Arthur Ellul, councillor, Ħamrun
Flouted smoking ban
Like Adrian Caruana (Enforcing Smoking Ban With A Heavy Hand, November 6) I too am a non-smoker, and the cigarette smell on my clothes and hair after socialising in bars in my locality does not amuse me at all. It is very disturbing that smokers are gradually taking over the bars in total disrespect of the law, as if no law exists forbidding smokers from puffing away in full view.
I live in Ħamrun and visit particular bars come Sundays and the odd football night. Every single place I enter is crowded with smokers, and when politely asked to refrain from smoking, usually their reply is that I, a non-smoker, should leave the place and go elsewhere, as if smokers enjoy a divine right to patronise places where others do not dare to enter.
May I suggest that the local police occasionally effect a snap check in the popular High Street bars, and, perhaps, bring to book those persons who behave in this disrespectful way towards society.
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Richard Scrowston
Nov 9th 2008, 12:22
Sirs,
Re: I Galea's comments
I'm sure that tobacco companies do fund research in order that a TRUE picture may be given. Look, this is all a question of choice, isn't it? It's also a question of one's interpretations of the
evidence.
I forgive you for saying that I stink, I am rather particular about my personal hygiene. In terms of stinkiness and "swallowing" second hand smoke (shouldn't it be breatheing?), then why not travel on an aircraft (could well be Air Malta) and breathe the foul, re-cycled air from non-smokers laden with air-borne viruses and bacteria? I would posit that a 3 hour flight is more dangerous to one's health than a 3 hour stay in a bar in Malta.
I'm afraid that I don't have the ear of Barak Obama (who is reportedly a stinker according to you, I Galea) but if I did, then I would advise that he didn't light up a Marlboro in a bar in Hamrun.
My kindest regards,
Richard Scrowston.
Conny Dittrich
Nov 9th 2008, 10:53
@ I Galea
In this list you can see, who financed the study http://www.forces.org/evidence/financial-ties/index.htm and http://www.forces.org/evidence/financial-ties/index_cardio.htm
The Report “Lifting the smokescreen” was financed by and prepared for the use of Cancer Research UK, European Respiratory Society, Institut National du Cancer and the European Heart
Network.
This report also redefined the term of passive smoking that they can claim more victims.
Passive smoking have been defined by consensus to mean the inhalation of another person's smoke by a ‘’non-smoker’’ and its consequences, for over the last 30 years. The report totally changes this definition. The 5863 deaths attributed to passive smoking in France are including the whole population - a large majority of smokers and non-smokers alike. One is to expect that if the air is filled with smoke, of course these active smokers inhale as much if not more smoke as the non-smokers since they do not find it necessary to avoid the company of smokers.
Also the non smokers in this report include all never-smokers as well as the former smokers. This means a classified non-smoker can be anyone who has smoked for 30 years and stopped 15 days ago! Is this really reliable data?
lGalea
Nov 8th 2008, 21:43
Richard Scrowston, Conny Dittrich
Who paid for those studies Conny? The Tobacco companies?
Even if ti doesn't kill you which I don't believe, why should other people have to swallow your second-hand smoke and go home stinking?
Richard scrowston
Nov 8th 2008, 20:31
Sirs,
Thank you Conny Dittrich. You have saved me a lot of time in your response to Franco Farrugi's contribution.
Pubs (bars) in England are closing at an alarming rate. Many reasons are suggested - cheaper alcohol in supermarkets, the "credit crunch" - but I suspect that the no-smoking law is a predominant cause.
In these days of high technology, it is perfectly possible to air-condition premises and keep non-smokers happy.
Regards,
Richard Scrowston.
Richard Scrowston
Nov 8th 2008, 19:14
Sirs,
Oh dear, Franco Farrugi,
I am so embarrassed that I have prompted such vitriol from yourself. I promise you that I don't stink - I am not abusive either.
Long may you continue in your positive "social engineering" wish to close bars in Hamrun.
Incidentally, I think that I can follow your brain pattern in saying that ,(sic "Two wrongs don't make one right.").
Actually, my point was that there should be a consideration of perhaps higher priority issues than having a blooming cigarette in a bar in Hamrun!
Regards,
Richard Scrowston.
Conny Dittrich
Nov 8th 2008, 18:34
@ Franco Farrugi
FYI a list of studies and their findings. http://www.forces.org/evidence/study_list.htm
To learn how to read the studies go to http://www.davehitt.com/facts/index.html
According to the report “Lifting the smokescreen” which is based on numbers provided by the WHO - ZERO non smokers died, who were employed by the hospitality industry in Malta. So do you really think, that a visit in a bar were people smoke will kill you. An analyse of the report for France figures you can read here. http://cagecanada.homestead.com/AnalyseCritiqueMolimard.html
Probably the same is true for Malta. Junk science an the masses buy it.
And for the statement that non smokers will replace the smokers it is also wrong. At least it did not happen in England http://freedom2choose.info/news_viewer.php?id=827
And according to your thinking it is maybe a positive effect, if bars are closing. Never mind, that these people have maybe to care for their family and will end up jobless. But of course this is not your problem.
Franco Farrugi
Nov 8th 2008, 16:27
@ Richard Scrowston -
1. When you smoke, you are also harming us, so-called passive smokers. When you say that danger to passive smokers is exaggerated, you fail to quote sources. I can quote thousands of sources to the contrary.
2. smoking is harmful to the country, and alcohol is, too. Two wrongs don't make one right.
3. Bars are known to experience smokers quitting their custom; yet, others, mainly non -smokers, will take their place - hence, bars in Hamrun will not close.
NB. And even then, perhaps it is only socially positive for some Hamrun bars to close down, permanently!
Last but not least .... when you smoke, you get so used to your own smoke that ...
.... you have no idea how much ....
YOU STINK!
Peter Lawton
Nov 8th 2008, 12:37
On my many visits to malta I stay in the Qawra area, and I frequent a few of the local bars. One which I won,t name for the sake of the owner is frequented by the police and prison officers.They always demand ashtrays and smoke openly (in uniform ).When I complained to the owner who by the way is a really nice guy, he said they only stay a hour or so, I don,t want to make things difficult for myself. So councilor take action yourself, thats why you were elected.
Nigel Lawrence
Nov 8th 2008, 12:30
If only smokers realise how much they STINK, they would give up the filthy habit right away.
Richard Scrowston
Nov 8th 2008, 12:27
Sirs,
Unlike Arthur Ellul (Letters 8th Nov.), I am a smoker. Perhaps, Arthur, you would care to ponder the following:
(i) Is smoking more harmful to a country's welfare than, let's say, drinking alcohol? The answer is a resounding NO!
(ii) Please embrace tthe concept of diversity. Let smokers quietly go about killing only themselves. The effects of passive smoking are grossly exaggerated. The killing of innocents by drunk drivers are not.
(iii) Not all laws are sensible and thought-through.
(iv) A large proportion of bars in Hamrun will cease trading or face bankruptcy if the local police criminalise smokers, as you require.
(v) Stale cigarette smoke "does not amuse me at all" but neither, in non-smoking bars, does the smell of body-odour, cheap perfume and the urinals". I don't go to these bars!
Regards,
Richard Scrowston.