My local train station doesn't smell if people smoke on it. I don't care whether they do or don't. I doesn't bother me.
However, whenever I get out of a train carriage at Zurich HB, the whole place just reeks of stale tobacco smoke, it really is disgusting.
Sends a great message out to our foreign visitors - a lot who now arrive by train rather than fly (at least all the people we have had to stay recently).
Their first impression of Switzerland is the smelly HB.
Having said that, I quite like it in a weird way: it feels like one is stepping back in time and I keep expecting to see steam trains gently pulling into the station and guards waving flags and checking their pocket watches.
Take away the smoke and cigarettes and it would just feel like any other first world modern transit hub.
I.e. why complain about smoke, when lots of things smell.
Tons of people seem to be afraid of showers and deodrant in the morning. This offends me, whilst not damaging my health I acknowledge, but passive smoking really is miniscule in the damage department.
Why should I be exposed to even "miniscule" damage because somebody takes a last drag in the doorway of a tram before tossing their still-lit butt into the gutter and exhaling into my face, or chooses to stand beside me at a tram stop and light a cigarette?
If somebody stood next to you at a tram stop and caused "miniscule" damage to your skin by cutting you with a piece of glass, I'm sure that any rational person would object. Especially if that glass looked like it may bear even a small chance of resulting in long-term, fatal illness (eg, blood from previous encounters with skin).
Passive smoking has been proven, in many studies over many years, to increase the risk of smoking-related illness in non-smokers. Regardless of how small that risk is, it is inconsiderate to expose others to that risk without need.
Women do make up and creams on the trains and some funky cosmetic smells whiff about, but it doesnt concern me, though I do fear for the safety of their eyesight and what they might inhale in those open mouths.
Smoke is just another smell, that people seem to get ever so uptight about, and quite frankly, unless you are in an air tight container, its not hurting you its just annoying you and I accept that, but then a non-smoker has to accept a smokers right to exercise their right to smoke outside.
Smoking, even outside, is hurting you - when the inconsiderate smokers choose to come, stand next to you and light up. This may surprise you, but cigarette smoke is not "just another smell", it contains particles which cause damage to human bodies.
Smokers have a right to smoke outside - non-smokers have a right to not breathe cigarette smoke outside.
I do not have to accept anyone coming and standing next to me and my children then lighting a cigarette. When that happens I have two (main) choices: ask them to stop or move away; or move myself.
Now, shall we return to the far higher incidence of littering by smokers compared to non-smokers?
The following 5 users would like to thank araqyl for this useful post:
.....................seeing as we have been forced outside these days, quite rightly too, though don't the clubs/pubs/bars have some funky smells now that are not masked by the smoke smell. Suppose its a case of preference i.e. stale beer, sweat, gas and sick, over smoke. I guess the former is not ponging your clothes and hair out.
Oh yes, that is SO true!
At our last Herbstmesse, we tried to enter one of the tents where the "in" crowd were hanging out ..... nice music, dancing, drinking ....... but the stench of sweaty bodies and/or greasy hair was too unbearable!
It dawned on us that in the "days before the ban" ....... these tents just stank of beer and cigarette smoke - a bit more tolerable than human stink.
This user would like to thank smoky for this useful post:
At our last Herbstmesse, we tried to enter one of the tents where the "in" crowd were hanging out ..... nice music, dancing, drinking ....... but the stench of sweaty bodies and/or greasy hair was too unbearable!
It dawned on us that in the "days before the ban" ....... these tents just stank of beer and cigarette smoke - a bit more tolerable than human stink.
I actually thought about going out this weekend. But I'm either put off by the idea that there will be smoking allowed... or the fact that I'll have to smell B.O.
You know it is a funny thing, every time a smoker lights up next to me on the Rail way platform, and I have to rush away gasping. I wished I had of eaten a load of Baked Beans that morning and let off an Offensive Smell that they have to Run Away From. I wish I could buy Fart Spray
The following 2 users would like to thank AussieNanny for this useful post:
IMO it's really simple and you don't even need to employ passive smoking.
When people around smoke, smoking is not taken as a miserable smelly addiction of barely literal people. It becomes normal when, come on, it completely is not.
Everyone, however, has a right to be addicted, miserable, and suicidal, just please do it in some isolation. It's enough that my taxes will pay for your COPD.
The following 4 users groan at janinaEN for this post:
Why should I be exposed to even "miniscule" damage because somebody takes a last drag in the doorway of a tram before tossing their still-lit butt into the gutter and exhaling into my face, or chooses to stand beside me at a tram stop and light a cigarette?
If somebody stood next to you at a tram stop and caused "miniscule" damage to your skin by cutting you with a piece of glass, I'm sure that any rational person would object. Especially if that glass looked like it may bear even a small chance of resulting in long-term, fatal illness (eg, blood from previous encounters with skin).
Passive smoking has been proven, in many studies over many years, to increase the risk of smoking-related illness in non-smokers. Regardless of how small that risk is, it is inconsiderate to expose others to that risk without need.
Smoking, even outside, is hurting you - when the inconsiderate smokers choose to come, stand next to you and light up. This may surprise you, but cigarette smoke is not "just another smell", it contains particles which cause damage to human bodies.
Smokers have a right to smoke outside - non-smokers have a right to not breathe cigarette smoke outside.
I do not have to accept anyone coming and standing next to me and my children then lighting a cigarette. When that happens I have two (main) choices: ask them to stop or move away; or move myself.
Now, shall we return to the far higher incidence of littering by smokers compared to non-smokers?
This user would like to thank FlyingDutchMan for this useful post:
IMO it's really simple and you don't even need to employ passive smoking.
When people around smoke, smoking is not taken as a miserable smelly addiction of barely literal people. It becomes normal when, come on, it completely is not.
Everyone, however, has a right to be addicted, miserable, and suicidal, just please do it in some isolation. It's enough that my taxes will pay for your COPD.
Erm... what? Either you're saying (in a very weird way) that smokers are barely even people or you meant something like "literate", which would be completely un-related to whether they smoke or not and would also be hypocritical as you would be the one who would be illiterate (or "illiteral" if we follow your method). Which is it? Either way, you seem quite contemptible.
The following 2 users would like to thank Kamarate for this useful post:
[QUOTE=araqyl;1398381]Why should I be exposed to even "miniscule" damage because somebody takes a last drag in the doorway of a tram before tossing their still-lit butt into the gutter and exhaling into my face, or chooses to stand beside me at a tram stop and light a cigarette?
If somebody stood next to you at a tram stop and caused "miniscule" damage to your skin by cutting you with a piece of glass, I'm sure that any rational person would object. Especially if that glass looked like it may bear even a small chance of resulting in long-term, fatal illness (eg, blood from previous encounters with skin).
Passive smoking has been proven, in many studies over many years, to increase the risk of smoking-related illness in non-smokers. Regardless of how small that risk is, it is inconsiderate to expose others to that risk without need.
This is all very well and good, but as i pointed out earlier, what are you doing about the other not so topical issues of daily pollution from vehicles, factories etc? I mean, I know they dont bug you as much as you probably not against them like you are against smoking.
And of course I am aware that you are not using mobile phones and laptops, and certainly not your precious children, as surely you are not exposing them to such health issues.
But then again, you are, so you are just a hypocrite really.
IMO it's really simple and you don't even need to employ passive smoking.
When people around smoke, smoking is not taken as a miserable smelly addiction of barely literal people. It becomes normal when, come on, it completely is not.
Everyone, however, has a right to be addicted, miserable, and suicidal, just please do it in some isolation. It's enough that my taxes will pay for your COPD.
COPD????
Taxes on cigarettes collect plenty of revenue that dampen the cries of others claiming their taxes pay for the upkeep of a smokers health.
Why should I be exposed to even "miniscule" damage because somebody takes a last drag in the doorway of a tram before tossing their still-lit butt into the gutter and exhaling into my face, or chooses to stand beside me at a tram stop and light a cigarette?
If somebody stood next to you at a tram stop and caused "miniscule" damage to your skin by cutting you with a piece of glass, I'm sure that any rational person would object. Especially if that glass looked like it may bear even a small chance of resulting in long-term, fatal illness (eg, blood from previous encounters with skin).
Passive smoking has been proven, in many studies over many years, to increase the risk of smoking-related illness in non-smokers. Regardless of how small that risk is, it is inconsiderate to expose others to that risk without need.
This is all very well and good, but as i pointed out earlier, what are you doing about the other not so topical issues of daily pollution from vehicles, factories etc? I mean, I know they dont bug you as much as you probably not against them like you are against smoking.
And of course I am aware that you are not using mobile phones and laptops, and certainly not your precious children, as surely you are not exposing them to such health issues.
But then again, you are, so you are just a hypocrite really.
Can you possibly re arrange all this to make it undersandable?
IMO it's really simple and you don't even need to employ passive smoking.
When people around smoke, smoking is not taken as a miserable smelly addiction of barely literal people. It becomes normal when, come on, it completely is not.
Everyone, however, has a right to be addicted, miserable, and suicidal, just please do it in some isolation. It's enough that my taxes will pay for your COPD.
Thanks for turning me on to Bill Hicks, very, very funny guy. He sums up those anti smokers to an absolute T.
I am anti "anti anything" people. The lectures and waffling on,,, the only possible good I can see coming from it may be in helping those that suffer insomnia, they send me to sleep anyway.
Honestly, people in their superior modes are very ugly to me. Besides, I'm sure that all that hot air they are expelling is probably bad for my health/the environment too.
While I said I'm anti those anti people, I at least don't give lectures, haughty stares nor sigh demonstratively, when an anti person is offending me with their "anti-ness", although I may have to surreptitiously stifle a yawn, so as not to upset them even further.
People and their rights, God save me from them.
The following 3 users would like to thank Twinklestar for this useful post:
The HB is pretty much open to the elements so i dont see an issue with smoking there - as for cyclists i drive and smoke and have never managed to flick a fag at a cyclist.
<snip>
I dispose of fag ends in bins and ashtrays where possible but I ain't carrying them around in my pocket looking for one.
And yet you can carry around a pack of cigarettes to keep you from looking for one?
I'm glad you are so facile with your flaming butts that you throw out of cars but most people don't look and make sure that their stuff doesn't hit other pedestrians and cyclists and cars when they are driving.
Let's just cut to the simple fact that chucking butts in the streets or parks or anywhere is littering and, regardless of whether or not you are a motorist or a pedestrian, the last time I checked it is illegal in most civilised countries.
__________________ Many men, of course, became extremely rich, but this was perfectly natural, and nothing to be ashamed of, because no one was really poor -- at least no one worth speaking of. - Douglas Adams
The following 3 users would like to thank the_clangers for this useful post:
This is what is so amazing about the English Forum. You can go away for months, come back one day and find the same topic being discussed again by the same people, with the same reasoning. Forget it, non-smokers will never understand why smokers in public places will never learn to move away from or not stand next to ashtrays. It's a lemming quality they have, I guess. Non-smokers will continue to be crucified and no matter how considerate they really are or not, makes absolutely no difference to smokers who are politically correct in their condemnations.
Fixed that for you.
Funny how just moving a phrase and a few prefixes changes the post from someone's perception to the reality of what actually happens.
Seriously, almost every time I am on a train platform I have to move myself and daughter away from someone who walks up right next to us and lights up.
After moving 5 or so meters away, invariably someone else will walk over to where we are and again light up. This happens over and over again until (if there is enough time during the wait) there is a an even distribution of smokers uniformly spread over the platform.
Oh, and the first thing that I do is look for the ash receptacles and stay well away from them.
I truly think that the problem is that even smokers don't want to stand next to other smokers so they move away from them and nearer to the non-smokers. Maybe they don't want to smell other smoke whilst they are enjoying their own smoke. I don't know and really don't care. I just wish that there was some way that I could use public services, that I am paying for, and I wouldn't have to deal with all of the smoke.
__________________ Many men, of course, became extremely rich, but this was perfectly natural, and nothing to be ashamed of, because no one was really poor -- at least no one worth speaking of. - Douglas Adams
The following 2 users would like to thank the_clangers for this useful post:
Fixed that for you.
Funny how just moving a phrase and a few prefixes changes the post from someone's perception to the reality of what actually happens.
Seriously, almost every time I am on a train platform I have to move myself and daughter away from someone who walks up right next to us and lights up.
After moving 5 or so meters away, invariably someone else will walk over to where we are and again light up. This happens over and over again until (if there is enough time during the wait) there is a an even distribution of smokers uniformly spread over the platform.
Oh, and the first thing that I do is look for the ash receptacles and stay well away from them.
I truly think that the problem is that even smokers don't want to stand next to other smokers so they move away from them and nearer to the non-smokers. Maybe they don't want to smell other smoke whilst they are enjoying their own smoke. I don't know and really don't care. I just wish that there was some way that I could use public services, that I am paying for, and I wouldn't have to deal with all of the smoke.
Life is so tough isn't it.
Which smokers are getting free travel? I assume this is what you are implying by stating you pay for public transport as if you should be immune to such god awful passive smoke.
Have you considered OCD? I think you have this. You seem ever so concerned with everything about smoking, the smoke itself, the ash, the butts, when I think the anxiety and stress you are putting on yourself, which is surely rubbing off onto your poor child, is affecting your health and well being so much more.
I am curious; have you ever had a bbq? Celebrated bonfire night? Sat in traffic? Or do these things have you panicking in a frenzy?
Thanks for the info, I'm not having a go at smoker's.... it's just that if I ever decided to commit suicide then I wouldn't want to take everyone else with me.....
If it's normal then I guess I'll just be the one standing at the end of the platform on his own.... and everyone is happy....
Which smokers are getting free travel? I assume this is what you are implying by stating you pay for public transport as if you should be immune to such god awful passive smoke.
Have you considered OCD? I think you have this. You seem ever so concerned with everything about smoking, the smoke itself, the ash, the butts, when I think the anxiety and stress you are putting on yourself, which is surely rubbing off onto your poor child, is affecting your health and well being so much more.
I am curious; have you ever had a bbq? Celebrated bonfire night? Sat in traffic? Or do these things have you panicking in a frenzy?
Life is tough for those who smoke that non smokers complain?
Or life is tough for those who are actually sensitive to the compounds in cigarette smoke that are unique to cigarettes but not wood or charcoal fires?
Would I be allowed to burn an open fire on a railway platform? I don't think so.
I never said that. Nice try. I said that I am paying for a public service which I should be able to use without being subjected to something that is un healthy for me and especially for my daughter. You don't seem to care about that so keep going.
Are you a "shrink?" Do you live in Switzerland? I find it odd that you have no understanding about people being concerned with the minutia of everyday life if you do. By your statement most people that live in Switzerland have OCD. Check out some of the other threads on so called "Swissiness."
BTW, love BBQ, if cigarettes smelled like BBQ then I don't think that there would be as much of an issue. Of course, since the chemicals that people smoke to inhale would probably still be present I would still get headaches and nausea and increased incidence of asthma attacks as well. But never you mind my medical concerns when you can make up what you assume ails me.
Next.
__________________ Many men, of course, became extremely rich, but this was perfectly natural, and nothing to be ashamed of, because no one was really poor -- at least no one worth speaking of. - Douglas Adams
The following 2 users would like to thank the_clangers for this useful post:
That is possibly the worst post I have read!
Linear Mode
