blurobbie said:
i enjoy smoking, i don't like the smell on my clothes but i am prepared to accept that as part of being a smoker
But as a non-smoker, why should I have to accept it? (You might be considerate but there's a hell of a lot who aren't)
i agree that non-smokers should not have to put up with having their clothes/hair smelling of my smoke
As you said, you're in the minority.
Within days the cigarette workers were out of work
We could use this argument against closing down crack dens and cannabis 'farms'
and claiming unemployment benefits from the government
Maybe they could get jobs producing the things that 'fag money' would now be spent on? Just a suggestion.
the anti-smoking lobby were finished in one fell swoop
After they got everything they wanted, why not?
the public were revolting
No comment.
they had had their RIGHTS violated (freedom of choice)
I totally support the right of folks to smoke- just so long as I don't get affected by it.
the government were forced to increase income tax to make up the short fall.
Misguided economics- whatever the fag money gets spent on (fuel, alcohol, takeaways, school fees......) will have vat and/or duty on it so the shortfall is nowhere near as big as you'd first think.
Similarly, all the house fires started by cigarettes would disappear, litter collection would reduce and there's a thousand other tiny savings made in the process. The book ignores these in its calculations.
Smoking will be forced underground thus making it more desirable to young people.
American experience of prohibition does tend to support many of your arguments, to be fair.
It's all about freedom of choice..........I will respect yours if you respect mine.
Totally agree PROVIDED you can get all smokers to be considerate about where they smoke.
RH