puff at your own risk

[bedbugy1-old]

BangkokPost.com) - Smokers have been warned that lighting up could cost them 2,000 baht.


The deputy director-general of the Disease Control Department, Seri Hongyok, said those who light up at public transportation stations and other non-smoking areas will be fined on the spot


A large number of commuters are expected to travel during the Songkran holiday and many will ignore smoking regulations, he said

that will be 300 baht thank you another nice earner from the men in brown

Similar Threads:

• Why circumcision reduces the risk of HIV
• motorbike theft risk?

As a lifetime non-smoker I always think it would be quicker and easier just to burn a few banknotes rather than rot my chest.

You think there are no toxic emissions from burning banknotes?
Additionally, at least in Thailand, you will go to prison for a long time for defacing His Majesty, The King's image if you get caught destroying any currency.

Be careful what you wish for. Social crusaders usually end up creating even worse hells than those they are trying to eradicate.

Just for the record, I am a non-smoker, do not drink alcohol or take illicit drugs, and am a vegetarian, but I hardly expect others to follow my example, for better or for worse. Moreover, I am more than a bit concerned about the attempts to legislate every aspect of human behaviour, and the people who suggest we try to do so frighten me no end.

[Davey612]

I am sure there is going to an ongoing discussion about what are the rights of a smoker. For a long time, I did not care much about what a cigarrete smoker did in public. If that person wants to perforate his or her lungs, it is his or her right.

Well, it was not until recently when a nephew in the medical field pointed to me about the dangers of the smoke that comes my way from someone else's cigarrete. In his view, second hand smoke is worse than the smoke inhaled by the smoker. Why? Because we are inhaling without the benefit of the filter.

I don't really know how much of the chemicals dissipate before reaching my lungs. I am not a scientist. However, if legislation can minimize my exposure to someone's smoke, then I am for it.

This is a link to the Mayo clinic's view of second hand smoke. Kind of scary: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/second ... ke/CC00023

Here we go again... It must have been, oh, at least a couple of weeks since the rights, wrongs, polite, rude, moral and immoral aspects of smoking in public areas were discussed here.

I've said before that I'm not a smoker, never have been, but I very much support free will, and am very much against the 'nanny state'. If people enjoy smoking, then good for them. I don't understand it myself, but then, I don't understand lots of aspects about other people's lives. Being attracted to people with large breasts, child bearing hips and a gaping hole where a penis should be, to name one example.

I am sure there is going to an ongoing discussion about what are the rights of a smoker. For a long time, I did not care much about what a cigarrete smoker did in public. If that person wants to perforate his or her lungs, it is his or her right.

Well, it was not until recently when a nephew in the medical field pointed to me about the dangers of the smoke that comes my way from someone else's cigarrete. In his view, second hand smoke is worse than the smoke inhaled by the smoker. Why? Because we are inhaling without the benefit of the filter.

I don't really know how much of the chemicals dissipate before reaching my lungs. I am not a scientist. However, if legislation can minimize my exposure to someone's smoke, then I am for it.

This is a link to the Mayo clinic's view of second hand smoke. Kind of scary: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/second ... ke/CC00023

Do you have any idea of what vehicle emissions are doing to your precious lungs? You poor dear!
India and China are developing at breakneck speed and every one of their citizens wants a car. Tata is about to bring out a car for US$2500. It will not be sold in Western Europe or Canada and the USA since it doesn't even come close to meeting the emission standards. But no emission standards are enforced in China, India and in most countries of the world for that matter. Already a huge percentage of California's pollution finds it origin in China. You better pass some laws against all those people who will be using those cheap and polluting cars.

Do you also worry about the fish farms all over the world that are selling food with toxic levels of deadly chemicals?

The list is endless! But people are very bad at risk assessment and hence spend their lives fretting about things that are almost absurd. The real threats almost always go unnoticed.

But look, pass all the laws you want. Execute people for doing all the things you think are bad for us. Lock up Ratan Tata for producing the cheapest car in the world that is going to sell in the millions.

You said: "if legislation can minimize my exposure to someone's smoke, then I am for it." More laws! Oh... please protect me from the world. And if that doesn't work, invoke religious fundamentalism! It worked for Bush. It worked for the Aytollahas! It can work for you!

ROTFL

[sjaak327]

Was in Hongkong a few weeks back. Made my way over to the Kowloon side to make pictures of the HK skyline. They have a walkway just after the star ferry terminal. Most of it is non smoking, even though it is in the open air. But many parks, and public spaces around HK are non smoking.

The pictures were not that good since the smog was obstructing the view of the skyline a few KM away. Made me think, all that air pollution (Bangkok doesn't come close on this one, believe me) and yet I cannot smoke in the outside air. As if my cigarette will make it any worse already.

The world really has gone mad when it comes to smoking.

yes I am sure that car will have a really bad impact on the level of pollution, scaring to think every Indian, Chinese or in fact Thai family will drive in their own car. Is it possible to make a law against that car?. I don't have the number just now, but a big scaring number of people, die every year because of the particles from diesel trunks.
I also think we should forbid the burning of shit in India, as it have a very bad impact on the world climate. Not to forget all the gas coming from the same animal that deliver the shit.
Oh one think I forgot and is on my agenda, forbid flying especially intercontinental. All this big machines that fly up there in the air, are polluting seriously and soon many small island will not be there anymore because of the raising water in the oceans. Okay then I have to go to Bangkok via Kabul on bicycle, and oh horror we will all miss the crowd of sextourist in Pattaya.
The question is not always how the guy or woman next to you are polluting, but what are yourself doing not to pollute to much. Let us give each other a promise. Next time we arrive in the LOS by boat from Europe or the US. We will not take the taxi or bus to reach Pattaya, but we will walk from bkk to the city of sin hand in hand shouting "hallelujah we are sawing the world,we are the examples to follow"

[dab69]

I am sure there is going to an ongoing discussion about what are the rights of a smoker. For a long time, I did not care much about what a cigarrete smoker did in public. If that person wants to perforate his or her lungs, it is his or her right.

Well, it was not until recently when a nephew in the medical field pointed to me about the dangers of the smoke that comes my way from someone else's cigarrete. In his view, second hand smoke is worse than the smoke inhaled by the smoker. Why? Because we are inhaling without the benefit of the filter.

I don't really know how much of the chemicals dissipate before reaching my lungs. I am not a scientist. However, if legislation can minimize my exposure to someone's smoke, then I am for it.

This is a link to the Mayo clinic's view of second hand smoke. Kind of scary: http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/second ... ke/CC00023

Maybe I do not scientifically agree
with Davey612's facts,
but I wholeheartedly
DO support his gorgeous avatar....

Outstanding

Hi,

As a person who knows only too well the hazards of smoking at learning first hand the damage and effects they have,

I would not now allow smoking in my car or House only.

I would not and will not lecture people on the plus or minus benefits either.

Public places, I would never criticize or complain as I feel it is not my right. If I can choose in my space or areas, my choices are as above.

Birdcage, because of the new legislation coming into law, we have operated a non smoking policy from the start with a smokers terrace and balcony provided which is in use and working to everyone's satisfaction.

I do agree with the posters who refer to the massive health hazards from Industrial pollution, cars and smog caused by the waste from factories etc and the many hazards bellowing out of Mines and Industrial plants which I think should be higher on the Health agendas of most Countries.

[Aunty]

Smokers should have no 'rights' other than the right to purchase tobacco and use it in the privacy of their own home or car.

The last time I was in a bar in Thailand I don't recall a motorway running through it, but I do remember the smokers.