Profile
lpetersson
Page Summary
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
cyberglamour.livejournal.com - (no subject)- zenmeisterin.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- gigib.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- nibber.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- kuchisake-onna.livejournal.com - *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
- topuzz.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- http://users.livejournal.com/___irot/ - (no subject)
- nibber.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- phantomsophie.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- fuzball.livejournal.com - (no subject)
- cbr-paul.livejournal.com - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: by
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:55 pm (UTC)...lights up...
I know i should stop...but i can't..;(
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:19 pm (UTC)I've been quit for almost 4 months after smoking for just over 10 years and instead of feeling that awful whistful feeling like I'm missing something, I now realise that quitting really was the best thing I ever did.
All you got to do is re-train your mind.
Think of it, if you quit, you too can join the ranks of the pious ex-smokers ;)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 12:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:53 pm (UTC)In the meanwhile, I'll enjoy being able to go to a pub and not have to endure smoke.
And maybe more pubs will get beergardens... Great for the summertime...
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 10:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:02 pm (UTC):-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:07 pm (UTC)I'm very pleased with it, too!
And I don't think it will make less people go out to clubs and pubs. Everything I've heard from Irish people suggests the opposite. People get used to it. I've even heard a lot of smokers being quite pleased about it, because it's made them smoke less.
Like I said in another discussion - if I knew that me eating chocolate next to other people was harmfull to their health, I'd eat my chocolate at home.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 08:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 09:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 09:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 11:58 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 11:40 am (UTC):p
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 11:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 08:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 12:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:02 pm (UTC)I wonder if parliament will make an amendment to the bill:
"Smoking is banned outside on warm, sunny days. So that non-smokers may go outside."
:-p
I am actually glad with the move, but wish there was a decision that would make both parties happy. But it seems to both sides that it wouldn't be good enough.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 01:51 pm (UTC)as for me i will be outside
freezing to death
dying a slow and painful death...
which i will probably enjoy...
:-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 01:52 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 01:55 pm (UTC)sllep trough the winter
and start smoking again as soon as it's warm
....
:-)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-14 11:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 09:47 am (UTC)My lungs, my hot water bill and my washing machine will all rejoice!
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
(I believe one of the "designated smoking room" criteria was that it must have its own separate self-contained air conditioning system.)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 10:00 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 11:28 am (UTC)it will probably result in the death of the dev, but still. it won't be the death of me...
*HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 01:04 pm (UTC)anyway, whatever happened to basic human rights? it should be the choice of the venue whether they become non smoking, not an enforced blanket policy. i bet if they had the choice, all the places you like would flip the bird and only the crappy chains of bars would take on the idea. like this shit with not serving food and smoking in the same establishment - thats just gonna make binge drinking worse! i dont have to eat when i'm wrecked, but i do because its sensible. but i wouldnt neccesarily leave the bar!
and the same thing will just happen that happened in NY, people will mostly go to the semi-legal clubs - unfortunate for you, you'll be sitting outside the smokers room all night trying to catch a glimpse of your friends!
this is not america. we are a always few years behind them in most socially spasticated faddy ways - see personal trainers, obesity etc, we follow in all their stupid ideas. but our national hatred of smoking had not get reached a peak where this opinion is the majority. its just dumb and a lot of businesses will suffer too. having worked at many bars, i'd be bricking it if i was your favourite landlord right now.
i fucking hate this topic! now go to weatherspoons and sit in the no bloody smoking area
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 01:25 pm (UTC)My right not to breathe your smoke is a basic human right...
And as you can see from some of the other comments, my friends will also be enjoying the nice pleasant smoke free environment :)
Now go outside where you can still smoke.
Enjoy the rain and/or cold :)
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 01:46 pm (UTC)very true. and i agree that everyone should get what they want. but this is the opposite. it is penalising a large group of people, which, health issues aside for a monent, is just as bad as the other. and good air conditioning can protect your delicate ass appropriately :)
however, does this mean that you will only be attending non smoking clubs after the ban has been introduced? or not walking down a main road for fear of the fumes until they ban cars? i think not.
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 01:56 pm (UTC)2) Good air conditioning can never protect you from smoke inside a club.
3) As there will only be non-smoking clubs after the ban takes effect, yes... :)
4) I would welcome a ban on cars...
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 02:05 pm (UTC)Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 03:05 pm (UTC)To rebel against a law that protect people from the negative effect of other people doing is just for the sake of it.
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 03:46 pm (UTC)well, good, i'm glad you agree.
but my point is thats not the idea - which, is in esscence good - that is objectionable. it is the way in which it is carried out. there will always be people who disagree, and will go about their business as usual. but the moral majority gets on its high horse and stomps about and rather than being fair in excersising policies such as these, sneaks them through to the detriment of general free will.
just like the banning of smoking on all hospital grounds, including mental facilities. what about the inpatients who have very little else to hold on to? and who are you to determine just how that will effect such people? because in supporting such a blanket ban, you are effectively saying this is ok, and opening doors for the world to get a whole lot more fascist.
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 04:48 pm (UTC)What about the right of going in a club without having to endure the thick smokey air (not mentioning people with asthma), the burning eyes, the stinking hair and clothes afterwards?
In my opinion, it's all a problem of habit. We are accustomed to the fact that it's possible to smoke in clubs and now that we realize that this is not that good for non smokers, people complain.
I could understand a TOTAL ban, like "you can't smoke in this country", which (while welcomed by me) would be a bit strict. But smokers are not prohibited to smoke, just not to smoke near people who don't.
What's fascist in this?
Do we call fascist a law that forbid us to keep silet in a cinema? Do we get angry if someone tells us to turn off a mobile during a movie? No, it's common sense, it's always been like this (before the mobiles it was just the general silence).
Not to smoke around non-smokers is common sense. Problem is, the majority of people lack it, so enter the law and I'm fully for it.
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 05:21 pm (UTC)so then you can't play football right?
if i'm in a club and someone asks me not to smoke near then, i'll move, if they ask politely, same as with anything else. if they give me lip, i'll tell them to move, amd due to my general stature they do. but when it gets to the same thing on the street, then what do you do?
if clubs want to continue to allow smokers, then they should be allowed to, providing adequate air conditioning and appropriate areas. most clubs are a health hazard in themselves anyways, and no-one ever objected to the concept of a VIP room before, so why not one for smokers?
you always stand on the side which you agree. but to be so high and mighty about something which will actually affect so many people, their temprament when drunk and their pleasure as a free citizen is unfair just because the law permits you to be right.
the same laws which people only use in their favour, not for example if they wanna smoke weed on the street, or do any drug.
should we also ban alcohol as it promotes drunken brawling, which is far more dangerous to the individual than passive smoking? you cannot change a culture so quickly, and the most dangerous offenders are the ones most likely to respond negatively.
and considering i was working on designing a way to make my fave hang out non-smoker friendly quite a few years ago, despite the fact i'm a drug takin, law oblivous, fag ash lil, i think i've spoken enough about this topic to exhaust my puny smoke filled lungs.
Re: *HISSSSSSSSSSSSS*
Date: 2006-02-15 05:40 pm (UTC)so then you can't play football right?
Doesn't make sense, the difference here isn't the same. One thing is to be hit by the occasiobal flying football, another is to enter a closed place full of smoke. The flying ball is, in fact, occasional, the smoke is think, heavy and persistent.
But I guess you aren't in the mood of going on with the discussion and I won't push it.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 01:51 pm (UTC)And I can't help noticing how, as usual, smokers (well, unpolite smokers, that's it) complain first about their supposed rights, forgetting how this actively affects non-smokers like us. On the other hand, I know several polite smokers who wouldn't even think to smoke when non-smokers are about (not without asking, at least) but sadly, they are a minority.
Clubs are everything but empty here, anyway. And if some people decide they won't go to a club because they can't smoke... Well, it's natural selection and we don't want them anyway.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 05:33 pm (UTC)and smoking will diminish culturally anyways, as most things do. its already happening. culturally, bars were established as a venue in which to drink and smoke.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 05:01 pm (UTC)i'm curious to see how they make provision for smoking either inside or outside at electrowerks.
cool.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-15 05:19 pm (UTC)When I was in LA they didn't let people out to smoke, and I only came across one club where the had a small outdoors area where people could smoke.
It wasn't a problem at all really.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-16 03:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-16 08:55 am (UTC)Fair play to the idea but surely individual pubs should be allowed to decide wether they want to ban it or not!
no subject
Date: 2006-02-17 11:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-17 12:15 pm (UTC)