"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
My beef is that the current blanket ban doesn't allow any choice and
the alleged health scares have been deliberately used to support a
campaign to demonise & punish smokers without any scientific basis.

You are a typical addict.. any evidence that goes against your drug is
wrong. There is loads of evidence that smoking is harmful you just
choose to ignore it.

There's also loads of evidence that alcohol harms many many people - more
die from its effects each month than die in a year from heroin. Nor can
you say it only effects the users - many city centres are near no go areas
due to its abuse.

Irrelevant and typical of the junk smokers bring up to justify their
addiction.


So I just hope as a likely boozer you'll be just as in favour of a similar
restriction on that when it comes - as it will, given all government's
love of control.

There are already laws to control drunkenness and they have been there far
longer than antismoking laws.
And I know of nobody that has suffered from secondary drinking in a
pub/restaurant or cinema.

--
*A conscience is what hurts when all your other parts feel so good *

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