Monday, 18 April 2011

Home Smoking Bans - State Sponsored Theft

Considering the nasty, soiled and contaminated sandpit Australia has become of late, I suppose we're quite lucky here in the UK that it's so very far away from us.

The cigarette police are coming to get you - at home

Smokers. The unthinkable may become a disagreeable reality. Smoking may be banned in private homes and apartments.

Scoff if you like about improbability of home smoking bans. How they would not only be unfair but unenforceable. Dismiss the concept as ridiculous.

Huff and puff about civil liberties, individual freedom of choice and the home being the family castle. Thump the table about government interference and intervention. About the spidery intrusion of the nanny state. But ignore the looming reality at your peril. The smokers’ nagging fear, that their final bastion will be invaded by smoke police, is already here.
These comments are in response to ever more frequent references to smoking bans in homes. Scarily, the idea of legislating the behaviour of citizens in their private property no longer holds any fear for health lobbyists. Like the spoilt kid who is always given what he wants, the bansturbators feel no shame in loudly and publicly demanding the world on a stick.

“As people’s awareness and understanding of the harm of second hand tobacco smoke increases, expectation is growing that there be no smoke in shared places,” the [Cancer Council of South Australia's] Chief Executive, Professor Brenda Wilson says.

“It’s entirely possible and even probable that people sharing apartment blocks will want those to be smoke-free too here in Australia.

“The fact remains that second hand smoke is harmful. The level of exposure can determine a person’s risk and you could imagine many would like to have the choice that their home be a safe haven – something that poses quite a challenge in a shared setting such as an apartment block.”
What we are now seeing is far in excess of the wettest dreams enjoyed by anti-smoking pioneers. Even superlatively obsessive 20th century smoke bigots like George Godber - architect of the passive smoking scam - at least showed respect for the concept of private property.

Godber recollected that he had said in 1962 to Keith Joseph, another of his Conservative ministers, that "we really have to do something about abolishing smoking" (having won the approval of the Health Minister Enoch Powell). Joseph looked quite shocked and said: "You really can't expect to abolish smoking." Godber replied: "No, but I want to see it reduced to an activity of consenting adults in private."
The most sinister part of these developments - as hinted at in the Aussie article - is how utterly defenceless we all are (not just smokers, either) in the face of such blatant and brutal health bullying. Yes, bullying, because there really is no other word for it.

If a burglar enters your home and nicks your TV, your wife's jewellery and rips out your copper pipes, the state will declare their determination to punish the theft under full weight of the law.

But when the health lobby comes to steal your privacy and right to quiet enjoyment of your own property, the government will be there ... keeping the getaway car's engine ticking over.


32 comments:

Beware of Geeks bearing GIFs said...

@kevin, indeed but I believe Oz have banned them so expect that to occur here shortly as they catch on.

I'm an ex- social smoker having given up ages ago but jumped at the chance to "rub the authoritarian left's noses in individualism" and bought an e-cig and have been using it in pubs.

No nicotine - just love the minty flavour and making smoke rings.

Most publicans have been ok about it although a couple of drunken numpties can't distinguish between an e-cig and a convential cig and start lighting up in the pub.

However, last weekend a publican said no. And I quote:

"Yeah, I know what they are but there's no way I'm letting someone light up in here as I've just given up smoking".

Fair dos!

Sue said...

What's happened to real men? Fuck!

So, Kevin and Beware of Geeks, you think the answer to fighting back is get an fake fag. Wow, REAL MEN!

You really are a sorry bunch. Why is it that "modern man" has taken to whinging instead of fighting back?

No wonder women become lesbians, ain't no men left!

Belinda said...

This will be enacted against people in public housing and apartment blocks. Not against the homes of detached home-owners. It's an attack on people least able to defend themselves. All for their own good, of course.

Dick Puddlecote said...

Precisely, Belinda. Tobacco control do love to punish the less well off, don't they?

handymanphil said...

@Sue-I couldn't agree more gal! I've been trying to get the licensees to stand together and fight for nearly 4 years but they must love looking down the barrel of a loaded gun!
The pubcos killed their own golden goose through greed-fancy thinking there were millions of non smokers waiting to come down from the hills when they never even drank in the first place. As Belinda states above apartments, blocks of flats will be the first to be victimised by the anti smoking bansturbators-using SHS marching through concrete etc. I think it will be interesting to see just how much 'power' CamerCleggs & Co give to local councils-because we could ALL be in serious trouble as mini Hitlers realise they can once again march!

JuliaM said...

"This will be enacted against people in public housing and apartment blocks. Not against the homes of detached home-owners..."

Not at first, maybe. But we already know they never declare themselves satisfied, don't we?

Sue said...

@handymanphil

Time to fight back. I know old lady pensioners with bigger balls! I'm not the giving up type. I'd rather go to prison than give in.

All it takes is a bit of co-operation. That means getting people together.

I'd love to know how they're going to enforce this. I really do. I suppose those wimps will let the government put anti nicotine sensors in their homes.

Of course, you could vote UKIP! That would solve everyone's problems.

They advocate smoking areas and rooms. Not the best solution as I think it should be up to the owner of the property to decide, but better.

botiquin de armario said...

Thanks for these nice and healthy advices; I am going to tell all these tips to my grandfather and my whole family also. Everyone should take good care about their health. Health is everything to human's life. :)

TheBigYin said...

DP, I have said this before and I will say it again. I live in a high rise block of flats which is council accommodation. In the eighties we were asked if we would mind going warden controled and I had no qualms about saying no, I had no problems with it as my ma in law was lost and felt she had no one to talk to. Little did I know then that I was handing over my rights as a tenant to a committee of control freeks.

The warden (good title for an enforcer of prison life) has to periodically get me to fill in a form after asking many personal questions and sign it. I have answered the questions but refuse to sign the form.

Not so long ago the block was refurbished and many anti fire regs were put in place, even to the point of detecting tobacco smoke. I am no longer allowed now to smoke from my flat to the outside door just two floors away.

Recently a council worker came to my door and installed a sign with a load of fire regs, just like you would see in a hotel. I, nor any other tenant, was asked if this was viable, we just have to accept it.

I have no doubt in my mind that the 'next step' will to ban me from smoking in my own home and I am getting prepared for a shootout.

I am at the mercy of the council but how can private citizens in their own bought and paid for homes, and cars for that matter, except this intrusion into their daily lives?

The fightback must start NOW!

Anonymous said...

The draconian attack on liberty of the individual will only be halted
when those who are to eager to restrict the freedom of others,
are faced with a brutal response
The gilded nannies are having a
pleasure cruise in the knowledge their only opposition is a chorus of twitters and a Facebook choking
with invisible furies.
Last orders for Mr Nice Guys,
they have achieved ZILCH,time to seek the nasties.

Dun Stoopin

Anonymous said...

It's a try on.
The state want's an excuse to enter homes.
Once in they can then control other activities.
Society would in effect become an open prison.

westcoast2 said...

@kevin "That's why electronic cigarettes are the answer."

The e-cig is not the answer, indeed e-cigs are themselves in a difficult position.

The people behind these bans will not stop here. They will and have moved onto Alcohol, Fast Food, this and that, all to maintain control and their own lifestyle. It is a prohibitionist mindset. This is not about health.

@Belinda/Phil
Local Control of Health issues is very worrying. This enables each area to play the 'one up' game.

Anonymous said...

If this will be enacted against apartment rentals and public housing then I won't have to worry as I live in detached housing and can smoke at home. Australia is also far away so I doubt it will happen here. I will not worry about it then as isn't my problem.

Mr A said...

This is why the science is key. On a day when Frank Davis points out the fivefold increase in lung cancer cases in the last 50 years, where smoking has dropped from 90+% of the population to 25 (and the exposure to second hand smoke, if you don't smoke yourself, has dropped to almost zero) and all these idiots have to say to impose fascistic incursions on liberty and property is guff like "Second hand smoke kills."

They need to be brought up on this, humiliated and exposed. Until then all the whingeing in the world won't help as "public health" is too powerful.

I say again - the science is key.

Belinda said...

westcoast2: local control of health issues is very worrying'

Yes it is.

Mr A: any idea *how* to humiliate these tinpots with science?

Dick Puddlecote said...

Sue: Kevin's many (identical) contributions weren't very helpful. I bought a tin of spam just the other day, so didn't require any more.

Not sure about "botiquin de armario". He could just be in entirely the wrong place, or be confused as to the message carried in my tabloid shite. Either way he appears to be a bit of a dick.

TBY: Remember that your tenancy agreement is binding on all parties and very important. If smoking isn't barred in the original document, don't allow them issue you with another one unless you're happy with the terms.

Mr A said...

@ Belinda

The science is already out there - we see it on Velvet Glove, Iron Fist and a few other places every day. The key is getting the MSM to report it and for those with media clout and political connections to ramp up their efforts. (Forest could be useful here, heavy emaphasis on the "could"....)

But really, we need scientists of conviction and renown to denounce the liars in Tobacco Control, but frankly most won't as TC is too powerful and unless their idiocy infects their own areas of research, most scientists are happy to just let them continue.

Robbing ASH of their funding would help. But yes - this is the frustrating thing - the science is there - it's available for all to see. But while heavily funded anti-tobacco groups can ruin reputations and have Health Ministers on speed-dial (and while a PC MSM continues to scaremonger and edit the truth) it's damn hard to see what can be done.

And this is what scares me and why I continue to think fighting Tobacco Control is so important. I've got to the point where I could almost give two shits about smoking in pubs (as nice as that would be!). What I am really fighting is fascism, pure and simple. Fascism based on easily discountable lies. If we let policy be dictated by liars when we know that they are lying, where does that leave us? Measuring the skulls of Jews and blacks to prove they are inferior? Advocating the "retirement" of the old and disabled as they are an inefficient burden?

If one group can dictate policy based on lies, then what is to stop others?

Besides, look at the slippery slope Tobacco Control have us speeding down. Four years ago the thought of banning smoking in pubs seemed incomprehensible - I was amazed when the idiots in Parliament voted for the ban. In only 48 months we have seen outdoor smoking bans, restrictions on fostering and employment, and definite moves towards banning smoking in cars and in homes. In 48 months! (And let's not forget their machinations with regard to fast food and alcohol). Where will we be in 10 years once the notion of civil liberties and private property rights, already so weakened, are allowed to be trampled further?

It's a long fight but one we have a duty to undertake, no matter how hard it will be. So we just have to do what we can. But you're right there's no easy way. I suspect that the Tobacco companies themselves could be useful here - while anything they say is easily discounted as they are so "nasty and evil", they do have money, and if they could, as we have seen in Oz, co-ordinate the disgruntled 25% of the population into an effective lobbying force, then the MSM, the pubcos and even the Government, would be forced to listen to us, rather than discounting us as a few disgruntled tobacco addicts on a handful of blogs.

Anonymous said...

Anon 22.27 – I am assuming that your comment is a tongue-in-cheek one, designed to illustrate precisely why smokers (and, soon, drinkers, chocolate-eaters, salt-lovers and exercise-avoiders) are now in the position they are ……

Mr A: You’re absolutely right, of course. Like any form of rot, you have to go back to its starting-point to get rid of it once and for all – ask any chippie about that one. But the big question is, as always – how? As you say, some way, somehow, we need to get some members of the MSM – much as I despise them – on board and get the counter-evidence in hard, inky print or on screen, and although there have been some tentative signs that the MSM are beginning to relax their “hold the Tobacco Is Evil line in extremis and under all circumstances” rule a bit in terms of some internet articles, the only manifestation I’ve seen in the “real” papers of this relaxation is a total silence on all matters related to smoking, whether negative or positive.

I think that your point about the tobacco companies is correct, and I think that what’s happened in Oz is more significant than we realise over here (probably because, once again, this story only broke on the internet and didn’t make the papers, TV or radio), because it indicates that some of the private property bans being proposed over there really, really are going to damage their sales (as opposed to public bans which, like here, simply led to people smoking at home instead of going out and doing it) and that’s the one thing which will stir them to action. I think that cards in cig packets, like they’ve done over there, would be an ideal way of getting the message across about the flawed science of anti-smoking. Yes, of course antis will scream about bias but in many ways I don’t think that that would matter (and the antis would know that – which is why they would scream in the first place), because, just as they have managed to brainwash the masses with a constant drip, drip, drip of propaganda and skewed statistics, then surely the same approach might well work the other way around – and if the message begins, slowly, to get through to the public that no-one should believe everything they read/hear/see about smoking, then that must surely be a good thing?

Problem being – where to start? Who does one approach without being cast aside like a junk-mailer? Anybody on here got any contacts within the industry?

Anonymous said...

It is now being claimed that the M1 fire was 'started by a cigarette thrown from a passing car' !

Makes you wonder which one of the anti-tobacco mafia thought that one up - and how soon it will be before the consequent law is passed to stop smoking in all private vehicles.

They move in mysterious ways, their wonders to perform !

James Higham said...

The bastards are turning the screws worldwide, aren't they?

Mr A said...

James, that's the other scary thing. After living in Barcelona from 95-97,I've always wanted to move out there permanently. I've finally got the money to do so, but it isn't an option. I mean, where can you go now? Czech Republic? But how long can they hold out, with the EU and the WHO banging on at them? You can't even give up and escape this shit!

SadButMadLad said...

@GIF - You should've sold the publican the concept of e-cigs. Maybe even have one spare which you can sell.

E-cigs should be easy to sell. Just go round any pub (or office) and you'll find all your potential customers standing outside. No need to ask if they smoke or not. No need to go inside and get chucked out.

Mark Wadsworth said...

They won't go straight to houses, they'll do it in this order:

1. Cars with kids in
2. Private cars (smoking in car used for work is already an offence AFAIAA)
3. Smoking in hallways of blocks of flats
4. Balconies of flats in blocks of flats
5. Flats in blocks of flats
6. Houses with children
7. Back gardens
8. All houses.

To spice things up, local councils and housing associations might take the lead on this and first refuse to allocate housing to smokers, and they will obviously be a couple of steps ahead of privately owned houses, e.g. outright smoking ban in social housing might come in at the same time as they ban smoking in private houses where there are children etc.

Anonymous said...

They won't have to "steal" people's privacy - people will voluntarily allow them to take it - at least those with children. We already have the '7 steps' ad which makes it absolutely clear that even a wisp of SHS back-draughting indoors endangers your child.

When parents have to make a virtue out of standing outside they'll complain about smoke coming through the walls to environmental health

Jay

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mark W about how they will try and do it. But they will hit a problem with "private cars". The police have enough to do completely failing to make an impression on mobile use in cars. I wouldn't smoke in the hallway of a block of flats, but banning smoking on balconies will be a problem. It would provoke more rows about barbecues, noise, cooking smells etc. I think banning smoking inside owner-occupied homes is a non-starter; unless they are those special anti-smoker homes which have tubes connecting them to the neighbouring dwellings. I've never smelled my neighbours' cooking from inside the houses I've lived in.
I'm not saying this isn't serious - I'll join in any "smoking research establishment" type protests- just that it will be very hard to enforce to any degree. I presume cannabis smoking is banned in apartment blocks, but it goes on a lot and nobody finds out. And when landlords specify non-smokers, what happens if you lie, or even genuinely believe you won't smoke in the flat? So long as there are two doors between you and the hallway, nobody is to know. The landlord has to make an appointment to come round and, contrary to popular belief, the place won't smell of smoke after a few hours and a couple of joss sticks.
Remember that the smoking ban succeeds only because the business owner gets fined. To go further is very difficult.

Mark Wadsworth said...

Anon, possibly.

"It would provoke more rows about barbecues, noise, cooking smells etc."

*Ahem*

Exhibit One - gas patio heater ban.

Exhibit Two - what makes you think that they won't be after barbecues next, applying the same logic as for patio heaters? And then there's the meme that "grilling meat causes cancer", they started getting their propaganda in place years ago.

Exhibit Three - for commercial premises there are strict "use permissions" saying who can make a noise or emit cooking fumes and at what time of day etc, is it so improbable that these will be gradually extended to residential premises? If you looked in the "restrictive covenants" bit of your title deeds, you'd be horrified to find out what you are not allowed to do - it's just that these are largely unenforced.

Exhibit Four - the cannabis ban. Is it enforceable? No of course not, but it creates jobs for the bansturbulary and that is the point.

/Ahem*

Eddie Douthwaite said...

A coalition created by bigots.

http://f2cscotland.blogspot.com/2011/04/work-together-says-scottish-coalition.html

Old Man Dustbin said...

3. Smoking in hallways of blocks of flats

Already banned.

Smoking Hot said...

Wow ... an e-cig is being rebellious? That's like sayong you're a bad ass biker and having a Honda 50 with stabilizers.

Have smoked in lots of places where smoking is banned but still not been fined.

Had a few confrontations but here's the thing ... don't confess! Say you wasn't smoking ... period! All they have is hearsay. Make it difficult for them and they give up. They are used to easy targets not difficult ones.

We just bought a new van and are in the process of having it sign written ... except it isn't a company vehicle ... it's private! Haven't made final decision on name yet but quite like Q-Van ... named after the Q-Ships of WW2 :)

Another tip ... get yourself one of those little travel ashtrays. Excellent for denying the little Hitlers any evidence.

Anonymous said...

But it's only like this because the concept of SHS has been allowed to take hold as in smokers now kill other people.

Tackle the SHS bollox and that's it. Not easy, I know, but there's enough 'science' out there to show what rubbish it is. Tackle this one thing and it's all over.

Anonymous said...

anon 13.46. Without the backing of a large number of credible scientists and prominent politicians, that's not possible. Doll and Peto were/are the two most eminent smoking-harm experts in the UK. Doll said on Desert Island Discs that he wasn't at all bothered by smoking in his presence. Peto gave evidence to a House committee, saying that any risk from passive smoking was likely to be small and very difficult to measure. Asked for a quote by the BBC at the time of the ban, all they got was that he hoped this would result in fewer people (actively) smoking.
An American Public Health professor said that the science is rotten but it justifies the ends.
Even with all this, and more, the weight of propaganda, including, very importantly, the BBC, makes it impossible for the truth to come out. When £500K of lottery money is handed to ASH Scotland, what hope is there?
Action has to be more direct. Get a couple of thousand cards printed with the web addresses of Chris Snowdon's blog, this blog and others which to you seem objective, knowledgeable and interesting and hand them out to smokers sitting outside pubs and cafes this summer. It's not junk mail - they have cigarette packets in front of them.

Anonymous said...

Smoking Hot,

Another tip ... get yourself one of those little travel ashtrays. Excellent for denying the little Hitlers any evidence.

Also excellent for having a stock of cig-ends to deposit in various locations at venues where clearly anti-smoking management have gone further than the law requires, such as banning smoking in outside areas or premises-wide. Particularly good for places which have expensive, state-of-the-art smoke detectors stationed around the place to catch anyone who dares to light up in their sacred premises – they’ll spend ages wondering how on earth somebody managed to sit there smoking, not just one but several, cigarettes, unnoticed and unchallenged by their legions of orange-coated anti-smoking wardens, and without setting off their “guaranteed to detect the slightest wisp of smoke” Carlos-Fandango smoke detection system …..