Smoking ban should extend to homes

[Ralph]

Just something I noticed on the TV there got me to thinking about this, I think the smoking ban which already exists in Scotland and soon the rest of the UK should extend into people's homes when they have external visitors on business appointments.

Last year I had a couple of clients who I visited at home and whose smoke I had to endure. In fairness to a lot of clients they're very decent that way. It's very difficult to say to someone in their own home that they not smoke but I think for those who are less considerate or just plain ignorant this should be a requirement if they want home visits.

Afterall if murderers as per another thread have human rights blah blah blah...

[Wayne]

Hmmm...... Sounds a bit dodgy......
But i would say that the clients should be obliged to visit you at your office or home, where of course they wouldn't be allowed to smoke.

[Ralph]

Well I'd agree with that - can be done in my case but what about the Central Heating engineer or plumber etc?

I think because we've had the ban up here for almost a year now it doesn't seem that draconian to me I bet it happens eventually in these circumstances...

[Wayne]

[Paul Clement]

Well I'd agree with that - can be done in my case but what about the Central Heating engineer or plumber etc?

Ban the builders bum crack showing and the tea swilling first though.

[Matthew T]

I don't smoke out of courtesy when I have a non-smoking visitor but I don't think you can realistically ban it in people's homes!

[Si Hunt]

Ban it completely, people would grumble but they'd still get used to it. Suicide is illegal, what's the difference?

Si.

[Larry]

I'm all for a ban on smoking in public places but what people do in the privacy of there own homes is their own business but I can understand your concerns about going to a home of a smoker. But at the end of the day you are a guest in their home and don't really have any right to tell them what they can or can't do.

[Pip Madeley]

I think Larry's right.

I hate smoking, but if people want to smoke in their own homes, it's their choice. Now sharing with a smoker, that's another matter. My dad and sis smoke, it drives me up the wall. Thankfully they're attempting to give up at the moment.

[Andrew Curnow]

It's all speculation anyway, isn't it, because if they brought in a ban on smoking in your own home tomorrow, how ever would they enforce it? Aren't we continually being told there aren't enough police on the streets as it is - how would they cope with being obliged to go knocking on people's doors to see if they're smoking?

Plus, does it really need saying - dictating to that extent what you can do in your own home crosses the line from nanny state (which is bad enough) to police state. It's the craziest thing I've heard so far today!

[Ralph]

It's the craziest thing I've heard so far today!

I'd dispute that! 10/10 for the Gunfighters in the "2007 rumoured DVD releases" thread fits that description better

But I think there is a fair point in what I'm saying in regards to those who must by necessity visit someone's home and have no choice but to enter a smoking environment and I refer here to the Plumber example. I think these people have got the right to a clean air to carry out their work - I'm sure the European Court of Human Rights would agree with me...

[Carol Baynes]

Whther it's good for me or anybody else isn't the issue here, is it? To a large extent what goes on in my home should be my own affair and nobody elses.
Where do you draw the line with freedom of choice? Where does the so called 'nanny state' beome something more sinister?

"Suicide is illegal", says Si. What's the difference? Suicide isn't addictive or part of people's social lives (although smoking is currently becoming viewed as anti-social; such are current times. I'm not saying this is a wrong view to take, by the way).
This clean air idea seems to be taken too far. Some people seem more concerned about whether someone is smoking in their own home than the planet destroying pollution caused elsewhere.

I'll admit I'm playing devil's advocat here, mainly because I think it's an argument that needs a bit of balance, rather than ' I don't smoke and i don't like it and don't want to know' (which is a fair statement to make).

[Si Hunt]

"Suicide is illegal", says Si. What's the difference? Suicide isn't addictive or part of people's social lives

I just threw that comment out there, part fasceously, but it's interesting to hear your attempts to refute it. Does it make much difference if something is addictive or social as to whether it should be allowed? If it were only allowed in homes, it wouldn't be part of social lives any more, and as to the other point are we saying that it should be allowed simply because it's addictive? You arn't allowed to take heroin in your own home, but that's addictive.

Si.

[Captain Tancredi]

But I think there is a fair point in what I'm saying in regards to those who must by necessity visit someone's home and have no choice but to enter a smoking environment and I refer here to the Plumber example. I think these people have got the right to a clean air to carry out their work - I'm sure the European Court of Human Rights would agree with me...

I think some health authorities are already starting to go that way as regards health visitor appointments and so on, but if somebody smokes in the privacy of their own home, all you can do is make them stop smoking when the visitor is actually there. More than that, and you get into the realms of whether the smoker would be OK just to put their fag out when the visitor arrives, or whether the visitor could object to the air quality.

[Carol Baynes]

This comes down to personality too, doesn't it. I don't like being tol dwhat to do by do-gooders (I'm not saying you here, Si! ) who think they know best and are (frankly) infringing on my own personal territory. They can **** off, to be blunt.
I'll be happy to do what is considered socially conductive when in the pub or whereever, when the majority want it a certain way and their well being is concerned. But in my own time and space it is none of your business.

If you "object to the air quality" don't come round! Incidentally, in my house I'd say you were being a cheeky sod, as I only smoke in the kitchen and back yard anyway (true!) But basically if you don't like the way I run the show, go and see another!

I will defend to the death your right to live your life by your personal coda, as long as it doesn't involve deliberate harm to others (and of course I will smoke out of your way if you consider that harmful). However, I expect the same respect in return.

[Lord President]

You said it Carol!!! Ban me from smoking in my own home? Is this Blair's Nazis again, infringing on every human right? I cannot even smoke in the carpark at work anymore because I work for Blair's government, but the jobless layabouts signing on can! Where is the common sense in that? If I want to smoke when down the pub with my mates, I'm going to have to go into the beer garden, that will be fun in November! Why can't there be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs? Why can't I have a smoking room at work? There is no reason for non-smokers to go into them, why is it a problem? The government are more than happy to take my tax on cigarettes, and then make out I'm some kind of criminal for lighting up! We've got anti-smoking posters all over the office, but they give away alcohol as raffle prizes , am I the only one that sees any hipocracy there? I bet the smoking ban doesn't extend to the Houses of Parliament!!!!!!

Rant over, and breathe. cough cough!!!!!

[Nathan]

Why can't there be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs? Why can't I have a smoking room at work? There is no reason for non-smokers to go into them, why is it a problem?

Because, as has been found out in the USA, it could lead to law suits from smokers who say that they were encouraged to smoke at work due to a place being specially provided for them for that very purpose.

You could hardly call it discouragement can you?

It's for legal and insurance reasons rather than health ones.

[Si Hunt]

If I want to smoke when down the pub with my mates, I'm going to have to go into the beer garden, that will be fun in November!

You mean everytime you want to go to the pub you'll have to suffer discomfort? Welcome to my world! That's what it's like for non-smokers! At least you have a CHOICE.

Why can't there be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs?

It just wouldn't work - smokers would intimidate their friends into going to smoking pubs on jaunts out, and we'd be back where we started.

Why can't I have a smoking room at work?

Why should my company pay for a special place to be built and run just because people want to pump poison into the air? You know, I'm sure my day would be great if I could stop work every hour and go and listen to my favourite CD for ten minutes. But I wouldn't dream of expecting my employers to pay for me to it, AND provide a room for me to do it in. Why is smoking any different? It's your hobby, do it in your own time and space.

We've got anti-smoking posters all over the office, but they give away alcohol as raffle prizes , am I the only one that sees any hipocracy there?

Despite what smokers kid themselves into believing, the dangers of smoking arn't just invented by every scientist in the world. The levels of danger from alcohol are much, much lower or else there'd be "ALCHOHOL KILLS" stickers on every bottle of scotch wouldn't there? Smoking is much, much more lethal than drinking alcohol, not least because it's so much more addictive and therefore more heavily used.

Let's hope the ban eventually extends to outdoor public places like high streets, railway platforms and bus stops as well. The I won't have to have the foul poison of cigarette smoke puffed in my face when I use them.

Si.

[Rob McCow]

Although I don't think people should be banned from smoking at home, I do think Ralph's case is rather different.

In effect, because he is working in a client's home for the convenience of that client (I presume), effectively they are setting up a working environment for him. In that respect, the working environment should be subject to the same laws as any other place of work, office, factory etc.

If you were doing regular work for a client in their home, say if you were their personal typist, then you would expect to have certain rights to do with the workplace provided. Working every day for a chain-smoker could be unpleasant, regardless of where you were working.

[Nathan]

But wouldn't that also cover cleaners, plumbers, decorators, etc?

Twelve years ago when we got the lease on the theatre from the council and truned it into a full time music venue, the first thing we did was remove all the "No smoking" signs. Not because we were smokers (most of us weren't) but we knew we would never survive with the clientele if we didn't let it happen.

A few days later the man from the council insisted we re-instated the policy as "all council owned buildings" (which this still was) were no smoking.

We asked him if he was going to send out a memo to all the council house tennents explaining this, and a few days later we got the nod to carry on as we were

We'll be going no smoking this year though when the legislation goes through, but attittudes have changed a lot in the intervening decade.

[Rob McCow]

Perhaps it's a different case with plumbers and decorators, as you're not providing a working environment for them as such. I'm not sure though - if you left exposed electrical wiring out in a place where they might come into contact with it, surely you'd be liable for that? Smoking, which is also considered a health risk, may fall under the same laws.

[Andrew Curnow]

I suppose they'd have the option NOT to take on the job, if they considered it an issue. I would have thought in the case of anybody visiting clients at home, the onus is on the visitor as to whether or not they want the business...


...which leaves doctors, etc as a grey area, I know, so I don't know!

[Lord President]

Let's hope the ban eventually extends to outdoor public places like high streets, railway platforms and bus stops as well. The I won't have to have the foul poison of cigarette smoke puffed in my face when I use them.

Si.

Yes, because prohibition has proved to be so successful over the years!

[Carol Baynes]

I bet Si is a right moaner at a Bonfire night.

[Si Hunt]

No, I love the smell of bonfires. No cadmium, arsenic or tar in it you see.

Si.