Andrew I do apologies if my remarks caused offense. However I get very angry when people suggest that the smoking ban is somehow attacking civil liberties. The ban as enacted in law was, if memory serves, not what the government wanted. Their bill would have allowed smoking in public places where food was not sold. Our representatives in parliament acting on your behalf increased it to include all public places. If you don't like what your MP's have done then you need to elect representatives who will overturn the law, which is your right.
Regards Paul Andrew Dyke wrote: > Hi Paul, > > Frankly your comment re Finch above, is unworthy of you, is silly and does > nothing to advance the debate. Sue's suggestion sounds very sensible. Give > the pubs/restaurants the choice. Smoking or non smoking. The paying customer > then has the choice to patronise that establishment with his/her hard earned > or not. Shops / workplaces, in fact any building that a member of the public > might be forced to visit, which is not a choice, should be smoke free. > > Devils advocate mode on - > Ponder this. A minority of the public smoke. About 25%, I think. If that > minority were all non white, this legislation would be racist and illegal. > It would never have come about. Health and safety or no health and safety. > Devils advocate mode off - > > Regards > > Andrew from The Cut - Still stuck in Stourport and feeling like making > light-hearted trouble ;-) > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
