[jambutty]

Anyone who uses a vehicle or buys goods from shops that were supplied by a vehicle is a hypocrite if they complain about smokers’ pollution shakermaker. So my accusation is not without reason. In fact it is rock solid valid.

If you get so uptight about 4x4’s then you should be really angry with all other vehicles. The modern 4x4, and most are, do not pollute as much as most other vehicles. What about that huge lorry that brings your food to the supermarkets or cash and carry’s? Did your guitar walk to the shop where I presume you bought it or someone bought it for you? Of course you could have nicked it but even then the instrument would have to be transported from where it was made to you. One way or another we all contribute to pollution but the smoker is a soft target.

People who are addicted to smoking find it a necessity and it is not your place to tell a smoker that it isn’t necessary that s/he should smoke. Sorry I forgot your holier than thou attitude takes precedence.

You are merely attacking the smoker and trying to justify your use, in one way or another, of vehicles. And then you have the audacity to claim that cars are necessary so it’s OK to pollute.

People glibly quote figures of alleged smoking related deaths and I would agree if those people didn’t breathe the air around them. But they do, so any death that is claimed to have been caused by tobacco smoke can only be a probable cause. Just because a guy is dying from lung cancer and smoked 20 a day it doesn’t automatically follow that it was the tobacco. What if he was a mechanic in a bus depot or a long distance lorry driver who spent many hours each day amongst traffic? How can anyone say with any degree of certainty that it was tobacco that caused the cancer or for that matter the vehicle fumes that he breathed in day in day out all his working life. They can’t!

I can and do compare car use with smoking because both pollute the air that we all breathe and one vehicle will create umpteen times more pollution in one day than one person smoking 20 fags in one day. Most of the anti-smoking brigade are just jumping on a bandwagon.

The incidence of asthma in the young has been increasing year by year but at the same time smoking has been decreasing and the number of vehicles on our roads has nearly doubled. Now there’s a probable cause.

Beds are always available in the NHS to those who need them. The hospitals do not differentiate as to the reason why someone needs admission. The only criterion is whether they are ill enough to need a bed. You are spouting statistics that exist only in your imagination.

Asthma and other lung diseases were rife in the days of SMOG steeljack. Hundreds of thousands died from SMOG. And what contributed to the SMOG as well as coal fires? Why the early and highly inefficient cars, buses and factories. SMOG was one of the reasons why domestic coal fires were phased out after going through the smokeless fuel phase.

I lived through the 40’s and 50’s and I can tell you that a decent fire did not push smoke into the house. It all went up the chimney. Gas mantles burned the gas quite efficiently.

So you are another one DeShark – cars serve a purpose so it’s OK to pollute the atmosphere. A hypocritical statement if ever I heard one. But smoking does serve a purpose. It creates billions of pounds in taxes and on a personal note I enjoy a smoke.

No one ever stated that smoking is not harmful to the smoker. But then that’s what the anti-smoking brigade do – bring in totally irrelevant issues.

When the compulsory wearing of a seat belt was introduced there was a huge uproar but what has that got to do with the debate in question? Oh! Yes! Of course! Muddying the waters!
“Why should I have my right to clean air impinged upon by an inconsiderate arrogant and completely self-centred smoker.” I would agree with you except for one point. Just exactly where is this clean air that everyone is pontificating about? It’s polluted with vehicle exhaust fumes and not forgetting industrial atmospheric pollution.