|
You've obviously not had a fag hit you in the face on a motorbike :-(
|
While the smoke may be a little noxious it's the burning object that's a problem.
Before the ban I had one discharged from a stationary London cab land in the lid of the Brommy's pannier. Only the size of the driver and the prospect, given the area of London that the passenger was a judge or lawyer deterred me from throwing it back.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 13/09/2008 at 19:37
|
|
|
|
|
Errrr I think litter is the issue ?
|
Litter is one issue, but there is another one.
There was an incident a few years back when a jettisoned cigarette end flew into the open visor of a following motorcyclist.
The rider was sufficiently distracted to fall off and he suffered fatal injuries.
Rare, but yet another reason not to throw anything from a moving car.
|
|
|
Errrr I think litter is the issue ?
People are walking a metre or so from vehicles weighing over a tonne and travelling at speeds enough to kill anyone, and the complaints are about the 5-gramme cigarette butt? That's a great sense of priorities.
NOT.
|
and the complaints are about the 5-gramme cigarette butt?That's a great sense of priorities. NOT.
lol
I assume this is your usual of just trying to wind people up so best ignored eh........
|
|
Smoking while driving should be banned in all vehicles, not just in most workplace vehicles !
|
Smoking while driving should be banned in all vehicles not just in most workplace vehicles
Could not agree more. When I`m dictator it will be done.
|
|
|
|
I assume this is your usual of just trying to wind people up
Not at all, I'm making a serious point about misplaced priorities.
About 3,000 people are killed on the roads every year, and many thousands more are seriously injured, yet remedial measures such as traffic calming are routinely derided on the backroom.
For the OP watching the ciggie thrown out the window, which was the greater hazard to the child at the side of the road: the 5g cigarette butt or the 1-tonne car? And which prompted the indignation?
Lots of people don't question the car. But now that cigarette smoking is (rightly) deprecated, it attracts the opprobrium even when done against the background of a much greater danger.
|
Oh now wheels please !
Walking by the side of a road is dangerous. Its a calculated risk that we all do at some stage or other. Teaching children how to walk near traffic is a very important part of learning.
A discarded cigarette butt cannot be treated in the same way. It may land in childs eye, inside clothing, may even land in litter and cause a fire! i could go on !
Very difficult to teach a child how to dodge such an object. Much much much better if its not discarded by throwing near people?
If people cannot discard them correctly then I agree smoking should be banned to the designated areas it now is. And imo it should be banned from all moving cars!
Personally I dont care if people smoke or not (as long as its somewhere I can have a choice to move away from) as long as its done with respect for others.
Sense of priorities? That 1 ton car can still hurt you when you are inside your 1 ton car. Do you stop driving, or drive with care? If you drive with care why cant you smoke with care?
|
I sympathise with the OP, but ban smoking?
I understand the revenue collected from tobacco and related industries is more than ten times the running cost of the NHS.
Think how much extra tax we'd have to pay if everyone gave up tobacco.
I think smokers should be actively encouraged ;>)
|
> understand the revenue collected from tobacco and related industries is more than >ten times the running cost of the NHS.
Wrong
The revenue form tobacco taxes barely scratch the surface of the NHS keeping people with smoking related disease alive.
Only loosing the votes of smokers prevents government doing it - not revenue
|
See this: money.uk.msn.com/tax/articles/article.aspx?cp-docu...9
In particular: "the amount levied in various ways by the government on every packet of cigarettes, cigars or smoking tobacco, comes to £12 billion per year, six times more than any NHS bills run up by nicotine addicts."
Once smoking is finally banned/outlawed/whatever, your tax is going to rise a fair whack. You'd probably want a ciggie to calm your nerves, then!
|
|
|
|
|
There is no reason insulting, promiscuous littering should be tolerated just because other issues and risks exist.
|
|
|
If you want to know why it is of concern, then place a burning cigarette on some hair, preferably NOT attached to anyone. The speed with which the hair ignites and burns is scary.
More so with the very fine hair on a young child's head.
As a nineteen year old I was sitting in a pub, someone standing bear carelessly brushed against my long hair with a cigarette - very nasty and I am still grateful to the man who reacted very quickly and extinguished it before it burned my skin. I ended up with a half cropped head of hair -probably fashionable now but not then!
I am not against other people smoking as long as they take a little care of the rest of us!
|
driving a car lawfully on a road is a perfectly acceptable practice
chucking litter out of the window is not, it is rude, anti-social and illegal
|
|
The fellow who threw the cigarette from his window was being as anti-social as most people who smoke are but he was probably more of a danger to the public at large about 5 minutes before when he lit up the offending weed, almost certainly whilst driving - a very dangerous practice.
|
Let's no go to extremes Scousford. The driver was as Westpig says above but to suggest that lighting a fag while driving is "a very dangerous practice" is going a bit far. Most smokers are well practised, they light up 20, 30, 40 times a day. Most probably have the fag packet open and handy, a lighter also, they don't need to look at the packet, fag or lighter when lighting up and probably take one hand off the wheel for as long as.........changing gear, the radio programme, adjusting the aircon, etc and a hell of a lot less that other "very dangerous practice" like changing a CD, answering the phone (handsfree or not), - all IMVHO of course.
However, I think the dangers have been discussed in the past and I may be in the minority.
By the way, I enjoy my little cigars.......but never in a car because it makes it stink, and having a smoke is a good excuse to stop for a stretch, a coffee etc.
Regards
Phil
|
|
|
Exactly Westpig, driving, traveling and delivering are classed as constructive acts as the purpose is beneficial, throwing smoking materials at people, especially in an urban environment has no secondary benefit whatsoever.
|
>About 3,000 people are killed on the roads every year, and many thousands more are >seriously injured, yet remedial measures such as traffic calming are routinely derided >on the backroom.
Around 100,000 people die of lung cancer each year caused by smoking. Ban that instead and get rid of speed humps. We will be 97,000 up.
|
Looking at the replies it seems that some regard throwing a 'lighted' fag out of the window as 'just' littering - stubbing the fag out and chucking the unlit stub out is littering, chucking a lighted fag is dangerous and lazy. Like others I've been the victim of fag ash and stubs when on my motorbike and I can assure people that its not pleasent at all!
You have an ashtray... Use It! as I said to one driver who did it! And if you have one of those cars which don't have an ashtray then get one, the road outside isn't one!
I suspect that its half ignorance and half lazyness with these people - the ignorant half is not actually realising what the consequences of their actions are and the lazy half is those who do know the consequences but couldn't give a damn anyhow!
|
|
To the OP, thanks for pointing out this heinous crime, be sure to post next time you see some genuinely dangerous driving.
|
I also agree with AE.
To me the point is that aside from smoking being dangerous per se, it is simply ludicrous that a driver is alowed to smoke and drive at the same time. I.e. dropping a lit fag into your lap and onto your 58 plate Merc seat and Gucci suit is likely to distract from the road rather more than, say, an apple though it is a punishable offence to eat an apple while driving.
Which reminds me, wasnt that a Granny Smiths that Lewis Ham ... ... ;-)
Edited by cheddar on 14/09/2008 at 10:40
|
It isn't illegal to eat at the wheel, although you can be done for driving without due care and attention. The same applies if you are smoking.
I don't know if you are a smoker Cheddar, but it isn't exactly difficult. In over 20 years of driving I have never dropped a cigarette in my lap or had a lit cigarette blow back onto the back seats.
I would say that that people who can't multi-task behind the wheel are the ones who should be banned.
|
I am a smoker, and I would be angry if a lit cigarette was thrown anywhere near either of my kids. I genuinely sympathise with the OPs view. You can drop a cigarette out of a car window considerately (littering issue aside) and there is no excuse for hitting pedestrians, motorcylists or anyone else.
However, I genuinely find anti smoking car enthusiasts baffling. Both car use and smoking are anti-social, have killed millions of people, and are the constant attention of do-gooders who want them banned.
I would also question AE's claim that tobacco tax revenue doesn't cover the cost to the NHS of smoking related illnesses. The treasury collects around £10 billion per year from tobacco duty. The most widely published cost to the NHS is £1.7 billion.
The government doesn't care about voters (look what it's doing to motorists). It doesn't care about our health. What it cares about is revenue, and the lack of an outright smoking ban is down to nothing more than balancing the books.
Cheers
DP
|
|
Given the evidence and statistics like these I am amazed that in 2008 smokers are not viewed more widely as seriously lacking in judgement, rather as alcoholics are. As redundancies loom I would be looking at the huddled outcasts outside office buildings as the first in line since they are obviously poor at decision-making, lacking in determination and commitment, and in some cases ostentatiously rebellious, though in a self-defeating way. I wouldn't want them on my team anyway.
|
|
Baskerville, I wouldn't be on your team, thanks.
|
|
Ah, but as you admit, your judgement is in question. ;-)
|
I would be looking at the huddled outcasts outside office buildings as the first in line since they are obviously poor at decision-making lacking in determination and commitment and in some cases ostentatiously rebellious though in a self-defeating way. I wouldn't want them on my team anyway.
Some of the most productive business discussions and idea sharing have been when on a fag break.
If you'd base a redundancy or team selection decision on "huddled outcasts" rather than understanding how productive or relevant a person is, then frankly I wouldn't give your team a great chance of success. Neither would I want to be on it.
|
>Some of the most productive business discussions and idea sharing have been when on a fag break.
And plenty at other times too. If your business depends on fag breaks you're crazy.
Touchy, aren't we?
|
Of course my business doesn't depend on fag breaks, and neither did I claim that it did. I was simply making the point that these "huddled outcasts" you speak about are often talking business and networking with colleagues who, in the case of large companies, they might not otherwise see. Just because people aren't hunched over their desks or sitting in meeting rooms does not mean they are not being productive.
Not touchy, just not appreciative of being called an outcast, and implied that I'm ripe for redundancy by someone who knows nothing about me, the job I do, how well I do it, or how highly regarded (or otherwise) I am by my company.
Edited by DP on 14/09/2008 at 12:39
|
|
We are rather getting away from the OP - can those smokers amongst us, especially the verbal ones in this thread, please coinfirm that they find it acceptable behaviour to throw a 'lighted fag' out of the window of a vehicle, whether in motion or not whilst other vehicles or people may be around?
|
We are indeed - back on topic please.
PS
The smokers in our Office (2 out of 11 staff now) are known as the "snoutcasts".
|
One of my work colleagues came in a few months back with a burn mark on his (expensive) suit.
A few months prior to this I'd had a go at him for throwing live cigarette butts out the window. He's a bit of an ignorant character who tends not to give a stuff about others' feelings in a range of areas, and the fact that he'd been chain-smoking in the car when one of the other colleagues in the car at the same time was asthmatic didn't seem to bother the little so-and-so either. He couldn't see how throwing the butt out could harm anyone else.
Lo and behold, the reason for the burn mark is that he'd attempted to throw the butt out when the window was down.
Poetic justice. Made my day that did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reason traffic calming is derided is that whilst backroomers would all like to make the roads safer for all, traffic calming is just not the answer. Most drivers are law abiding and try to drive carefully but are infuriated by having cars damaged by humps, money raisng camara schemes etc etc. The only way to safer roads is to catch and punish offenders hard. This means putting the Police out there with a will to succeed. This of course costs money and would not raise much either so it unlikely to be popular with the powers that be. There is an umarked cop car on the M3 in Hants which seems to do some good and I would like to see police in droves enforcing the rules....careful drivers have nothing to fear and would welcome this approach.
|
|
Barney, you are on the same planet as us, aren't you?! We're discussing smoking, not traffic calming! ;-)
|
|
Well at least its gone back to being motoring related !
|
|
From the 'Viz' Letterbocks: 'I don't know why they call them speedbumps. They slow you down if anything."
|
Whilst we're on the subject of ignorant smokers, can anyone tell me if the firm I am delivering to has any jurisdiction over what I do inside my cab?
Pat
|
|
Yes - its a "workplace" consequently a no smoking zone !
|
I do find all this stuff a bit laughable. A cigarette end, even a lighted one (UNLESS discarded in the face of an overtaking biker or chucked into tinder-dry undergrowth during a heatwave) is a very, very trivial piece of litter, quickly ground up under wheels or washed or swept away. Of course people should use their ashtrays. But all this barking and yelping about cigarette ends when there is chewing gum and dog excrement and food wrapping material and vomit all over many urban pavements is simply barmy, and just a tiny bit pathetic.
Lift in the Empire State building, 1973. Large black lady approaches holding a cigarette, and the lift man says: 'Uh, ma'am, smoking is not allowed in the elevators.'
The lady walked into the lift undeterred with the words: 'Stand aside, son, and show a little respect for your elders ...(here flicking her ash towards the fellow's feet) ... or I'll set your leg on fire.' And she tranquilly smoked, with a twinkle in her eye, all the way up.
In my opinion at the time her attitude was correct, even laudable, although I felt a bit sorry for the lift man who clearly felt humiliated.
|
I do find all this stuff a bit laughable. A cigarette end even a lighted one (UNLESS discarded in the face of an overtaking biker or chucked into tinder-dry undergrowth during a heatwave) is a very very trivial piece of litter
Tell that to the people who died in the Mont Blanc tunnel fire (almost certainly caused by a fag end in an airfilter cartridge).
|
|
One of three possible causes.
|
Yeah, Bromptonaut, and there was that awful King's Cross escalator fire, killing many, that really was caused by a cigarette almost certainly. But the cigarette had gone into piles of grease and rubbish under the escalator, uncleaned for too long...
People shouldn't discard lighted cigarette ends carelessly. And the tube is certainly a better place without people smoking.
|
" The fag is the least of the dangers in the situation described. "
I would totally disagree with that staement as a cyclist the act of digarding a cigarette out of the window can be most dangerous also when it lands on truck trailer and sets it on fire.
|
People shouldn't discard lighted cigarette ends carelessly.
And thats the key point that I think you missed in your earlier post, Lud. Many smokers are so used to "flicking" ash/fag ends out of the window thats exactly how they do it, and why we get so annoyed with them... The OP actually said that - the guy never checked he just flicked it out... Flicking a stubbed out unlit fag end is purely littering, flicking out lighted fag ash/stubs is something very, very different... Wouldn't you agree Lud?!
|
Unlit cigarette ends are a very mild form of littering, negligible compared to others (see my post above). Lighted stubs are not much different under nearly all circumstances.
The behaviour described in the OP was perhaps boorish but inflicted no injury. I hadn't missed a point at all. I thought people were making too much of it, and I still do.
I accept however that to some people the sight of someone smoking is roughly equivalent to the sight of someone torturing a puppy or openly committing the sin of Onan. When I smoked cigarettes all day long these people used to cause me some irritation, but now I just feel a bit sorry for them. 'Get a life', I might think if I were that kind of person.
They can comfort themselves with the thought that they are now in a moral majority, the carphounds.
|
Lighted stubs are not much different under nearly all circumstances.
I'm really sorry you feel that way... you have obviously never been on the recieving end of fag ash or a lighted fag end, then, especially when travelling at speed on a motorbike - I can assure you that it is not uncommon! If you had suffered I am certain you would change your view... the point I was making is that most smokers who do flick ash/butts out of their window do not chack to see if they are lit or not.. that is dangerous, pure and simple.
|
|
I agree that it is dangerous, as well as boorish, to flick ash or stubs out of the window without checking for following bikes. I learned this many years ago when smoking was more general and a quarterlight kept judiciously ajar would suck the ash or stub out into the slipstream conveniently. I would never do it now without checking. But I don't smoke cigarettes any more.
|
Glad to see someone in this thread supporting us smokers... :-)
I'm with Lud, this is yet another topic where some people appear to be bordering on apoplexy over what is really quite a trivial issue. If people were a little more tolerant of other people's habits, foibles, mistakes, pasttimes etc then the world would be a better place.
For instance, whoever the biker is up above (it's not important who it was) who moaned on about the (incredibly small) risk of getting a fag end in the face - does he realise what a pain bikers are, weaving dangerously in and out of traffic, blasting noisily up my road scaring kids and grannies, driving across pavements and all the other dangerous and anti-social things they do? Those things happen many hundreds of times daily all around the country. How often does a biker get a fag in the face? Yet I tolerate bikes without having to go into print about it...
(btw that wasn't meant to be a pop at that poster, just illustrating my point a little)
Live and let live...that's what I say!! :-)
|
That's correct Smokie, the world used to divided between smokers and non-smokers.
Now it seems to be smokers and anti-smokers, the self-righteous whingers who have had their prejudices reinforced by gubberment propaganda.
|
Glad to see someone in this thread supporting us smokers... :-) some people appear to be bordering on apoplexy over what is really quite a trivial issue. For instance whoever the biker is up above (it's not important who it was) who moaned on about the (incredibly small) risk of getting a fag end in the face
and let live...that's what I say!! :-)
I am speechless!! To take the above points in order:
1. I am not anti smoking... if you want to smoke by all means do, but don't around me (I'm asthmatic!).
2. Its not bordering on apoplexy, and in my time riding motorbikes it happened several times so its not an "incredably small" risk.
3. Yes, I agree, but that also includes having the intellegence to think before taking an action which could harm someone else.
Your post reeks of someone who is a smoker who has "always done that" without thinking about the consequesnces of their actions... all the OP and those of us who ride bikes ask is that you change your mindset and start thinking of others...
Surely that is not unreasonable?!
Edited by b308 on 16/09/2008 at 09:52
|
Judging by the number of fag ends all over the pavements, most smokers see nothing wrong in leaving their litter for someone else to pick up. The problem is worse now that smoking indoors in public places is verboten.
Well, it's a selfish, unpleasant thing to do which makes the world a less pleasant place for others. Even worse if you can't be bothered to put the cigarette out first.
When I used to smoke, I would stub out the cigarette and put the stub in a bin. In fact, I used to carry a small tin in my pocket to stub out fag ends and keep them till I found a bin.
I have nothing against people who smoke, but I do object to people who are needlessly inconsiderate, such as the driver in the original post.
Edited by pyruse on 16/09/2008 at 11:26
|
Well, it's a selfish, unpleasant thing to do which makes the world a less pleasant place for others
You could say the exact same thing about driving a car.
Edited by DP on 16/09/2008 at 11:29
|
>> Well it's a selfish unpleasant thing to do which makes the world a less pleasant place for others You could say the exact same thing about driving a car.
I *think* he was talking about littering with fag ends, not smoking, if that makes any difference?
|
Snipquote !I *think* he was talking about littering with fag ends not smoking if that makes any difference?
I was, but I doubt it makes any difference.
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 17/09/2008 at 01:55
|
I was but I doubt it makes any difference.
If DP thought you were talking about smoking, as opposed to littering, I could understand his comment.
|
Yes I did, and that's my last comment/viewing of this thread as it's clearly rubbing me up the wrong way. :-)
|
Anyone who can't smoke and drive efficiently and concurrently just needs more practice. It's easy. Don't see what all the fuss is about.
Now, driving, smoking, eating a sandwich, using the phone and drinking a cup of coffee at the same time is hard and takes years of experience. That's worth an argument.
;-)
|
Now driving smoking eating a sandwich using the phone and drinking a cup of coffee at the same time
... while watching Starsky and Hutch on a portable TV and allowing your satnav to navigate your 18-wheeler into a 1-in-4 dirt track up onto the South Downs...
|
|
Sorry Lud, forgot about the sat nav. No problem to include that though if you stick the cruise on and wedge a knee up behind the wheel..............
|
|
...leaving your hands free to pump up the Primus under the pot of boiling goulash on the passenger seat...
|
>>that's my last comment/viewing of this thread as it's clearly rubbingme up the wrong way. :-)
Sorry to hear that DP, as I was wondering why asking smokers to stub out they fag and watch out for other road users when chucking it out was rubbing you up so badly?
|
@b308 (with no malice intended)
"Your post reeks of someone who is a smoker who has "always done that" without thinking about the consequesnces of their actions... all the OP and those of us who ride bikes ask is that you change your mindset and start thinking of others..."
A wrongly-jumped-to conclusion I'm afraid.
Oh, and isn't speechlessness on the route to apoplexy? ;-)
And anyway, I think I *did* make the point that my post was more around tolerance than the topic in hand, but as I need to go for a smoke I won't bother checking just now... :-)
An afterthought - again without malice - did you actually read what my post said, rather than what you thought it said? Anyway, we digress... :-)
|
Yep, I did read the post, and replied to it the way I read it...
Perhaps you saying "over what is really quite a trivial issue" I found a little offensive having had it happen several times and only just avoiding an accident on one accassion... yes, there are lots of things that all motorists do every day that are dangerous, but seeking to trivialise something which is both dangerous and avoidable with a little common sense, seemed out of order!
However as you didn't mean it the way I read it (if I understand your last post right!), then no harm done and hopefully some smokers may think before they flick, which is all the OP and I seek to do! ;-)
|
And I digress further!
Today, for the first time in 20 years of full time lorry driving, I was pulled into a full VOSA check at the NEC.
My lorry and trailer were thoroughly checked over and found to be faultless, my tachograph was downloaded and checked and again found to be faultless.
My licence, Operators licence and other documents were checked along with my fuel tank being dipped for red deisel, again all absolutely fine.
BUT, I was photographed entering the VOSA check smoking in a working vehicle by 2 Public Health Inspectors and issued with a £30 fixed penalty.
I live in my cab from Monday to Friday, it's my workplace by day but my lounge and my bedroom by night.
The PH Inspectors put forward the case that even with no-ne but me driving the lorry for 3 years until it's sold for a new one, when it is sold someone else will have to drive it.
It's very reassuring to know that our local Council Workers are so dilligent but am I complaining?
No, on the contrary, I think it's very good value to be able to do what I want in my home every week, for over a year!
Pat
Edited by pda on 16/09/2008 at 21:46
|
|
Pat, you have my every sympathy. This country has actually gone mad. Whether or not one approves of or indulges in smoking, this type of uber control stinks far worse than any form of tobacco smoke.
|
|
Whatever were you smoking - a nuclear fuel rod ?!
|
Pat, you are cool.
Unlike certain others out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
