Comments on: Smoking bans stoke global warming?

By: StopSmokerMen

StopSmokerMen — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:13:45 +0000

The smoking ban is the right decision, smoking is very harmful. Not only that people who smoke, harms not only himself. Passive smoking, when a pair of cigarette smoke inhaled by smokers not even be a very harmful. I think that is very correct and vzveshannoe decision. Especially in bars and and restaurants. Because of the habits of one affects many.

By: dbwb

dbwb — Fri, 02 May 2008 08:26:17 +0000

Eileen wrote: Putting the smokers outside also means more people dropping cig butts on the ground. Even if ashtrays are available, smokers tend to just toss the butts, often still burning, on the ground. Someone should do an environmental study on the effect of all the butts…especially the ones tossed by the tree-huggers.

Perhaps they could also do a study on discarded gum and fast food packaging. Seems to a lot of those (and they’re not prohibited indoors).

By: EileenB

EileenB — Thu, 01 May 2008 19:31:30 +0000

Putting the smokers outside also means more people dropping cig butts on the ground. Even if ashtrays are available, smokers tend to just toss the butts, often still burning, on the ground. Someone should do an environmental study on the effect of all the butts…especially the ones tossed by the tree-huggers.

By: Greener.Ideal » Smoking Bans Worsening Energy Consumption?

Greener.Ideal » Smoking Bans Worsening Energy Consumption? — Thu, 01 May 2008 13:40:08 +0000

[...] that in colder climates, smokers are provided with a heat source for their smoking area which is often electric heat? In some places, like Scandinavia, some restaurant owners even go as far as to internally heat the [...]

By: DaveA

DaveA — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:03:18 +0000

CassieB: Thank you for your correction you were quite right to point it out, thanks.

By: Peter Barnes

Peter Barnes — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:48:20 +0000

Pehaps we have gone past the point where facts matter.

http://www.forestonline.org/output/Page1 80.asp

Take away the hysteria, and the smoking ban, is just another manifistation of the nanny state.True there are people who are repulsed by cigarette smoke, so the decisions should be left to the individual establishments and members.

Trouble is that would have to have local decisions, and our decisions are now made many miles away from the places they are enacted.

By: Cassie B

Cassie B — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:39:44 +0000

DavidA, being an American pendant, I noticed that you have spelled caffeine incorrectly.

By: DaveA

DaveA — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:12:20 +0000

Margaret Hogge: I would suggest the Mona Lisa Restaurant “panders” to the wishes of their customers. If there was not a demand for smoking in bars and restaurants they would close them down and go completely non smoking. With regards to drugs, is not alcohol a drug, caffine too? Do you drink Margaret or just have a soft drink? I can only assume you are a hypocrite. How many people have smoked 8 cigarettes and felt the need to go and hit someone, unlike beer, whereby drinking 8 pints/pots just might do the trick? Also is it not the definition fascism imposing by law and deed your value system on others? “Pandering” to smokers, must democrats would agree, is far preferable to a pencil moustache, swastika and a desire to invade Poland. Hitler was the first man to ban smoking in public places in 1942.

By: David B (UK)

David B (UK) — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:38:24 +0000

Sarah writes - Passive Smoke & Global Warming/Climate Change will go down in history as the two biggest money making scams of all time.

Succinct and true. The perpetrators of these scams rely on the naivety and fanaticism of the ‘Useful Stupid’ to line their pockets. Unfortunately, these fools vastly outnumber those of us who have not succumbed to the relentless brain washing……..

By: Margaret Hogge

Margaret Hogge — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:23:50 +0000

One wonders how good the fare is at the Mona Lisa Restaurant when management feels the need to pander to patrons’ drug habits in order hold them.