Things I Hate

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
You are very, very bad! :thwak

funny-gifs-work-it-sistah.gif
 

I didn't read through the entire article thoroughly this time round, but it seems to me that the author is prefacing a rant against the anti-smoking brigade (and the notion of legislative dependency in which they are apparently ensconced) with an observation that those who don't like smokers congregating around entrances to buildings are somehow eliciting psychosomatic symptoms or being overly precious.

Let me just say: if the entrances to shopping malls and offices through which I must pass to go about my daily business were to somehow become hangouts for those with horrendous flatulence, and each time I wished to access one of these places I was subjected to clouds of durian-like stench, I'd be equally offended.

I don't especially care about my health when it comes to others' smoking. I'm sure the car and factory fumes I breath in everyday are doing far worse damage than the itty bitty bit of smoke I breathe in occasionally. But geeze, it stinks. And interestingly, it didn't stink when I was a smoker for ten years. Maybe if Edward Cline were to give up smoking for a few weeks he'd see that non-smokers are not making this up - the smell of smoke is really unpleasant.

Interesting as well is that since the ban on cigarette smoking in planes, the air that passengers breathe is actually worse in terms of its purity. Its because airlines cut costs by not filtering the air as often. So passengers don't breathe in as much oxygen as they did when smoking was permitted. Given how crap I feel when I hop off a long-haul flight, airplanes is one enclosed space where I'd actually welcome that cloud of cigarette smoke.

But yeah, I accept the broad point that the author was making. The nanny state is just getting bigger and bigger, and it is enabled by legislation that picks off the easy targets first.
 
1) Durians smell infinitely worse than cigarettes. I learned it on the internet.

2) Before all this legislation was entrenched, did you have to deal with that kind of abuse every time you entered some establishment or other?
 
1) Durians smell infinitely worse than cigarettes. I learned it on the internet.

Some places ban durians too :dunno

2) Before all this legislation was entrenched, did you have to deal with that kind of abuse every time you entered some establishment or other?

No, because all the smoke was contained in the establishment I was entering :lol.
 
Kitchen staff at my old hotel used to smoke on a sidewalk that got little traffic. Well away from any entrances. There was a vent two stories up that apparently drew in smoke and choked the office employees within to the brink of a bloodcurdling death.

New rule implemented that no hotel employee could smoke on hotel grounds, or space adjacent to buildings on the same block. If you wanted to smoke, you had to walk around the block. If you were caught standing still, and smoking, anywhere along the perimeter, you were written up.

Psychological genetics is the point of the article. Tell me you can't see the progression. Weren't you the one *****ing about the no camera rule at the public pool?
 
Kitchen staff at my old hotel used to smoke on a sidewalk that got little traffic. Well away from any entrances. There was a vent two stories up that apparently drew in smoke and choked the office employees within to the brink of a bloodcurdling death.

New rule implemented that no hotel employee could smoke on hotel grounds, or space adjacent to buildings on the same block. If you wanted to smoke, you had to walk around the block. If you were caught standing still, and smoking, anywhere along the perimeter, you were written up.

Psychological genetics is the point of the article. Tell me you can't see the progression. Weren't you the one *****ing about the no camera rule at the public pool?

Yeah, there's definitely a progression. Like I said, the nanny state picks off the easy targets first, but I'm not sure whether it's entirely to do with conspiratorial conditioning on the government's part. A lot of stupid laws we have in Oz came about from councils, companies and other bodies being sued because some clumsy oaf wanted someone to blame for their paraplegia, or respitory condition or some such.

The camera rule I mentioned was in a publicly accessed but privately owned pool. So it's not legislation that brought it about, but something that was entirely initiated by private interests. I guess I see the nanny state being more symptomatic of litigation than politics.

The scenario you describe is absurd. I'd like to think this place manages to retain its sense of perspective and common sense when it comes to smoking. Australians by and large love their rules, but are pretty laid back at heart. For the time being, anyhow...
 
Back
Top