Its legal to smoke an electronic cigarette on NO SMOKING PREMISE'S
- Thread starter Kit
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
-
- Tags
- revolution
- Status
You can get the nicotine from potatoes instead. Revelle, or at least a revelle distributer, claimed in a post once that theirs is made from potatoes. Totally tobacco free.
then theyll move the goal posts to a nicotine free Britain...you cant win with ...... like that.
i discreetly esmoke wherever and whenever i want,and nobody has tried to stop me yet-i dont hide it,and i dont make it obvious,its an easy balance to strike after awhile....it kind of gives me a buzz.
for me personally,its counter-productive to rub the haters noses in it...i just cant be arsed to constantly keep explaining and justifying my actions to people i dont give a toss about...they annoy me,and im not going to waste my energy.
i discreetly esmoke wherever and whenever i want,and nobody has tried to stop me yet-i dont hide it,and i dont make it obvious,its an easy balance to strike after awhile....it kind of gives me a buzz.
for me personally,its counter-productive to rub the haters noses in it...i just cant be arsed to constantly keep explaining and justifying my actions to people i dont give a toss about...they annoy me,and im not going to waste my energy.
then theyll move the goal posts to a nicotine free Britain...you cant win with ...... like that.
i discreetly esmoke wherever and whenever i want,and nobody has tried to stop me yet-i dont hide it,and i dont make it obvious,its an easy balance to strike after awhile....it kind of gives me a buzz.
for me personally,its counter-productive to rub the haters noses in it...i just cant be arsed to constantly keep explaining and justifying my actions to people i dont give a toss about...they annoy me,and im not going to waste my energy.
Why don't you just say what your thinking Mr. Darcy - LOL. I have to say - you don't hold anything back.
Darcy has the right attitude. Be discreet. Don't ASK for trouble. You'll surely get it.
As for banning nicotine -- that's a very real possibility, while still allowing legal tobacco products to be sold (and taxes collected!). If, as is written in many scientific papers, nicotine is as addictive as ...... or ......., then it's a problem drug. You can't buy legal ...... or ........ It would not be much of a stretch for a government to place nicotine or nicotine-laced liquids in an illegal category and ban its sale in any non-medicinal form.
Just a thought the pushees ought to consider when asserting "rights" that aren't written in law. Keep "sticking" it to the 4 out of 5 people who do not smoke and don't want smoking anywhere near them. If push comes to shove, who wins that matchup?
As for banning nicotine -- that's a very real possibility, while still allowing legal tobacco products to be sold (and taxes collected!). If, as is written in many scientific papers, nicotine is as addictive as ...... or ......., then it's a problem drug. You can't buy legal ...... or ........ It would not be much of a stretch for a government to place nicotine or nicotine-laced liquids in an illegal category and ban its sale in any non-medicinal form.
Just a thought the pushees ought to consider when asserting "rights" that aren't written in law. Keep "sticking" it to the 4 out of 5 people who do not smoke and don't want smoking anywhere near them. If push comes to shove, who wins that matchup?
I know I'm bad, Bob, but as fat Morpheus says, the reason most of us are here is because of our affinity for disobedience.
It doesn't sit well with me not to fight just because the whipping is a foregone conclusion. This isn't illegal and people who get up in my face about it are themselves asserting rights that aren't written in law.
It doesn't sit well with me not to fight just because the whipping is a foregone conclusion. This isn't illegal and people who get up in my face about it are themselves asserting rights that aren't written in law.
You are of course totally right, as usual TB. I smoke in much the same way as Darcy, just as I would an ordinary cigarette. I don't wave it about, I just get what I need from it.
I wouldn't rush to assume that nicotine will be banned in the near future though, although I had heard that in the UK they are already talking about keeping all tobacco products under the counter, and stopping the sale of packets of 10 cigarettes.
I wouldn't rush to assume that nicotine will be banned in the near future though, although I had heard that in the UK they are already talking about keeping all tobacco products under the counter, and stopping the sale of packets of 10 cigarettes.
I began smoking as a rebel and remain one. Can't STAND the anti-tobacco Nazi crowd. I often want to light up and blow smoke in their faces just to strike back at 'em. But then I remind myself that I'd be the one hurt by that action.
I just want e-smoking to remain possible for as long as possible. I will cherish the time I have with my e-devices.
I do understand your perspective, however, and a screaming demon inside me wants to join in the revolution. If I thought shaking my fists would help, I'd shake. But I think only quiet diplomacy like Ruyan is conducting in Italy will get this practice and our products legitimized once and for all. Protests of any kind against the majority will result in harsher backlashes of new law. It's a game we're already losing. Why hasten its end?
Be discreet.
I just want e-smoking to remain possible for as long as possible. I will cherish the time I have with my e-devices.
I do understand your perspective, however, and a screaming demon inside me wants to join in the revolution. If I thought shaking my fists would help, I'd shake. But I think only quiet diplomacy like Ruyan is conducting in Italy will get this practice and our products legitimized once and for all. Protests of any kind against the majority will result in harsher backlashes of new law. It's a game we're already losing. Why hasten its end?
Be discreet.
It's a game we're already losing. Why hasten its end?
Be discreet.
Why should it be a losing game TB? And why should we be discreet? The antis have got their way in many countries by having smoking banned in public places. If they try and have e-cigs banned too, it will show them up as being the narrow-minded bigots that they are because it will have nothing to do with "health" but everything to do with the fact they don't like the "thought" of people appearing to be smoking.
The anti-smokers have, for a long time, brainwashed people with their junk science and fictitious claims. Many people have chosen to question those claims. These are the people the antis hate. The other side of the coin are those who question nothing, the apathetic. Those who say "...oh well, but it is bad for you..." etc. etc. They never think to question those who say it is bad for you. E.g. the SHS scandal. According to ASH and their ilk, millions of people die from SHS. Oh really? Well, if that's the case, why can't these organisations name just one person to have died directly from SHS anywhere in the world? Simply because no-one has died from SHS and no-one is going to.
The antis spread fear and hysteria. That is how they operate, that and the knowledge that many people won't question their junk science and statistics and that many people won't stand up to them. They seem themselves as all-powerful, and, at the moment, maybe they are, but like all empire builders eventually they will come crashing down.
And what's it all for anyway? Two things. Complete control over people and lots of profit for the ones behind the anti-smoking campaign - big pharma.
Be discreet.
Why should it be a losing game TB? And why should we be discreet? The antis have got their way in many countries by having smoking banned in public places. If they try and have e-cigs banned too, it will show them up as being the narrow-minded bigots that they are because it will have nothing to do with "health" but everything to do with the fact they don't like the "thought" of people appearing to be smoking.
The anti-smokers have, for a long time, brainwashed people with their junk science and fictitious claims. Many people have chosen to question those claims. These are the people the antis hate. The other side of the coin are those who question nothing, the apathetic. Those who say "...oh well, but it is bad for you..." etc. etc. They never think to question those who say it is bad for you. E.g. the SHS scandal. According to ASH and their ilk, millions of people die from SHS. Oh really? Well, if that's the case, why can't these organisations name just one person to have died directly from SHS anywhere in the world? Simply because no-one has died from SHS and no-one is going to.
The antis spread fear and hysteria. That is how they operate, that and the knowledge that many people won't question their junk science and statistics and that many people won't stand up to them. They seem themselves as all-powerful, and, at the moment, maybe they are, but like all empire builders eventually they will come crashing down.
And what's it all for anyway? Two things. Complete control over people and lots of profit for the ones behind the anti-smoking campaign - big pharma.
Didnt roy castle die from second hand smoke thought i read in the papers they reckoned he performed in so many working man clubs over the years shs was what killed him.
Last edited:
He thought SHS was to blame. Never saw any proof because there isn't any. Poor old Roy was a godsend to the antis. Well, my Uncle Fred smoked 500 fags a day for 200 years and he still runs a marathon every day.
Here some info on poor old roy!
Castle was diagnosed with lung cancer in January 1992, and underwent chemotherapy and radiotherapy before going into remission in the autumn of that year. Castle, a non-smoker, blamed his illness on years of playing the trumpet in smoky jazz clubs. On 26 November 1993, Castle announced that his illness had returned, and once again underwent treatment in hope of overcoming it. Several months later, he carried out the high profile Tour of Hope to raise funds for the erection of the building that would become the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, which was - and still is - the only British charity entirely dedicated to defeating lung cancer.
His final contribution to Record Breakers was aired over the summer of 1994, although the programme continued until 2001.
He died on 2 September 1994, two days after his 62nd birthday.
His widow Fiona, who is still alive, worked with the charity for many years after her husband's death, and was a key figure in campaigning for the British smoking ban which came into effect during 2007 and has seen smoking banned in virtually all enclosed public places.
He faced his final illness with immense dignity and courage. He appeared to be completely devoid of bitterness or regret regarding his lung cancer, and was overwhelmingly positive right up to the end.
Castle was diagnosed with lung cancer in January 1992, and underwent chemotherapy and radiotherapy before going into remission in the autumn of that year. Castle, a non-smoker, blamed his illness on years of playing the trumpet in smoky jazz clubs. On 26 November 1993, Castle announced that his illness had returned, and once again underwent treatment in hope of overcoming it. Several months later, he carried out the high profile Tour of Hope to raise funds for the erection of the building that would become the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation, which was - and still is - the only British charity entirely dedicated to defeating lung cancer.
His final contribution to Record Breakers was aired over the summer of 1994, although the programme continued until 2001.
He died on 2 September 1994, two days after his 62nd birthday.
His widow Fiona, who is still alive, worked with the charity for many years after her husband's death, and was a key figure in campaigning for the British smoking ban which came into effect during 2007 and has seen smoking banned in virtually all enclosed public places.
He faced his final illness with immense dignity and courage. He appeared to be completely devoid of bitterness or regret regarding his lung cancer, and was overwhelmingly positive right up to the end.
Uncle Fred sounds like Jimmy Saville,only Jimmys been on 500 huge cigars a day for about 200 years.
Roy Castle had a type of lung cancer that is genetic. Even if he'd lived in a sterile bubble, free from any pollution at all, of any kind, the poor soul would still have succumbed to lung cancer.
Unfortunately for every smoker on the planet, and particularly here in the UK, his embittered widow was instrumental in forcing through the UK smoking ban Thanks to this bitter and twisted woman and her relentless anti-smoking drive and hatred of smokers, along with ASH et al, millions of people are being persecuted
However, it would seem that the late Mr Castle had more than one problem.
Roy Castle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Unfortunately for every smoker on the planet, and particularly here in the UK, his embittered widow was instrumental in forcing through the UK smoking ban
Thanks to this bitter and twisted woman and her relentless anti-smoking drive and hatred of smokers, along with ASH et al, millions of people are being persecutedHowever, it would seem that the late Mr Castle had more than one problem.
Roy Castle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
bitter and twisted, Lady P? The woman is bereaved. It's a mistake to allow such individuals to have any say in propounding legislation against whatever it was that bereaved them, as we've seen time and again, but their actions are at least understandable. The problem is that our legislators don't have the cojones to resist media pressure. Instead they jump on emotive bandwagons.
[QUOTE Lady Python]Unfortunately for every smoker on the planet, and particularly here in the UK, his embittered widow was instrumental in forcing through the UK smoking ban Thanks to this bitter and twisted woman and her relentless anti-smoking drive and hatred of smokers,
I disagree i think thats a bit cruel and underhand.
Even though i loath the smoking ban !
I do not agree with you lady python,
She loved him dearly and was just supporting her beloveds charity
Thanks to this bitter and twisted woman and her relentless anti-smoking drive and hatred of smokers,I disagree i think thats a bit cruel and underhand.
Even though i loath the smoking ban !
I do not agree with you lady python,
She loved him dearly and was just supporting her beloveds charity
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
