In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many) make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because you're
a user.

--
*Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many) make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because you're
a user.

Anyone who needs to take 15 minutes per hour off work to get a drink has
a problem. So does someone who needs to spend the same amount of time
smoking.

I've no objection to someone who smokes like most people drink. Do you
know anyone who has one to three cigarettes in an evening and who has
abstinences between cigarettes of several days or even weeks?

On 29/08/2011 13:51, Steve Firth wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

In ,
wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many) make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because you're
a user.

Anyone who needs to take 15 minutes per hour off work to get a drink has
a problem. So does someone who needs to spend the same amount of time
smoking.

15 minutes? How big is this cigarette?

Another gross exaggeration, typical of the anti smoking fascists.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 30/08/2011 10:18 a.m., The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 29/08/2011 13:51, Steve Firth wrote:
Dave Plowman wrote:

In ,
wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many)
make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because
you're
a user.

Anyone who needs to take 15 minutes per hour off work to get a drink has
a problem. So does someone who needs to spend the same amount of time
smoking.

15 minutes? How big is this cigarette?

Another gross exaggeration, typical of the anti smoking fascists.



I think it would make sense to legalize cocaine and ban tobacco.
Smokers could then switch and become coke-heads. Cocaine is both less
harmful to the user and harmless to bystanders.

Does this make me a puritanical fascist?

In article ,
Gib Bogle wrote:
I think it would make sense to legalize cocaine and ban tobacco.
Smokers could then switch and become coke-heads. Cocaine is both less
harmful to the user and harmless to bystanders.

I'd suggest you do some research before writing such crap. Cocaine does an
incredible amount of damage to the body and mind. As can alcohol.

The safest of all the common drugs as regards physical damage is heroin.

But I'm not advocating using it or any other drug.

--
*Fax is stronger than fiction *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:31:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many) make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because you're
a user.

And where did I say alcohol is harmless? Alcohol certainly has great
dangers and has to be controlled.

What I said is that it's a non sequitur. Look it up if you need to.
Alcohol is not relevant to the discussion on passive smoking, and has
no bearing on whether passive smoking is unpleasant and/or dangerous.

By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

He wasn't 'complaining' at all. Just the usual troll.

--
*If you don't pay your exorcist you get repossessed.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:40:54 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

He wasn't 'complaining' at all. Just the usual troll.

He's not the 'usual' troll on the gardening group which I follow, so I
assume you are referring to the diy group.
But it's been quite enlightening to learn just how extreme some
addicts can be in defence of their habit. It's a reminder why we need
to have laws to protect the innocent majority from the diminishing few
who set their own needs above their neighbours' comfort and safety.

"Fuschia" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:40:54 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

He wasn't 'complaining' at all. Just the usual troll.

He's not the 'usual' troll on the gardening group which I follow, so I
assume you are referring to the diy group.
But it's been quite enlightening to learn just how extreme some
addicts can be in defence of their habit. It's a reminder why we need
to have laws to protect the innocent majority from the diminishing few
who set their own needs above their neighbours' comfort and safety.

Too true

Mike


--

....................................

Don't take life too seriously, you'll never get out alive.

....................................

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:40:54 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Fuschia wrote:
By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

He wasn't 'complaining' at all. Just the usual troll.

He's not the 'usual' troll on the gardening group which I follow, so I
assume you are referring to the diy group.

I was referring generally. I don't know the gentleman. But since he hasn't
participated in the thread it's safe to say he's a troll

But it's been quite enlightening to learn just how extreme some
addicts can be in defence of their habit. It's a reminder why we need
to have laws to protect the innocent majority from the diminishing few
who set their own needs above their neighbours' comfort and safety.

It might be more to the point if you thought up some ways of answering the
problem. It's almost certain you have habits others would happily ban. The
nature of the human.

--
*If your feet smell and your nose runs, you're built upside down.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" observed:

I was referring generally. I don't know the gentleman. But since
he hasn't participated in the thread it's safe to say he's a troll

You're right, we haven't heard much from the OP since he lit the blue
touch-paper and retired to a safe distance!

He initiated a lively, entertaining thread though ;-)
--
Interloper

In article ,
Interloper wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" observed:

I was referring generally. I don't know the gentleman. But since
he hasn't participated in the thread it's safe to say he's a troll

You're right, we haven't heard much from the OP since he lit the blue
touch-paper and retired to a safe distance!

He initiated a lively, entertaining thread though ;-)

;-) It comes up about every year. With the same predictable arguments.

--
*Thank you. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 29/08/2011 17:34, Fuschia wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 14:40:54 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In ,
wrote:
By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

He wasn't 'complaining' at all. Just the usual troll.

He's not the 'usual' troll on the gardening group which I follow, so I
assume you are referring to the diy group.

To which he cross posted.

But it's been quite enlightening to learn just how extreme some
addicts can be in defence of their habit.

Even more enlightening to learn how extreme rabid anti smoking fascists
can be in the persecution of a minority.

It's a reminder why we need
to have laws to protect the innocent majority from the diminishing few
who set their own needs above their neighbours' comfort and safety.

Its a reminder that we should be teaching people to think for themselves.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 29/08/11 23:22, The Medway Handyman wrote:


Even more enlightening to learn how extreme rabid anti smoking fascists can
be in the persecution of a minority.


Paranoia. That's another thing triggered by the perceived threat of addiction
withdrawal.

People are not persecuting you. They just want to lead their lives quite
happily away from the stench and risk associated with your smoke. That is not
persecution.

People around you shouldn't know or care that you smoke, unless you tell
them. The problem is that symptoms of addiction make it quite obvious and can
make you an unpleasant person to be around - just like with alcohol
addiction. Aside from the addiction symptoms smoking is physically unpleasant
in and of itself.

So you're free to indulge in your addiction. Do it on your own or with other
smokers and no-one will mind, you're not bothering anyone. But don't be under
the illusion that others should make efforts to accommodate you or
accommodate the unpleasant smells and side effects of the addiction.

On 29/08/2011 14:19, Fuschia wrote:
On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 12:31:35 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In ,
wrote:
A non-sequitur much beloved of smokers.
"Help, I've lost the argument again! - ah yes, the alcohol dodge."

Plenty of similarities. Both are mind changing recreational drugs.
However, the detrimental effects of alcohol on behaviour (with many) make
it very different. And the havoc is causes to society in a totally
different league. But carry on thinking it's harmless. Just because you're
a user.

And where did I say alcohol is harmless? Alcohol certainly has great
dangers and has to be controlled.

What I said is that it's a non sequitur. Look it up if you need to.
Alcohol is not relevant to the discussion on passive smoking, and has
no bearing on whether passive smoking is unpleasant and/or dangerous.

By all means let's talk about alcohol in another thread, but that's
not what the OP was complaining about.

And thats not what I was talking about idiot.

Smoking has been demonised by the health police - fact.

Alcohol is next on their lists - fact.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk