permalink for this thread : http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/528673846
borobuddah Posted on 19/7 12:03
FAO All gloating anti-smokers

They're coming to get you next, car journeys to be monitored on cctv and film passed to the police, no NHS if yer overwight,kids lunchboxes raided,

here it comes, THE NANNY STATE with boots on!

Lefty3668 Posted on 19/7 12:05
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Good job the Police are underfunded.

The_Commisar Posted on 19/7 12:06
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Tsk
Thatchers Britain or what............

Ickes_disciple Posted on 19/7 12:06
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I think we should make it the Au-pair state. Then at least she might be fit.

BoroMutt Posted on 19/7 12:07
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Relax, have a fag my little tubby bellied chum (hope it's not raining) *sniggers*

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 12:09
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

god job im not fat either then

T4Tomo Posted on 19/7 12:12
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Er so what.

Now feck off outside the pub, in the rain, for your nicotine fix, there's a good lad.

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 12:13
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Yer ID card will be along soon, Boromutt.

Y'all asked for it, especially some of the anti-pc brigade, but now you are to reap this governments interfering, misplaced liberalism

yellow_cloud Posted on 19/7 12:14
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

At what point do you think they will stop giving smokers treatment on the NHS? should be soon I hope.

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 12:14
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

i cant say any of the things you have mentioned will affect me in the slightest

mr_r_soles Posted on 19/7 12:17
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

It's doing my head in all this.


*sparks tab up*


Dont care really.

salt_boro Posted on 19/7 12:20
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Bought a new shirt the other day, wore it out and next day it still smelt new, that is amazing, Fact.

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 12:22
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

lol - so sweet that smokers think we care

*keeps gloating*

chorleyphil Posted on 19/7 12:23
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

filthy get!

KENDAL Posted on 19/7 12:30
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I don't mind the CCTV watching me drive.
I'm certainly not overweight and I don't have any kids.

So continue with the cancer sticks if you wish.

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 12:37
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Its not the specifics folks, its the principle!

It will reach into all our lives, and is anti-freedom, anti democratic, anti local.

Smokers and drinkers should be given special VIP treatment at the point of delivery of all health services, we pay the most for them!

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 12:44
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

how is it democratic for a stinking, whingeing minority to spread cancer and stinking clothes through passive smoking to the majority?

JLinardi Posted on 19/7 12:52
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"stinking, whingeing minority to spread cancer and stinking clothes through passive smoking to the majority"

That is all brain washed tat you have been fed by the government. I dont remember ANYONE kicking up as much fuss as the non smoking holyer than thou brigade did when this ban was announced.

Why moan about your clothes stinking after a night out when you will wash them anyway? Passive smoking has not been proven to be this killer the government said it was. Some people just need to get off their high horse.

plymuff_diver Posted on 19/7 12:56
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Haven't been in a pub since the ban. Is it true that they smell of pi$$, farts and rotting carpet?

Can't agree with the conspiracy theories regarding the nanny state. As long as you, at all times, conform physically and behaviourally to whatever standards are set by the Government/Media, what have you got to worry about? I'm all for unlimited detention for Terror suspects too, because it could never happen to any of us.

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 12:56
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

..."stinking, whingeing minority to spread cancer and stinking clothes through passive smoking to the majority"

That is all brain washed tat you have been fed by the government....



And heres me thinking you could get cancer through passive smoking. Well the government certainly had me fooled

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 12:57
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

i can tell you that the view from my high horse is so much better than the view shuffling and puffing away like lepers in a pen outside the doors of some seedy bar

anything, why should us do-gooders worry about boring proof arguments now? ain't gonna change back.

Chutney Posted on 19/7 12:57
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

You appear to be confusing human rights with petulant bellyaching.

Grow up, you baby.

Snoop_Smog Posted on 19/7 13:01
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Yawn ...Yawn

JLinardi Posted on 19/7 13:04
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Every smoker I know who smokes outside the pub, doesnt really care. So while you are all sat inside giggling like school children at those men who have to stand in the rain. Well the men in the rain dont really give a chit.

What about the non drinker who stays at home? What would you say to him as he laughs at you walking past his house in the pouring rain in your desparation to get to the pub for a "quick one"?

And you maybe can get cancer off passive smoking, but you can also get cancer off your mobile phone... Cant you? So does that mean when you make a phone call, you have a helmet resistant to microwaves over your head?

salt_boro Posted on 19/7 13:06
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I don't want every smoker to stop because if they did i'd have less people to feel better than.

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:07
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

yeah, bovvered, like, we're standing in the rain, does my face look bovvered? rain? pavement? cigarette? rain? I'M NOT BOVVERRED

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 13:09
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"And you maybe can get cancer off passive smoking, but you can also get cancer off your mobile phone... Cant you? So does that mean when you make a phone call, you have a helmet resistant to microwaves over your head?"

and the award for the weakest ever argument on FMTTM goes to...

KENDAL Posted on 19/7 13:11
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

OK You smoke yourself into an early grave and I'll mobile phone myself into one. I think you'll be there before me to be honest.

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:11
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

am unclear why microwaves are an issue?

are smokers trying to ban people eating chicken jalfrezi from the Tesco's chiller cabinet range?

killjoys.

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 13:14
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

bit of reading for you JLinardi, re: your mobile phone argument

Link: clearly as bad as smoking

Snickerdoodle Posted on 19/7 13:16
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"but you can also get cancer off your mobile phone... Cant you?"

I only smoke low-tar mobile phones, so I'm ok.

JLinardi Posted on 19/7 13:17
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

No m8 I wasnt saying talkin on your mobile was as bad as smoking, I was saying its effects are unclear the same as PASSIVE SMOKING.

Seriously if your going to jump back on your high horses about something ive said, at least fookin read it properly.

London_Boro Posted on 19/7 13:19
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I love it how smokers still think it's about taking away their rights. Can't you get it into your heads that it isn't! It's about protecting the rights and health of those that do NOT smoke!

FFS!!!!

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:20
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Linardi, surely the mobile phones risk that you plucked from thin air are mobiles that we use ourselves. whereas you do realise that passive smoking is forced upon you by others' smoking?

if mobile phones were proven to cause cancer like cigarettes but i could get it too because you were using one in the same building - then clealrly, i wouldn't be using a cancer causing mobile phone for my own pleasuer and i would also object to having to wear a helmet because you refuse to stop

think you have just posted the stupidest argument yet!!!


--- Post edited by means_the_world on 19/7 13:25 ---

Chutney Posted on 19/7 13:21
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Nothing particularly unclear about the information on that Cancer Research site. Then again, no one but Linardi can read, so who knows what it really says...

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 13:23
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"its effects are unclear the same as PASSIVE SMOKING."

wrong again.

jam69 Posted on 19/7 13:26
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

smokers are very smelly people,and non smokers want to have a choice not to be smelly people,thats why we have put you out in the rain

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 13:27
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Catch on please! passive smoking is a myth, it helps all the big corporations, businesses and services save tons on fire insurance.And holier than though nobbers who just didn't like the smell, will get to realise that they still smell, should wash and change each day, just like evryone else!

If fags were that dangerous wouldn't all us smokers have dropped dead after about the second week?

Tish and tosh, me hearties.

mickbrown Posted on 19/7 13:28
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

What sort of weird pubs are you lot going to.

i've yet to go to one that's full of non smokers at the windows, pointing and laughing at the daft lads out in the rain.

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 13:28
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"i've yet to go to one that's full of non smokers at the windows, pointing and laughing at the daft lads out in the rain."

me too. its a funny thought though

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:30
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

i have seen a few lads inside the pub taking the chance to chat up the smoker's girlfriends as they are out there taking a break though

jam69 Posted on 19/7 13:32
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

bullshyte,only another smoker would go out with a smoker surely?

mickbrown Posted on 19/7 13:32
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

There you go smokers. Another reason to pack in.

You'll lose your lass to a sweet breathed non smoker.

TheSmogMonster Posted on 19/7 13:37
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Do smokers really believe there is no link between passive smoking and cancer?

(incidently there is no link between mobile phones and cancer)

I think all this ban stuff has made a few smokers a bit paranoid, I imagine most non-smokers have better things to do then laugh at you.

Mattyk50 Posted on 19/7 13:38
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"Do smokers really believe there is no link between passive smoking and cancer?"

no, just this linardi fella i think

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:40
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

clearly there is a link between smoking and lunacy

he is now proposing non-smokers to wear a helmet when going out in case there is a microwave in the kitchen.

KENDAL Posted on 19/7 13:42
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Maybe this is Linardi ?

Link: Head

Saldamuz Posted on 19/7 13:46
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

How bout the non smokers smoking birds that are being swept of their feet by the down to earth folk piping away with them outside????

Quickest way into a girls, ahem, 'conversation'?? Ask for a light

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:48
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

saldamuz, potential in one way, though girls know better than their male counterparts that non-smoking boys left inside also get chatted up too

Saldamuz Posted on 19/7 13:51
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

But lets face it, a girl is far more likely to be approached by a randy fella than vice versa.

Also - Its very few and far between that I would go out on the raz with just me and wor lass, tends to be a few or just the lads.

Smoking outside has been canny funny, actually talking to folk (especially the chicks) - mind it will change come wintertime

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 13:53
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

i won't say what i was going to say

but yes in the main you are probably right.

KENDAL Posted on 19/7 13:54
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Aye, In the winter you'll be able to strike a match on their nips.

Corcaigh_the_Cat Posted on 19/7 13:56
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I can't believe the ignorance shown by some smokers. Whether it's harmful or not, it should have been banned from indoor area years ago.

I've nothing against smoking, but do it where you don't affect others, a little bit of consideration from the sizeable minority would have meant laws didn't need to be passed.

Unfortunately, consideration isn't the smokers strength. Have you now noticed the area outside the pub, strewn with litter from them.

And they expect sympathy?

Saldamuz Posted on 19/7 14:00
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I dont expect anything.

Am happy to go outside.

Cant speak for all non smokers, but my buddies werent bothered at all about smoking in pubs, most had non smoking sections anyway - which might I add, tended to be a lot less crowded, cant imagine why considering all the damage it does.

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 16:23
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I think I've almost radicalised some anti-smokers into gloating ones here. Failed thread.

Fickle things, aren't they?

Wait 'till a few of their liberties get took away.

Coming soon, as Rob would say!

mickymac Posted on 19/7 16:34
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

going out tommorow for the the first time since those dirty stinking fags have been bannedfrom pubs,thats if I can score some coke like.

JLinardi Posted on 19/7 16:55
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I never said there was no link between passive smoking and cancer. All i am saying was that alot of people have been sucked in, by the government, to believing that passive smoking is some major killer, when there is no concrete proof to say PASSIVE smoking IS this major killer.

Im not complaining about the ban at all, nor am I complaining about people having to go outside for a fag. The thing I have a problem with is the derogatory comments constantly made towards smokers as if they are all some form of super ignorant race of humans who are out to kill everyone with their second hand smoke. And making out you are so much better and care for the world and the trees and all gods creatures. Just get over yourselves. You dont smoke, they do, so fookin what. The smokers have to go outside to fag it now. Youve got what you wanted, so why not just drop it now?

--- Post edited by JLinardi on 19/7 17:26 ---

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 17:09
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Hear, hear, well said.

They'll get theirs!

salt_boro Posted on 19/7 17:26
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Smokers look cool though, cooler than non smokers. in a kind of dangerous way. I like that.

means_the_world Posted on 19/7 17:51
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

think it does look cool in some ways

though less cool when you are talking out of your throat.

Cobain_94 Posted on 19/7 18:00
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Good thing I'm not overweight and have Bupa insurance. Meanwhile I won't be getting lung cancer from your disgusting passive smoke and my clothes don't smell like a cigar factory after a night out. Get outside in the car park you leper.

Rauko Posted on 19/7 18:57
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

"No lab in the world has ever proven that smoking causes cancer .. "

Just go ahead and research it yourself and don't take the 'facts' spouted by government funded "scientists" as gospel ..

Cancer rates in the world have soared since countries such as the US and the UK started dropping Nukes all over the place during testing. Its estimated that currently their are 4.9 billion billion radioactive particles blowing around in the atmostphere each with half-lifes of 1000s of years. With more being added daily through the use of DU weapons being used in places like Iraq.

Just breathe in one radioactive particle from fallout and you will get lung cancer everytime. Get one particele on your skin - you'll get skin cance. Research actually suggests that smoking can help protect against lung cancer from airborne radioactive particles as the mucus layer that forms on the lungs through smoking acts as a protective barrier.

Governments have needed something to blame otherwise the compo claims would have broke the bank ... so stop just reading the emotive headlines and look beyond them instead.

Yours
a non smoker

karembeu_ca Posted on 19/7 19:00
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

buddah: "passive smoking is a myth"

ROFLMAO

a myth, just like your 'arguments'. you're the one who has fallen for the myth's mate. check the source on your data and i'll check the source on mine and we'll see who's is the independent unbiased one.

not sure which topic on this board produces the most inane comments, but the smoking topics MUST be in the top 3.

LIDDLE_TOWERS Posted on 19/7 19:14
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Bring it on

Honest people like me

Have nothing to fear

I lay straight in Bed

every night

borobuddah Posted on 19/7 19:22
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Don't dare slip a hand into the jarmie bottoms though,


the Ministry of Proper Behaviour are watching.........

means_the_world Posted on 20/7 0:43
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I mean i know some people wanted Tony Blair out, but to blame my great uncle's lung cancer in the 1950s on the war in Iraq ....

yeah, your lot are wacked out.

Grumpy_Paul Posted on 20/7 1:00
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

I smoke but the ban doesn't really bother me. I've been out to pubs and clubs half a dozen or more times since the ban came into force and simply didn't smoke all evening.

What does bother me is the banning culture that has developed in this country. FFS, read into the spirit of what borobuddah is saying, he's right. The control freaks are well and truly taking over.

You none smokers who gloat, don't forget, your car or your fishing trip or your KFC (schitt anyway but I would not advocate banning it) could be the next target of the control freaks

means_the_world Posted on 20/7 1:06
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

puh-lease, it's not about gloating nor is it about some 'banning culture', it's just that the rest of us are bored by the stinking cancer causers trying to turn their being turfed out of a pub into some sort of human rights case

honestly, you aren't Martin Luther King or the Pankhursts on a great cause for civil rights. it's just the fag end, if you excuse the pun, of the rest of finally extinguishing the stench we've had to deal with for decades.

--- Post edited by means_the_world on 20/7 1:07 ---

Grumpy_Paul Posted on 20/7 1:46
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

means_the_world

Agree to a large extent, but see the wider picture.

Have to say, the stench of beery and pissyy carpets is no better than that caused by the smoke, albeit it doesn't stick to your clothing so much

--- Post edited by Grumpy_Paul on 20/7 1:50 ---

borobuddah Posted on 20/7 9:32
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

Thanks Grumps, that was the dabate I was interested in.

The Govt's attitude is that we can't make local decisions any more, everything will be closely regulated from the centre. If the good people of Whitby want to carry on smoking fish, why should they be stopped, why should the police be given cctv footage unless there is a particular problem, who should decide what's in a kids lunchbox, not the govt FFS!?

And why can't some pubs decide they are for smokers, with staff fully aware and disclaimed

XXLshirts_fit_all Posted on 20/7 10:07
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

jlinardi said "The thing I have a problem with is the derogatory comments constantly made towards smokers as if they are all some form of super ignorant race of humans who are out to kill everyone with their second hand smoke. "

but wasnt this thread started by a smoker who was laughing that the non smokers human rights were being erroded BB style by the nanny state?

borobuddah Posted on 20/7 10:27
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

XXL, yes it was me having a go back, wiping the smile off their faces attempt, because what can happen to smokers, can happen to them too.

I understand people being pleased at a smoke free atmosphere, I even appreciate it myself, but taking delight at others discomfort is taking it a bit too far, IMHO

Snoop_Smog Posted on 20/7 10:51
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

This one has been done to death.

People are smoking outside now, you've got it your way. Get over it.

The people who feel better for laughing at smokers come across as a a bit sad and twisted in my opinion. Do you laugh at people who are a fatter than you when you see them? Hows about people who earn less money than you? Are they sources of amusement?

And as for chatting up smokers girlfriends, I'm really not worried, honestly.

rolling_thunder Posted on 20/7 13:05
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

The late Bill Hicks had a good take on anti smokers. Pointed out that if a smoker was ill, they had all sorts of things in a hospital designed to keep you alive, spent millions on developing all this stuff just to keep the hearts and lungs going. When a non smoker gets ill, theres nothing, sorry we don’t know whats wrong with you so we cant fix it, you should have been a smoker…Could have done all sorts of wonderful things for ya.


Poor Bill, pancreatic cancer saw him off

means_the_world Posted on 20/7 13:44
re: FAO All gloating anti-smokers

ok buddah, when they ban drinking in pubs then I'll join your brave crusade.