Taking the government to court over the smoking ban please help

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nepalese black

Yes they have changed the Cannabis Laws, it was about three years ago.

Home Office | Cannabis reclassification

I know someone very well that was in the Drug Squad up in London, ad basically if your sitting down in public smoking blow and bothering no-one they will let you carry on, same if there are a load of you in the house smoking blow, basically they will turn a blind eye, as they donâ??t want to do the paper work, however it all depends on the way you look and dress.

Wayne

---

Here say, not fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nepalese black

Hi Davadish,

Glad there are some here that understand, as next they will â??tryâ?� and I mean try, try and make it illegal to smoke 10 meters from any pub or public place, try and stop you smoking, fags or blow in parks, beaches or nearly anywhere that the public go, so us potheads need to stick together over this, thatâ??s why this Government has to be stopped, as no one can dictate to me how to live my life, damn fing check.

I know we canâ??t do what I am about to say but feel like saying it anyway;

Lets Just ask the Judge in the JR, all we ask for is separate smoking rooms, with ventilation and filtration, in pubs and clubs, where we can smoke in piece, is this to much to ask for, for Gods sake, how can any MP and Lord be so damn selfish, spiteful, biased, childlike, non-logical, and un-professional and break their own code of practise, no wonder they get attack by terrorists, as they do not think right, the MPâ??s seem to make all the wrong decisions, why ??? And why are they there, are they real people or computer programs, programmed to be against the right decisions and against the people, there should be a full revolution to remove 80% of them.

And ask each and every Lord that voted against the smoking rooms why they voted against, love to have them all at the JR, and ask them that without any warning, I wonder what they would say, as they would be put on the spot.

Then state one of to other things, like all the Countries with blanket bans have higher smoking rates because of this, but Spain with a ban but not in the pubs has a lower rate of smokers.

Our main studies proving passive smoking is just about harmless.

Ventilation works.

More smoking in the homes, where the alleged passive smoking hits the children.

Pubs will stay open.

Hospitals should be receiving the 50Million that they have spent on this ban, for the people that are waiting for live threatening operations.

All I want is a happy and quite life, I did not want is this, but now I have wasted one year on my computer finding out all about the huge ridiculous conspiracy against the smokers, and am not amused, I love life love to use my computer for other things, but hardily have the time for these things now, and have put up money for the JR, when all we ask is a damned smoking room.

For Gods sake if there are any antis, anti smokers of anything, or any MPâ??s or Lords here reading this grow up as you antis are very odd fanatical people that need help, please you are totally wasting your life doing all this, please go away and forget all about this, and ask for a little help, as you pollute the air a Billion Billion Billion more times than I will in my whole life with my passive smoking, in lets say 4 hours travelling in your car, find a life, you have totally brainwashed yourself, you need some time away, perhaps a holiday, they say Pluto is nice this time of year, it take 9 1/2 years to get to Pluto in a spaceship, however for you people I suggest a airliner to Pluto, the trip would take no more than 800 years, and I have a funny feeling I would have kicked the habit by then, hehehe. Then we could all live happily after.

---

Wayne[/QUOTE]

Again a lot of opinion posted as fact.

Most people agree with the smoking ban. Even if passive smoking wasn't dangerous as you claim, despite the fact there are numerous reports and studies claiming otherwise people still should not have to be forced to go home with itchy eyes and smelly clothes.

Give it a few years and you will get used to it.

If ventilation works so well why didn't pubs install adequate ventilation in the first place? This could all have been avoided.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divadish

So you are a Daily Mail reader ah ah enough said

---

That makes about as much sense as everything else you've said.

P E don't be so touchy mate , chill out and roll one up it is after all why we are all herer in the first place lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divadish

P E don't be so touchy mate , chill out and roll one up it is after all why we are all herer in the first place lol

---

The I suggest you take your own advice 'cos your protest is going nowhere. Standing on the beach trying to stop the tide from coming in is not a chilled out activity.

I am king Canute lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

Here say, not fact.

---

Sorry this is fact.

Nepalese black

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberle

Again a lot of opinion posted as fact.

Most people agree with the smoking ban. Even if passive smoking wasn't dangerous as you claim, despite the fact there are numerous reports and studies claiming otherwise people still should not have to be forced to go home with itchy eyes and smelly clothes.

Give it a few years and you will get used to it.

If ventilation works so well why didn't pubs install adequate ventilation in the first place? This could all have been avoided.

---

What opinions that I posted do you think are not facts.

I not think there are many that go home with itchy eyes and smelly clothes, I mean for 99.9% of non-smokers most 5 years ago before all this came up did not even care or notice that people smoked, and I can never understand the smelly cloths thing, I mean who picks up their cloths in the morning to smell them, I pick them up and just wash them because of my own body odder on them, however if you read my posts again, when we go into the court rooms against the Government, we are only after separate smoking rooms with ventilation and filtration.

Itâ??s not the point in getting used to it, itâ??s the Government trying to do what they think is best, WHEN THEY SHOULD BE HELPING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WAITING FOR LIVE SAVING OPERATIONS, and when they donâ??t know much about it, and itâ??s backfired in every way, over a 1000 bas shut in Ireland,

New Zealand smoke more after the ban,

Scoop: Smoking Prevalence Falling Too Slowly

Italians smoking more despite national ban,

SignOnSanDiego.com > News > World -- Italians smoking more despite national ban

Spain: Spaniards knuckle under to new smoking curbs and there are 1/2 million less smoking;

THERE 1/2 MILLION LESS SMOKING IN SPAIN ??? WHEN ALL OTHER PLACES THE PEOPLE ARE SMOKING FAR MORE, BECAUSE SPAIN LETS YOU SMOKE IN THE BARS AND CLUBS.

Spaniards knuckle under to new smoking curbs: poll

New York has a bar smoking ban, so Smoker Numbers Rise,

Smoker Numbers Rise, but Mayor Lauds Other City Statistics - September 15, 2006 - The New York Sun

Ireland Has Almost 20 000 More Smokers after the ban,

Ireland Has Almost 20 000 More Smokers

Smoking rates up in Scotland,

Smoking ban 'a triumph of propaganda over science' says Imperial as sales and profits rise | Business | Money | Telegraph

Children are victims of smoking ban, says study
Scotsman.com News - Tobacco - Children are victims of smoking ban, says study
Children's passive smoking increases after pub bans

The Publican - number one for licensed trade news, and Proud of Pubs - Home - Children's passive smoking increases after pub bans

DIRECT MEASUREMENT read-outs from BC AirCare laboratories indicate that vehicular emissions 1995 in the Vancouver's Lower Mainland amount to 324,500 tons, or 2 pounds per person per day. How does that compare with 0.5 millionth of a gram per cubic foot of Environmental Tobacco Smoke in a normally ventilated room?

Vehicular emissions have far more toxic substances then cigarettes, they are the real cause for the higher cancer rates UK Government statistics from 1970 to 2006 show smoking is in decline worldwide. in 1970, 45% of the UK smoked, now in 2006, only 25% smoke, that is means the total smokers in the UK in the last 36 years has nearly halved, HOWEVER cancer is on the rise, Between 1971 and 2003, the age-standardised incidence of cancer increased by around 17 per cent in males and 40 per cent in females.

So we wonder why do the Government waste all these Millions on a smoking ban itâ??s over 50Million, when the N.H.S needs it so so bad please please please, lets help save lives and buy new machines for the Hospitals, and remember there are people out the waiting for life saving operations, and not one person can be named that has been harmed by passive smoke, and someone dieing from passive smoke is a joke, well actually itâ??s not, this whole political propaganda of the passive smoke is a total disgrace, when there are so many dieing around the World, with all the money that has been wasted on the passive smoke rubbish, we could most properly eradicated most of the diseases like cancer.

Departments: Advertising: 17 Apr 2007: Written answers (TheyWorkForYou.com)

That chart shows what a bloody disgrace the N.H.S is, it no wonder its going down the pan. Then spent £24,000 on advertising for new nurses and then spent £22,700,000 telling them they shouldn't smoke! ??? Please letâ??s stop this madness.[/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

If ventilation works so well why didn't pubs install adequate ventilation in the first place? This could all have been avoided.

---

Your to damn right there.

Wayne[/quote]

All your links bar a couple are about increased smoking rates, which are down the stupidity of people smoking not the non smoking majority. We wont really know what the full effect this ban will have for a long time yet. These increased smoking rates could be a reaction to what many feel is a persecution - this is of course speculation.

If pubs and clubs were exempt then it would leave an opening for more litigation in the future as it's supposed to be protecting workers.

I consider vehicle emissions a different debate.

I think it's fair to say we are not going to agree on this one :) But I would like to have seen smoking and non smoking premises but that would have involved too much common sense for any government. Smoking pubs would then have been ideal places to start the sale of cannabis I'm just dreaming now :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

All your links bar a couple are about increased smoking rates, which are down the stupidity of people smoking not the non smoking majority. We wont really know what the full effect this ban will have for a long time yet. These increased smoking rates could be a reaction to what many feel is a persecution - this is of course speculation.

---

Did you notice the Spanish link and what happened there. However all over the World there has been the natural decline in the smoking preference, but the bans stop this and but them in reverse, and I have showed the Government this and they still will not admit they are wrong this is what gets me.

Here is the Irish chart; the ban stated on 3/04 the percentage of smokers was 23.1 now over three years later itâ??s 25.5, and notice before the ban it had a natural decline.

And look what has happened in Northan Ireland in a few weeks;

Smoking outside ain't no drag for 'smirters' - News - Sunday Life

[/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

If pubs and clubs were exempt then it would leave an opening for more litigation in the future as it's supposed to be protecting workers.

---

The thing is that all the real studies from, HSE, WHO, BMJ, and the Cancer Society themselves say there is hardly any harm in SHS, actually milk has a slightly higher rating then SHS, they have based this ban on estimates, and a report thatâ??s called the SCOTH Report, we call the SCOTH Fable, and some of itâ??s members are also members of ASH, which are anti smoking, I have now found out that the Welsh Assembly, which we call ASS and the DOH, donâ??t even have 83 of the studies I asked them for, which are in the SCOTH Fable, so that means that no one has actually read the so called studies, as the immortal Rigsby once said, stop the World I want to get off.

By the way when I win the Euro Lotto, guess what I am going to buy ??? An Island, and with me being Emperor, King and Government, guess what will be legal ??? hehehe, and guess what your all welcome. [/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

I consider vehicle emissions a different debate.

---

Yes they are different, they are a Billion times worst, only thing is you canâ??t see them, but you can see Tobacco smoke, and 99% of that is water.

DIRECT MEASUREMENT read-outs from BC AirCare laboratories indicate that vehicular emissions 1995 in the Vancouver's Lower Mainland amount to 324,500 tons, or 2 pounds per person per day. How does that compare with 0.5 millionth of a gram per cubic foot of Environmental Tobacco Smoke in a normally ventilated room? [/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by amberler

I think it's fair to say we are not going to agree on this one :) But I would like to have seen smoking and non smoking premises but that would have involved too much common sense for any government. Smoking pubs would then have been ideal places to start the sale of cannabis I'm just dreaming now :P[/color]

---

Well we do agree on the separate smoking rooms with ventilation and filtration, and that all we want. Yes when we go to the courts against the Government in the Judicial Review that is all we ask them for separate smoking rooms with ventilation and filtration.

I have a sneaky feeling that 80% of the Government are computer programs, there to make the wrong decision and to wind us up, the Government must be intelligent people, I mean they can all get A+ in maths and English and know how to write a formal letter and all that crap, but have they the common sense and the street wise, no they have not. [/quote]

All we want is the Freedom To Choose

Nepalese black