take them off 3 minutes later.Of course not. I won't roll my eyes.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:

    From what I can see so far, the smokers are attending and sitting/standing outside. There are not so many and they stay for a shorter time. As the weather warms up and everyone wants to sit outside, the smokers will be in the road ! :lol: Personally, I'll go for a few pints in the daytime occasionally but the evenings are a no go area for me until it's warmer. The wife is not happy as I also won't eat out in restaurants until later in the year and she has to endure my home cooking !Selfish barsteward aren't I ?

Yes Andrew, you most certainly are a selfish barsteward!
You don't seem to realise that many wives read these pages and when they see you openly admitting that you do the cooking, they will expect their other half's to do the same. Throughout the land the ladies will be giving us all earache, "If Andrew can do it, why can't you?"
I may not have always agreed with you, but I have generally respected you as a man's man, now you have let us all down! Why'd you do it buddy, why'd you do it? :wink:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • evo wrote:
    So when you walk down to the pub in January do you go in a t shirt.No you wear a coat and other things to keep you warm.When you are at the pub in the lovely warm conditions do you take your coat off....er yes.
    You would never see this because you are not there are you.
    So everytime you pop out do you put theses clothes on to take them off 3 minutes later.Of course not.
    I won't roll my eyes.

Oh well, now you've explained things!!
You say I'm not there (perhaps I haven't got suitable attire - you know, sheepskin coat, thermal underwear, etc.) but the question I asked was if the smokers are there, or not - remember my earlier confusion?
No smoker has sought to answer this, maybe their fingers are too cold to use their keyboard?
Now, the really big decision, shall I or shan't I .............................. roll my eyes?
What the hell - let's go for it! :roll:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • evo wrote:
      So when you walk down to the pub in January do you go in a t shirt.No you wear a coat and other things to keep you warm.When you are at the pub in the lovely warm conditions do you take your coat off....er yes.
      You would never see this because you are not there are you.
      So everytime you pop out do you put theses clothes on to take them off 3 minutes later.Of course not.
      I won't roll my eyes.

    Oh well, now you've explained things!!
    You say I'm not there (perhaps I haven't got suitable attire - you know, sheepskin coat, thermal underwear, etc.) but the question I asked was if the smokers are there, or not - remember my earlier confusion?
    No smoker has sought to answer this, maybe their fingers are too cold to use their keyboard?
    Now, the really big decision, shall I or shan't I .............................. roll my eyes?
    What the hell - let's go for it! :roll:

From what I can see so far, the smokers are attending and sitting/standing outside. There are not so many and they stay for a shorter time. As the weather warms up and everyone wants to sit outside, the smokers will be in the road ! :lol: Personally, I'll go for a few pints in the daytime occasionally but the evenings are a no go area for me until it's warmer. The wife is not happy as I also won't eat out in restaurants until later in the year and she has to endure my home cooking !Selfish barsteward aren't I ?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Well, I don't go the Pub here in the UK very often, why would I? I can't have a fag, and it spoils my enjoyment. When I do go, I take my E-Fag. For instance, If I go for a pint with one of my non-smoking mates, I would have to go outside for a fag and leave him sitting at the bar on his own, that's not playing soldiers is it? And, i don't care what anyone says, the Pubs here have taken a real bashing due to the smoking law, so the same will happen in Cyprus-if it lasts.

Posted By: MrsBouvier

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well, I don't go the Pub here in the UK very often, why would I? I can't have a fag, and it spoils my enjoyment. When I do go, I take my E-Fag. For instance, If I go for a pint with one of my non-smoking mates, I would have to go outside for a fag and leave him sitting at the bar on his own, that's not playing soldiers is it? And, i don't care what anyone says, the Pubs here have taken a real bashing due to the smoking law, so the same will happen in Cyprus-if it lasts.

....except you and your non smoking friend will be sitting outside for 10 months of the year anyway...so no issue! ](*,)

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Well, I don't go the Pub here in the UK very often, why would I? I can't have a fag, and it spoils my enjoyment. When I do go, I take my E-Fag. For instance, If I go for a pint with one of my non-smoking mates, I would have to go outside for a fag and leave him sitting at the bar on his own, that's not playing soldiers is it? And, i don't care what anyone says, the Pubs here have taken a real bashing due to the smoking law, so the same will happen in Cyprus-if it lasts.

I don't dispute that some sorts of pubs have taken a bashing since the smoking ban was implemented but, it also cannot be denied that the same sort of pubs have been in decline and closing down since the late 1980s. One only has to look at the fortunes of many breweries since then to see that the writing was on the wall long before the ban.
Why I've posted on this thread again though I really don't know ](*,)

Posted By: MCM Carrington

No Richard, they were not in decline, they were very busy Pubs. Marge, Think you are confusing The UK with Cyprus lol, sit outside? Brrrr.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    No Richard, they were not in decline, they were very busy Pubs.
    Marge, Think you are confusing The UK with Cyprus lol, sit outside? Brrrr.

The ones declaring bankruptcy in my local area in vast numbers must have been a figment of my imagination then.
Strange because I was actually in this business at the time too. This dementia catches up real fast.

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Richard, I'm so sorry you have Dimentia, it's a terrible thing, and I also hope you weren't one of those to suffer bankruptcy, all I know is about the Pubs in my own area, I'm not familiar with the situation over the rest of the UK, only what I read in the papers I'm afraid.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:

      From what I can see so far, the smokers are attending and sitting/standing outside. There are not so many and they stay for a shorter time. As the weather warms up and everyone wants to sit outside, the smokers will be in the road ! :lol: Personally, I'll go for a few pints in the daytime occasionally but the evenings are a no go area for me until it's warmer. The wife is not happy as I also won't eat out in restaurants until later in the year and she has to endure my home cooking !Selfish barsteward aren't I ?

    Yes Andrew, you most certainly are a selfish barsteward!
    You don't seem to realise that many wives read these pages and when they see you openly admitting that you do the cooking, they will expect their other half's to do the same. Throughout the land the ladies will be giving us all earache, "If Andrew can do it, why can't you?"
    I may not have always agreed with you, but I have generally respected you as a man's man, now you have let us all down! Why'd you do it buddy, why'd you do it? :wink:

It has always been this way with me Woodie. My wife won't learn to drive so I've always been the taxi man, the shopper, the cook/washer up and the cosmetic tidying, half of our relationship.
She is the laundry and serious cleaning operative and if the hoover won't work for me, she has to fix it :lol: I am the most useless man in the world at anything practical/DIY and I get a headache just walking through the doors of places like Wickes :lol:
My wife is also teaching full time out here and I am retired, so it is justifiable that I do the cooking etc. surely ?
Don't any of you ladies get the wrong impression and start bullying your menfolk because I definitely still wear the trousers ! :wink:

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:

        From what I can see so far, the smokers are attending and sitting/standing outside. There are not so many and they stay for a shorter time. As the weather warms up and everyone wants to sit outside, the smokers will be in the road ! :lol: Personally, I'll go for a few pints in the daytime occasionally but the evenings are a no go area for me until it's warmer. The wife is not happy as I also won't eat out in restaurants until later in the year and she has to endure my home cooking !Selfish barsteward aren't I ?

      Yes Andrew, you most certainly are a selfish barsteward!
      You don't seem to realise that many wives read these pages and when they see you openly admitting that you do the cooking, they will expect their other half's to do the same. Throughout the land the ladies will be giving us all earache, "If Andrew can do it, why can't you?"
      I may not have always agreed with you, but I have generally respected you as a man's man, now you have let us all down! Why'd you do it buddy, why'd you do it? :wink:

    It has always been this way with me Woodie. My wife won't learn to drive so I've always been the taxi man, the shopper, the cook/washer up and the cosmetic tidying, half of our relationship.
    She is the laundry and serious cleaning operative and if the hoover won't work for me, she has to fix it :lol: I am the most useless man in the world at anything practical/DIY and I get a headache just walking through the doors of places like Wickes :lol:
    My wife is also teaching full time out here and I am retired, so it is justifiable that I do the cooking etc. surely ?
    Don't any of you ladies get the wrong impression and start bullying your menfolk because I definitely still wear the trousers ! :wink:

There you go blowing your own trumpet, I thought I was the most useless man in the world practical/ DIY I cant even fix a plug or replace a light bulb without blowing a fuse. Tea and Coffee machines dislike me. Mind you I thought I was the worst but there are 300,000 Cypriot men thicker than me i have since found out after living here for over 6 years. :lol:

Posted By: AskCy

I can't iron... ! I make no bones about it... I could slowly get through doing a shirt or something.. probably not exactly right.. but I really don't like ironing.. drives me mad... so I don't.. I refuse point blank...

Posted By: dawnnett

My Hasband doesnt iron , he doesnt need to i do it all But he's fantastic at DIY and can do most things , im lucky and so proud of him ....mind you behind every good Man ..is a even Better Woman :wink: Dawn

Posted By: AskCy

  • dawnnett wrote:
    ...mind you behind every good Man ..is a even Better Woman :wink:
    Dawn

yeah nagging... !
LOL
Steve

Posted By: dawnnett

Dave says Yeah Right :lol: :lol: now would i Nag Dawn

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • AskCy wrote:
    I can't iron... ! I make no bones about it... I could slowly get through doing a shirt or something.. probably not exactly right.. but I really don't like ironing.. drives me mad... so I don't.. I refuse point blank...

Me too.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

I am utterly useless at anything domestic - amazing really, considering I am so good at everything else! As regard the household chores, a friend of mine always says "You don't keep a dog and bark yourself." Please note these are not my words, I am simply the messenger, so please don't pillory me as a male chauvinist - the very idea! :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Here's one for the ladies. I have a friend, a northern lad,good at huntin n fishin and all practical tasks. He wouldn't even live with his long term girlfriend until he was sure she was able in all domestic duties. Many years after they were wed , I was invited to dinner and when we had finished eating he told me that we were off to the pub. His wife protested that he had been to the pub every night that week. He gave her a look and declared that if she didn't stop nagging, one day he would go out and not bloody come back ! :lol:

Posted By: Richard.G

A HUSBAND IS AT HOME WATCHING A
FOOTBALL MATCH WHEN HIS WIFE INTERRUPTS,
'HONEY, COULD YOU FIX THE LIGHT IN THE HALLWAY?
IT'S BEEN FLICKERING FOR WEEKS NOW.'
HE LOOKS AT HER AND SAYS ANGRILY,
'FIX THE LIGHTS NOW? DOES IT LOOK LIKE I HAVE 'POWERGEN' WRITTEN ON MY FOREHEAD?
I DON'T THINK SO!'
'FINE!'
THEN THE WIFE ASKS,
'WELL THEN, COULD YOU FIX THE FRIDGE DOOR?
IT WON'T CLOSE RIGHT'
TO WHICH HE REPLIED,
'FIX THE FRIDGE DOOR?
DOES IT LOOK LIKE I HAVE 'FRIDGIDAIRE'
WRITTEN ON MY FOREHEAD?
I DON'T THINK SO!'
'FINE!' SHE SAYS
'THEN YOU COULD AT LEAST FIX THE STEPS
TO THE FRONT DOOR? THEY ARE ABOUT TO BREAK'
'I'M NOT A CARPENTER AND I DON'T
WANT TO FIX STEPS', HE SAYS, 'DOES IT LOOK LIKE I HAVE 'TAYLOR WOODROW' WRITTEN ON MY FOREHEAD?
I DON'T THINK SO! I'VE HAD ENOUGH OF THIS, I'M GOING TO THE PUB!!!!'
SO HE GOES TO THE PUB AND DRINKS FOR A
COUPLE OF HOURS................
HE STARTS TO FEEL GUILTY ABOUT HOW
HE TREATED HIS WIFE, AND DECIDES
TO GO HOME
AS HE WALKS INTO THE HOUSE HE NOTICES
THAT THE STEPS ARE ALREADY FIXED.
AS HE ENTERS THE HOUSE , HE SEES THE
HALL LIGHT IS WORKING
AS HE GOES TO GET A BEER, HE NOTICES
THE FRIDGE DOOR IS FIXED.
HONEY, HE ASKS, 'HOW'D ALL THIS GET FIXED?'
SHE SAID, 'WELL, WHEN YOU LEFT I SAT
OUTSIDE AND CRIED. JUST THEN A NICE YOUNG MAN ASKED ME WHAT WAS WRONG, AND I TOLD HIM.
HE OFFERED TO DO ALL THE REPAIRS, AND ALL I HAD TO DO WAS EITHER GO TO BED WITH HIM OR BAKE A CAKE.'
HE SAID,
'SO WHAT KIND OF CAKE DID YOU BAKE?'
SHE REPLIED, 'HELLOOOOO.., DO YOU SEE 'MR KIPLING' WRITTEN ON MY FOREHEAD?
I DON'T THINK SO!'


Posted By: mouse

  • AskCy wrote:
    I can't iron... ! I make no bones about it... I could slowly get through doing a shirt or something.. probably not exactly right.. but I really don't like ironing.. drives me mad... so I don't.. I refuse point blank...

What's an Iron!!! :?

Posted By: bromerzz

  • mouse wrote:
    • AskCy wrote:
      I can't iron... ! I make no bones about it... I could slowly get through doing a shirt or something.. probably not exactly right.. but I really don't like ironing.. drives me mad... so I don't.. I refuse point blank...

    What's an Iron!!! :?

Most players have 9 of them in their golf bag. Take a look next time your out, they have numbers on the end traditionally from 3 to 9, then you have the other iron clubs Pitching,Sand and Lob wedges. And of course your Woods.
Simples.

Posted By: mouse

  • bromerzz wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • AskCy wrote:
        I can't iron... ! I make no bones about it... I could slowly get through doing a shirt or something.. probably not exactly right.. but I really don't like ironing.. drives me mad... so I don't.. I refuse point blank...

      What's an Iron!!! :?

    Most players have 9 of them in their golf bag. Take a look next time your out, they have numbers on the end traditionally from 3 to 9, then you have the other iron clubs Pitching,Sand and Lob wedges. And of course your Woods.
    Simples.

Hi Pete
You should know i only use putters.
Kev :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

This thread has turned very friendly! Perhaps someone should start a new one, "Where has all the nastiness gone?" :wink: :lol:

Posted By: cansweet

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    This thread has turned very friendly!
    Perhaps someone should start a new one, "Where has all the nastiness gone?"
    :wink: :lol:

WW
Up in smoke!!

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • cansweet wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      This thread has turned very friendly!
      Perhaps someone should start a new one, "Where has all the nastiness gone?"
      :wink: :lol:

    WW
    Up in smoke!!

Steady....................... !

Posted By: PatCon

  • dawnnett wrote:
    My Hasband doesnt iron , he doesnt need to i do it all
    But he's fantastic at DIY and can do most things , im lucky and so proud of him ....mind you behind every good Man ..is a even Better Woman :wink:
    Dawn

...and behind her, there's his wife!

Posted By: Richard.G

Smoking really is bad for your health. :lol: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8493288.stm Indonesian man loses his teeth in a cigarette explosion An Indonesian man has been given compensation after a cigarette he was smoking exploded, taking out six teeth. Andi Susanto, 31, told Indonesian media the cigarette had blown up in his mouth while he was riding a motorcycle. He accepted a payment of 5m rupiah ($535; £335) and all his medical costs from PT Nojorono Tobacco, makers of the brand of cigarette he was smoking. Police are investigating what caused the blast, but Mr Susanto said he would try to give up smoking now anyway.

Posted By: Deanna

:D :D :D :D -that's for the story, not at the poor toothless man.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

As I patrol the streets in the evening, walking the dog, I have noticed that they have started smoking in the betting shop again and even in one of the food /take away establishments. Probably because it's cold outside. :wink:

Posted By: cansweet

Hopefully somebody will report them, and use your e-mail as well :lol: :lol:

Posted By: geof j

Paralimni, coffee shop next to old M&S front area with blinds, one blind open, but smoking inside?( no smoking area was further inside?) what would be the ruling if this was a Brit establishment ? answers on a postcard perlease.

Posted By: lakelander

Well, I've been reading this thread from the start and was sure according to the places I frequent that the ban was being adhered to. On Saturday night however, I was at a party in a pub on the Dhekelia Rd which I'd never been to before. I'd already been out for my first cigarette before I noticed many people smoking and the staff handing out ashtrays. On my way back in after another cigarette I saw someone I know and asked what they were doing there. They told me they go there all the time now as it's a smoking bar. So, it seems as others suspected that support for the ban is already wavering.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • lakelander wrote:
    Well, I've been reading this thread from the start and was sure according to the places I frequent that the ban was being adhered to.
    On Saturday night however, I was at a party in a pub on the Dhekelia Rd which I'd never been to before. I'd already been out for my first cigarette before I noticed many people smoking and the staff handing out ashtrays.
    On my way back in after another cigarette I saw someone I know and asked what they were doing there. They told me they go there all the time now as it's a smoking bar.
    So, it seems as others suspected that support for the ban is already wavering.

Hopefully. I've also heard from the locals that moves to follow Greece [now there's a surprise] and allow private establishments to choose their own policy are afoot. From what I have observed, many Cypriots who actually frequent the bars and cafes are smokers. The loss in revenue from them staying at home is probably already becoming apparent.
The H&S Gestapo can have my email Cansweet...................... I'm really scared :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Richard.G wrote:
    Smoking really is bad for your health. :lol:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8493288.stm
    Indonesian man loses his teeth in a cigarette explosion
    An Indonesian man has been given compensation after a cigarette he was smoking exploded, taking out six teeth.
    Andi Susanto, 31, told Indonesian media the cigarette had blown up in his mouth while he was riding a motorcycle.
    He accepted a payment of 5m rupiah ($535; £335) and all his medical costs from PT Nojorono Tobacco, makers of the brand of cigarette he was smoking.
    Police are investigating what caused the blast, but Mr Susanto said he would try to give up smoking now anyway.

Reminds me of the story of the guy who's driving along the road in his car at 30 mph. A motorcyclist rides alongside him with an unlit cigarette in his mouth, taps on his window and asks for a light! The driver ignores him and increases his speed to 40 but the motorcyclist pursues him and asks again! This continues a couple more times until the driver gets up to 80, and the motorcyclist is still tapping on his window asking for the light!
So he opens the window and shouts to the motorcyclist "You're gonna kill yourself if you carry on like this!"
Motorcyclist replies "No, I only smoke 5 a day!!"
:lol:

Posted By: mouse

Most people on this forum know my feelings on the subject, but what a lot of smokers who break the law, whether you agree or dissagree do not realise that they are condoning selective law breakers. In other words if you don't agree with particular law do you break it. Speeding at 100k in a 30k area and the person who speeds says but i have always done it or it was ok last year when i did it, or he may say he did not injure anyone or its his right to do as he pleases. Or perhaps the shoplifter or fraudster because he wasn't doing any harm or could not see anything wrong in what he was doing. Or the Developer who cons people out of there thousands, it can't be wrong because he has always done it and the law has let him get away with so he continues to do so. If its the law you should respect it, whether or not you agree or dissagree with it. I cannot see why anyone could see the right in selectavely breaking any law they might think is ok to break. I was brought up to respect laws.

Posted By: cansweet

ANKARA - Hürriyet Daily News Tobacco consumption has reached a level where it is as destructive as, or even more destructive than, terrorism, according to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. “This is a reality. Consequently, the fight against tobacco has gained as much importance as the fight against terrorism,” Erdoğan said Thursday at a meeting marking the second anniversary of the legislation banning smoking in public places. “The fight against tobacco is a vital issue not to be underestimated in regard to the lives it has claimed,” the prime minister said. “Tobacco is practically a death machine our people keep in their pockets. A kind of gun to kill us, available in our homes. A death machine wandering among our children. A disease nest.” Underscoring the importance it places on the health of the country’s youth, Erdoğan said his government is against the consumption of all sorts of addictive materials, both dry and wet, referring to the consumption of alcohol as well. “We are against all, both dry and wet. Why? Because all of them play merry hell with my nation. It is necessary to consider this with common sense; it is unreasonable to shift this issue to the left or the right,” He said. “There it is. What it has brought and lost is evident. The health of our Lilliputian children is the point at issue. The health of our unborn children is the point at issue. Each of these is a fact on its own.” Criticizing the efforts of some opposition deputies to soften the smoking ban, Erdoğan said: “It will never be done. We will implement the law as it is.”

Posted By: pav

we went out to one of the local traditional village restaurant/meze houses with two friends and two small children on tuesday night,we new it was going to be busy because you couldnt see a pavement within 200 metres of the restaurant because they were covered with cars and pickups. we were lucky to get a table because it was packed to the rafters and not a single cigarette was smoked inside all night. fantastic meal great service and a very very pleasant and enjoyable atmosphere. i hope they keep it up but like drink drivers and persistent speeders theres always going to be the odd knob that persists in flouting the law. paul

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

The law is an ass in this instance. Private, not public/government establishments should, in a free world, have the right to choose their own policy on smoking, drinking, eating cream cakes and fatty foods, nagging etc. None of these substances/activities are illegal and there is room for everyone to enjoy their own chosen vices. What is the anti smoking lobby afraid of ? Would none of the bars /cafes/restaurants go 'no smoking ' and capture that section of the market ?

Posted By: Deanna

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    The law is an ass in this instance. Private, not public/government establishments should, in a free world, have the right to choose their own policy on smoking, drinking, eating cream cakes and fatty foods, nagging etc. None of these substances/activities are illegal and there is room for everyone to enjoy their own chosen vices.
    What is the anti smoking lobby afraid of ? Would none of the bars /cafes/restaurants go 'no smoking ' and capture that section of the market ?

Absolutely agree Andrew; it's those two ideas isn't it 'free world' and 'choice'. Many wars fought for this ideal. Taken away by social engineering/Orwellian government.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • pav wrote:
    we went out to one of the local traditional village restaurant/meze houses with two friends and two small children on tuesday night,we new it was going to be busy because you couldnt see a pavement within 200 metres of the restaurant because they were covered with cars and pickups.
    we were lucky to get a table because it was packed to the rafters and not a single cigarette was smoked inside all night.
    fantastic meal great service and a very very pleasant and enjoyable atmosphere.
    i hope they keep it up but like drink drivers and persistent speeders theres always going to be the odd knob that persists in flouting the law.
    paul

Pav, are you sure you didn't dream all this? It surely can't be correct!
After all we have been told ad nauseum that firstly, the Cypriots would not accept the dictates of the "Health & Safety Gestapo" and secondly, that any establishment that did would quickly go out of business!
:wink:

Posted By: pav

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • pav wrote:
      we went out to one of the local traditional village restaurant/meze houses with two friends and two small children on tuesday night,we new it was going to be busy because you couldnt see a pavement within 200 metres of the restaurant because they were covered with cars and pickups.
      we were lucky to get a table because it was packed to the rafters and not a single cigarette was smoked inside all night.
      fantastic meal great service and a very very pleasant and enjoyable atmosphere.
      i hope they keep it up but like drink drivers and persistent speeders theres always going to be the odd knob that persists in flouting the law.
      paul

    Pav, are you sure you didn't dream all this? It surely can't be correct!
    After all we have been told ad nauseum that firstly, the Cypriots would not accept the dictates of the "Health & Safety Gestapo" and secondly, that any establishment that did would quickly go out of business!
    :wink:

definitely not a figment of my imagination.
taverna mousikos at sotira telephone number23828833 i would advise booking.
very easy to find.
travelling from ayia napa to paralimni turn left at the traffic lights in paralimni towards sotira, when you come to the end of that road when you are in sotira turn left and its 2-300 metres on your right.
one of the best meze,s we have had in a long time.
paul....

Posted By: Kwacka

  • Deanna wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      What is the anti smoking lobby afraid of ? Would none of the bars /cafes/restaurants go 'no smoking ' and capture that section of the market ?

    Absolutely agree Andrew; it's those two ideas isn't it 'free world' and 'choice'. Many wars fought for this ideal. Taken away by social engineering/Orwellian government.

I now appreciate having a choice. I didn't before.
Sorry, not strictly true - I had the choice of staying at home or going out (making sure I had inhalers with me).
Don't understand the relevance of 'Orwellian government' to this topic though. Nor social engineering.

Posted By: pav

    Quote:
  • I now appreciate having a choice. I didn't before.
    Sorry, not strictly true - I had the choice of staying at home or going out (making sure I had inhalers with me).
    Don't understand the relevance of 'Orwellian government' to this topic though. Nor social engineering.
:clap:
the 7 week old baby and 2 year old child never had anything to complain about either.
after a lovely meal we ventured in to the centre of paralimni to the cafe bar in the car park opposite the old m + s no smokers in the bar only outside.
as kwacka so rightly states before the new year our only option would have been staying in, so much for choice then :wink:
paul...

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

So , some of you are saying you had no choice previously and others are saying that it was predicted by smokers like myself, that places would close down because of the ban. Perhaps what is happening is proof that neither scenario need happen. Some establishments will happily be non smoking and others will prefer to entice smokers through their doors. What is the problem with that ? Many of the smaller bars/cafes seem to be struggling already, as their customers are/were largely smokers. We will see how this all pans out in Cyprus. I am happy that non smokers can now eat & drink without having to suffer 2nd hand smoke but I still fail to see why smokers are denied their own places to enjoy an evening out in the cold weather. Mind you, I am saving some money ! :lol: My local publican is not happy though ! Soon be spring................. next winter will be interesting. If the Cypriots let me down and don't follow Greece on this matter, I'll be taking Woodie out to dinner and I won't be able to smoke to steady my nerves ! Maybe I'll go outside for a quick one and leave the miserable git with the bill ! :lol:

Posted By: Elizavet

We also use bars/ tavernas in Sotira the other week when we over, everyone went outside to smoke, Cypriots as well. I found it strange at first to see them sitting outside having a smoke. So thats 3 places we know of in Sotira that are sticking to the rules. :) in fact make that 4 as I know of another place as well. :) Also one of the places was so much warmer this winter, he said it because he does not have to have the fans on and the windows open to let the smoke out. Some places are a lot quieter this year, but when you mention this , it seems to be "no work" or "lack of work" that is being given as the main reason. Even on football nights with the local teams showing the place was packed and I never seen a single person light up inside.

Posted By: mouse

I notice non of the smokers have any opinion on post 269 or don't they like a few home truth's.

Posted By: fettler

Hi Kevin; May we reasonably assume from the challenging nature of that post that you have never broken a law? Never "borrowed" something from your workplace? Never exceeded a speed limit? Never had a drink after hours in a friendly local? Very hard to believe. In my (much) younger days everybody I knew (the boys, that is) did a little light shoplifting occasionally. We knew it was wrong, but we did it. Never scrumped apples as a kid? Don't tell me you didn't know that it was stealing? Before you come back and point out that most of that isn't life- or health-threatening in any way - that's not the point. By the way, I'm a smoker, not of cigarettes, but still a smoker. Cheers Alex

Posted By: mouse

  • fettler wrote:
    Hi Kevin;
    May we reasonably assume from the challenging nature of that post that you have never broken a law? Never "borrowed" something from your workplace? Never exceeded a speed limit? Never had a drink after hours in a friendly local? Very hard to believe. In my (much) younger days everybody I knew (the boys, that is) did a little light shoplifting occasionally. We knew it was wrong, but we did it. Never scrumped apples as a kid? Don't tell me you didn't know that it was stealing?
    Before you come back and point out that most of that isn't life- or health-threatening in any way - that's not the point.
    By the way, I'm a smoker, not of cigarettes, but still a smoker.
    Cheers
    Alex

But the problem is Alex, some people are actually telling people to break the law because they dont like it. Would you or did you ever tell your kids to deliberately break a law because you didn't like that particular law.
And yes i was a good boy, perfect in every way!!! :wink:

Posted By: mouse

  • Deanna wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      The law is an ass in this instance. Private, not public/government establishments should, in a free world, have the right to choose their own policy on smoking, drinking, eating cream cakes and fatty foods, nagging etc. None of these substances/activities are illegal and there is room for everyone to enjoy their own chosen vices.
      What is the anti smoking lobby afraid of ? Would none of the bars /cafes/restaurants go 'no smoking ' and capture that section of the market ?

    Absolutely agree Andrew; it's those two ideas isn't it 'free world' and 'choice'. Many wars fought for this ideal. Taken away by social engineering/Orwellian government.

You are forgetting one thing Dee, drinking,eating ceam cakes and fatty foods and nagging etc. does not harm other peoples health and affect other peoples breathing or make everybody's clothes stink!! So you think its a free world and choice to smoke in bars etc. What about the Non- smokers freedom of choice or arn't we allowed to have one in your free world. Funny ain't it i thought the wars were fought to try and rid us of tyranny!!, not to help peoples addictions and inflict there addictions on other people.

Posted By: Richard.G

As James I said in 1604, the habit is loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs and in the black stinking fume thereof, the nearest resembling the horrible Styglan smoke of the pit that is bottomless.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment! Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents? The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them. So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

Posted By: MCM Carrington

I have consideration for the kids, I don't smoke in the same room as my Grandkids. However, the same kids could very well end up smokers themselves regardless. I don't smoke in our livingroom, I keep it confined to one room in the house, never smoke in the bedroom etc. In other words, I try to keep my 'habit' to myself as much as I can, as I am the only smoker in our house. The family don't mind if I smoke in the same room as them, but i do, which is something new for me, so I must be thinking more about it which is good. I think as more and more people become 'non-smokers' the 'smokers' like me, are becoming much more considerate. I won't stop though, until I want to.

Posted By: cansweet

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    I have consideration for the kids, I don't smoke in the same room as my Grandkids. However, the same kids could very well end up smokers themselves regardless. I don't smoke in our livingroom, I keep it confined to one room in the house, never smoke in the bedroom etc. In other words, I try to keep my 'habit' to myself as much as I can, as I am the only smoker in our house. The family don't mind if I smoke in the same room as them, but i do, which is something new for me, so I must be thinking more about it which is good. I think as more and more people become 'non-smokers' the 'smokers' like me, are becoming much more considerate. I won't stop though, until I want to.

MCM,
10 out of 10 for that well thought out reply. I wish i could be as considerate as you. It has to be age. Well done though, now one less a day for a week, and Steve will give you a prize, and if he doesn't, i will!! :wink: :P

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    I have consideration for the kids, I don't smoke in the same room as my Grandkids. However, the same kids could very well end up smokers themselves regardless. I don't smoke in our livingroom, I keep it confined to one room in the house, never smoke in the bedroom etc. In other words, I try to keep my 'habit' to myself as much as I can, as I am the only smoker in our house. The family don't mind if I smoke in the same room as them, but i do, which is something new for me, so I must be thinking more about it which is good. I think as more and more people become 'non-smokers' the 'smokers' like me, are becoming much more considerate. I won't stop though, until I want to.

MCM, I think the point of the ad is not so much that people shouldn't be blowing smoke over their kids, it is that the children simply want their parents to live longer!

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Yeh, I know that Woody, one of my Grandchildren had a lecture at School about the perils of smoking, I got the mother of lectures that evening, he went into every detail of what my lungs must look like, and what it is doing to my health, then asked me when I was going to stop. There was no answer to that, so I told him not to go on at me lol. I should really have wrote a letter to the School congratulating them on doing such a great job!

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

MCM, your reply has left me feeling quite sad. I'm not -for a change- having a go, and I -again for once- don't really know what to say! My antaganism on this subject, up to now, has been solely directed at "second hand smoke" and how it affects myself and other non smokers, and I really haven't given much thought to the health of the smoker. But your words reminded me that both my parents were heavy smokers and that contributed to their dying at a relatively early age. Of course when they started the habit they would have been unaware of the dangers, but in this day and age why does anybody still do it? On another thread we are talking about the craziness of riding a motorbike without wearing a crash helmet and the sad loss of life it incurs, surely there is a parallel to be taken from that?

Posted By: fettler

Kevin - basically, I agree with you, but I couldn't resist it! Furthermore, I fully accept your declaration concerning your youth. Now it's your amnesia I worry about. Cheers Alex

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Woody, I'm sure there is, but of course not wearing a helmet isn't an addiction. Talking of parents, both mine were heavy smokers, both stopped in their early fifties. My Mother died of a massive stroke at 73, my Dad is still alive at 83, although he has COPD. You would think that would stop me, but this is a strong addiction I have!

Posted By: mouse

  • fettler wrote:
    Kevin - basically, I agree with you, but I couldn't resist it!
    Furthermore, I fully accept your declaration concerning your youth. Now it's your amnesia I worry about.
    Cheers
    Alex

Worry about what!! what are you talking about, who are you, for that matter who am I. :lol: :P :shock: :wink: :?:

Posted By: mouse

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Woody, I'm sure there is, but of course not wearing a helmet isn't an addiction. Talking of parents, both mine were heavy smokers, both stopped in their early fifties. My Mother died of a massive stroke at 73, my Dad is still alive at 83, although he has COPD. You would think that would stop me, but this is a strong addiction I have!

Hi MCM
I don't know why I have not thought about it before but there is a sure fired way of giving up smoking. Don't buy FAGS !! this will work. :lol:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D Kevin! Don't buy fags? are you nuts? if I don't have at least 200 in the house, I go into panic mode! I simply don't want to stop, I enjoy them too much, iI kid myself on that if I smoke Menthol, then it's not so bad, they certainly don't smell the same, my clothes don't smell etc, and the funny thing is, if my Son smokes near me, (he smokes ordinary fags) I hate the smell! also, the E-Fag is too strong for me, so I need to order Menthol tabs for it lol. I had a bit of fun with that the other night, went to the Pub with my mates, got perched at the bar, then got my E-Fag out, took a couple of puffs, and the barmaid comes over and says,'Scuse me, you can't smoke in here' suddenly there were a hundred eyes on me, I took another puff, she still didn't clock it, the hands went on the hips, 'you can't smoke in here' I said, 'Oh yes I can' she turned bright red, and there was silence, eventually, my mate broke the silence and says,'It's a dummy' but because it lights up on the end, and blows out a vapour like smoke, she wasn't having it, so I threw it on the bar, it was so funny, next thing I'm surrounded, everyone wanted to know how it works, where I got it etc. The poor barmaid kept asking, ' yeh, but is it legal?' lol, I wished I'd had a couple of dozen of them, could have made a fortune.

Posted By: bill

was listening to BBC world on the car radio this aftrnoon ~ they were doing a news report of the effects of the smoking ban in Athens. It seems that over 60% of bars/clubs are ignoring the ban and letting their patrons smoke if they want to . A few bar owners were interviewed and stated that they would lose to many customers if thet enforced the smoking ban ~ up to now none have been fined as the police seem to have taken a lax attitude to the legistlation. Bill

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
    Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
    The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
    So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
Can't wait.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
      Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
      The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
      So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

    Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
    What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
    All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
    Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
    No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
    Can't wait.

Get out of the wrong side of bed, did we Andrew? :lol:
You haven't had a rant like that for ages! :wink:
I was only reporting what I'd seen on TV!
Who knows, if they ever do an advert where the kids are singing to their parents about giving up Burgers, I may share that with you as well!!
:bwink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
        Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
        The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
        So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

      Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
      What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
      All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
      Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
      No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
      Can't wait.

    Get out of the wrong side of bed, did we Andrew? :lol:
    You haven't had a rant like that for ages! :wink:
    I was only reporting what I'd seen on TV!
    Who knows, if they ever do an advert where the kids are singing to their parents about giving up Burgers, I may share that with you as well!!
    :bwink:

I'm known for the occasional rant Woodie :lol: During this colder weather and on the rare occasions I venture to the local, the landlord has been known to present me with an upturned beer bottle crate so I can do a John Major ! Business is suffering apparently and it's costing them to heat the outside areas whilst the inside of the pub is often nearly empty. Crazy world.
On a positive note.................. I hear that many bars in Nicosia are following Greece by ignoring the ban.

Posted By: Deanna

A few stats have been gathered............... http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/over-300-flouted-smoking-ban-january/20100209

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Deanna wrote:
    A few stats have been gathered...............
    http://www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/over-300-flouted-smoking-ban-january/20100209

I also know of a bar where the owner charges 5 euro per smoker in his bar. His theory is that he'll pay any fines out of the growing collection. A bit like the hole in one club ! :lol: Makes the beer a bit pricey but ok if you want a good session.
And no, I'm not telling you where it is :wink:

Posted By: cansweet

Andrew, be careful,!!! :? The Times - Tuesday, February 9, 2010 TWO IRISHMEN are recovering from gunshot wounds in a New York hospital after being shot by a security guard in a dispute over smoking at a bowling alley. Gerard Hourigan from Limerick and Justin Donaghy from Navan, both age 29, were smoking indoors in a bowling alley in Queens at about 1.45am on Saturday when Michael Iavecchio (54), the bowling alley’s security guard, told them to leave. Mr Iavecchio then escorted them outside and a fight ensued. The guard, a retired policeman, pulled out his .380 calibre Ruger semi-automatic pistol and shot Mr Hourigan on the right side of the torso and Mr Donaghy in the stomach. “This has been an enormous trauma,” said a young American woman who identified herself as Mr Hourigan’s wife. She was reached by telephone at the Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, where the two men are recovering. A police spokeswoman said the Irishmen will be arrested and arraigned by a local judge on charges of menacing as soon as they are released from hospital. She said their punishment will be up to the court. Their lives are not in danger. “They’re charged with a misdemeanour, not a crime,” said James Patrick Delaney, the Irishmen’s lawyer. “They had no weapon and they didn’t cause any injury. They both have clean records in Ireland and the US. They are both married to American girls. They’re hard-working and they’re both here legally. Their families have come over from Ireland since the incident.” Mr Delaney says he owns pubs in New York and Dublin and that smoking “is not an issue. I’ve never seen anybody get in a fight about it.” The AMF 34th Avenue Lanes bowling alley in Jackson Heights, Queens, is described by the New York Times as being located on “a desolate commercial strip just south of Northern Boulevard”. It has 35 lanes, billiard tables and a snack bar and was described in the New York Daily News as “family-oriented”. Mr Iavecchio was a policeman for 18 years before retiring in 1999. He had an unrestricted licence to carry a concealed weapon. His last posting was in the prison ward of the Kings County Hospital Centre. He has been charged with two counts of second-degree assault. The police spokeswoman said Mr Iavecchio was detained by police who went to the scene of the shooting, but she did not know if he was still being held. The altercation between Mr Iavecchio and the two Irishmen was recorded by a surveillance camera

Posted By: pav

    Quote:
  • Famagusta - 620 inspections, five fines, and one case will be brought to court

pretty good stats in the report for the famagusta area less than 1%.
paul

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
      Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
      The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
      So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

    Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
    What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
    All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
    Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
    No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
    Can't wait.

I notice again Andrew that all those extras you covered do not affect other peoples health only the people who indulge.

Posted By: Deanna

Actually they do; children are at the mercy of their parents with regard to what they eat and drink, also with regard as to whether they go out to play or sit in front of the pc/tv in out of school hours. Therefore, there are many ways in which adults can influence the well-being of others - especially those dependent on them.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • cansweet wrote:
    Andrew, be careful,!!! :?
    The Times - Tuesday, February 9, 2010
    TWO IRISHMEN are recovering from gunshot wounds in a New York hospital after being shot by a security guard in a dispute over smoking at a bowling alley.
    Gerard Hourigan from Limerick and Justin Donaghy from Navan, both age 29, were smoking indoors in a bowling alley in Queens at about 1.45am on Saturday when Michael Iavecchio (54), the bowling alley’s security guard, told them to leave.
    Mr Iavecchio then escorted them outside and a fight ensued. The guard, a retired policeman, pulled out his .380 calibre Ruger semi-automatic pistol and shot Mr Hourigan on the right side of the torso and Mr Donaghy in the stomach.
    “This has been an enormous trauma,” said a young American woman who identified herself as Mr Hourigan’s wife. She was reached by telephone at the Elmhurst Hospital in Queens, where the two men are recovering.
    A police spokeswoman said the Irishmen will be arrested and arraigned by a local judge on charges of menacing as soon as they are released from hospital. She said their punishment will be up to the court. Their lives are not in danger.
    “They’re charged with a misdemeanour, not a crime,” said James Patrick Delaney, the Irishmen’s lawyer. “They had no weapon and they didn’t cause any injury. They both have clean records in Ireland and the US. They are both married to American girls. They’re hard-working and they’re both here legally. Their families have come over from Ireland since the incident.” Mr Delaney says he owns pubs in New York and Dublin and that smoking “is not an issue. I’ve never seen anybody get in a fight about it.” The AMF 34th Avenue Lanes bowling alley in Jackson Heights, Queens, is described by the New York Times as being located on “a desolate commercial strip just south of Northern Boulevard”. It has 35 lanes, billiard tables and a snack bar and was described in the New York Daily News as “family-oriented”.
    Mr Iavecchio was a policeman for 18 years before retiring in 1999. He had an unrestricted licence to carry a concealed weapon. His last posting was in the prison ward of the Kings County Hospital Centre. He has been charged with two counts of second-degree assault. The police spokeswoman said Mr Iavecchio was detained by police who went to the scene of the shooting, but she did not know if he was still being held.
    The altercation between Mr Iavecchio and the two Irishmen was recorded by a surveillance camera

And did you hear about the Turkish cafe owner, killed by a customer because he wouldn't let him smoke ?
It's all a bit unnecessary really. I see that the ban in the north also came in on Jan 1st and whilst it is being widely observed there are many places still encouraging smokers, mainly Turkish owned and outside the main areas.
One story made me laugh when two guys were smoking in the corner of a cafe and a Brit pointed out to them that it was against the law. They replied that they were the law ! 2 policemen :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • mouse wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
        Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
        The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
        So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

      Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
      What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
      All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
      Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
      No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
      Can't wait.

    I notice again Andrew that all those extras you covered do not affect other peoples health only the people who indulge.

Hi Dee
I take it from your post no.305 that you did not understand the quote. Let me help you,!! Smoking affects those innocent people around who dont wish to inhale or be ill because of it, or have there clothes stink of smoke because of it, I hope this helps. Seems smoking affects logic thinking as well :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • mouse wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
          Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
          Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
          The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
          So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

        Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
        What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
        All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
        Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
        No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
        Can't wait.

      I notice again Andrew that all those extras you covered do not affect other peoples health only the people who indulge.

    Hi Dee
    I take it from your post no.305 that you did not understand the quote. Let me help you,!! Smoking affects those innocent people around who dont wish to inhale or be ill because of it, or have there clothes stink of smoke because of it, I hope this helps. Seems smoking affects logic thinking as well :lol:

Hi Mouse
I take it from your post that logical thinkling is not a speciality as far as you are concerned either.
Tobacco is not illegal and provides governments with much needed tax revenue as well as jobs both directly and indirectly.
To allow privately owned establishments to choose and clearly display whether they allow smoking or not, would logically, suit everyone.

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • mouse wrote:
        • Andrew Brooks wrote:
          • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
            Let's look at the bigger picture for a moment!
            Have you seen the anti-smokind advert on TV where the children are singing "I'd do anyting" to their parents?
            The ad then goes on to say that your kids would do anything for you, so will you give up smoking for them.
            So, forget the fact that some smokers don't give a tinkers cuss for the sensibilities of strangers, how about having a little consideration for your offspring!?

          Yehhh.............. be caring parents and take them to Macdonalds. :lol:
          What about the parents who are drinking and eating themselves to death ?
          All smokers want are places to go to socialise with like minded [addicted if you like] people, away from their children. With the old school , smokey boozer no longer permitted in our wonderfully caring society, many smoking adults will smoke and drink more at home in front of their children. Educate youngsters but don;t ban things , it only makes them want it more. You only have to look on places like facebook to see that young adults are now often seen partying at someone's home, with the booze, fags andother substances flowing.
          Don't worry though, when they've finished with the smokers the H&S Gestapo will turn their attention to alcohol and fatty foods.
          No pubs. No fast food outlets, just plenty of veggie cafes !
          Can't wait.

        I notice again Andrew that all those extras you covered do not affect other peoples health only the people who indulge.

      Hi Dee
      I take it from your post no.305 that you did not understand the quote. Let me help you,!! Smoking affects those innocent people around who dont wish to inhale or be ill because of it, or have there clothes stink of smoke because of it, I hope this helps. Seems smoking affects logic thinking as well :lol:

    Hi Mouse
    I take it from your post that logical thinkling is not a speciality as far as you are concerned either.
    Tobacco is not illegal and provides governments with much needed tax revenue as well as jobs both directly and indirectly.
    To allow privately owned establishments to choose and clearly display whether they allow smoking or not, would logically, suit everyone.

Hi Andrew
But the smoking of it is!!! in enclosed public places. And yes it does provide work for Doctor's and Nurses and Hospitals who have to treat smoke related Illnesses whether particular persons smoke or is a victim of passive smoking.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

It doesn't make this particuler piece of legislation right or logical though. Smokers more than pay for their healthcare through tobacco taxes and if non smokers stayed away from the smoking bars they wouldn't have a problem. Admittedly, there needed to be legislation to protect non smokers and most smokers will accept that places like shopping malls/airports/hospitals etc etc should be smoke free but small, privately owned establishments should logically be allowed to choose. If there are so many people who want to avoid smoke when out for a drink/meal, the businesses offering this facility should thrive and the evil smoking places will also stay in business. We will have to wait and see how this all pans out in Cyprus once the 'ash' has settled.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    Admittedly, there needed to be legislation to protect non smokers and most smokers will accept that places like shopping malls/airports/hospitals etc etc should be smoke free.........

Bet you -and most other smokers- weren't saying that 20, 10 or even 5 years ago, Andrew! Back then the consensus among smokers seemed to be "We have the right to smoke wherever we want, whenever we want!"
I remember all the belly aching (similar to the situation today, really) that went on when smoking was banned in workplaces, cinemas and on public transport!
It's a good bet that if your favourite people, "the Health & Safety Gestapo" hadn't taken action then nothing would have changed and smokers would have just carried on as they were. Oblivious, or totally indifferent, to the effects their habit had on others!

Posted By: mouse

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      Admittedly, there needed to be legislation to protect non smokers and most smokers will accept that places like shopping malls/airports/hospitals etc etc should be smoke free.........

    Bet you -and most other smokers- weren't saying that 20, 10 or even 5 years ago, Andrew! Back then the consensus among smokers seemed to be "We have the right to smoke wherever we want, whenever we want!"
    I remember all the belly aching (similar to the situation today, really) that went on when smoking was banned in workplaces, cinemas and on public transport!
    It's a good bet that if your favourite people, "the Health & Safety Gestapo" hadn't taken action then nothing would have changed and smokers would have just carried on as they were. Oblivious, or totally indifferent, to the effects their habit had on others!

Don't forget the Road Safety Gestapo and the Anti Terrorist Gestapo and the Anti Criminal Gestapo I think Andrew forgets there are people who actually think along these lines as well because they also think it affects there rights. :lol:

Posted By: sagalout

1 of the big myths about smoking is that the tax pays for the smokers use of the nhs I worked in the tobacco ind for some 12 yrs. Believe me it don't, most surveys look at cancer & breathing related illnesses. However the they do not include other illnesses ie dvt the biggest cause of leg amputation is smoking as is strokes as is 'erectile' dysfunction there is also some recent info about Alzheimer's with smoking. Tobacco now contains so many additives that it is no longer the same product it was say 30 yrs ago. These plus days lost at work etc added together far outweigh the amount of tax gathered. Doctors surgery time alone is vast. But we should all be free to enjoy life as we wish provided what we do does no harm to any one else unfortunately smoking does, the tobacco industry's own investigation into smoking & health concluded in 1953 ish found amongst other things passive smoking causes cancer. I was told that by the National Sales Manager of the worlds largest Tobacco company during a conference arranged to inform us of this survey in 1971. Enjoy your habit but please don't insist that others share it with you unless they wish to. Sagalout

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • sagalout wrote:
    1 of the big myths about smoking is that the tax pays for the smokers use of the nhs I worked in the tobacco ind for some 12 yrs. Believe me it don't, most surveys look at cancer & breathing related illnesses. However the they do not include other illnesses ie dvt the biggest cause of leg amputation is smoking as is strokes as is 'erectile' dysfunction there is also some recent info about Alzheimer's with smoking. Tobacco now contains so many additives that it is no longer the same product it was say 30 yrs ago. These plus days lost at work etc added together far outweigh the amount of tax gathered. Doctors surgery time alone is vast.
    But we should all be free to enjoy life as we wish provided what we do does no harm to any one else unfortunately smoking does, the tobacco industry's own investigation into smoking & health concluded in 1953 ish found amongst other things passive smoking causes cancer. I was told that by the National Sales Manager of the worlds largest Tobacco company during a conference arranged to inform us of this survey in 1971. Enjoy your habit but please don't insist that others share it with you unless they wish to.
    Sagalout

Sag, if you watch the BBC breakfast programme every day, there is always some new study, often contradicting others, telling everyone how good or bad various things are for you.
This is not the issue. I watch Sky out here quite a bit and have noticed recently how the advertising campaigns by the H&Safety Gestapo are now turning on the alcohol drinkers. At this rate we'll end up with no pubs at all ! The Jocks have just declared war on obesity. It won't be long before anyone with a vice will have to go sectretly to the forest for a ciggy, a pint or a hamburger !

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D :D :D

Posted By: AskCy

If these rules are part of being in the EU, does that mean any country that doesn't want to follow the EU rules should be revoked from it ?

Posted By: Steve - SJD

  • AskCy wrote:
    If these rules are part of being in the EU, does that mean any country that doesn't want to follow the EU rules should be revoked from it ?

The EU doesn't have a rule about banning smoking (at the moment) it is just
a directive.
HTH
Cheers
Steve

Posted By: sagalout

Take your point Andrew how ever we know that smoking kills not only the user but also those exposed to it. Which is why I say enjoy your habit but don't insist others share it with you. Sagalout

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • sagalout wrote:
    Take your point Andrew how ever we know that smoking kills not only the user but also those exposed to it. Which is why I say enjoy your habit but don't insist others share it with you.
    Sagalout

And that is why I suggest smoking and non smoking bars.

Posted By: mouse

  • dawnnett wrote:
    It worked for years before the Ban
    Dawn

Only for the smokers, non smokers did not have a choice, again as normal a case of the tail wagging the dog. Again you seem to ignore the fact that non smokers outnumber the smoker by 4-1.
Brick wall springs to mind.

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • sagalout wrote:
      Take your point Andrew how ever we know that smoking kills not only the user but also those exposed to it. Which is why I say enjoy your habit but don't insist others share it with you.
      Sagalout

    And that is why I suggest smoking and non smoking bars.

Does that mean if you work in a smoking bar you have to sign a declaration that if you work there you know what the consequences are or could be. :?

Posted By: kipper889

I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea? Ruth

Posted By: mouse

  • kipper889 wrote:
    I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
    Ruth

It would not work as they i believe they tried it in some Ameican States, it ended up with workers suing there employers as they became ill because of passive smoking, even though they had been working in places for years.
What next smoking flights and none smoking flights.

Posted By: Elizavet

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8540651.stm

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Elizavet wrote:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8540651.stm

Beware the H&Safety Gestapo, they would rule the world. :x

Posted By: LynSab

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Elizavet wrote:
      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8540651.stm

    Beware the H&Safety Gestapo, they would rule the world. :x

You could be right Andrew
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/7331997/Budget-2010-Drinkers-face-rise-in-spirits-duty.html
The unelected health campaigners who say we can,t smoke,
may now stop ordinary people who drink safely from drinking, purely because of binge drinkers
obese people from eating anything other than what they allow otherwise no nhs treatment.
In fact putting a spoke in on most lives without us actually electing them and who pays for them?......The tax payer :roll:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • LynSab wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Elizavet wrote:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8540651.stm

      Beware the H&Safety Gestapo, they would rule the world. :x

    You could be right Andrew
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/7331997/Budget-2010-Drinkers-face-rise-in-spirits-duty.html
    The unelected health campaigners who say we can,t smoke,
    may now stop ordinary people who drink safely from drinking, purely because of binge drinkers
    obese people from eating anything other than what they allow otherwise no nhs treatment.
    In fact putting a spoke in on most lives without us actually electing them and who pays for them?......The tax payer :roll:

Well, if it's in the "Torygraph" it must be true!!
As for the publican who organised a "mass light up" in his two pubs, on the day the smoking ban came into force in the UK, if he hadn't have been sent to prison for not paying his fine then he would have deserved to be jailed for gross stupidity!!

Posted By: mouse

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • LynSab wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        • Elizavet wrote:
          http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8540651.stm

        Beware the H&Safety Gestapo, they would rule the world. :x

      You could be right Andrew
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/budget/7331997/Budget-2010-Drinkers-face-rise-in-spirits-duty.html
      The unelected health campaigners who say we can,t smoke,
      may now stop ordinary people who drink safely from drinking, purely because of binge drinkers
      obese people from eating anything other than what they allow otherwise no nhs treatment.
      In fact putting a spoke in on most lives without us actually electing them and who pays for them?......The tax payer :roll:

    Well, if it's in the "Torygraph" it must be true!!
    As for the publican who organised a "mass light up" in his two pubs, on the day the smoking ban came into force in the UK, if he hadn't have been sent to prison for not paying his fine then he would have deserved to be jailed for gross stupidity!!

:lol: :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • kipper889 wrote:
    I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
    Ruth

With your idea of Smoking and Non Smoking bars, who would actually have the power to determine which Bar is which. If the owners have the choice and they all choose to have Smoking Bars we are back to square one when you remember that between 70 to 75% of the adult population is Non smoking which means the majority would not have a choice, which is one of the reasons why it would not work.

Posted By: dawnnett

It worked for years before the Ban Dawn

Posted By: Steve - SJD

  • mouse wrote:
    • dawnnett wrote:
      It worked for years before the Ban
      Dawn

    Only for the smokers, non smokers did not have a choice, again as normal a case of the tail wagging the dog. Again you seem to ignore the fact that non smokers outnumber the smoker by 4-1.
    Brick wall springs to mind.

Kevin,
That is not true - non smokers did have a choice - there were no smoking
bars before the ban in the UK. However as far as I recall they didn't
seem to do that well. Non smokers may well outnumber smokers in the
general public but what are the percentages for pub goers??
BTW Where are all the non-smokers who were put off from going out
to bars because of the the smoke etc?? Two months in to the ban and
into getting what they wanted and as far as I can see they are not
in the bars in any kind of numbers.
Cheers
Steve

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Steve - SJD wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • dawnnett wrote:
        It worked for years before the Ban
        Dawn

      Only for the smokers, non smokers did not have a choice, again as normal a case of the tail wagging the dog. Again you seem to ignore the fact that non smokers outnumber the smoker by 4-1.
      Brick wall springs to mind.

    Kevin,
    That is not true - non smokers did have a choice - there were no smoking
    bars before the ban in the UK. However as far as I recall they didn't
    seem to do that well. Non smokers may well outnumber smokers in the
    general public but what are the percentages for pub goers??
    BTW Where are all the non-smokers who were put off from going out
    to bars because of the the smoke etc?? Two months in to the ban and
    into getting what they wanted and as far as I can see they are not
    in the bars in any kind of numbers.
    Cheers
    Steve

And that is why Cyprus will eventually follow Greece and a few other countries in softening the ban. I'm looking forward to the non smokers complaining about the smoke when sitting outside bars/restaurants this summer.
It is comical really, the majority[ not so great in Cyprus] of people are non smokers, yet it is the smokers who largely use the bars. Everyone is now outside and the inside of pubs are gathering dust and cobwebs.

Posted By: chuckie

The bar we use isn't gathering dust and cobwebs! And I, as a non smoker, will quite happily stand outside and talk to my smoking friends. And I, as a non smoker, will not complain about people smoking outside. Why should I? But it's so much nicer going into a bar or restaurant and not smelling smoke or come home stinking like a ashtray. Carol

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Steve - SJD wrote:
      • mouse wrote:
        • dawnnett wrote:
          It worked for years before the Ban
          Dawn

        Only for the smokers, non smokers did not have a choice, again as normal a case of the tail wagging the dog. Again you seem to ignore the fact that non smokers outnumber the smoker by 4-1.
        Brick wall springs to mind.

      Kevin,
      That is not true - non smokers did have a choice - there were no smoking
      bars before the ban in the UK. However as far as I recall they didn't
      seem to do that well. Non smokers may well outnumber smokers in the
      general public but what are the percentages for pub goers??
      BTW Where are all the non-smokers who were put off from going out
      to bars because of the the smoke etc?? Two months in to the ban and
      into getting what they wanted and as far as I can see they are not
      in the bars in any kind of numbers.
      Cheers
      Steve

    And that is why Cyprus will eventually follow Greece and a few other countries in softening the ban. I'm looking forward to the non smokers complaining about the smoke when sitting outside bars/restaurants this summer.
    It is comical really, the majority[ not so great in Cyprus] of people are non smokers, yet it is the smokers who largely use the bars. Everyone is now outside and the inside of pubs are gathering dust and cobwebs.

Steve, in answer to your two points;
I don't recall many - if any- "non-smoking" bars in the UK prior to the ban there. They must have been so tucked away it's no wonder they didn't do that well!
As for the absence of people in the bars, could it have something to do with the recession and the fact that it is winter?!
And Andrew, I have always complained about people blowing smoke in my direction when sitting outside! :wink:
Whilst the pubs with "dust and cobwebs" are probably run by the same lazy landlords who let their filthy ashtrays overflow in the bad old days!!

Posted By: evo

The 2 pubs i use have reverted back.Nice to see custom slowly building up again.Stop by Andrew i will buy you a pint!

Posted By: Deanna

  • mouse wrote:
    • kipper889 wrote:
      I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
      Ruth

    With your idea of Smoking and Non Smoking bars, who would actually have the power to determine which Bar is which. If the owners have the choice and they all choose to have Smoking Bars we are back to square one when you remember that between 70 to 75% of the adult population is Non smoking which means the majority would not have a choice, which is one of the reasons why it would not work.

If there was a choice of smoking/non-smoking bars and, as you say, 70-75% people are non-smokers, then surely the bar-owner would choose 'non-smoking' because he would get more punters in?

Posted By: kipper889

Exactly, 70-75% non smoking and 25% smoking. No problem as far as I can see. I bet the Smoking bars will take more money per night. I would take a guess that of the 75% non smoking community only half are regular pub-goers. Of course we can't do a physical survey that would make any sense as all pubs are non-smoking, which means that a lot of smokers are avoiding pubs during the colder months. Ruth

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • kipper889 wrote:
    Exactly, 70-75% non smoking and 25% smoking. No problem as far as I can see. I bet the Smoking bars will take more money per night. I would take a guess that of the 75% non smoking community only half are regular pub-goers.
    Of course we can't do a physical survey that would make any sense as all pubs are non-smoking, which means that a lot of smokers are avoiding pubs during the colder months.
    Ruth

So you, and others, appear to be boasting that most smokers are also heavy drinkers. That's really something to brag about! :roll:
And I wouldn't want to be paying your life insurance insurance premium's!!!
:ill:

Posted By: Kwacka

Bar-staff can choose to work in a smoking or non-smoking bar ONLY if there is a choice of jobs. It is the nature of any addiction to demand to be satisfied so whilst non-smokers would accompany friends/spouses to smoking bars those addicted to tobacco products were reluctant to enter non-smoking establishments.

Posted By: kipper889

WW
    Quote:
  • boasting that most smokers are also heavy drinkers

Did I say that? I thought I said that smokers tend to frequent bars more than non-smokers. I said nothing about the amount of alcohol they consume.
Ruth

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • kipper889 wrote:
    WW
      Quote:
    • boasting that most smokers are also heavy drinkers

    Did I say that? I thought I said that smokers tend to frequent bars more than non-smokers. I said nothing about the amount of alcohol they consume.
    Ruth

Sorry Ruth, obviously my mistake!
When you said "I bet the smoking bars will take more money per night" I assumed you meant in alcohol sales when you must have been alluding to all the packets of crisps they buy!
:wink:

Posted By: DAC

As much as I believe that the no smoking rules were made with the usual knee jerk method that we in the UK have become accustomed to, nothing is going to change, so get used to it However, a subject that some, obviously dependent upon which side of the fence you sit, or not as the case may be, might find as equally as vile as smoking, has again reared its head and probably will do for the foreseeable future. And that subject is: Should Obese Air Passengers pay for a second seat? Or as one report er said, why should one passenger pay extra because their bag is 1-kilo overweight when the next person in the queue could be 8-stone overweight and not pay a penny extra.....?

Posted By: Kwacka

  • DAC wrote:
    And that subject is: Should Obese Air Passengers pay for a second seat? Or as one report er said, why should one passenger pay extra because their bag is 1-kilo overweight when the next person in the queue could be 8-stone overweight and not pay a penny extra.....?

http://preview.tinyurl.com/ykpbnkp

Posted By: MCM Carrington

:D On and on like Ariston we go, does anyone remember that ad? I don't believe people who are overweight should be penalised on an Aircraft, an infant can travel free, but no-one is going to complain about that. If we go down that road, will we all have to start being weighed before getting on a plane?

Posted By: DAC

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    an infant can travel free, but no-one is going to complain about that.

That's because Infants don't get a seat. Whereas, "others", require two.
This is a bit like the supermarket stance on not allowing people into the store if they are wearing horse riding attire, because apparently they smell. But they wouldn't dream of stopping someone from coming in because they stunk of B.O. And some people do have very bad personal hygiene problems.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • kipper889 wrote:
    Exactly, 70-75% non smoking and 25% smoking. No problem as far as I can see. I bet the Smoking bars will take more money per night. I would take a guess that of the 75% non smoking community only half are regular pub-goers.
    Of course we can't do a physical survey that would make any sense as all pubs are non-smoking, which means that a lot of smokers are avoiding pubs during the colder months.
    Ruth

I personally couldn't give a stuff what smokers do. I have long held the view that anyone who indulges in this filthy smelly revolting habit doesn't have much intelligence anyway but I drove up the Edgeware Road on Sunday evening and there was no shortage of smokers sitting outside bars and pubs making the argument that it's too cold outside in Cyprus somewhat redundant.

Posted By: lynnandpete

    Quote:
  • On and on like Ariston we go, does anyone remember that ad?

Yes I do MCM - Ariston and on and on - and do you remember the "airy soogi kaboogi" and the "okey cokey 2000"? Wasn't that the same advert? Please tell me someone remembers that advert because when I mentioned it to hubby, he just looked at me as if I'd gone mad.
And I haven't been drinking!! Don't go to pubs anymore, can't smoke!! :wink:
Lynn

Posted By: mouse

  • kipper889 wrote:
    WW
      Quote:
    • boasting that most smokers are also heavy drinkers

    Did I say that? I thought I said that smokers tend to frequent bars more than non-smokers. I said nothing about the amount of alcohol they consume.
    Ruth

So are you saying the smokers only go the bars to smoke!! they can do that outside or at home. :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • kipper889 wrote:
      WW
        Quote:
      • boasting that most smokers are also heavy drinkers

      Did I say that? I thought I said that smokers tend to frequent bars more than non-smokers. I said nothing about the amount of alcohol they consume.
      Ruth

    Sorry Ruth, obviously my mistake!
    When you said "I bet the smoking bars will take more money per night" I assumed you meant in alcohol sales when you must have been alluding to all the packets of crisps they buy!
    :wink:

:lol: :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • Steve - SJD wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • dawnnett wrote:
        It worked for years before the Ban
        Dawn

      Only for the smokers, non smokers did not have a choice, again as normal a case of the tail wagging the dog. Again you seem to ignore the fact that non smokers outnumber the smoker by 4-1.
      Brick wall springs to mind.

    Kevin,
    That is not true - non smokers did have a choice - there were no smoking
    bars before the ban in the UK. However as far as I recall they didn't
    seem to do that well. Non smokers may well outnumber smokers in the
    general public but what are the percentages for pub goers??
    BTW Where are all the non-smokers who were put off from going out
    to bars because of the the smoke etc?? Two months in to the ban and
    into getting what they wanted and as far as I can see they are not
    in the bars in any kind of numbers.
    Cheers
    Steve

The problem is Steve that non smokers have stayed away from smelly bars for years and it will take time for them to start going back, but remember there is a recession, that is the main reason bars are fairly quite.
Remember the Anais club closed down last winter because of the lack of punters 10 months before the smoking ban, and even just before Xmas and last summer and in the Autumn there was not the amount of people about in bars. Last October Charlies took the decission to only open wednesday, friday and and saturday nights, long before the smoking ban. Most bars have been in slow decline for years. Two or three years ago you could not get a seat in woody's after 8-30pm on bingo and quiz nights. Also remember one of our board members who had a bar restaurant in Pernera closed down long before any smoking ban. Pernera itself has been in decline for years mainly because of recession.

Posted By: mouse

  • evo wrote:
    The 2 pubs i use have reverted back.Nice to see custom slowly building up again.Stop by Andrew i will buy you a pint!

Thats the problem!!! law abiding land lords will suffer while ignorent arrogant barstewards get away with it. I hope they get caught and fined including the law breakers inside. I see you have no respect for the law regardless of which side of the fence you stand. Remember all laws are there to be broken incuding Drink Driving, no helmets on motor cyclelists, mobile phones whilst driving, excessive speeding, gun laws, lets all break them. BUT REMEMBER THEY ARE THERE TO PROTECT YOU!!! and to save lives, or don't you give a damn as long as you can have a fag.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • mouse wrote:
    or don't you give a damn as long as you can have a fag.

Most of them carry on smoking when they're having their toes, then feet then legs chopped off due to their habit so they're hardly likely to have much respect for anyone else or the law.

Posted By: mouse

  • Richard.G wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      or don't you give a damn as long as you can have a fag.

    Most of them carry on smoking when they're having their toes, then feet then legs chopped off due to their habit so they're hardly likely to have much respect for anyone else or the law.

Sad,!! but true. :cry:

Posted By: journo

The vast majority of toe, foot and lower limb amputations are as a result of complications from diabetes, not from smoking. There is no evidence smoking causes diabetes......

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D I am off to the Canaries on Thursday, I noticed the nearest Hotel to where we are staying, a five star, has a sports bar in it where smoking is allowed, so I gather i will be able to practice my habit to my hearts content over there. Happy days.

Posted By: dawnnett

Carrington Enjoy your Jollies I stopped smoking for about 4 months , im now back to having a Cig with a drink and i bloody love it :lol: In all the years i was smoking in the before Ban Days Noone Ever moaned about smoking in any of the pubs i used and there were always a mixed group ....we just had a good laugh and enjoyed the evening we spent last weekend in London , there were more people outside then in Even when we went for a meal we were talking to a Gentleman on the next table he was from NY over here for the Cadbury take over , he went out side several times for a smoke he told me his non smoking freinds non smokers didnt like it when he had to keep popping out so they have had plenty of time to get used to it 1st April 2003 but they still dont like being split from smokers So i dont think a Hand full of forum folk should moan now just go in the pubs and keep them open !! Dawn

Posted By: LynSab

The ban is flouted in some countries:- http://www.topnews.in/antismoking-ban-postponed-spain-search-consensus-2253616 http://www.nrc.nl/international/article2239623.ece One of the strictest bans in the EU is Ireland and Ireland has constantly increased the price of tobacco and now has the highest rate of cigarette tax of any EU country; it has graphic warnings on cigarette packs; it has banned all forms of tobacco advertising; it has raised the age of purchase to 18 and it was the first country in the world to ban tobacco displays in shops. It has, in fact, done even more than the UK. And yet it is fast becoming one of Europe's heaviest smoking nations. Of the EU states only 2 the UK and Ireland have a 'total' smoking ban (Italy, France, Malta & Scandinavian countries allow designated areas) Even in Brussels smokers have designated areas in bars restaurants and cafes. If you are an individual that does,nt use a car or public transport or planes, you dont use electricity or gas ALL of which pollute the air which we all breathe maybe then you can object to others. The USA have come up with a third hand smoke campaign soon there will be a fourth, the media are starting to question the reports they are given. I would NEVER advocate smoking, this is about liberties and how some countries are dealing with it, I don,t get taken in totally by everything I read, its all becoming too dictatorial from the UK and some of the arguements are becoming ridiculous, therefore less believeable imho of course :wink: :wink:

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Thanks Dawn. I feel that 'they' got it all wrong, a smoking ban won't stop a smoker, never. A smoker will only stop when they want to, which begs the question,'What would make a smoker stop?' answers on a postcard please.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

To all the selfish smokers, imagine if you frequented places where a number of people continually passed wind - wouldn't you prefer it if they went outside to do it? Not for a moment, obviously, am I comparing smoking with passing wind! After all, Farting is a natural function that causes no long term harm to anyone!! :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • evo wrote:
    The 2 pubs i use have reverted back.Nice to see custom slowly building up again.Stop by Andrew i will buy you a pint!

PM me the names and locations of the pubs please and I'll buy you a pint too !
Still no real answer from the anti smoking brigade as to why small pubs can't have the right to choose. Everyone can then decide whether to go in or not. If the anti smoking lobby is in such a vast majority they should fill the non smoking places.
Fact is that for many, smoking and drinking are directly linked. I too haven't used a pub in the UK or Cyprus when the temperature is below 20 deg.
The story of the pub in Nicosia where non smokers are not allowed in the outside area makes me smile. Be pious and lonely on your own :lol:
Smokers are more fun. :wink:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • dawnnett wrote:
    Carrington Enjoy your Jollies
    I stopped smoking for about 4 months , im now back to having a Cig with a drink and i bloody love it :lol:
    In all the years i was smoking in the before Ban Days Noone Ever moaned about smoking in any of the pubs i used and there were always a mixed group ....we just had a good laugh and enjoyed the evening
    we spent last weekend in London , there were more people outside then in Even when we went for a meal we were talking to a Gentleman on the next table he was from NY over here for the Cadbury take over , he went out side several times for a smoke he told me his non smoking freinds non smokers didnt like it when he had to keep popping out so they have had plenty of time to get used to it 1st April 2003 but they still dont like being split from smokers
    So i dont think a Hand full of forum folk should moan now just go in the pubs and keep them open !!
    Dawn

A somewhat strange and contradictory posting Dawn!
If you think that smoking is such a wonderfully social thing, and every non smoker you've ever known so enjoys breathing in other peoples toxic fumes, why ever did you stop for 4 months?
As for people moaning on this Forum, I think you'll find it's not the non-smokers who are doing that - in case you hadn't noticed, we are very happy with the ban!

Posted By: DAC

I'm afraid to say that the No Smoking laws have caused far more problem for future generations that some people can imagine. It's not just a case of passive smoking in bars or leaving restaurants smelling of smoke, the implications and knock-on effects of these knee-jerk bans will have, I believe, a massive social effect/problem in years to come. Some people live in a cloud and can't see it, and some are just to stubborn to believe it, but by creating a one-size-fits-all “Solution” to the smoking problem the government have in-effect planted the seeds to a health problem and social imbalance that probably won't have any effect for at least another 8-10 years. Why...? Well, up until recently Mummy, Auntie Peggy and the next door neighbour Sue, all used to go to the Bingo Hall to do their gambling, drink alcohol and smoke their fags. Likewise, Daddy, Uncle John and the bloke for the end of the road, all used to go to the Bookies to place their bets, have a fag and then go to the local for several more pints, loads of fags and then go back to the bookies to see if they'd won. The problem now is that since the smoking ban come into effect, all these people now can't partake in the favoured leisure habits like what they used to, and it's a know fact that people don't like change, so as a result they will make as few a compromises as they can and then try their hardest to carry on as normal. So what does that mean..? Well, they can't/won't go to the Bingo Hall or Bookies or Pub any more as they don't want to have to go out in the cold and rain for a fag every ten minutes. So what's the answer...? Well, the supermarkets saw this coming and very quickly adapted their Off-Sales accordingly. So as a direct result of the government not putting any brain power into looking for workable or alternative solutions, the supermarkets have now taken over in alcohol sales to feed that Drinking-at-Home culture that the mindless laws have now created. The knock on effect is that the government, through a lack of thinking in the first place, is now having to back peddle to try to stop the supermarkets carrying out what is their Free and Democratic right, to sell a product, which in this case is alcohol, at whatever price they want to. Cheap Booze, so what..? Well, we ain't a nation of wine sippers who sit outside Bistro's and Cafes playing backgammon, never have been and never will be. We are a nation that drinks beer, eats pies and watches football or rugby. Linked to that is the already increasing problem of adolescent drinking, an already existing problem of heavy home drinking and an a nation that already has an ever expanding waistline. Hopefully, by now some of the readers might have seen the picture that is building, or in this case, how these half-arrsed and poorly thought out laws have in effect just added even more fuel to the fire that was already burning. My final point on all of this is this..... You and I, are, and always were, able to make that choice as to whether or not you/we went into the smokey Pub, Bingo Hall or Bookies. However, the little children all across this country, and in many cases Europe and beyond, have NO choice whatsoever about where their parents, relative or family friends decide to gamble, drink and smoke.... Think about it. Had the Government spent longer than ten minutes pondering over these inapt laws and if they had come up with a plan that would have given Publicans, Etc. Etc. a choice as to which path they wanted to take, be it smoking, non-smoking or a return to the good old fashioned Bar and Lounge, then these Kids wouldn't now be being subjected to a life whereby heavy drinking, gambling and smoking in the home is the Norm and not the exception.... Some won't agree with my opinions, and some just won't care. But as the advert once said. The effects of smoking doesn't care how considerate you were, it doesn't care if you didn't smoke in front of the kids and it's poisons will strike at anyone that is sees fit to affect. Do I smoke..? No. Do I care about our Democratic rights and freedoms that Millions have laid down their lives to protect..? You're dammed right I do. But everyday another little piece of those freedoms is chipped away and the most worrying thing about it all, is that hardly anyone cares. However, once it's to late, they'll all have something to say about it then.....

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Dave, That was a very good post, and very accurate. Woody, you are a hoot :D I'm going to miss reading these posts. :(

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

MCM, where are you going? Dave, you went a long way round the houses (so unlike you :wink: ) but it seems what you were getting at, is that the government and the rest of us, should take on the responsibility for lazy, inconsiderate parents in assuring a safe, clean enviroment for their off-spring to grow up in. If that is what you are advocating, I think you are well off the mark! People should naturally do all they can (and most do) to protect their children from danger, and those that dont -and that includes inflicting copious amounts of tobacco smoke on them- are guilty of child abuse, and should be dealt with accordingly!

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    MCM, where are you going?
    Dave, you went a long way round the houses (so unlike you :wink: ) but it seems what you were getting at, is that the government and the rest of us, should take on the responsibility for lazy, inconsiderate parents in assuring a safe, clean enviroment for their off-spring to grow up in.
    If that is what you are advocating, I think you are well off the mark!
    People should naturally do all they can (and most do) to protect their children from danger, and those that dont -and that includes inflicting copious amounts of tobacco smoke on them- are guilty of child abuse, and should be dealt with accordingly!

No. That's not what I am saying.
What I am saying is that is exactly the environment that the Government has created. Adolescent drinking always has and always will be prevalent. However, by adopting a One-size-fits-all ban on smoking in public places, what they have done is to make matter worse.
How often do you see a little kid strapped into a child seat in the back of the car whilst the driver is sat at the wheel smoking...?
So what does the government do..? The make statements and new laws, or reinvent older ones, that that tar us all with the same brush and say that eating a Mars bar whilst driving (or whatever) is now an infringement of the law. Just to be able to ban the person from smoking whilst they're driving..
I'm sorry, but I have done years and years of driving training, snow and ice, skid-pan, cross country, cross country at night with no lights, advanced driving. Etc. Etc. and I am more than capable of reading the road, engaging my brain and knowing when it's safe to have a mouth full of that Mars bar whilst at the wheel. But why do they create these new laws? To make up for making crapp ones in the first place.
Before long you'll have to attach a brain scanner that reads your thoughts and activates the indicators and changes gear for you. 3000 people a year are killed on the roads and the Government bends over backwards to find ways to Fine or Tax us all in the so called aim of reducing road deaths. Funny thing though is that some 50,000 people die a year as a result of having a Stroke, yet the research to reduce that relies upon Charity. Maybe that because you can't Tax a Stroke Victim....!
Had the Government really thought about it laws could have been made, standards set and equipment installed so as to allow the primarily alcohol and food trade to allow for smoking and non-smoking environments within buildings.
So I'm afraid that you're reading me wrong. I'm not suggesting for one minute that your kids are my responsibility, or vice a versa, what I'm saying is that if the Government ceased trying to find as many ways as possible to eradicate the average persons requirement to engage their own brain, and stopped trying to enforce a society whereby everything is 100% safe, the people would be left to make their own decisions and there be in a position to decide for themselves if they want to go into “That” Pub/Restaurant where people are smoking, or go in to “That” Pub/Restaurant where they aren't. Cause at the minute there's only one choice, and that's the one that the Government has made for you.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

Well said that man ! Oooh can't you go without a fag for a few hours............... can't you go outside the pub........................... can't you just give up ............... can't you abide by this ill conceived legislation ???? No I won't............ or should that be can't ! :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      MCM, where are you going?
      Dave, you went a long way round the houses (so unlike you :wink: ) but it seems what you were getting at, is that the government and the rest of us, should take on the responsibility for lazy, inconsiderate parents in assuring a safe, clean enviroment for their off-spring to grow up in.
      If that is what you are advocating, I think you are well off the mark!
      People should naturally do all they can (and most do) to protect their children from danger, and those that dont -and that includes inflicting copious amounts of tobacco smoke on them- are guilty of child abuse, and should be dealt with accordingly!

    No. That's not what I am saying.
    What I am saying is that is exactly the environment that the Government has created. Adolescent drinking always has and always will be prevalent. However, by adopting a One-size-fits-all ban on smoking in public places, what they have done is to make matter worse.
    How often do you see a little kid strapped into a child seat in the back of the car whilst the driver is sat at the wheel smoking...?
    So what does the government do..? The make statements and new laws, or reinvent older ones, that that tar us all with the same brush and say that eating a Mars bar whilst driving (or whatever) is now an infringement of the law. Just to be able to ban the person from smoking whilst they're driving..
    I'm sorry, but I have done years and years of driving training, snow and ice, skid-pan, cross country, cross country at night with no lights, advanced driving. Etc. Etc. and I am more than capable of reading the road, engaging my brain and knowing when it's safe to have a mouth full of that Mars bar whilst at the wheel. But why do they create these new laws? To make up for making crapp ones in the first place.
    Before long you'll have to attach a brain scanner that reads your thoughts and activates the indicators and changes gear for you. 3000 people a year are killed on the roads and the Government bends over backwards to find ways to Fine or Tax us all in the so called aim of reducing road deaths. Funny thing though is that some 50,000 people die a year as a result of having a Stroke, yet the research to reduce that relies upon Charity. Maybe that because you can't Tax a Stroke Victim....!
    Had the Government really thought about it laws could have been made, standards set and equipment installed so as to allow the primarily alcohol and food trade to allow for smoking and non-smoking environments within buildings.
    So I'm afraid that you're reading me wrong. I'm not suggesting for one minute that your kids are my responsibility, or vice a versa, what I'm saying is that if the Government ceased trying to find as many ways as possible to eradicate the average persons requirement to engage their own brain, and stopped trying to enforce a society whereby everything is 100% safe, the people would be left to make their own decisions and there be in a position to decide for themselves if they want to go into “That” Pub/Restaurant where people are smoking, or go in to “That” Pub/Restaurant where they aren't. Cause at the minute there's only one choice, and that's the one that the Government has made for you.

Sorry Dave, but your reply has now left me totally confused!
I took you initially to say that if people could not smoke in the pub, betting shop etc. then they would smoke more at home, to the detriment of their children. Therefore smoking should not have been banned in these places to protect the kids. Did you not mean that? So, what did you mean? Please explain - in no more than two sentences, if you can! :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

I took it that he meant that the legislation and what it was supposedly trying to achieve may well be a flawed concept.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    I took it that he meant that the legislation and what it was supposedly trying to achieve may well be a flawed concept.

"Flawed" because irresponsible and feckless parents will now smoke more in front of their children at home?

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:

    Sorry Dave, but your reply has now left me totally confused!
    I took you initially to say that if people could not smoke in the pub, betting shop etc. then they would smoke more at home, to the detriment of their children.
    Point 1 - Therefore smoking should not have been banned in these places to protect the kids. (I guess that by this that you mean at home as well..?)
    Point 2 - Did you not mean that?
    Point 3 - So, what did you mean?
    Please explain - in no more than two sentences, if you can! :wink:

No one is saying that smoking in the home should be banned, god forbid the day when you can't do as you please in your own home.
Point 1 - No
Point 2 - No
Point 3 - By banning smoking in Pubs, Etc. Etc and because of the knock-on effect of supermatkets now competeing to fill the void that Pubs once filled, their [The Governments] ill thought out law has now encouraged/forced people to drink more, smoke more and gamble more at home, when previously they would have gone to the pub, bookies etc etc.
So like I said, they are now Back Peddling to try and eradicate the problem that their own laws have created. i.e. trying to impose a minimum sales price on alcohol, which as you say, affects all and not just the smokers.
Bingo. More Taxes.....

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      I took it that he meant that the legislation and what it was supposedly trying to achieve may well be a flawed concept.

    "Flawed" because irresponsible and feckless parents will now smoke more in front of their children at home?

That pretty much sums up what I meant to say..

Posted By: Richard.G

  • journo wrote:
    The vast majority of toe, foot and lower limb amputations are as a result of complications from diabetes, not from smoking. There is no evidence smoking causes diabetes......

No actually you are wrong.
The main reason people have these amputations is peripheral vascular disease.
The main cause of peripheral vascular disease is smoking although diabetes is another cause.

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Thanks Dawn. I feel that 'they' got it all wrong, a smoking ban won't stop a smoker, never. A smoker will only stop when they want to, which begs the question,'What would make a smoker stop?' answers on a postcard please.

No a smoking ban won't stop the smoker but maybe, like most laws, it was introduced to protect the victim (aka non smoker) rather than the criminal (aka smoker).
As I said previously, having bit of their body progressively chopped off doesn't stop them and I've said previously, seeing the painful death of a loved one doesn't stop them and for many the health of their children doesn't stop them so not a lot will. The best way therefore seems to ban them smoking around generally more civilised people :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        I took it that he meant that the legislation and what it was supposedly trying to achieve may well be a flawed concept.

      "Flawed" because irresponsible and feckless parents will now smoke more in front of their children at home?

    That pretty much sums up what I meant to say..

Well, I think we got there in the end, although I think you may have mis-understood my interpretation of what I thought you were saying???????? :lol:
So, in a nutshell, you WERE saying that to prevent parents from excessively smoking at home they SHOULD be allowed to smoke in pubs and betting shops etc?
And that is exactly the point I was disagreeing with! Why should the rest of us suffer a smoke filled atmosphere just because some people don't care enough about their own kids!?
And I was not saying that smoking should be banned at home, but that if children are exposed to any unhealthy enviroment, then it should be dealt with!
As for "god forbid the day when you can't do as you please in your own home," well of course there are countless things you are not allowed to do, including other acts of child, and animal, cruelty, drug taking, assault,murder and - if in Cyprus with no title deeds - any structual alterations!!

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:

    So, in a nutshell, you WERE saying that to prevent parents from excessively smoking at home they SHOULD be allowed to smoke in pubs and betting shops etc?
    And that is exactly the point I was disagreeing with! Why should the rest of us suffer a smoke filled atmosphere just because some people don't care enough about their own kids!?

It's hard to word things right on a forum, but what I was saying is that HAD the Government looked at this thoroughly and had they not just rushed it through parliament as an after-thought. Then PROPER and more detailed legislation could have been made so as to give Landlords Etc. Etc. a choice. And in that choice, you and I would also have had a choice. But they didn't, they just rushed through what they thought was the best option which as it turns out, is only the best option for one segment of society, non-smokers.
Had it been better thought out then establishment could have exercised their democratic right to choose their own path, as I said before, either a Non-Smoking Pub, A smoking Pub or a return to the traditional Bar (Smoking) and Lounge (Non-Smoking). Either way, if the pub was to have any areas whereby smoking was permitted inside, then recommended fume extraction and ventilation would have had to be provided by law. Before this ban came into place many pubs had a demarcation line before the bar where smoking was not permitted. These rules could simply have been extended to include a higher quality of smoke extraction devices so as to protect the staff.
But hey, it's much easier to just say “Bollox to Democracy” and to go for the good old fashioned Knee-Jerk reaction and issue a blanket ban. Next they'll be banning Political Opposition Party's and going for a Single Party State. But hey, as long as no one has to tax that grey matter and actually think about anything, then who cares.....!

Posted By: Richard.G

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

Posted By: Richard.G

No, smokers don't like being told they are breaking the law.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/8547558.stm
Smoker jailed after Farningham Road railway push
A man who pushed a woman on to a live railway track after a row about him smoking has been jailed for four years.
Ionel Rapisca, 33, was found guilty of causing grievous bodily harm by shoving Linda Buchanan off the platform at Farningham Road, Kent, in August 2008.
The court heard Miss Buchanan, 59, landed close to a 750-volt live rail, breaking her wrist.

Posted By: mouse

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    To all the selfish smokers, imagine if you frequented places where a number of people continually passed wind - wouldn't you prefer it if they went outside to do it?
    Not for a moment, obviously, am I comparing smoking with passing wind!
    After all, Farting is a natural function that causes no long term harm to anyone!!
    :wink:

And it smells better, and passes away in a minute. :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • evo wrote:
      The 2 pubs i use have reverted back.Nice to see custom slowly building up again.Stop by Andrew i will buy you a pint!

    PM me the names and locations of the pubs please and I'll buy you a pint too !
    Still no real answer from the anti smoking brigade as to why small pubs can't have the right to choose. Everyone can then decide whether to go in or not. If the anti smoking lobby is in such a vast majority they should fill the non smoking places.
    Fact is that for many, smoking and drinking are directly linked. I too haven't used a pub in the UK or Cyprus when the temperature is below 20 deg.
    The story of the pub in Nicosia where non smokers are not allowed in the outside area makes me smile. Be pious and lonely on your own :lol:
    Smokers are more fun. :wink:

Try reading post 328, 350 and 351.

Posted By: mouse

  • DAC wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:

      So, in a nutshell, you WERE saying that to prevent parents from excessively smoking at home they SHOULD be allowed to smoke in pubs and betting shops etc?
      And that is exactly the point I was disagreeing with! Why should the rest of us suffer a smoke filled atmosphere just because some people don't care enough about their own kids!?

    It's hard to word things right on a forum, but what I was saying is that HAD the Government looked at this thoroughly and had they not just rushed it through parliament as an after-thought. Then PROPER and more detailed legislation could have been made so as to give Landlords Etc. Etc. a choice. And in that choice, you and I would also have had a choice. But they didn't, they just rushed through what they thought was the best option which as it turns out, is only the best option for one segment of society, non-smokers.
    Had it been better thought out then establishment could have exercised their democratic right to choose their own path, as I said before, either a Non-Smoking Pub, A smoking Pub or a return to the traditional Bar (Smoking) and Lounge (Non-Smoking). Either way, if the pub was to have any areas whereby smoking was permitted inside, then recommended fume extraction and ventilation would have had to be provided by law. Before this ban came into place many pubs had a demarcation line before the bar where smoking was not permitted. These rules could simply have been extended to include a higher quality of smoke extraction devices so as to protect the staff.
    But hey, it's much easier to just say “Bollox to Democracy” and to go for the good old fashioned Knee-Jerk reaction and issue a blanket ban. Next they'll be banning Political Opposition Party's and going for a Single Party State. But hey, as long as no one has to tax that grey matter and actually think about anything, then who cares.....!

See post 328!!!

Posted By: MCM Carrington

Woody, I'm going on holiday to the Canaries, where they have smoking Pubs, and non-smoking Pubs depending on size, which I think is sensible. Richard, It stops me being a facetious bore! :D

Posted By: kipper889

Are there any other substances that are illegal to be inhaled/consumed within a public building, but legal in the open air or within private residences? How do the TV/Film/Stage companies get away with their actors smoking on set? Are they exempt from the law? Ruth

Posted By: DAC

  • mouse wrote:
    • kipper889 wrote:
      I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
      Ruth

    With your idea of Smoking and Non Smoking bars, who would actually have the power to determine which Bar is which. If the owners have the choice and they all choose to have Smoking Bars we are back to square one .

Well, that's not exactly very difficult to answer that question.
All councils have a licensing committee and all licensing committee's also maintain a database of all the licensed premises within their council area.
So, if an area has 100 licensed premises a good place to start would be to then break those down into types. i.e. restaurants, pubs, take-away's, bookies, bingo halls, casinos or any other type of establishment that might fall within the remit of the licensing committee.
The licensing committee could then break each type down further:
An example being: Pub Licences – Smoking all areas Pubs 10 licences, Total Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences, Mixed area of both Smoking and Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences
Each licence would be priced accordingly to desirability and each Pub could then bid for the type of licence that they want. Obviously all the establishments that want either all smoking or areas of both smoking and non-smoking would then have to meet the required standards of fume ventilation and extraction before being allowed to open to the public.
Not exactly rocket science, but obviously well beyond the brain capacity of our current government. But just think of the amount of new jobs that could have been created as result of having to implement these possible new measures that they could have lauded about.
Oh well, I suppose that it's back to the politics of knee-jerking....!

Posted By: dawnnett

Ruth , i said exactly the same , How do they get round the ban Eastenders , smoke on the set So do Shameless ........in the pub too Dawn

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • MCM Carrington wrote:
    Woody, I'm going on holiday to the Canaries, where they have smoking Pubs, and non-smoking Pubs depending on size, which I think is sensible.
    Richard, It stops me being a facetious bore! :D

:lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • kipper889 wrote:
        I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
        Ruth

      With your idea of Smoking and Non Smoking bars, who would actually have the power to determine which Bar is which. If the owners have the choice and they all choose to have Smoking Bars we are back to square one .

    Well, that's not exactly very difficult to answer that question.
    All councils have a licensing committee and all licensing committee's also maintain a database of all the licensed premises within their council area.
    So, if an area has 100 licensed premises a good place to start would be to then break those down into types. i.e. restaurants, pubs, take-away's, bookies, bingo halls, casinos or any other type of establishment that might fall within the remit of the licensing committee.
    The licensing committee could then break each type down further:
    An example being: Pub Licences – Smoking all areas Pubs 10 licences, Total Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences, Mixed area of both Smoking and Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences
    Each licence would be priced accordingly to desirability and each Pub could then bid for the type of licence that they want. Obviously all the establishments that want either all smoking or areas of both smoking and non-smoking would then have to meet the required standards of fume ventilation and extraction before being allowed to open to the public.
    Not exactly rocket science, but obviously well beyond the brain capacity of our current government. But just think of the amount of new jobs that could have been created as result of having to implement these possible new measures that they could have lauded about.
    Oh well, I suppose that it's back to the politics of knee-jerking....!

Dave, you refer, detrimentally, to "the brain capacity of our current government."
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how many smoking establishments the Tories saw fit to install "fume ventilation and extraction" in, when they were in power!?
Come to that, are all the authorities in most of Europe, Australia and the USA -where, in some States they have far more restringent curbs on smoking than the UK- also so lacking in brain power, and guilty of "knee-jerking" politics?

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

:roll: give it a rest Woodie. Dave isn't even a smoker but he can see the lunacy that is taking over the so called civilised world. Smokers just happen to be the easiest targets right now. Everything in moderation is the way. Anyway, if we all are forced into clean , healthy lives, how the hell are governments going to pay pensions and care facilities for all those very boring centurions ?

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    :roll: give it a rest Woodie. Dave isn't even a smoker but he can see the lunacy that is taking over the so called civilised world. Smokers just happen to be the easiest targets right now.
    Everything in moderation is the way.
    Anyway, if we all are forced into clean , healthy lives, how the hell are governments going to pay pensions and care facilities for all those very boring centurions ?

Don't tell me you're turning Tory, Andrew!!
:wink:

Posted By: journo

Ruth, Dawn, Smoking (and drinking) on TV and film sets? I'll give you a clue.... the drinks don't actually contain any alcohol.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      :roll: give it a rest Woodie. Dave isn't even a smoker but he can see the lunacy that is taking over the so called civilised world. Smokers just happen to be the easiest targets right now.
      Everything in moderation is the way.
      Anyway, if we all are forced into clean , healthy lives, how the hell are governments going to pay pensions and care facilities for all those very boring centurions ?

    Don't tell me you're turning Tory, Andrew!!
    :wink:

Far from it Woodie. Sad to hear of the death of dear old Michael Foot. A real gentleman, a man of the people and a Plymouth Argyle supporter... RIP.

Posted By: kipper889

Journo...now you are gonna say that the fags don't contain real smoke!!! Don't say that.. I can tell when Dot drags on a cigarette that it's real smoke that comes out. I went to see Billy Elliot on the stage a few weeks back. They were definately smoking real cigarettes. Are herbal fags ok to smoke in public places? Ruth

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Andrew Brooks wrote:
        :roll: give it a rest Woodie. Dave isn't even a smoker but he can see the lunacy that is taking over the so called civilised world. Smokers just happen to be the easiest targets right now.
        Everything in moderation is the way.
        Anyway, if we all are forced into clean , healthy lives, how the hell are governments going to pay pensions and care facilities for all those very boring centurions ?

      Don't tell me you're turning Tory, Andrew!!
      :wink:

    Far from it Woodie. Sad to hear of the death of dear old Michael Foot. A real gentleman, a man of the people and a Plymouth Argyle supporter... RIP.

Amen to that. Shame there are not more like him in Parliament today.

Posted By: Deanna

Michael Foot; yes we could do with a few like him ie a person of principle who spoke his mind (he wouldn't 'do' PC). Also a flamboyant character who could hold an audience. Makes today's politicians look like robots.

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:

    Dave, you refer, detrimentally, to "the brain capacity of our current government."
    Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how many smoking establishments the Tories saw fit to install "fume ventilation and extraction" in, when they were in power!?
    Come to that, are all the authorities in most of Europe, Australia and the USA -where, in some States they have far more restringent curbs on smoking than the UK- also so lacking in brain power, and guilty of "knee-jerking" politics?

One, my politics has absolutely nothing to do with it. But I'll telkl you this, I'm no Nu Labour fan nor am I a Tory.
Two, everything that the Government has thrown countless billions of pounds at in the last 13 years has all failed. Or failed to show any worthy progress for the amount of money spent on it.
Three, asking what the Tory's done over 13 years ago is just completely pointless as back then, this wasn't even on the radar. Maybe the current world financial meltdown is all Maggie's fault as well..
Four, I couldn't give a f—king monkeys for whether smokers have to stand in the cold or not and I love being able to leave pubs or restaurants without stinking of smoke. However, had you read my posts fully you would have seen, as was picked up on by Andrew Brooks, is that this whole saga is simply another tiny part of that freedom that democracy is supposed to bring that is being chipped away by a government that is hell-bent on controlling as much of all of our lives as is possible.
This is a situation where the degradation of our freedom's is so prolific that people now don't even raise an eyebrow when another bit is lost.

Posted By: Deanna

Are we really living in a democracy?
Not, I think as was born out of the Greek Philosophers.................
http://boards.msn.com/UKNewsboards/thread.aspx?threadid=1673209

Posted By: dawnnett

Ruth i tried the Herbal fags when i were trying to pack in :lol: They really stink, i was even asked if i was smoking wacky baccy :lol: funny thing is i couldnt smell them much .. ps they dont taste nice either , so stick to ya fags Dawn

Posted By: Richard.G

  • dawnnett wrote:
    Ruth i tried the Herbal fags when i were trying to pack in :lol:
    They really stink, i was even asked if i was smoking wacky baccy :lol:
    funny thing is i couldnt smell them much ..
    ps they dont taste nice either , so stick to ya fags
    Dawn

Oh blimey. Are you really trying to kid yourself that you don't stink to high heaven of stale ash? Only ever kissed one woman who smoked and it was like eating a full ashtray. Revolting.

Posted By: dawnnett

Im so Glad you said that , Richard I didnt fancy kissing you either ...weve never met Dawn

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Richard.G wrote:
    • dawnnett wrote:
      Ruth i tried the Herbal fags when i were trying to pack in :lol:
      They really stink, i was even asked if i was smoking wacky baccy :lol:
      funny thing is i couldnt smell them much ..
      ps they dont taste nice either , so stick to ya fags
      Dawn

    Oh blimey. Are you really trying to kid yourself that you don't stink to high heaven of stale ash? Only ever kissed one woman who smoked and it was like eating a full ashtray. Revolting.

Nothing quite like a post coital cigarette in the arms of a beautiflul woman, smoking or merely smouldering. :wink:

Posted By: Richard.G

I'll pass on that thanks. Beautiful woman great. Beautiful stinking woman no thanks., I'd rather an ugly woman with a feminine aroma.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:

      Dave, you refer, detrimentally, to "the brain capacity of our current government."
      Perhaps you could enlighten us as to how many smoking establishments the Tories saw fit to install "fume ventilation and extraction" in, when they were in power!?
      Come to that, are all the authorities in most of Europe, Australia and the USA -where, in some States they have far more restringent curbs on smoking than the UK- also so lacking in brain power, and guilty of "knee-jerking" politics?

    One, my politics has absolutely nothing to do with it. But I'll telkl you this, I'm no Nu Labour fan nor am I a Tory.
    Two, everything that the Government has thrown countless billions of pounds at in the last 13 years has all failed. Or failed to show any worthy progress for the amount of money spent on it.
    Three, asking what the Tory's done over 13 years ago is just completely pointless as back then, this wasn't even on the radar. Maybe the current world financial meltdown is all Maggie's fault as well..
    Four, I couldn't give a f—king monkeys for whether smokers have to stand in the cold or not and I love being able to leave pubs or restaurants without stinking of smoke. However, had you read my posts fully you would have seen, as was picked up on by Andrew Brooks, is that this whole saga is simply another tiny part of that freedom that democracy is supposed to bring that is being chipped away by a government that is hell-bent on controlling as much of all of our lives as is possible.
    This is a situation where the degradation of our freedom's is so prolific that people now don't even raise an eyebrow when another bit is lost.

Dave, firstly I do read your posts fully, One has to, to get,eventually, to your point!
I note though, that you only respond to the questions you feel comfortable with!
"Asking what the Tories did over 13 years ago ..........this wasn't on the radar." What!! We know the BAN wasn't on the radar, but smoke filled bars and restaurants certainly were and none, to my knowledge were fitted with "fume ventilation and extraction" units! What about the other countries, I mentioned, who also have smoking bans?
And, "everything that the government has thrown countless billions of pounds at in the last 13 years has all failed." What, EVERYTHING? Very well, thought out Dave!! :roll:
"Maybe the current world financial meltdown is all Maggie's fault as well."
Well, funnily enough ........ maybe not "the world's" exactly, but it was the mad witch who allowed the City to become so de-regulated that the Banks, interested only in their own vast profits and bonuses, created the woeful situation the UK now finds itself in!!
In a civilised society there has to be curtailments on some "freedoms" for the benefit of others, otherwise we would still be sending little boys up chimneys and allowing mounted terrorists to romp around the countryside, tormenting animals before ripping them to pieces! Of course, if the "servatives" (The "Con" is silent!) regain power the latter activity, so they promise, will again become perfectly legal and acceptable!! :twisted:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Richard.G wrote:
    • MCM Carrington wrote:
      Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

    Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

Richard, to be fair, I don't feel that one has to be lacking in intelligence to become a smoker, (Barack Obama is a smoker, after all) but, as has been shown by some recent contributions, it certainly helps!! :wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Richard.G wrote:
      • MCM Carrington wrote:
        Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

      Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

    Richard, to be fair, I don't feel that one has to be lacking in intelligence to become a smoker, (Barack Obama is a smoker, after all) but, as has been shown by some recent contributions, it certainly helps!! :wink:

Woodie. Why don't you and Dicky go down the bleddy pub while you can still have a cup of creamy coffee and a bag of crisps in alll that clean air and stop pestering us ? There's plenty of room inside these days ! :lol:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Richard.G wrote:
        • MCM Carrington wrote:
          Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

        Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

      Richard, to be fair, I don't feel that one has to be lacking in intelligence to become a smoker, (Barack Obama is a smoker, after all) but, as has been shown by some recent contributions, it certainly helps!! :wink:

    Woodie. Why don't you and Dicky go down the bleddy pub while you can still have a cup of creamy coffee and a bag of crisps in alll that clean air and stop pestering us ? There's plenty of room inside these days ! :lol:

Andrew, I wouldn't like to think I was pestering anyone, you know like when people blow smoke over everybody else!!
:wink:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        • Richard.G wrote:
          • MCM Carrington wrote:
            Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

          Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

        Richard, to be fair, I don't feel that one has to be lacking in intelligence to become a smoker, (Barack Obama is a smoker, after all) but, as has been shown by some recent contributions, it certainly helps!! :wink:

      Woodie. Why don't you and Dicky go down the bleddy pub while you can still have a cup of creamy coffee and a bag of crisps in alll that clean air and stop pestering us ? There's plenty of room inside these days ! :lol:

    Andrew, I wouldn't like to think I was pestering anyone, you know like when people blow smoke over everybody else!!
    :wink:

What do you mean 'over everybody else' ? There's noone inside the bleddy pub anymore :lol:

Posted By: DAC

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    Dave, firstly I do read your posts fully, One has to, to get,eventually, to your point!

Maybe I should just give one word answers that have very little meaning. Anyway, if you read my responses you would seen that I stated that I'm not a Tory, so why you keep bringing them up is beyond me.
  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    I note though, that you only respond to the questions you feel comfortable with!

I respond to questions that possibly deserve an answer.
  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    "Asking what the Tories did over 13 years ago ..........this wasn't on the radar." What!! We know the BAN wasn't on the radar, but smoke filled bars and restaurants certainly were and none, to my knowledge were fitted with "fume ventilation and extraction" units! What about the other countries, I mentioned, who also have smoking bans?

When did the smoking in public places ban begin..? 1st July 2007 – So what were your beloved Labour doing about it in 1997..?
  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    And, "everything that the government has thrown countless billions of pounds at in the last 13 years has all failed." What, EVERYTHING? Very well, thought out Dave!! :roll:

Education standards have lowered. The NHS has become a management tool. The Regional Regeneration Agencies have produced nothing.
  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    "Maybe the current world financial meltdown is all Maggie's fault as well."
    Well, funnily enough ........ maybe not "the world's" exactly, but it was the mad witch who allowed the City to become so de-regulated that the Banks, interested only in their own vast profits and bonuses, created the woeful situation the UK now finds itself in!!

And IIRC, it was Mr Brown that frivolously squandered that same income that the Financial Sector contributed to the UK's economy. Which bearing in mind that some 28% of all the UK's corporation taxes and income taxes are generated by the financial services, Labour didn't exactly bend over backwards to sort out all of these inherited “Problems” did they. I mean, They've only had 3 full terms in power to address them, so things can't have been that bad...!
  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    In a civilised society there has to be curtailments on some "freedoms" for the benefit of others, otherwise we would still be sending little boys up chimneys and allowing mounted terrorists to romp around the countryside, tormenting animals before ripping them to pieces! Of course, if the "servatives" (The "Con" is silent!) regain power the latter activity, so they promise, will again become perfectly legal and acceptable!! :twisted:

So, because the Stalinist's say that these activities are not to their liking, that they are now outlawed and all those that participate in them are now criminalised.
As was once said:
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".

Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

Posted By: DAC

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      • Richard.G wrote:
        • MCM Carrington wrote:
          Lynn, I can't remember those! must be due to lack of intelligence, well, so Richard G thinks lol :D

        Feel free to prove me wrong. Give me one intelligent reason for smoking.

      Richard, to be fair, I don't feel that one has to be lacking in intelligence to become a smoker, (Barack Obama is a smoker, after all) but, as has been shown by some recent contributions, it certainly helps!! :wink:

    Woodie. Why don't you and Dicky go down the bleddy pub while you can still have a cup of creamy coffee and a bag of crisps in alll that clean air and stop pestering us ? There's plenty of room inside these days ! :lol:

About two years ago my mates F-i-L (Terry) was doing some plastering for us. He said to me that him and his son had gone to the village pub from work to have a pint, or two. Anyhow, they both went outside for a fag and whilst there some bloke came out and started moaning at them for making the smoking area smell of smoke.
Terry said to him, "it's the smoking area." To which the bloke said, "I've come out here for some fresh air". Terry then highlighted to this idiot, in his best trade's-men's manner that, "The F--KING Pub, is full of fresh F--king air".

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • DAC wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      Dave, firstly I do read your posts fully, One has to, to get,eventually, to your point!

    1) Maybe I should just give one word answers that have very little meaning. Anyway, if you read my responses you would seen that I stated that I'm not a Tory, so why you keep bringing them up is beyond me.
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      I note though, that you only respond to the questions you feel comfortable with!

    2) I respond to questions that possibly deserve an answer.
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      "Asking what the Tories did over 13 years ago ..........this wasn't on the radar." What!! We know the BAN wasn't on the radar, but smoke filled bars and restaurants certainly were and none, to my knowledge were fitted with "fume ventilation and extraction" units! What about the other countries, I mentioned, who also have smoking bans?

    3) When did the smoking in public places ban begin..? 1st July 2007 – So what were your beloved Labour doing about it in 1997..?
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      And, "everything that the government has thrown countless billions of pounds at in the last 13 years has all failed." What, EVERYTHING? Very well, thought out Dave!! :roll:

    4) Education standards have lowered. The NHS has become a management tool. The Regional Regeneration Agencies have produced nothing.
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      "Maybe the current world financial meltdown is all Maggie's fault as well."
      Well, funnily enough ........ maybe not "the world's" exactly, but it was the mad witch who allowed the City to become so de-regulated that the Banks, interested only in their own vast profits and bonuses, created the woeful situation the UK now finds itself in!!

    5) And IIRC, it was Mr Brown that frivolously squandered that same income that the Financial Sector contributed to the UK's economy. Which bearing in mind that some 28% of all the UK's corporation taxes and income taxes are generated by the financial services, Labour didn't exactly bend over backwards to sort out all of these inherited “Problems” did they. I mean, They've only had 3 full terms in power to address them, so things can't have been that bad...!
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      In a civilised society there has to be curtailments on some "freedoms" for the benefit of others, otherwise we would still be sending little boys up chimneys and allowing mounted terrorists to romp around the countryside, tormenting animals before ripping them to pieces! Of course, if the "servatives" (The "Con" is silent!) regain power the latter activity, so they promise, will again become perfectly legal and acceptable!! :twisted:

    6) So, because the Stalinist's say that these activities are not to their liking, that they are now outlawed and all those that participate in them are now criminalised.
    As was once said:
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety".

    Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
    US author, diplomat, inventor, physicist, politician, & printer (1706 - 1790)

1) Dave, we all realise you would never use one word, when a hundred
would do just as well!
The Tories are mentioned in answer to some of the points you raise!
(Sorry if that's beyond you! :wink: )
2) But not the ones you feel uncomfortable with!
3) Why do you bring up Labour when the question was about what the
Tories had done - or rather hadn't done?
4) But EVERYTHING!?
5) Again you come back to Labour when the issue raised was Thatcher!
6) So now all anti-smokers are Stalinist's!!! :roll: :lol:
And so, as your statement would infer, do you really believe that, in
the name of freedom, it should still be OK to send little boys up
chimneys?!

Posted By: mouse

  • DAC wrote:
    • mouse wrote:
      • kipper889 wrote:
        I presume a couple of years ago, those that chose to work in bars were not opposed to working in smokey places? If we had smoking and non-smoking bars couldn't the employees have the choice of where they work? I'm sure there must be lots of bar staff who smoke themselves, those that do could work in the smoking bars. Is that too simple an idea?
        Ruth

      With your idea of Smoking and Non Smoking bars, who would actually have the power to determine which Bar is which. If the owners have the choice and they all choose to have Smoking Bars we are back to square one .

    Well, that's not exactly very difficult to answer that question.
    All councils have a licensing committee and all licensing committee's also maintain a database of all the licensed premises within their council area.
    So, if an area has 100 licensed premises a good place to start would be to then break those down into types. i.e. restaurants, pubs, take-away's, bookies, bingo halls, casinos or any other type of establishment that might fall within the remit of the licensing committee.
    The licensing committee could then break each type down further:
    An example being: Pub Licences – Smoking all areas Pubs 10 licences, Total Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences, Mixed area of both Smoking and Non-Smoking Pubs 10 Licences
    Each licence would be priced accordingly to desirability and each Pub could then bid for the type of licence that they want. Obviously all the establishments that want either all smoking or areas of both smoking and non-smoking would then have to meet the required standards of fume ventilation and extraction before being allowed to open to the public.
    Not exactly rocket science, but obviously well beyond the brain capacity of our current government. But just think of the amount of new jobs that could have been created as result of having to implement these possible new measures that they could have lauded about.
    Oh well, I suppose that it's back to the politics of knee-jerking....!

Do you really think this would work in Cyprus!!! remember smoking had been banned for years in Cyprus. It was the law that all Restaurants , Bars etc. and public areas must be non -smoking, but they may provide a smoking area provided it is well ventilated, they had there chance and didn't do it. Which is one of the reasons why the law has now been enforced.

Posted By: DAC

  • mouse wrote:

    Do you really think this would work in Cyprus!!!

No, not in a million years. Why worry about a licence for smoking when you can open a majpr shopping mall with no licence.....!
But then I wasn't talking about Cyprus, I was talking about the UK.

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

I know of 5 establishments that are 'smoking' again, unfortunately not my local............................. yet.

Posted By: dawnnett

Andrew , I know of more then 5 in the UK that close the doors and the Ashtrys come out The Publicans have said they have to break the law to make a living But , the people love it ......A real Boozer Dawn

Posted By: Richard.G

I'd take the stance of someone on CL if I happened to be in a bar where they allowed smoking. Refuse to pay the bill. It worked for them. :lol:

Posted By: mouse

  • Richard.G wrote:
    I'd take the stance of someone on CL if I happened to be in a bar where they allowed smoking.
    Refuse to pay the bill. It worked for them. :lol:

Good idea !! and then inform the authorities.

Posted By: dawnnett

I Bet some on here ...Are Fun at partys :roll: Dawn

Posted By: stevecroad

  • dawnnett wrote:
    I Bet some on here ...Are Fun at partys :roll:
    Dawn

They probably don't go to partys because people may smoke. :wink:
Steve Croad
PS...If smoking is so bad for everyone, why isn't it illegal? Because of the huge amounts of dosh the government get! :money:

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • dawnnett wrote:
    I Bet some on here ...Are Fun at partys :roll:
    Dawn

Oh yes the fun, the joy, the sheer exuberance of breathing in other peoples foul stench!
People who don't appreciate, and see the real pleasure of that must, by definition, be right bores!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • dawnnett wrote:
      I Bet some on here ...Are Fun at partys :roll:
      Dawn

    Oh yes the fun, the joy, the sheer exuberance of breathing in other peoples foul stench!
    People who don't appreciate, and see the real pleasure of that must, by definition, be right bores!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

:sleep:

Posted By: dawnnett

Bubble and own little world comes to mind ....sad little world that is Get real. if folk want to smoke ,then thats up to them ranting on a forum wont change a bloody thing :roll: Dawn

Posted By: mouse

  • dawnnett wrote:
    Bubble and own little world comes to mind ....sad little world that is
    Get real. if folk want to smoke ,then thats up to them
    ranting on a forum wont change a bloody thing :roll:
    Dawn

So you don't care if you do affect other peoples health or make them seriously ill because of smoking in enclosed areas, at least it shows how smokers really feel as long as they can have a fag they don't care about anyone else. :cry:

Posted By: Richard.G

I shouldn't worry Mouse, you don't have to look far to see what Dawn really thinks about smoking :wink:
  • dawnnett wrote:
    Just thought id let everyone know .....
    Im still Not smoking neither is my Daughter
    Im pleased that i am on my way, But im more proud of my Daughter quitting, i didnt want her to go through life as i did a smoker
    Ill keep you all updated , as i think it can be moral support to anyone who are trying to stop
    If i can ...was a 40 a day sometimes more !!
    Dawn

  • dawnnett wrote:
    Well
    , where do i begin
    I can now walk up hill's , and not be out of breath
    my skin looks better
    my teeth are whiter
    i can have a good laugh ...without coughing
    my house smells fresher
    iv put a bit of weight on , but still size 14 so not to botherd there
    And iv got a few hundred £££ in my tin


Posted By: cansweet

Well, anyone that has no respect for their own health, would hardly have respect for other people's health. Thing is, i would love to meet one of you people who light up illegally, it would really make my day, and rest assured that person would not be smoking for quite some time. Of course you have a choice to smoke or not smoke. It just goes to show how bloody ignorant you are to decide to smoke. Enough said.

Posted By: journeyman

cansweet is that a threat. And i thought you were saying smokers were the twats.

Posted By: dawnnett

Richard , havent you realy got better things to do :roll: than to drawl through all my posts Yes your right I Dont smoke now ....After smoking 40 per day for a long time i packed in But if i feel like a fag i will have one , ..i may have had 10 in the last 5 months But i am still on the side of the smokers, if youve never smoked you dont know how hard it is to pack it in Its been something that as gone together for years fags/ pubs Those of you that smoke puff away to your enjoyment Dawn

Posted By: Richard.G

It took me about 2 minutes to find your post. I've got a good memory. When people totally contradict themselves they ought to bear in mind what they posted previously. :lol: At least you can laugh now at those fun parties instead of choking. :lol:

Posted By: dawnnett

Richard, I was NOT contraditing myself ,,,read my posts properly !! I was pointing out that This smoking Ban in pubs is wrong OK Put Bans in Restaurants, Hospitals etc where its not fair on non smokers ..But to Ban it in pub's Bingo halls where drinkers and smokers have mixed for years ..is just bloody barmey And iv never chocked at Parties , smoking or not smoking iv always had a good time and enjoyed myself ...you should try it :lol: Dawn xx :lol:

Posted By: stevecroad

  • journeyman wrote:
    cansweet is that a threat. And i thought you were saying smokers were the twats.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Nice One!
Steve Croad

Posted By: Richard.G

  • dawnnett wrote:
    Richard,
    I was NOT contraditing myself ,,,read my posts properly !!
    I was pointing out that This smoking Ban in pubs is wrong
    OK Put Bans in Restaurants, Hospitals etc where its not fair on non smokers ..But to Ban it in pub's Bingo halls where drinkers and smokers have mixed for years ..is just bloody barmey
    And iv never chocked at Parties , smoking or not smoking iv always had a good time and enjoyed myself ...you should try it :lol:
    Dawn xx :lol:

There you go again contradicting yourself. You see you said in your post extolling the virtues of not smoking that you could now have a good laugh without coughing but now you say that wasn't true at all.
Dear dear me. :roll:
Still at least you haven't got grey skin and brown teeth anymore so that has to be a bonus.
It's good of you to show concern for my 'joie de vivre' but I have great times and enjoy myself but make sure I'm never in the company of smokers so all is good in my world thanks. :lol:

Posted By: dawnnett

Richard You seem to be a very argumentive Man (God help your wife) I dont want to post to you anymore, You are just making yourself look like A big woman My Husband cant belive that men post such tittle tettle dont bother answering im not interested ps my profile photo pvoves you dont have grey skin and brown teeth , i was smoking 40 plus then Dawn

Posted By: evo

Well Richard the amount of posts you make and the way you conduct yourself on here i can see you have great times and enjoy yourself. Your life must be "edge of the seat stuff" Steve.

Posted By: Steve - SJD

Is there any point to this thread now? If it is just going to deteriorate further in to personal jibes and threats then it has run its course. Cheers Steve

Posted By: dawnnett

I couldnt agree more Steve People dont like being wound up time for a fag ..me thinks :lol: Dawn

Posted By: LynSab

  • Steve - SJD wrote:
    Is there any point to this thread now?
    If it is just going to deteriorate further in to personal jibes and threats then
    it has run its course.
    Cheers
    Steve

No point at all, instead of discussing the no smoking ban in Cyprus its just mostly become a personal insult thread, unbelievable, very boring to the rest, and not the reason I started it. Its like a game of tennis that never finishes!
I would like a big line drawn under it seen as I was the OP. We all know peoples opinions and being repeated again and again does,nt make them any stronger on either side of the smoking divide. So perhaps its wise to .....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRCPQFVWrRE

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

Sorry if this thread appears to be getting so boring for everyone but if some of the pro's didn't keep coming back with such rediculous statements ......... BTW, I see Wetherspoons have just announced that their pre tax profits have increased by 17.5%! How can that possibly be, when other pubs in the UK are closing down at an alarming rate, solely we are constantly told, because of the smoking ban! All their pubs must be the ones that Dawn refers to, you know the ones that close their doors, bring out the ashtrays and let all the jolly people in!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    Sorry if this thread appears to be getting so boring for everyone but if some of the pro's didn't keep coming back with such rediculous statements .........
    BTW, I see Wetherspoons have just announced that their pre tax profits have increased by 17.5%!
    How can that possibly be, when other pubs in the UK are closing down at an alarming rate, solely we are constantly told, because of the smoking ban!
    All their pubs must be the ones that Dawn refers to, you know the ones that close their doors, bring out the ashtrays and let all the jolly people in!!
    :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ahhhhh Wetherspoons. Great catering for the masses................ if you like cheap and bland fayre in a semi chaotic environment. Don't forget your wooden spoon and/or table number :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • cansweet wrote:
    Well, anyone that has no respect for their own health, would hardly have respect for other people's health. Thing is, i would love to meet one of you people who light up illegally, it would really make my day, and rest assured that person would not be smoking for quite some time.
    Of course you have a choice to smoke or not smoke. It just goes to show how bloody ignorant you are to decide to smoke. Enough said.

Keyboard warrior or just a knuckle head ?

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • Andrew Brooks wrote:
    • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
      Sorry if this thread appears to be getting so boring for everyone but if some of the pro's didn't keep coming back with such rediculous statements .........
      BTW, I see Wetherspoons have just announced that their pre tax profits have increased by 17.5%!
      How can that possibly be, when other pubs in the UK are closing down at an alarming rate, solely we are constantly told, because of the smoking ban!
      All their pubs must be the ones that Dawn refers to, you know the ones that close their doors, bring out the ashtrays and let all the jolly people in!!
      :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Ahhhhh Wetherspoons. Great catering for the masses................ if you like cheap and bland fayre in a semi chaotic environment. Don't forget your wooden spoon and/or table number :lol:

As you may have determined Andrew, I never forget my wooden spoon!!!
:wink: :lol:

Posted By: Andrew Brooks

  • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
    • Andrew Brooks wrote:
      • Woodrow Why?at wrote:
        Sorry if this thread appears to be getting so boring for everyone but if some of the pro's didn't keep coming back with such rediculous statements .........
        BTW, I see Wetherspoons have just announced that their pre tax profits have increased by 17.5%!
        How can that possibly be, when other pubs in the UK are closing down at an alarming rate, solely we are constantly told, because of the smoking ban!
        All their pubs must be the ones that Dawn refers to, you know the ones that close their doors, bring out the ashtrays and let all the jolly people in!!
        :lol: :lol: :lol:

      Ahhhhh Wetherspoons. Great catering for the masses................ if you like cheap and bland fayre in a semi chaotic environment. Don't forget your wooden spoon and/or table number :lol:

    As you may have determined Andrew, I never forget my wooden spoon!!!
    :wink: :lol:

Ain't that the truth :lol:

Posted By: pav

reckon its gone on about 18 pages too long. i,ve been out of it a while because a lot of my time has been taken up with the bi-annual fog knitting competition over at cape greco. it was entering that or keep some of you company here :lol: paul.

Posted By: Woodrow Why?at

  • pav wrote:
    reckon its gone on about 18 pages too long.
    i,ve been out of it a while because a lot of my time has been taken up with the bi-annual fog knitting competition over at cape greco.
    it was entering that or keep some of you company here :lol:
    paul.

Blast, missed it!
I always find that so entertaining, why wasn't there more information on the dates it was on?
Do you know who won?


[ ADVERTS: UK Stores Delivering To Cyprus | Find eBay Misspellings - Grab A Bargain! ]



Viewing Cyprus Eastern Forum Archive - Lo-Fi Version | Visit Cyprus Eastern Forum - Full Version | Questions?

TOP TIP: BUYING PROPERTY IN CYPRUS? PLEASE ENSURE THAT YOU SEEK INDEPENDANT LEGAL ADVICE FIRST.
Cyprus forum covering Kapparis, Protaras, Pernera, Agia Napa, Agia Thekla, Paralimni, Larnaca, Oroklini, Pervolia & surrounding areas
Please note that the views expressed on this forum are those of the author and may not reflect the views of the management.