Town used as "giant ashtray"
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 The Oxford Mail has just asked me to write 250 words in response to the news that Cherwell district council has started fining smokers £75 if they are caught dropping fag butts in the street. The council says it is sick of smokers using the towns as a "giant ashtray".
Simon Clark
Here's my response:
I would never condone anyone who drops litter, be it sweet wrappers, chewing gum or cigarette butts. But if you’re going to target litter louts don’t discriminate against one section of the public. That’s unfair.
Instead of threatening smokers with fines and other penalties, councils should work with them to improve the environment. Forest would happily promote any positive initiative to reduce cigarette litter as long as it doesn’t become yet another excuse to berate smokers for their habit.
Instead of stigmatising consumers, councils should also work with cigarette bin and portable ashtray manufacturers to provide solutions to the problem.
Unfortunately I have heard that some councils are reluctant to install or give planning permission for cigarette bins because they don’t want to “normalise” smoking.
That’s ridiculous. Like it or not, tobacco is a legal product. There are eleven million smokers in the UK and thanks to the smoking ban an increasing number are smoking in the street and other outdoor areas.
One idea that would address this problem is an amendment that would allow designated smoking rooms in pubs and clubs. Overnight many of the smokers who are currently forced to stand outside would go indoors, taking their litter with them.
Before councils blame smokers for turning their town into a “giant ashtray” they should lobby government for a change in the law on public smoking. Only then will we see how serious they are about tackling the problem of cigarette litter.
Reader Comments (37)
So a shiny plastic sweet-wrapper's okay, but a biodegradable roll-up dimp [weight 0.1g] will make me a criminal. I'm sick of useless councils appropriating my money to spend on prejudice-driven petty-minded bullying whilst struggling to fulfill their core function of emptying the bins.
Perhaps you should start a campaign for smokers to package up all their butts, and mail them to their local councils, if they don't like sweeping them off the streets like they're paid to do.
You could say that smokers are forced onto the streets because of an unjust law and there are very few ashtrays on the streets. Contrast this with chewing gum eaters who can munch their product inside and out but choose to spit it out on the street. I have never stepped on a cigarette butt that stuck to my foot, was subsequently trailed inside and ruined a carpet! Are chewing gum munchers under attack too?
Maybe Cherwell district council should be fined for not providing adequate refuse bins in the town, as I am sure most smokers are sick of the Council treating them like a "giant money making machine".
Chewing gum is the biggest cause of litter on our streets. Council officials will follow smokers in the hope of fining them for dropping a cigarette end, but they do not follow chewing gum users.
What a crappy country these, "theiving totalitarean pigs" in Parliament have created.
Military coup anyone ?
I am slightly more moderate on this. No doubt there are inconsiderate smokers who distinguish their fags without any thought and shame on them. However there is no reason to believe that smokers are any more untidy than other people. I was travelling on the underground on Monday and had a cup of coffee and there was absolutely nowhere to dispose of it responsibly, probably a nationwide pattern.
One final thought. I don't want to be presumptuous but when the smoking ban does get amended, I would strongly suggest from Forest and other pro-choice groups a "Be A Considerate Smoker Campaign." Whereby all smokers are asked to be empathetic to non smokers.
I hope the people of Cherwell have the wit to give the wrong name/address when one of these wankers come along with their fine book and/or shout 'pervert' and run away.
Even as a smoker, I agree with the fine, although I suspect smokers are an easy target for increasing revenue. It is difficult to predict when someone is about to spit chewing gum out. If you really must drop cigarette ends - for example in Manchester Piccadilly train station, where they are no bins on the station nor within 30 metres of the entrances, don't flick them ostentatiously, but slide them down the side of your briefcase as you kneel down to tie a shoelace. Better still, get a small tin and take them home.
Jon,You agree with the fine?! In that case you obviously think that 50 years ago when 70% + of the population smoked we were up to our knees in fag-ends on the streets,and the fines should have been in place then? The difference is that street cleaners were the choice at that time, rather than 'enforcers', as is the choice now.
A different state of mind and insideous propaganda which has clearly had an impact on you, but not a good one. Enforcer over cleaner, so we all feel we are being watched at all times wherever we go . Very nice, and just one of the steps to an open prison state.
On first hearing about fines for dropping cig butts (easy target) I got myself a personal ashtray that I carry around and empty when I finally see a bin.
But why on earth should I? I want to find somewhere to dispose of the butt so that it is not littering the streets, but there are very few receptacles for this purpose. I could put it in a bin but, even with carefully trying to make sure it is out, this could still be a fire risk.
I heard that one bar (without an ashtray outside - it wasn't allowed apparently) usually had these enforcer folks loitering around waiting for the smokers to drop their butts and instantly claimed their fine.
Easy target for extra revenue? Absolutely.
This is nothing new. For some time now, Bristol has been littered with signs threatening £75 fines for dropping cigarette ends. You can see one here:
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.452563,-2.588954&spn=0,359.979122&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.452623,-2.589078&panoid=Wv31MOVdrGh9S_uQ5X_jFw&cbp=12,172.69,,0,-6.13
Why £75, though? Where does this number come from? Cherwell's suggested fine is the same as Bristol's.
San Francisco, after banning outdoor smoking and eliminating all ashtrays, under Getty-Billionaire Mayor Gavin Newsom, under constant advice from UCSF's Mitch Katz, associate to Stanton Glantz who shares the same office, commissioned a "study" that "proved" after banning outdoor ashtrays or at least making them scarce thanks to scare mongering editorials in local media encouraging and condoning physical violence against outdoor smokers, that cig butts now constituted 1/2 to 3/4 of all trash in the streets - and from that commenced a 33-cent per pack of cigarettes "fee" (not called a "tax" since local tobacco "tax" is officially illegal) - and this newly imposed "fee" is of course to pay for the excessive amount of street sweeping "required" as a result of this "study" which of course "proved" San Francisco is knee-deep in cig ends.
Of course none of that is true and the largest amount of visible trash remains what it is - namely non-cigarette related litter. But never mind that, the additional revenue to be gained, the "tax" named as "fee" imposed, the "study" of course justifying it.
They always ban outdoor smoking after banning indoor smoking and they always then go after "butts" in the streets - after removing all the ashtrays of course.
And they can't be reasoned with. If one complains of lack of outdoor ashtrays one is simply told not to smoke and it won't be a problem. There is no humor among the progressive politicians on this matter, taking their marching orders, in the case of San Francisco, directly from advisors appointed directly out of Stanton Glantz's offices up at UCSF, San Franciso's largest employer.
With all said and done and what can a smoker do, having paid the additional 33-cents non-tax "fee" and still seeing no placement of outdoor ashtrays, since outdoor smoking is banned in most areas by law anyhow, would probably be well justified to simply chuck the discarded final end of the cig in the nearest trash receptacle - and if it causes a bin fire, it causes a bin fire.
I have seen quite often a public trash bin on a corner mysteriously cough out smoke and go up in flames only to be doused out by someone walking by who throws their can of soda or bottled water on it.
To my way of logic, if no ashtrays are being provided and nobody is permitted to stub out on the streets lacking ashtrays then it is open season on all outdoor trash receptacles - and smokers need only for a few weeks' time start obeying the letter of the law and dispose of their cig ends appropriately - by tossing them all in the nearest corner trash bins.
Let the laws of physics do as they may and the laws of government deal with their own consequences.
It's a fairly mild form of protest and with the number of smokers forced out into the streets would send a clear message to the public of the idiocy of banning outdoor smoking, outdoor ashtrays and then issuing complaints about outdoor cig ends on the sidewalk.
Otherwise they will never listen and never do, have a million excuses to simply ban further and further along all the outdoor streets, byways and parks and never create smoking areas with proper ashtrays as government should.
In the case of San Francisco they jimmyed up a "study" to "prove" the "justification" required for their 33-cent per pack "fee" - so now let them install outdoor ashtrays along all streets and sidewalks using the money from their "fees" - and if they don't wish to listen to logic - and they don't - then the next best thing is follow the letter of the law to a tee - and start tossing all discarded cig-ends into the nearest trash receptacle.
It's the perfect protest and is justified by their very own laws implying to do so is what I think.
A few weeks of spontaneous bin fires sprouting up all over the area of a major large city would send clear the state of the problem and demonstrate the hypocrisy that local governments have become in regards to any matters concerning smoking and their total lack of tolerance and illogical responses to perceived problems manufactured out of lies.
There has been a lack of rain in East Anglia and the fire brigade has been overworked putting out hedgerow fires, I don't believe that there is a fine for throwing a dogend into a field, but it is more dangerous and costly, than throwing it in the gutter.
Until the smoking ban is amended I will continue to stub out my butts wherever I happen to be in silent protest against the discrimination against smokers.
I still throw my empty fag packets in the gutter.
I cant believe Jon when he says to kneel down and furtively slide them into your briefcase, the pong off him must be deadly, wouldnt like to sit beside him on the tube.
Poor Jon needs to be debriefed big time from the brainwashing process.
If there's one thing I cannot stand its a creeping jesus smoker.
Ann, Slide them down the outside of your briefcase, onto the floor, not the inside. I can't think of a good reason why I shouldn't agree with the fine. I agree with fines for dropping other forms of litter, so why not cigarette ends. I wouldn't drop a sandwich wrapper onto the street. I'd take it home with me. That said, I don't agree with the policy of not proving bins, which was here before the smoking ban and has caused an increase in all sorts of litter, not just cigarette ends. Whatever anybody thinks about this, it doesn't further our cause to seemingly want an exemption to the littering laws for cigarette ends. Imagine if there were no cigarette ends on the street. Smokers would have a pretty good image.
Smokers will never have a 'pretty good image' as long as the lies and indoctrination continues, and people like Jon lap it up, furthering their control and smears.
Well said, Simon. I hope they listen. I think litter was taken into account when the ban was introduced. NuLab knew smokers would drop more litter and therefore knew it would give local communities another reason to hate them. This hate, of course, has Govt backing and encouragement.
David, I agree with you and frequently toss my cig butt into bins on our local park when I am walking my dog - unfortunately none have yet caught fire! Most annoying. However, I feel that should there be a spate of bin fires as a result of this action, councils would prefer to put notices on bins banning cig butts from being deposited!
Regarding the pocket ashtrays; I have a collection of these, but being a woman often find it difficult to carry one with me as pockets of often scarce in womens clothing and whatever pockets I do have usually just about accommodate my ciggies! Also, when walking the dog there is all the other stuff required, such as the lead to hold onto, the bags to clean up after the dog and, if the weather is hot, water to take as well! As far as handbags go, in order not to carry a rucksack I try to limit the contents to the mininum, so there is often no space left! These ashtrays can also be very fiddly to use when you already have your hands full, even if you do have a pocket to keep one in.
I realise I may be sounding quite negative here, but these are just my own experiences.
David wrote: A few weeks of spontaneous bin fires sprouting up all over the area of a major large city would send clear the state of the problem and demonstrate the hypocrisy that local governments have become in regards to any matters concerning smoking and their total lack of tolerance and illogical responses to perceived problems manufactured out of lies.
Then they'd just remove all the bins. They'd then get even more revenue by fining non-smokers who have nowhere to put their litter. This is how the 'economy' of California seems to work these days.
I Just read your post, above, Dave. I absolutely agree. I think we would be in a very different situation now if the initial anti-smoking campaign had focussed on encouraging smokers to be good mannered and considerate instead of the social insults, health scaremongering, and the divide and rule tactics.
Smokers who "blow smoke in antis' faces" and drop their cig ends anywhere, are playing into the hands of those who would like to see them extinct and giving the antis the ammo to do the job.
I would hope that the Conservatives, who are likely to form the next Govt, do not go down the same line of hatred against smokers and actually work to bridge the divides and unite people instead of setting them apart. I'd like to think this will happen but so far from what we have heard from the Tories, I fear that nothing will change for smokers at all.
Win or lose, my conscience vote goes to UKIP because it is the only party that cares about smokers and treats them as human beings. If all smokers put their vote where there is most definitely support for them, then the Cons would be forced to see that this issue really does matter.
Be warned - there are NO lengths to which Anti-Smoking Bigots will not go with their campaign of hate. Frivolous lies like this one about litter are just one of many items on their agenda, and some of the items on that list make Mussolini look like a Wet.
Just Say No to Tobacco Discrimination.
From Junican
Listen, everybody,this stuff about being fined £75 for dropping cigarette ends is just propaganda. There is no way in which the Local Authorities can have patrols on every street. It is just propaganda.
What I do not understand is why the media find these miniscule events (people being fined for dropping cigarette ends or sweet papers) so newsworthy - unless, of course, they see these incidents as being an amusement for the masses. That sounds about right. Amusing.
There is this extremely long article by Prof John Brtton in Times on Line in which he states how wonderful the Smoking Ban has been. He goes on and on about heart attacks etc, but AT NO POINT in his article does he say that tobacco should be banned totally.
Why not?
I say that their bluff should be called. The antis should be made to say, "Tobacco, in all its forms, MUST be banned". I want to hear it from ASH and the HEALTHISTS. I want to hear them say, "TOBACCO IN ALL ITS FORMS MUST BE BANNED".
Simon, on behalf of all the members of Forest, and on behalf of people who enjoy tobacco generally, must say to the antis, "Ban it then".
Think about it.
I just cant see how any councillor can come along and fine a person for throwing a butt on the street, unless he targets one person at a time.
God knows there are too many of them employed in the first place but if they were to cover every person in a village for instance, it just could not be done.
And anyway just how could this be enforced.
Is there anyone stupid enough to stand there and give honest answers without seeing proof of their 'crime' on the spot. I dont think so.
Its just more scaremongering, especially when they have people complying to their disgusting rule of scooping up their own dog's pooh.
Personally, I'd do time before I'd stoop to doing such a thing.
Does anyone know how many people were fined and charged for not scooping up after their dogs since this so called law was introduced?
I thoroughly enjoy reading the posts and bulletins on this site and from time to time, chucking in my two pennorth. However, something sinister is creeping up in my brain i.e. Is Forest part of UKIP? I have my own views on UKIP; some good and some bad; and I'm not going to debate them here. Do tell. If so; I'm off.......
As far as I am concerned (and my allegiance to Forest in patricular) - this is an independant platform, free of any political allegiance be it Labour (hahahahah!!) Tory (double ahhahahahaha!!) Lib Dem (Define "liberal etc etc etc ).
So.........as I have been indoctrined since 1979 in the Nazi cuture in which we all live, anyone mentionihng any particular party - including UKIP - will be taken out and shot. I joke of course but do you get me? (as the youth of today tend to ask....)
To the case in point and for the record; I thoroughly stub my fags out and whack em in the bin (where one is available) I also have a dog and clean up after him (even carrying a pocket full of turds in the absence of a bin which enrages all on public transport!! Great fun!! Especially for the non-smoking nimbys. It would be better if I lit up as far as they're concerned, but they couldn't stand that either!!)
I'm off now. You might need to moderate this comment as I am, clearly, mad.........
Ann, I have no idea how many people have been fined for not picking up after their dog, but else do you believe CCTv cameras are for? There are more and more of the damn things and personally I feel violated when walking across our local park or along our high street and you constantly hear the whir of these things moving, even above the noise of the traffic.
Big Brother is watching and will provide the proof via their spies in the form of CCTv, whether it be dropping a cig butt or not picking up after your dog! Be Warned.
Max D - as far as I am aware, Forest has no political allegiance. I answer your point as the person who, probably, mentions UKIP on here more than most and I do so because I thought smokers who really care about this issue, would want to know which political party supports them.
To see just how our councils use their positions of authority to dictate where our money goes priority wise check out this link.
It really does take some believing!
http://freedom-2-choose.blogspot.com/
Max D
We have had this thing with UKIP before. It is young Pat Nurse. We have learnt to put up with her. She means no harm. Her heart is in the right place - she is pro-Britain, pro-England, pro-people who enjoy tobacco. Also, she is young, pretty and sweet. Fall in love with her! (Gosh! Is that sexist?)
I shall have to start butting into letterboxes to get my message through to the dictators who have turned us smokers into criminals. We will now start behaving like crims.
Oh Junican - what can I say to the accusation that I am YOUNG Pat Nurse! God Bless you!
no smokers = no smoking litter
everyone wins
do it
A rather infantile view, dave f, and not worthy of further response
Dave f.No smokers = no diversity. No backbone. No individuality. No free thinking.No choice.
All the qualities that the ignorant, the authoritarian and weak minded indoctrinated morons hate.Recognise yourself there?
No fast food shops. No fast food rubbish.
No chewing gum. No chewing stuck to pavements.
No anti-smokers. Much better world.
I think you're all being FAR too hard on our friend, dave f.
He DOES make a valid point.
In 1930s' Germany (ah, Happy Days !), for example, crime among the Jewish/Gypsy/Homosexual/Mentally-Disabled 'communities' dropped to ZERO.
So, you see, it wasn't ALL bad.
And as Strother Martin's prison warden said in 'Cool Hand Luke':
"You gotta get your mind right."
I think dave f has succeeded admirably................
At Pat Nurse and Junican -
Firstly, thanks for clearing that up ( a bit like a discarded fag end or a dog turd, if you will and,as I am won't to do - see how I stay "on topic"? - I'm a genius)
And, at Junican's suggestion, I intend to fall in love with you immediately, Pat. I am in the process of forming a new political party called "Common Sense". I am not confident, however. There is no money it, there never will be and it is intended to be run by the common people wiht a modicum of er..sense. So Dave F. Please do go and F.....off.........