Should E cig users be allowed to vape on buses, trains and in their workplace?

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


Are they nonsense?

Or factual?

Extremes?

How many people have died and are still dying of aids Eilzel, both hetrosexual and homosexual?

is that not a major risk?

So how am I being a loser?

Its funny when you get taken to task you constantly get emotionall compremised

Its a choice to have sex and having sex, runs major risks

A kid at a bus stop is not going to be effected if someone is smoking there. They also have the choise to move a couple of feet away from them

Stop being a prejudice dick

So they have to move because you can't wait a little while to get a fix of your addiction? How is that fair? The smoker should move away if they need to smoke so badly.

And sex between two people who don't have any kind of diseases is totally harmless. Smoking? Always harmful.

Extremes, extremes, extremes. It's all you got

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Btw point 3 has everything to do with it.

I have a problem with smoking BECAUSE it is done in public.

You mentioned a homophobe telling me not to have sex. Well, he would never know if I did. Because people tend NOT to have sex in public. Duh.

He would if he saw you holding hands and kissing in public

He would then guess, you woould be having sex and could very well be against this

I mean how many gay couples do you know that kiss and hold hands in public, that do not have sex in private?

Well thank goodness i do not have a problem with yoou expressing your love in public with your partner

It does not offend me

Hence if you are offended with me smoking in public, you are then the problem here

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


He would if he saw you holding hands and kissing in public

He would then guess, you woould be having sex and could very well be against this

I mean how many gay couples do you know that kiss and hold hands in public, that do not have sex in private?

Well thank goodness i do not have a problem with yoou expressing your love in public with your partner

It does not offend me

Hence if you are offended with me smoking in public, you are then the problem here

If you buy a packet of cigarettes, I'm not offended.
If you smoke in front of me, I'd think it disgusting but won't say anything. I do oppose it.
If you smoke in a designated area, that's your choice.

If I hold hands, someone may oppose my relationship but probably won't say anything.
If I have sex in public, they'd be disgusted.
If I have sex in my bedroom, they won't care.

So knowing someone has sex or smokes is NOT the same as seeing them or being around them doing it. Obviously.

NOTE: To the post you just made. Again, I know you aren't stupid didge, none of those things harm people around them. I don't oppose smoking in public because it's 'offensive' I oppose it because it's harmful to others.

Syl wrote:
No......the vapour stinks and the user and anyone nearby is usually swamped by a sweet smelling stench that I for one find quite obnoxious. If you want to vape, go somewhere where you are not bothering other people.

"E-cigarette users should be allowed to vape in public places, such as in offices, buses and trains, a controversial report by MPs has recommended.
The Science and Technology Committee said that forcing vapers into the smoking shelters could undermine their efforts to quit and called for a ‘liberalisation on restrictions’ which would necessitate ‘non-vapers having to accommodate vapers.’
MPs also said regulations should be relaxed to allow licensing, prescribing and advertising of e-cigarettes to promoted their health benefits.
Committee chair Norman Lamb MP, said: “E-cigarettes are less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same. There is no public health rationale for doing so.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/17/let-e-cigarette-users-vape-offices-buses-say-mps-controversial/

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:
No......the vapour stinks and the user and anyone nearby is usually swamped by a sweet smelling stench that I for one find quite obnoxious. If you want to vape, go somewhere where you are not bothering other people.

"E-cigarette users should be allowed to vape in public places, such as in offices, buses and trains, a controversial report by MPs has recommended.
The Science and Technology Committee said that forcing vapers into the smoking shelters could undermine their efforts to quit and called for a ‘liberalisation on restrictions’ which would necessitate ‘non-vapers having to accommodate vapers.’
MPs also said regulations should be relaxed to allow licensing, prescribing and advertising of e-cigarettes to promoted their health benefits.
Committee chair Norman Lamb MP, said: “E-cigarettes are less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same. There is no public health rationale for doing so.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/17/let-e-cigarette-users-vape-offices-buses-say-mps-controversial/

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Didge wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:
No......the vapour stinks and the user and anyone nearby is usually swamped by a sweet smelling stench that I for one find quite obnoxious. If you want to vape, go somewhere where you are not bothering other people.

"E-cigarette users should be allowed to vape in public places, such as in offices, buses and trains, a controversial report by MPs has recommended.
The Science and Technology Committee said that forcing vapers into the smoking shelters could undermine their efforts to quit and called for a ‘liberalisation on restrictions’ which would necessitate ‘non-vapers having to accommodate vapers.’
MPs also said regulations should be relaxed to allow licensing, prescribing and advertising of e-cigarettes to promoted their health benefits.
Committee chair Norman Lamb MP, said: “E-cigarettes are less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same. There is no public health rationale for doing so.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/17/let-e-cigarette-users-vape-offices-buses-say-mps-controversial/

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Can you providce evidence you are breathing in anything harmful in public next to them?

Seriously?

Its hot vapor?

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:
No......the vapour stinks and the user and anyone nearby is usually swamped by a sweet smelling stench that I for one find quite obnoxious. If you want to vape, go somewhere where you are not bothering other people.

"E-cigarette users should be allowed to vape in public places, such as in offices, buses and trains, a controversial report by MPs has recommended.
The Science and Technology Committee said that forcing vapers into the smoking shelters could undermine their efforts to quit and called for a ‘liberalisation on restrictions’ which would necessitate ‘non-vapers having to accommodate vapers.’
MPs also said regulations should be relaxed to allow licensing, prescribing and advertising of e-cigarettes to promoted their health benefits.
Committee chair Norman Lamb MP, said: “E-cigarettes are less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same. There is no public health rationale for doing so.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/17/let-e-cigarette-users-vape-offices-buses-say-mps-controversial/

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Exactly! It seems this really is a case of one group of people wanting the right to impose their dirty habit on others.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Exactly! It seems this really is a case of one group of people wanting the right to impose their dirty habit on others.

Suggesting that we should also pay for it as an NHS prescription item through our taxes is unacceptable.

I have to confess to having been a pipe smoker years ago, something that I started while in the RAF when wearing a smart uniform augmented by a briar clamped firmly between the teeth was almost de rigeur.

Later, I smoked in company with other smokers but other than that not even in my own house because my late wife was asthmatic.

I was lucky enough never to become addicted and was able to quit with no trouble at all.

Eilzel wrote:

Didge wrote:


Can you providce evidence you are breathing in anything harmful in public next to them?

Seriously?

Its hot vapor?

Ah I see, so you are OK with telling people not to smoke normal cigarettes in public. That's good!

Eilzel wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Exactly! It seems this really is a case of one group of people wanting the right to impose their dirty habit on others.

Didge wrote:Being the fact he has not learnt a damn thing from how this very same warped view on offense was used against homosexuals to discriminate against them.

Original Quill wrote:

Didge wrote:Being the fact he has not learnt a damn thing from how this very same warped view on offense was used against homosexuals to discriminate against them.

OMG...now, in addition to blacks, you're down on gays and lesbians?  Who, in your little Kentish hovel, do you like??

Original Quill wrote:And Vegans, too?

Original Quill wrote:Well sexism...I"m not surprised.  Goes along with anti-Gay and anti-Vegan.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Syl wrote:

Outside is good, unless it's sat eating at an outside café or restaurant, and then, just as it's horrible to have your food and lungs infected with the next tables smoking habit, it's also quite unpleasant to have the sweet sickly smell of someones E cig wafted around your food and  nostrils.

Go inside then. Smokers can't go inside, they have to be outside, and they're entitled to go to cafes as well.

magica wrote:

Syl wrote:

Good, who wants to sit on a train or a bus and be enveloped in some sweet smelling stink for the duration of the journey?

They may be healthier than smoking traditional cigarettes, (until new research contradicts this) and there is very little danger of anyone being harmed through secondary smoking, but that still doesn't mean that people want to inhale candy floss or tutti fruity headache induces aromas for hours.

Yes they can have a sweet smell but unless its blown in my face, I don't notice them. E cigs don't smell, they look like a cigarette, but arn't.

I feel sorry for vape users, smokers have had bad press, so using these are a better alternative.

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Why not? Smoking is revolting, why should others like you and me have to deal with the stink of whatever type of cig it is? There should be designated smoking areas and that should be it. Everywhere else - no. Even bus stops. Kids often uses buses and have to line up with people smoking these putrid things. Sure e-cigs are harmless but they still smell and still set a worse example than just not smoking anything.

What?

Oh so smell is your issue here?

Shall we ban people for being in public when they fart?

Ban people, when you dislike a type of perfume, deodorant, aftershave?

Do you not see how totalitarian you are being?

I mean, where are you going to draw the line on smell here?

Are you now going to ban hands on phsyical workers getting on trains and buses, because they have worked their arse all day and now smell a tad?

I can understand rational arguments based on enclosed spaces, when people smoke. Which can and do cause harm to others but out in the open and you want to ban people, based on your offense here on smell?

Seriously?

Have you not learnt a damn thing?

Only a Far lefty could come out with a view to restrict people based on offense. Being the fact he has not learnt a damn thing from how this very same warped view on offense was used against homosexuals to discriminate against them.

The same sort of lefty who would have no consideration about driving his car daily and the ill effects this has on people

Go figure

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:

What?

Oh so smell is your issue here?

Shall we ban people for being in public when they fart?

Ban people, when you dislike a type of perfume, deodorant, aftershave?

Do you not see how totalitarian you are being?

I mean, where are you going to draw the line on smell here?

Are you now going to ban hands on phsyical workers getting on trains and buses, because they have worked their arse all day and now smell a tad?

I can understand rational arguments based on enclosed spaces, when people smoke. Which can and do cause harm to others but out in the open and you want to ban people, based on your offense here on smell?

Seriously?

Have you not learnt a damn thing?

Only a Far lefty could come out with a view to restrict people based on offense. Being the fact he has not learnt a damn thing from how this very same warped view on offense was used against homosexuals to discriminate against them.

The same sort of lefty who would have no consideration about driving his car daily and the ill effects this has on people

Go figure

You have a really odd way of trying to provoke people when they are in a discussion with you.
Homosexuality is totally unrelated to this topic, so why mention it?.

Whenever you row with Rags you somehow manage to squeeze Christianity into the debate....I swear if you thought someone was obese, fattism would be the button you pushed when in debate with them.

Didge wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

A harmful pleasure, if we are talking normal cigarettes, and one which causes even more harm to others.

Also didge, STOP talking the ridiculous extremes of everything.

I made it absolutely clear early on that some smells are unavoidable and I do NOT hold those against people.

OBVIOUSLY when I have a child it will smell at times - that's part of what having a baby entails.
OBVIOUSLY if a loved one had problems with their bowels (and I do have experience with elderly relatives in this regard) I just deal with it.
OBVIOUSLY some homeless people will smell, though in the street I haven't often experienced them smelling so bad that I can smell them unless standing right beside them. In which case I understand and again, don't hold it against them.

Also, OBVIOUSLY none of the above can be avoided. They are all facts of life and not things that bother me. They are all also totally harmless to others.

Smoking is MASSIVELY different since it IS a choice, it IS harmful (in the case of real cigarettes), it IS a bad example to children.
So it should be done in restricted places imo.

IF you respond again ignoring any one of the points I've mentioned above or by throwing out extreme again, I'll just ignore your reply and move on.

Dont tell me what to talk about.

Again another glowing example of your fascism

Smoking is harmful, so is trains, planes, cars etc. They add more to pollution that anything else, but you hold smokers to a higher standard. Hence the hypocrisy of your bullshit and double satndards here

Well you best start getting used to such smells and actually see its a part of life

So if you just deal with it, why are you not applying the same when out ion public with poor or bad smells?

You see, you just rubbished your own argument

You deal with it and yet you want to punish others, when its not someone close to you, as i bet you would not shun a single friend that vaped or smoked. You just simple want to discriminate against others, and as seen based on a flawd argument

Did you stop and help those homeless that smelled so bad though?

You see how you avoided my questions again

I know the kind of half hearted liberal you are

You talk a good talk, but when reality comes, you would walk past a drunk, lying in their own vomit, not caring if they are breathing. You would avoid someone so smelling if homeless, because the smell drives you more away than the view to do what is right. This is why your answers give you away Eilzel and why you are a hypocrite

So whilst we at smoking being a bad example, lets not stop their on your fascism

Drinking is a bad habbit, lets ban that from public, as with fast food, lets ban that from public. Lets ban any adreanline feeling, that is bad for children, so no more fun fort them

Do you want me to continue down your idiotic argument?

Ignoring points?

How many of my points have you fucking ignored?

Seriously?

[b[You sound like a girl now[/b]

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


Dont tell me what to talk about.

Again another glowing example of your fascism

Smoking is harmful, so is trains, planes, cars etc. They add more to pollution that anything else, but you hold smokers to a higher standard. Hence the hypocrisy of your bullshit and double satndards here

Well you best start getting used to such smells and actually see its a part of life

So if you just deal with it, why are you not applying the same when out ion public with poor or bad smells?

You see, you just rubbished your own argument

You deal with it and yet you want to punish others, when its not someone close to you, as i bet you would not shun a single friend that vaped or smoked. You just simple want to discriminate against others, and as seen based on a flawd argument

Did you stop and help those homeless that smelled so bad though?

You see how you avoided my questions again

I know the kind of half hearted liberal you are

You talk a good talk, but when reality comes, you would walk past a drunk, lying in their own vomit, not caring if they are breathing. You would avoid someone so smelling if homeless, because the smell drives you more away than the view to do what is right. This is why your answers give you away Eilzel and why you are a hypocrite

So whilst we at smoking being a bad example, lets not stop their on your fascism

Drinking is a bad habbit, lets ban that from public, as with fast food, lets ban that from public. Lets ban any adreanline feeling, that is bad for children, so no more fun fort them

Do you want me to continue down your idiotic argument?

Ignoring points?

How many of my points have you fucking ignored?

Seriously?

[b[You sound like a girl now[/b]

I thought you frowned on sexist comments.

I agree with everything Eilzel has said so far......you are as usual going way off topic to score points.

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

You have a really odd way of trying to provoke people when they are in a discussion with you.
Homosexuality is totally unrelated to this topic, so why mention it?.

Whenever you row with Rags you somehow manage to squeeze Christianity into the debate....I swear if you thought someone was obese, fattism would be the button you pushed when in debate with them.

I have not brought up Christianity in ages with Rags

Secondly, this is a prejudice against people who smoke

Hence comparrisons to other prejudices

So not provoking anything but attempting to have thought provoking views

A huge difference, but never mind, I guess you cannot see that

Anyway, as some of my friends do not like smoking, I always move away fropm people when I smoke anyway. So to say I have to go to specially designated areas, when I can simple move away from people to have a smoke. Is being prejudiced towards smokers

I respecy the fact of banning in enclosed spaces, but this is going one step to far. To say I have to find designated places when out in public

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


I have not brought up Christianity in ages with Rags

Secondly, this is a prejudice against people who smoke

Hence comparrisons to other prejudices

So not provoking anything but attempting to have thought provoking views

A huge difference, but never mind, I guess you cannot see that

Anyway, as some of my friends do not like smoking, I always move away fropm people when I smoke anyway. So to say I have to go to specially designated areas, when I can simple move away from people to have a smoke. Is being prejudiced towards smokers

I respecy the fact of banning in enclosed spaces, but this is going one step to far. To say I have to find designated places when out in public

You are always bringing up Christianity when you are rowing with Rags.



The only people who cant see it's unsociable and unacceptable to suffer someone elses tobacco stench or flavoured E cig pong and smoke/vape, are either the ones who puff away themselves, or people who have little sense of smell.

I dont want to sit in a bus or train and suffer because some inconsidrate oaf insists on puffing and blowing on a E cig,  and I cartainly dont want my food tainted by it if I am eating out.

As for the farting and perfume red herrings.....thats a totally different subject, perfume isnt forever refreshing itself in a cloud of smoke, and no one farts repeatedly, unless they have stomach problems and thats a different matter.

eddie wrote:Regarding vaping in public and the people moaning about the smell.

It’s STEAM! It evaporates within seconds leaving no smell. Because it’s STEAM!

Perfumes and aftershaves are stronger, linger longer and are far worse than STEAM.

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

I thought you frowned on sexist comments.

I agree with everything Eilzel has said so far......you are as usual going way off topic to score points.

Oh for goodness sake aand so what that you agree with him

Give yourself a pat on the back


Anyway, as some of my friends do not like smoking, I always move away fropm people when I smoke anyway. So to say I have to go to specially designated areas, when I can simple move away from people to have a smoke. Is being prejudiced towards smokers

I respecy the fact of banning in enclosed spaces, but this is going one step to far. To say I have to find designated places when out in public

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


Oh for goodness sake aand so what that you agree with him

Give yourself a pat on the back


Anyway, as some of my friends do not like smoking, I always move away from people when I smoke anyway. So to say I have to go to specially designated areas, when I can simple move away from people to have a smoke. Is being prejudiced towards smokers

I respecy the fact of banning in enclosed spaces, but this is going one step to far. To say I have to find designated places when out in public

What about at an outside seating area when other people are eating nearby, do you smoke then?
Or are you one of those who lights up at the table, but very considerately (so the smoke doesnt go near their friends) hold their cigarette away from them but right in direction of the people sitting at the next table.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Regarding vaping in public and the people moaning about the smell.

It’s STEAM! It evaporates within seconds leaving no smell. Because it’s STEAM!

Perfumes and aftershaves are stronger, linger longer and are far worse than STEAM.

Exactly Eddie

The fuss over the smell is simple bullshit

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Exactly Eddie

The fuss over the smell is simple bullshit

Of course it is. And STEAM is gone within seconds.  Like I said, perfume and aftershave can be extremely overpowering.

There are some very precious people posting on here.

eddie wrote:Regarding vaping in public and the people moaning about the smell.

It’s STEAM! It evaporates within seconds leaving no smell. Because it’s STEAM!

Perfumes and aftershaves are stronger, linger longer and are far worse than STEAM.

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


Exactly Eddie

The fuss over the smell is simple bullshit

Of course it is. And STEAM is gone within seconds.  Like I said, perfume and aftershave can be extremely overpowering.

There are some very precious people posting on here.

eddie wrote:And by the way! I don’t like some cheeses. They smell like feet and worse, some smell like vomit.

I am going to ask that smelly feety vomit cheese is not sold in restaurants.

It offends me.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Syl wrote:
No......the vapour stinks and the user and anyone nearby is usually swamped by a sweet smelling stench that I for one find quite obnoxious. If you want to vape, go somewhere where you are not bothering other people.

"E-cigarette users should be allowed to vape in public places, such as in offices, buses and trains, a controversial report by MPs has recommended.
The Science and Technology Committee said that forcing vapers into the smoking shelters could undermine their efforts to quit and called for a ‘liberalisation on restrictions’ which would necessitate ‘non-vapers having to accommodate vapers.’
MPs also said regulations should be relaxed to allow licensing, prescribing and advertising of e-cigarettes to promoted their health benefits.
Committee chair Norman Lamb MP, said: “E-cigarettes are less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but current policy and regulations do not sufficiently reflect this and businesses, transport providers and public places should stop viewing conventional and e-cigarettes as one and the same. There is no public health rationale for doing so.”



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2018/08/17/let-e-cigarette-users-vape-offices-buses-say-mps-controversial/

I agree. Why the hell should we non-smokers be forced to breathe in someone else's chemical emissions?

The fact that e-cigs may be "less harmful" than real ones is no excuse for officially-approved and compulsory secondary vaping.

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

What about at an outside seating area when other people are eating nearby, do you smoke then?
Or are you one of those who lights up at the table, but very considerately (so the smoke doesnt go near their friends) hold their cigarette away from them but right in direction of the people sitting at the next table.

Just highlighted the above again for you

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

What about at an outside seating area when other people are eating nearby, do you smoke then?
Or are you one of those who lights up at the table, but very considerately (so the smoke doesnt go near their friends) hold their cigarette away from them but right in direction of the people sitting at the next table.

Just highlighted the above again for you

eddie wrote:And by the way! I don’t like some cheeses. They smell like feet and worse, some smell like vomit.

I am going to ask that smelly feety vomit cheese is not sold in restaurants.

It offends me.

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


Just highlighted the above again for you

Well you are contradicting then.

If you are sitting at an outside cafe, and you dont smoke in front of people who are eating....be they your friends or others, you either refrain from smoking, or move away from them....ie, you go to a designated area for smokers.

Glad we agree on something.

Didge wrote:

Syl wrote:

You are always bringing up Christianity when you are rowing with Rags.



The only people who cant see it's unsociable and unacceptable to suffer someone elses tobacco stench or flavoured E cig pong and smoke/vape, are either the ones who puff away themselves, or people who have little sense of smell.

I dont want to sit in a bus or train and suffer because some inconsidrate oaf insists on puffing and blowing on a E cig,  and I cartainly dont want my food tainted by it if I am eating out.

As for the farting and perfume red herrings.....thats a totally different subject, perfume isnt forever refreshing itself in a cloud of smoke, and no one farts repeatedly, unless they have stomach problems and thats a different matter.

No I do not and that is nothing more than misdirection and can easily prove I do not always do so

Unsocialable it maybe to you, but not others. Hence its subjective to say its unsocialable. Its not a standard view or governed by law. Its you thinking it should be. 

Again the view on smells, well that is your problem not those vaping. There are plenty of smells daily

Well considering they are also banned on the train and buses, as its and enclosed space, that is not going to happe

Its not red herrings, its simple you not like the fact there is a multitude off smells that people like or dislike

What is evident, and clear to me, is that if there is someone homeless and unwashed, you would walk on by

So at the end of the day, you can move and the person vaping can also move, hence its not a big issue. Only those who want to control others are the ones creating an issue out of nothimng

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:


No I do not and that is nothing more than misdirection and can easily prove I do not always do so

Unsocialable it maybe to you, but not others. Hence its subjective to say its unsocialable. Its not a standard view or governed by law. Its you thinking it should be. 

Again the view on smells, well that is your problem not those vaping. There are plenty of smells daily

Well considering they are also banned on the train and buses, as its and enclosed space, that is not going to happe

Its not red herrings, its simple you not like the fact there is a multitude off smells that people like or dislike

What is evident, and clear to me, is that if there is someone homeless and unwashed, you would walk on by

So at the end of the day, you can move and the person vaping can also move, hence its not a big issue. Only those who want to control others are the ones creating an issue out of nothimng

I very often dont walk on by when I see a homeless person, but by all means bring in yet another red herring to bolster up your selfish attitude re smoking.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:And by the way! I don’t like some cheeses. They smell like feet and worse, some smell like vomit.

I am going to ask that smelly feety vomit cheese is not sold in restaurants.

It offends me.

Can you imagine eating out with these fuss pots?

Based on the numereous smells brought off by food?

eddie wrote:Sorry, I’m sending an email asking for feet-vomit-cheese to be banned in public places.
I just simply can’t stand the smell.

Syl wrote:

Didge wrote:

Can you imagine eating out with these fuss pots?

Based on the numereous smells brought off by food?

I am a delight to eat out with....just as long as you dont vape near me and go to the designated area to indulge your little dirty habits.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Sorry, I’m sending an email asking for feet-vomit-cheese to be banned in public places.
I just simply can’t stand the smell.

Dont forget people with bad breath.....

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:




Dont forget people with bad breath.....

And strong perfume! That actually makes me cough.