I understand that mate and I am really sorry for your loss. Somkers know the risks though and your comments are just going to put their backs up, commendable & understandable though it is.peoffrey said:SWP's back said:DPn't be such a soft sod. It's fuck all to do with you what smokers spend their disposable income on. I don't tell you to eat less pies and give the money instead to "Save the Panda" do I. You're on the WUM now.
I watched my heavy smoking Father die of cancer and I don't want to see anyone else go down that road regardless of who they are. And there's a small Charitable trust in his name for the one cause close to his heart where he lived.
What I've advocated all along is that people are well aware of where the smoker's toilets are and if you want you avoid them it's pretty simple. If you make the decision to endanger your own health by smoking or voluntarily placing yourself in the vicinity of smokers then that's their prerogative. Where that's not the case i.e. if there was only one toilet, smokers should refrain from smoking then. I've been consistent throughout. Both smokers and non-smokers should be accommodated where possible but if it's not (rare), non-smokers win out for the reason you cited.peoffrey said:Why should we "let 'em be" when what they're doing affects the health and comfort of others? If they've got money to burn (literally) then they can put it to good causes like Charity instead of destroying their own lives. Most smokers I know don't even like smoking. They can't give up.
mxpx said:Allen Carr's Easy Way to Stop Smoking.
Read it, these threads will be no more if very little!
Yes and smokers are also well AWARE that you cant smoke in the toilets..Skashion said:What I've advocated all along is that people are well aware of where the smoker's toilets are and if you want you avoid them it's pretty simple. If you make the decision to endanger your own health by smoking or voluntarily placing yourself in the vicinity of smokers then that's their prerogative. Where that's not the case i.e. if there was only one toilet, smokers should refrain from smoking then. I've been consistent throughout. Both smokers and non-smokers should be accommodated where possible but if it's not (rare), non-smokers win out for the reason you cited.peoffrey said:Why should we "let 'em be" when what they're doing affects the health and comfort of others? If they've got money to burn (literally) then they can put it to good causes like Charity instead of destroying their own lives. Most smokers I know don't even like smoking. They can't give up.
Alright, so you think smokers shouldn't smoke. I think non-smokers can prattle off to another toilet and leave smokers in peace. Here endeth the debate.The cookie monster said:Yes and smokers are also well AWARE that you cant smoke in the toilets..
I just dont get your argument,our football club m.c.f.c state no smoking in the bogs,is that hard to follow...Skashion said:Alright, so you think smokers shouldn't smoke. I think non-smokers can prattle off to another toilet and leave smokers in peace. Here endeth the debate.The cookie monster said:Yes and smokers are also well AWARE that you cant smoke in the toilets..
Skashion said:What I've advocated all along is that people are well aware of where the smoker's toilets are and if you want you avoid them it's pretty simple. If you make the decision to endanger your own health by smoking or voluntarily placing yourself in the vicinity of smokers then that's their prerogative. Where that's not the case i.e. if there was only one toilet, smokers should refrain from smoking then. I've been consistent throughout. Both smokers and non-smokers should be accommodated where possible but if it's not (rare), non-smokers win out for the reason you cited.
The cookie monster said:Yes and smokers are also well AWARE that you cant smoke in the toilets..Skashion said:What I've advocated all along is that people are well aware of where the smoker's toilets are and if you want you avoid them it's pretty simple. If you make the decision to endanger your own health by smoking or voluntarily placing yourself in the vicinity of smokers then that's their prerogative. Where that's not the case i.e. if there was only one toilet, smokers should refrain from smoking then. I've been consistent throughout. Both smokers and non-smokers should be accommodated where possible but if it's not (rare), non-smokers win out for the reason you cited.peoffrey said:Why should we "let 'em be" when what they're doing affects the health and comfort of others? If they've got money to burn (literally) then they can put it to good causes like Charity instead of destroying their own lives. Most smokers I know don't even like smoking. They can't give up.