A non-smoker writes
Thursday, December 6, 2007 
Prior to and after the introduction of the smoking ban in Ireland, I made several trips to Dublin. I also embarked on what can best be described as an extended pub crawl from Waterford to Galway and beyond. One of the things that struck me was how, post-ban, previously tolerant non-smokers developed an extraordinary sensitivity to even a whiff of smoke.
The same, I believe, is true in the UK. This is bad news because it suggests that most non-smokers (the majority) are unlikely to welcome even a small amendment to the smoking ban. On the other hand, the following email offers hope that some can see how foolhardy (and counter-productive) the current legislation is:
I am a non smoker, but I have looked up your website for a strange reason. I feel that the recent legislation may bring two sides of the smoking debate together to a certain degree.
As a non smoker, I have been very irritated by the emergence of large numbers of smokers from areas where they previously smoked, to the front of shops, cinemas, cafes etc as a result of the new anti-smoking legislation. This makes it an unpleasant experience for me to go to any of these places.
I am sure that the smokers themselves would rather not have to stand outside of these places, but would rather return to wherever they smoked before. I cannot understand the COMPLETE ban on indoor smoking which prevents the use of smokers rooms, so that both smokers and non smokers can enjoy their rights without interfering with each other.
In fact, looking through the legislation, it would appear that even if a factory went to the trouble of providing a shed, outside in a yard, for smokers, that shed would be an enclosed area on work premesis, and therefore it would be illegal to smoke inside it. This is clearly a poorly thought out piece of legislation.
Reader Comments (14)
I know someone who used to smoke with no problems whatsoever. He quit 20 years ago, but was still tolerant of other people's smoke. Even went to pubs and enjoyed himself with no problems at all. Then he went to live in the USA and started hanging out with a bunch of puritans. The last time I saw him, he visited my home. Given his increasing intolerance, I opened a window and sat by it to have a cigarette, so as not to cause conflict. I was smoking a roll-up - which churns out a far thinner and less pervading stream of smoke than a pre-made cigarette. After a few minutes, he complained that 'the place is full of smoke!' - I couldn't see that myself, but opened a door to clear the air (just didn't want to have a conflict). When I returned to the living room, he was bright red in the face, and had put on one of those masks that you buy in DIY stores. Obviously he carried these around with him, because he certainly didn't get it from me. Since then he has ordered me (yes, 'ordered')not to smoke in my own home when non-smokers are present. As if it was any of his business!
How can this be anything but a psychosomatic response, brought on by brainwashing from his new 'crowd'?
My solution is that I simply won't have him in my house again. I will not be dictated to in my own home, nor am I prepared to try and have a civil and mature conversation with someone who wears a mask in my presence. It's like being on the set of Planet of the Apes.
It's a great shame, because we used to get on so well. He is now thoroughly corrupted and as intolerant as they come. He is also restricted in where he can be and who he can spend time with - because of his (new and never before seen) deep anxiety about smoke.
What a world these antis have created.
Stop the world, I want to get off.
I work long shifts in a facility, where smoking
has always been banned, except, during designated breaks, and in a one area, which was a large, well ventilated, porta-cabin.
Smokers, the only people who used the cabin were at least kept, somewhat, protected from the elements.
Since legislation was intoduced in Scotland, under the umbrella of Health and Safety, the only protection smokers have is from, what can only be described as, a bike shed, with little shelter from wind, rain or snow.
My question is what thought process,if any, brought about the 50% rule i.e. less than 50% enclosed ?
This is rapidly becoming a coutry, where freedom of choice is being systematically eroded and even our Politicians have lost the freedom, to stand up and defend our rights, for fear of being excluded.
I take it that, obesity, alcohol, freedom of movement, free speech etc. will shortly all come under the scrutiny of the junk scientists and lobbyists.
The 50% crap started in Ireland, Don.
Scotland copied Ireland.
England copied Scotland. So did Wales. So did Northern Ireland.
Send a note of thanks to Michael Martin.
Our Myspace site has grown to over 4500 friends and since late October,we have received a steady stream of emails from non smokers who whilst not wanting to return to how it used to be,would welcome indoor smoking rooms and some positively outraged at how smokers are being treated.
This is a witch-hunt and be sure it is the thin end of the wedge. On the F2C site, a most interesting saga about Bluewater shopping centre in Kent - where customers smoking outside (that is, outside) may be escorted off the site. By very satisfied staff apparently!
Another retail saga relates toMarks & Spencer in Green Park W1 who have elected to have a larger-than-necessary sign on their front door. It has the added sentence: 'If you see anyone smoking in these premises please report it immediately to the manager'. I was so furious that I nicely found a sensible looking member of staff and said how disappointed I was with M&S to see such a notice. How many times, for example, had she seen someone light up in Boots the chemist next door, or the local cinema, library, civic centre, church? No? Exactly. Very disappointing that M&S have fallen for the propaganda. As a long-term customer, I thoroughly objected and would she kindly pass it on. She said, with some enthusiasm I have to say, that she most certainly would. And smiled.
All logic has flown out of the window with this process. Someone blasted this 'law' through on false science and emotive badgering. Probably a personal need to control (as in the virulent and false advertising slogans: "England is smoke-free". No, it isn't and what about the trade descriptions act?!!) It wasn't even in the labour manifesto. The pledge was for a partial ban and not this. If only an opposition party would make a stand for a return to sanity and civil liberty to give some honour and dignity back to adults who choose some tobacco, they would earn millions of votes.
Isn't any one of them interested: a) in some decent adult justice? and b) in 14-20m votes?
Makes no sense at all. Insulting actually to our intelligence and makes the lot of them look very gullible indeed. Are they really fit to tell the rest of us what to do? Doesn't look like it.
My work takes me and my partner to schools. We both smoke and try to be careful about not smelling of smoke by spraying ourselves with Oust before entering the building. A few weeks ago my partner was approached by a caretaker and told that a parent had complained to the Head that she suspected my partner of being drunk because she thought she could smell alcohol on him which meant he had to explain what the smell was and why!
On a more recent occasion I was in the staff toilets at another school, getting changed in a cubicle, when the main door to the toilets opened and I heard someone say in a loud voice "Pooh, someone is smoking in here". This person even got someone else to come in and say she could smell it to back her story. (obviously the smell lingers on the clothes). My said accuser (who I never saw) then went to the head and told them somebody was smoking in the toilets, the head then going to my partner and asking him, saying as a complaint had been received he had to ask (fair enough). My partner responded that there was no way that either of us would do that.
These incidents have left me feeling totally embarrassed and humiliated and (as my partner says paranoid).
Does anyone have a suggestion of dealing with this should the situation arise again as the worry is making my life miserable.
I know I should just get on with it but this ban is increasingly affecting people trying to earn a living.
Yes, it's open season on smokers, isn't it? My work takes me into people's homes and I'm waiting for the first complaint that I "smell of smoke". I could retaliate that my nostrils are offended by the smell of dogs, dirt and cooking smells and my sight offended by excruciating taste in decor!!
I think the way to deal with accusations of "smelling of smoke" is to politely but firmly point out that this is not a criminal offence and that tolerance is what enables us all to live together in society. If the day comes when smokers are not deemed fit for work because they "smell of smoke" then it's time to leave the country before society breaks down entirely! I think that going to extreme lengths to disguise the "smell of smoke" is to pander to an unreasonable expectation.
What is wrong with common sense? If a shed was built with a large sign 'for smokers only' how can anybody seriously complain?
I really don't think we should be spraying ourselves with Oust. Good grief! I remember so fondly the family gatherings when I was a child; the wonderful cigars and fragrance of tobacco. Good tobacoo is a fragrance, and so is a really subtle nice perfume, which gets into the clothes, hair and person quite effectively. They go together well and, provided we wash - as most people do these days - and keep our clothes clean, we should be vaguely acceptable! Cheap tobacco maybe something else. Don't forget this IS a witch-hunt, and let's keep some dignity in choosing to smoke. I make a point of telling people now, without apology,
that I do. Very pleased to see Joni Mitchell on the AM programme last Sunday, described by Andrew Marr as 'a passionate smoker'. She had a fag on during the interview, looked wonderful and said "no apologies - this is me". Good woman. What a rotten, controlling and guilt-soaked society these small minds have created. I won't buy into it.
Don't be fooled into thinking that the ANTIS want to get rid of smoking. They want to get rid of smokers, any way they can. That is why there is no compromise from these criminals.
They'll wreck your working life, social life, home life, your sense of personal choice and freedom, and then laugh and sneer all the way to the bank. Despicable, Nazi scum who can never be reasoned with.
The anti fag brigade are having a field day now this law has been passed. They are well pleased that this government has taken away our choice to smoke in certain places, the fact that they agree with and love what the government have done makes them tunnel visioned. Don't they realise that by letting the government get away with picking and choosing what we can or cannot do is paving the way for them to completely rule our lives.
I wonder how the members of the anti fag brigade who overeat will feel when the government turns its attentions to the overweight (and they will) and starts banning the sale in cafes & restaurants of anything containing more than 10 calories?
As a smoker I did sympathise with non smokers inasmuch that THEY didn't have a choice to socialise or work in a smoke free place. The answer was so simple - GIVE PEOPLE THE CHOICE!!
We have a duty to ourselves to oppose any ban that takes away someones choice on how they live their lives - whether we agree with it or not.
I think your preception of growing intolerance is correct. However, with most anti-smokers it is out of sight and out of mind. Smokers need to start clubs with no employees and no hot food or alcohol served: just coffee and cakes. Apart from the lunatic fringe, most people would find it very difficult to object to this and draconian clampdowns would not get much public sympathy; just as most people would find it difficult to walk 30 yards down a windy, deserted station platform and then tell you to stop smoking. This is why it was so important to ASH that no indoor meeting place was exempt from the ban - not even clubs with no employees. Otherwise a stable equilibrium would have been reached where everyone is happy. And that wouldn't do.
The Anti Fag brigade are really pathetic. What about Freedom? Each to his own and leave us poor smokers alone? We carry our own ashtrays around and DONT litter any street so anti fag brigade please do leave us alone. You may well drink but at least its your choice.
Move to Wales...we may have a smoking ban, but most country pubs have smoking lock-ins, reminds me of the good old days SIGH