We won’t extend the smoking ban (From Swindon Advertiser)
Get involved! Send photos, video, news & views. Text SWINDON NEWS to 80360 or email us
Email us your story, call 01793 501806 or text 80360, starting your message with 'SWINDON
NEWS'
We won’t extend the smoking ban
10:40am Saturday 4th September 2010 in
COUNCILLORS have said introducing a smoking ban for council employees during their lunch breaks would have been verging on a ‘dictatorship’.
At a meeting of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, it was decided that banning employees from smoking during contractual hours and extending the smoke-free policy to all 340 council owned sites would not be possible, following an annual review of the current smoking policy.
It was also agreed that the council would continue to encourage workers to give up smoking through the NHS Stop Smoking Service.
Councillors Mavis Childs and John Short backed the council’s decision not to further extend the smoking policy.
Coun Childs (Con, Walcot) said: “I want to remind everybody that there is a fine line between genuine help and dictatorship and this is the fine line.”
Coun Short (Con, Highworth), who quit smoking three years ago, said: “I derived quite a lot of pleasure from smoking, I still miss it, I’m not going to go back to it, but that is my choice.
“I don’t condemn smokers in any way shape or form.
“I believe that we should encourage people to stop smoking, but there is the old saying that you can take a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.
“For example, I’m a great supporter of the the GWH, but I don’t support the non smoking rules on the campus.
“We must be careful, we don’t want to become a dictatorship.”
A spokeswoman said making council-owned sites completely smoke free was too costly to be considered a viable option.
“The cost of removing the smoking shelter in the grounds of the Civic Offices would be £250,” she said.
“Signage requirements, if the smoke-free policy was extended to council grounds for areas in which council employees work, would be established in the smoke-free policy and costs would fall to individual site budgets at an estimated cost of £50 per site for 340 sites at an overall cost of £17,000.
“In the current economic climate, we do not feel that is something we can recommend.
“Having said that, we will encourage people to stop smoking wherever possible.”
Comments(101)
TinkeyWinkey
says...
11:19am Sat 4 Sep 10
I'm not a smoker but it's not "my" right to say somebody shouldn't smoke, that's a persons own choice.
faatmaan
says...
11:38am Sat 4 Sep 10
handymanphil
says...
11:58am Sat 4 Sep 10
For once, Swindon Council has acted correctly and not tried the heavy handed approach (illegally) against a minority.
Robfm
says...
12:14pm Sat 4 Sep 10
tug wilson
says...
12:15pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Kin_Free
says...
1:48pm Sat 4 Sep 10
It is a welcome move in the right direction but there is much more that needs to be done to right the wrongs associated with the insidious smoking ban social engineering project.
How Soon Is Now
says...
3:11pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
4:04pm Sat 4 Sep 10
How Soon Is Now wrote:Hear, Hear!
Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.
.
The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
4:27pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Robh wrote:What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.
tug wilson
says...
5:51pm Sat 4 Sep 10
itsamess
says...
6:03pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
6:32pm Sat 4 Sep 10
.
Only a moron would have the audacity to suggest that smoking and passive smoking isn't associated with cancer and other serious illnesses.
.
The one benefit of smoking is the premature death that smokers will ultimately have.
BusDriver
says...
6:41pm Sat 4 Sep 10
"Feals like a martini", you are a pompous semi-literate moron with no more right to comment on other people's behaviour than a dog has to ride a bicycle.
Gooey
says...
7:02pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Smaller class sizes,new hospitals,more doctors,nurses,minim
How Soon Is Now wrote: Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.Hear, Hear! . The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
um wage,improved public services,heating payments for the elderly,fruit for kids in schools,cheaper mortgages,etc,etc,et
c.
Different name.Same old Briz talking sh1te
shannon_satines
says...
7:04pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Gooey wrote:Who is Briz?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Smaller class sizes,new hospitals,more doctors,nurses,minim um wage,improved public services,heating payments for the elderly,fruit for kids in schools,cheaper mortgages,etc,etc,et c. Different name.Same old Briz talking sh1teHow Soon Is Now wrote: Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.Hear, Hear! . The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
chas
says...
7:35pm Sat 4 Sep 10
itsamess
says...
7:53pm Sat 4 Sep 10
It is a human right to choose what we choose to do. That right was first given to us in the Magna Carta and confirmed in the Human Rights Act which most certainly does not allow for discrimination. A smoker is well advised as to the risks from packaging--and yes go to most of the schools as kids leave and see how many smoke--its not a perfect world. I most certainly do not have all the answers and have never smoked--but never criticise friends or folk that do--its their freedom to choose.
shannon_satines
says...
8:07pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
8:48pm Sat 4 Sep 10
itsamess wrote:It is my freedom to choose to breath fresh air when in a public open space. Not the filthy air from an obnoxious smoker.
You need to swat up on facts--not rely on your very warped mind. Many lovely pubs were hit by the ban--not just the working mens hangouts--which include working mens clubs. The working man is the heart of the community and have skills that neither you nor i have.
It is a human right to choose what we choose to do. That right was first given to us in the Magna Carta and confirmed in the Human Rights Act which most certainly does not allow for discrimination. A smoker is well advised as to the risks from packaging--and yes go to most of the schools as kids leave and see how many smoke--its not a perfect world. I most certainly do not have all the answers and have never smoked--but never criticise friends or folk that do--its their freedom to choose.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
8:51pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Gooey wrote:Who is Briz?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Smaller class sizes,new hospitals,more doctors,nurses,minim
How Soon Is Now wrote: Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.Hear, Hear! . The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
um wage,improved public services,heating payments for the elderly,fruit for kids in schools,cheaper mortgages,etc,etc,et
c.
Different name.Same old Briz talking sh1te
.
Declining standards in schools, easier exams. New schools and hospitals paid for on the never never. The worse recession since the 1930's. Two wars on the back of lies.
.
Yes son, the smoking ban was the only decent thing the labour government did.
itsamess
says...
9:34pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Robh
says...
10:28pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
ickleme
says...
10:29pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You talk about obnoxious smokers, get a grip love, what makes you think that the air that you breath is fresh? even if there were no smokers on the planet, the air would still not be fresh.
itsamess wrote: You need to swat up on facts--not rely on your very warped mind. Many lovely pubs were hit by the ban--not just the working mens hangouts--which include working mens clubs. The working man is the heart of the community and have skills that neither you nor i have. It is a human right to choose what we choose to do. That right was first given to us in the Magna Carta and confirmed in the Human Rights Act which most certainly does not allow for discrimination. A smoker is well advised as to the risks from packaging--and yes go to most of the schools as kids leave and see how many smoke--its not a perfect world. I most certainly do not have all the answers and have never smoked--but never criticise friends or folk that do--its their freedom to choose.It is my freedom to choose to breath fresh air when in a public open space. Not the filthy air from an obnoxious smoker.
take a look at the following groups of people to find out who really denies your right to breath fresh air, then decide who is obnoxious and who has more to answer for;
house mums who ferry their fat children the 2 minute journey to school in their unnecessary 4x4 vehicles or the wasteful families who leave every single appliance and light on like blackpool illuminations or the fat good for nothing morons who take the car to work for the 10-15 minute journey rather then get on the bus or heaven forbid actually walking
its about time smokers stopped getting treated like second rate citizens, especially so as there are far bigger culprits who have far more to answer to then the average smoker!!
Gooey
says...
10:45pm Sat 4 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
2:59am Sun 5 Sep 10
Robh wrote:What a stupid and ignorant comment to make. You are paid a wage, either monthly or weekly (very few people get paid annually). You are contracted to work 35, 37 or what ever hours per week. You are entitled to xx weeks or days holiday. What you do when you are not at work is your business. INCLUDING WHEN ON HOLIDAY AS IT IS NOR CONTRACTED TIME. NOW WHO IS THE THICK ONE SOCK AND SANDAL BOY?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
3:04am Sun 5 Sep 10
ickleme wrote:So icklme you defend the fact that you pollute my air because of other pollution? That is a bit like saying it is OK to steal something small because others steal more valuable items? NO lass it is wrong. Is it OK for chavs to fiddle benefits? No, it is not is of course the same answer. In the same way it is not OK for some chav to pollute my air with their smoke. It is wrong.
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You talk about obnoxious smokers, get a grip love, what makes you think that the air that you breath is fresh? even if there were no smokers on the planet, the air would still not be fresh.
itsamess wrote: You need to swat up on facts--not rely on your very warped mind. Many lovely pubs were hit by the ban--not just the working mens hangouts--which include working mens clubs. The working man is the heart of the community and have skills that neither you nor i have. It is a human right to choose what we choose to do. That right was first given to us in the Magna Carta and confirmed in the Human Rights Act which most certainly does not allow for discrimination. A smoker is well advised as to the risks from packaging--and yes go to most of the schools as kids leave and see how many smoke--its not a perfect world. I most certainly do not have all the answers and have never smoked--but never criticise friends or folk that do--its their freedom to choose.It is my freedom to choose to breath fresh air when in a public open space. Not the filthy air from an obnoxious smoker.
take a look at the following groups of people to find out who really denies your right to breath fresh air, then decide who is obnoxious and who has more to answer for;
house mums who ferry their fat children the 2 minute journey to school in their unnecessary 4x4 vehicles or the wasteful families who leave every single appliance and light on like blackpool illuminations or the fat good for nothing morons who take the car to work for the 10-15 minute journey rather then get on the bus or heaven forbid actually walking
its about time smokers stopped getting treated like second rate citizens, especially so as there are far bigger culprits who have far more to answer to then the average smoker!!
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
3:07am Sun 5 Sep 10
Gooey wrote:Gooey is a well known working class socialist fool. But even Red-Goofy can see that smoking is wrong. Its a shame his chav comrades can't see the error of their ways.
Smokers can directly effect those they smoke next to.It's highly unpleasant for those in the near vacinity who dont smoke themselves.Until the ban, where was non puffers choice to avoid the smoke if they wanted to go out?
How Soon Is Now
says...
7:49am Sun 5 Sep 10
How about it Bob?
Robfm
says...
8:56am Sun 5 Sep 10
But here's an analysis of the effects of the smoking ban on pubs.
http://tinyurl.com/3
5ek7cp
How Soon Is Now
says...
9:37am Sun 5 Sep 10
Gooey
says...
10:15am Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:**** off you poisonous cretin.
Gooey wrote: Smokers can directly effect those they smoke next to.It's highly unpleasant for those in the near vacinity who dont smoke themselves.Until the ban, where was non puffers choice to avoid the smoke if they wanted to go out?Gooey is a well known working class socialist fool. But even Red-Goofy can see that smoking is wrong. Its a shame his chav comrades can't see the error of their ways.
Briz. you are the most vile person on these pages(and that's saying something as there is plenty of competition)
TROLL....
itsamess
says...
11:20am Sun 5 Sep 10
Before you lauch attacks on individuals you should consider the undeniable fact that singularly more deaths are caused by motor vehicles and drink related illness. Overall life expectancy has increased in this country as the body is an amazing thing--it adjusts to the prevailing conditions. Secondly the govt are the biggest offenders in the money grabbing arena and overlook the pollution vehicles cause in comparison to smokers--we tolerate vehicle poisons yet attack smokers. Lead poisoning was common years ago from petrol and was proven by science. Charities however have never proved smoking causes cancer as it contradicts the known fact that we all have cancer in our genes that require a trigger. Science has indeed shown that if we inherit certain genes from our families with known history of cancer the risk is extremely high of us getting it. Factually once scientists have found the trigger-drugs can be designed to cure cancers. You do not have to be a smoker to get lung cancer but for sure COPD is highly likely. In fact if you look around the world you will find that other countries lead the way in research and do not rely on charities. China leads the way in stem cell technology which has cured many forms of Cancer--not recognised here. Our culture being--if i dont like something-you cant do it.
Always Grumpy
says...
11:24am Sun 5 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:The Morning Advertiser - not a biased publication then?
I wouldn't waste my breath HSIN, you are too stupid to understand the science.
But here's an analysis of the effects of the smoking ban on pubs.
http://tinyurl.com/3
5ek7cp
I don't care if pubs close because of the ban, they would probably close soon enough anyway if smoking's the only attraction. What I am happy with is the smoking ban itself. The best thing to happen to pubs in the nearly fifty years I've been drinking in them. Long may it continue.
tug wilson
says...
11:36am Sun 5 Sep 10
Robfm
says...
11:39am Sun 5 Sep 10
As itsamess says all forms of cancers have triggers, the gene in smokers and non smokers prone to Lung Cancer has been identified. If there were truly a desire from the likes of CRUK to wipe out this form of cancer they would concentrate their resources on devising a simple test which could identify those with the gene. Then resources and advice could be targeted at those susceptible to it.
But we know by finding cures Big D will ultimately do themselves out of business.
If you don't believe me, what about a veteran of the drug industry who has had the courage to speak out.
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=AazObF_pH
SU&NR=1
Gooey
says...
11:50am Sun 5 Sep 10
Healthylady
says...
2:09pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Second hand smoke is major element in heart and breathing difficulties not just cancer. Roy Castle is one of the leading examples of a non smoker killed by exposure to smoke in pubs and clubs where he worked.
The smoking ban is first and foremost about protecting workers. University of Liverpool research shows a marked improvement in bar staff's health since the ban.
How much extra time do smokers have away from their work by constantly going out for a ciggie?
Always Grumpy
says...
3:18pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:I don't care, I do not believe the claims that smoking and second hand smoke isn't harmful.
Always Grumpy, it's not which publication but the study, that was nothing to do with pubs or the MA.
As itsamess says all forms of cancers have triggers, the gene in smokers and non smokers prone to Lung Cancer has been identified. If there were truly a desire from the likes of CRUK to wipe out this form of cancer they would concentrate their resources on devising a simple test which could identify those with the gene. Then resources and advice could be targeted at those susceptible to it.
But we know by finding cures Big D will ultimately do themselves out of business.
If you don't believe me, what about a veteran of the drug industry who has had the courage to speak out.
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=AazObF_pH
SU&NR=1
You believe what you like, as far as I'm concerned smoking is a killer and there are plenty of scientists and experts who believe the same.
If smoking is allowed, then I'll stop going to any pub that allows smoking, even if it's in a different room.
I well remember the Carpenters when it allowed smoking in the front room, the whole pub stank of stale smoke.
If I had my way, tobacco would be on a par with cannabis.
DaveA
says...
4:01pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
4:14pm Sun 5 Sep 10
.
Smoking doesn't pollute as much as a mum in her 4x4.
It's my human right.
It doesn't hurt anyone!
.
What a bunch of lame arguments from lame obnoxious chavs!
Cavalera
says...
4:57pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You sad sad deluded fool - at least if you are going to create a new username, firstly choose one that you can't see right through and secondly, change the manner in which you post. You really are a detestable repugnant pompous nasty little person (and I use that word lightly) whose views are completely alienated. Did Evil_Genius get revoked YET AGAIN or did you choose this time to simply retire that one and create a new one. You think that you are one step ahead and above everyone else but in reality it's the other way around. You are so transparent it is embarrassing. May I suggest your next username - something along the lines of 'Repulsive_ignorant_
Gooey wrote:Who is Briz?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Smaller class sizes,new hospitals,more doctors,nurses,minim
How Soon Is Now wrote: Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.Hear, Hear! . The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
um wage,improved public services,heating payments for the elderly,fruit for kids in schools,cheaper mortgages,etc,etc,et
c.
Different name.Same old Briz talking sh1te
.
Declining standards in schools, easier exams. New schools and hospitals paid for on the never never. The worse recession since the 1930's. Two wars on the back of lies.
.
Yes son, the smoking ban was the only decent thing the labour government did.
bigoted_hateful_vill
age_idiot - that should do it.
Cavalera
says...
4:58pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:It is my freedom to choose to breath fresh air when in a public open space. Not the filthy air from an obnoxious bigot.
itsamess wrote:It is my freedom to choose to breath fresh air when in a public open space. Not the filthy air from an obnoxious smoker.
You need to swat up on facts--not rely on your very warped mind. Many lovely pubs were hit by the ban--not just the working mens hangouts--which include working mens clubs. The working man is the heart of the community and have skills that neither you nor i have.
It is a human right to choose what we choose to do. That right was first given to us in the Magna Carta and confirmed in the Human Rights Act which most certainly does not allow for discrimination. A smoker is well advised as to the risks from packaging--and yes go to most of the schools as kids leave and see how many smoke--its not a perfect world. I most certainly do not have all the answers and have never smoked--but never criticise friends or folk that do--its their freedom to choose.
Cavalera
says...
5:02pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Same tripe, usual suspect. Quick question for you - it'll show you how popular you are and what people think of your opinions. When have you EVER had ANYONE (another person, not one of your numerous aliases) agree with ANYTHING you have said?
Robh wrote:What a stupid and ignorant comment to make. You are paid a wage, either monthly or weekly (very few people get paid annually). You are contracted to work 35, 37 or what ever hours per week. You are entitled to xx weeks or days holiday. What you do when you are not at work is your business. INCLUDING WHEN ON HOLIDAY AS IT IS NOR CONTRACTED TIME. NOW WHO IS THE THICK ONE SOCK AND SANDAL BOY?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
5:29pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Cavalera wrote:Settle down please bobfm, we all know it is you!
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You sad sad deluded fool - at least if you are going to create a new username, firstly choose one that you can't see right through and secondly, change the manner in which you post. You really are a detestable repugnant pompous nasty little person (and I use that word lightly) whose views are completely alienated. Did Evil_Genius get revoked YET AGAIN or did you choose this time to simply retire that one and create a new one. You think that you are one step ahead and above everyone else but in reality it's the other way around. You are so transparent it is embarrassing. May I suggest your next username - something along the lines of 'Repulsive_ignorant_
Gooey wrote:Who is Briz?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Smaller class sizes,new hospitals,more doctors,nurses,minim
How Soon Is Now wrote: Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.Hear, Hear! . The only useful thing that Labour government did for this country. It is a shame it doesn't extend to public open air spaces. Nothing worse than having your air polluted by a vile ignorant smoker.
um wage,improved public services,heating payments for the elderly,fruit for kids in schools,cheaper mortgages,etc,etc,et
c.
Different name.Same old Briz talking sh1te
.
Declining standards in schools, easier exams. New schools and hospitals paid for on the never never. The worse recession since the 1930's. Two wars on the back of lies.
.
Yes son, the smoking ban was the only decent thing the labour government did.
bigoted_hateful_vill
age_idiot - that should do it.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
5:30pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Cavalera wrote:Oh dear bob you are so transparent. Try reading some posts instead of insulting folk and you would see plenty of support for my point of view. Sad little man bob.
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Same tripe, usual suspect. Quick question for you - it'll show you how popular you are and what people think of your opinions. When have you EVER had ANYONE (another person, not one of your numerous aliases) agree with ANYTHING you have said?
Robh wrote:What a stupid and ignorant comment to make. You are paid a wage, either monthly or weekly (very few people get paid annually). You are contracted to work 35, 37 or what ever hours per week. You are entitled to xx weeks or days holiday. What you do when you are not at work is your business. INCLUDING WHEN ON HOLIDAY AS IT IS NOR CONTRACTED TIME. NOW WHO IS THE THICK ONE SOCK AND SANDAL BOY?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
Robfm
says...
6:11pm Sun 5 Sep 10
As for the Carpenters smelling of tobacco smoke AG, I think that features under the heading complete fallacy, with 3 doors, numerous windows and a very powerful 4 individual inlet/outlet air system and 2 open chimneys that is simply not true.
Always Grumpy
says...
6:32pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:You probably got used to it and never realised just how bad it was. Believe me or not, I know what it was like.
Oh dear posting when I'm asleep now.
As for the Carpenters smelling of tobacco smoke AG, I think that features under the heading complete fallacy, with 3 doors, numerous windows and a very powerful 4 individual inlet/outlet air system and 2 open chimneys that is simply not true.
Cavalera
says...
6:51pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You could at least try and be original given that you are the master of the universe and founder of all knowledge as we know it. I believe that I made reference to 'transparency' and just how 'sad' you are - for you to them come back with not only the same insults but the very same words. Perhaps your lack of intellect and intelligence has let you down once again. While you're at it, please show me ONE SINGLE INDEPENDENT POST BACKING UP YOUR VIEWS AND AGREEING WITH THEM. And No, comments from Evil_Genius, Briz, do not count. How is the village this evening - who is on idiot-duty while you're in front of the keyboard?
Cavalera wrote:Oh dear bob you are so transparent. Try reading some posts instead of insulting folk and you would see plenty of support for my point of view. Sad little man bob.
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Same tripe, usual suspect. Quick question for you - it'll show you how popular you are and what people think of your opinions. When have you EVER had ANYONE (another person, not one of your numerous aliases) agree with ANYTHING you have said?
Robh wrote:What a stupid and ignorant comment to make. You are paid a wage, either monthly or weekly (very few people get paid annually). You are contracted to work 35, 37 or what ever hours per week. You are entitled to xx weeks or days holiday. What you do when you are not at work is your business. INCLUDING WHEN ON HOLIDAY AS IT IS NOR CONTRACTED TIME. NOW WHO IS THE THICK ONE SOCK AND SANDAL BOY?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
Robfm
says...
6:58pm Sun 5 Sep 10
The Real Librarian
says...
8:23pm Sun 5 Sep 10
How Soon Is Now wrote:Actually I think it is a bad thing.
Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.
.
They imposed their will on the public, and restricted people's right to do something which was and is legal, and no-one stopped them.
.
After that its a slippery slope to 90 days detention, ID cards and all the other fascist cr*p they imposed.
.
It wasn't the worst thing they did though. Two illegal wars have to cout fr something.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
8:49pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Cavalera wrote:Bob you really shouldn't be so righteous after all the lies you have told and logins you have used to pervert threads on these pages.
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:You could at least try and be original given that you are the master of the universe and founder of all knowledge as we know it. I believe that I made reference to 'transparency' and just how 'sad' you are - for you to them come back with not only the same insults but the very same words. Perhaps your lack of intellect and intelligence has let you down once again. While you're at it, please show me ONE SINGLE INDEPENDENT POST BACKING UP YOUR VIEWS AND AGREEING WITH THEM. And No, comments from Evil_Genius, Briz, do not count. How is the village this evening - who is on idiot-duty while you're in front of the keyboard?
Cavalera wrote:Oh dear bob you are so transparent. Try reading some posts instead of insulting folk and you would see plenty of support for my point of view. Sad little man bob.
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Same tripe, usual suspect. Quick question for you - it'll show you how popular you are and what people think of your opinions. When have you EVER had ANYONE (another person, not one of your numerous aliases) agree with ANYTHING you have said?
Robh wrote:What a stupid and ignorant comment to make. You are paid a wage, either monthly or weekly (very few people get paid annually). You are contracted to work 35, 37 or what ever hours per week. You are entitled to xx weeks or days holiday. What you do when you are not at work is your business. INCLUDING WHEN ON HOLIDAY AS IT IS NOR CONTRACTED TIME. NOW WHO IS THE THICK ONE SOCK AND SANDAL BOY?
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Thick as two short planks and twice as stupid. You are paid for 52 weeks of the year which includes holidays.
Robh wrote: It could be argued that contractual hours also include holidays. Try enforcing a smoking ban during the day on staff then.What a stupid statement contractual hours are the hours you are contracted to work. Not your holiday time.
What you are not paid for is lunch breaks.
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
8:56pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Always Grumpy wrote:The carps used to stink and stale fags. The cigarette smoke was pretty bad as well.
Robfm wrote:You probably got used to it and never realised just how bad it was. Believe me or not, I know what it was like.
Oh dear posting when I'm asleep now.
As for the Carpenters smelling of tobacco smoke AG, I think that features under the heading complete fallacy, with 3 doors, numerous windows and a very powerful 4 individual inlet/outlet air system and 2 open chimneys that is simply not true.
.
People who post here regularly should know better than to try and engage bobfm/daniel10/robfm
/Cavalera in an objective discussion about smoking. The truth is that as a low end working mans pub his establishment and many others of his paymasters has suffered tremendously because of the ban. Only successful pubs (few of which are Arkels) have been able to survive.
Robh
says...
9:18pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Who would have thought such a silly little article would draw so many stupid, personal and abusive comments. That's the problem when you let children comment on here.
How Soon Is Now
says...
10:20pm Sun 5 Sep 10
The Real Librarian wrote:Well most people think about what immediately affects them - if you think it's a bad thing to be able to go into a pub and not have to breathe other people's smoke then fine, you are resigned to the past.
How Soon Is Now wrote:Actually I think it is a bad thing.
Smoking ban - best thing the last government did, and I hope it never gets reversed.
.
They imposed their will on the public, and restricted people's right to do something which was and is legal, and no-one stopped them.
.
After that its a slippery slope to 90 days detention, ID cards and all the other fascist cr*p they imposed.
.
It wasn't the worst thing they did though. Two illegal wars have to cout fr something.
itsamess
says...
10:32pm Sun 5 Sep 10
itsamess
says...
10:46pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini
says...
10:49pm Sun 5 Sep 10
Robh wrote:whatever bobfm/daniel10/robfm
You lot still at it?
Who would have thought such a silly little article would draw so many stupid, personal and abusive comments. That's the problem when you let children comment on here.
/Cavalera
Robfm
says...
7:06am Mon 6 Sep 10
As for describing my pub as a low end working mens pub. What an insult to working men. I am proud of the fact that we have a very diverse range of customers, from professional people, to the elderly, young families, the disabled, and yet those traditionally known as working men.
And guess in general are the biggest spenders, those traditional working men, so that explains why traditional boozers are closing. The once a week or month users in proportion spend little.
And once again Briz given you've never been to my pub your observations are fallacy.
Robfm
says...
7:13am Mon 6 Sep 10
Obviously the Sergeant has been convicted and will be sentenced accordingly, but the fact that this has been shown before sentence and the media hype means that he will have a right of appeal immediately on the grounds any punishment could be 'public perception' based.
What the tape does show is the actions of a typical drunk, which is the reason she was arrested.
Cavalera
says...
7:22am Mon 6 Sep 10
Feals_like_a_martini wrote:Whatever Briz/Daniel 10/Evil_Genius/Feals
Robh wrote:whatever bobfm/daniel10/robfm
You lot still at it?
Who would have thought such a silly little article would draw so many stupid, personal and abusive comments. That's the problem when you let children comment on here.
/Cavalera
_like_a_martini/moro
n/bigot/loner/hypocr
ite (few more suggested usernames for you there as well - if you need any more, let me know as I've got plenty of alternatives).
itsamess
says...
8:22am Mon 6 Sep 10
Unfortunately i did not see the video. I just read the report wjich stated the lady was found asleep in a car. My point was simply that it is rare for one officer to report such an incident and indeed a court conviction. I cannot see that an argument for appeal could be made on those grounds unless the video was released prior to trial as the Jury will have decided on the evidence seen and heard. Sentencing should be based on the evidence and a public servant under the law is deemed to attract a more severe sentence--wait and see!
Always Grumpy
says...
8:36am Mon 6 Sep 10
Personally, I think she brought it all on herself and the policeman involved is likely to lose his job because of this womans actions.
Billy Jo
says...
8:50am Mon 6 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:"What an insult to working men."
Blimey so I am Robh now, Briz really has lost it, even if he had it. Must be mixing cider with lager that's doing it. As for describing my pub as a low end working mens pub. What an insult to working men. I am proud of the fact that we have a very diverse range of customers, from professional people, to the elderly, young families, the disabled, and yet those traditionally known as working men. And guess in general are the biggest spenders, those traditional working men, so that explains why traditional boozers are closing. The once a week or month users in proportion spend little. And once again Briz given you've never been to my pub your observations are fallacy.
You bl00dy hypocrite. It was YOU who decried the honest blue collar worker in previous posts and you know it!
The more you spew forth your bile the more of a disgusting poor excuse of a human being you show yourself up to be!
Robfm
says...
9:17am Mon 6 Sep 10
Billy Jo
says...
10:32am Mon 6 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:Enforced absence? Are you deluded man?
Another constructive comment BJ. I guess another enforced absence is imminent.
A fortnights holiday does not constitute an "enforced absence"
I,unlike some, have NEVER had my access to this site disrupted in anyway. This is because I refrain from foul language and speak only of fact!
My comment is constructive in that I believe that all posters should be aware that some of the most pompous comments on these pages are offered up by a fraud/liar/hypocrite
!
itsamess
says...
10:35am Mon 6 Sep 10
Sorry--but a court of law convicted the officer on the evidence presented to the court--video and witness statements. I believe the words to every jury is that the case must be proved beyond any reasonable doubt--they found no doubt.
Always Grumpy
says...
10:46am Mon 6 Sep 10
Unfortunately, I wasn't on that jury, but based on the report in yesterdays paper and seeing the video evidence I would have reasonable doubt. Without reading the full court records however, I've no doubt the papers didn't report everything that transpired and probably a lot more evidence was presented in court during the trial. It doesn't alter the fact that in my opinion the woman brought much of it on herself.
It doesn't mean I condone the police action, rather perhaps understand what can happen in these frustrating circumstances. I've no doubt this sort of thing happens quite often, but never gets to court.
itsamess
says...
11:13am Mon 6 Sep 10
Unfortunately as far as i am aware the trial was held in a Magistrates Court and as far as i know jury trials are not heard there. Sentencing powers are less and possibly not custodial.
Robfm
says...
1:08pm Mon 6 Sep 10
So you do not consider 'Bloody Hypocrite' to be foul language, interesting.
Billy Jo
says...
1:26pm Mon 6 Sep 10
Billy Jo wrote:You should do your homework before you start shooting your obnoxious mouth off.
Robfm wrote: Another constructive comment BJ. I guess another enforced absence is imminent.Enforced absence? Are you deluded man? A fortnights holiday does not constitute an "enforced absence" I,unlike some, have NEVER had my access to this site disrupted in anyway. This is because I refrain from foul language and speak only of fact! My comment is constructive in that I believe that all posters should be aware that some of the most pompous comments on these pages are offered up by a fraud/liar/hypocrite !
I maintain.... You are a master of fudge,lies,rudeness,
hypocrisy and fraud and thankfully the majority of posters on this site are fully aware of this.
Sickening.
Cavalera
says...
4:38pm Mon 6 Sep 10
s comments will start to lead people to believe that you are Mrs Briz - fraud/liar/hypocrite - you even use the same words as him. And we're all still waiting for your answer on the Three Tuns question raised under that news item but you seem to gone rather quiet on that.
Robfm
says...
6:32pm Mon 6 Sep 10
Cavalera
says...
7:04pm Mon 6 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:Cue Briz/Daniel 10/Evil_Genius/His/h
Cavalera, thank you for your post, and I had 5 witnesses to the fact I couldn't have posted it.
er_latest_user_name'
s post accusing us of being one and the same Bob - won't be long now......
lloydp
says...
7:43pm Mon 6 Sep 10
Billy Jo
says...
10:33pm Mon 6 Sep 10
Cavalera wrote:Oh dear...
'Refrain from foul language' - apart from calling Bob a 'bloody hypocrite' and 'spew forth your bile the more of a disgusting poor excuse of a human being you show yourself up to be' - but that's OK. After all, you 'refrain from foul language and speak only of fact'. Pot/kettle/black anyone? Be very careful Billy Jo, your anti-Bob/anti-Arkell s comments will start to lead people to believe that you are Mrs Briz - fraud/liar/hypocrite - you even use the same words as him. And we're all still waiting for your answer on the Three Tuns question raised under that news item but you seem to gone rather quiet on that.
Am I not being clear?
You call me anti-Bob like it is some kind of insult. I am PROUD to say I am anti-Bob.
His disregard for the well being of others just to earn a pound and try to endear himself to a failed "political" party is disgusting.
His attitude toward the charities who are desperately trying to fight cancer and the causes thereof is disgusting.
His attitude and comments regarding blue collar workers are again disgusting.
His defence of the racist comments put forth by one of the UKIP candidates in the last election was disgusting.
His sycophantic allegiance toward his paymasters is disgusting.
His inability to EVER accept he may be wrong on ANY subject just makes him look like a fool.
His multiple log-ins PROVE he is not above fraudulent behaviour.... And that's the cases we KNOW about.
I am not anti-Robert Feal-Martinez the man.... I couldn't give to figs about him...I am anti BOB.... The BOB that I see as a symbol for so many wrongs.
(As for the Three Tuns.... I shall allow future press releases to answer that one for me.... I will then graciously allow myself the tiniest smile when you delve in to a huge slice of humble pie)
How Soon Is Now
says...
7:56am Tue 7 Sep 10
Cavalera
says...
8:00am Tue 7 Sep 10
Billy Jo wrote:So Billy Jo - every one that has a differing opinion to yours means that that opinions is 'disgusting' does it? There are two sides to every story. Seems to me that you've done a Briz and taken every word Bob has said, chewed it about a bit and spat it back out with exaggerated meaning. Deary deary me - such a passionate outburst. Would you like to qualify your accusations with some actual comments - and their meanings so that we can all be enlightened. Not summations, or your versions but actual comments to back up what you have said please. oh - and you swerved that Arkells issue very nicely didn't you - watch this space - brilliant! I'll do what you do now and twist that slightly. 'If any press release at any stage in the future paints Arkells in a negative light then I (Billy Jo) will be correct'. Very well done - you'd be correct if Arkells decide to close another pub - well done.
Cavalera wrote:Oh dear...
'Refrain from foul language' - apart from calling Bob a 'bloody hypocrite' and 'spew forth your bile the more of a disgusting poor excuse of a human being you show yourself up to be' - but that's OK. After all, you 'refrain from foul language and speak only of fact'. Pot/kettle/black anyone? Be very careful Billy Jo, your anti-Bob/anti-Arkell s comments will start to lead people to believe that you are Mrs Briz - fraud/liar/hypocrite - you even use the same words as him. And we're all still waiting for your answer on the Three Tuns question raised under that news item but you seem to gone rather quiet on that.
Am I not being clear?
You call me anti-Bob like it is some kind of insult. I am PROUD to say I am anti-Bob.
His disregard for the well being of others just to earn a pound and try to endear himself to a failed "political" party is disgusting.
His attitude toward the charities who are desperately trying to fight cancer and the causes thereof is disgusting.
His attitude and comments regarding blue collar workers are again disgusting.
His defence of the racist comments put forth by one of the UKIP candidates in the last election was disgusting.
His sycophantic allegiance toward his paymasters is disgusting.
His inability to EVER accept he may be wrong on ANY subject just makes him look like a fool.
His multiple log-ins PROVE he is not above fraudulent behaviour.... And that's the cases we KNOW about.
I am not anti-Robert Feal-Martinez the man.... I couldn't give to figs about him...I am anti BOB.... The BOB that I see as a symbol for so many wrongs.
(As for the Three Tuns.... I shall allow future press releases to answer that one for me.... I will then graciously allow myself the tiniest smile when you delve in to a huge slice of humble pie)
Billy Jo
says...
9:30am Tue 7 Sep 10
No chewing.... No change of direction.... No failure to understand the meaning....
Mr. Feal-Martinez has proven, and no doubt will prove again, that he is indeed a cruel excuse for a human being with dubious morals. He has also proven himself to be a fraud.
There are indeed two sides to every story. Unfortunately for Mr. Feal-Martinez his side is well documented and available for all to read on these pages.
Robfm
says...
11:31am Tue 7 Sep 10
You as always have chosen to taken comments out of context. It is easy to do in the knowledge that most have probably never read my comments. But continue your stupidity if you wish. It matters not to me.
Robfm
says...
11:32am Tue 7 Sep 10
You as always have chosen to taken comments out of context. It is easy to do in the knowledge that most have probably never read my comments. But continue your stupidity if you wish. It matters not to me.
How Soon Is Now
says...
12:36pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Robfm
says...
12:46pm Tue 7 Sep 10
It's OK I know I won't get an honest answer.
Cavalera
says...
1:14pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Billy Jo wrote:1. I asked for proof - you provided no proof. 2. You avoided the Arkells issue....AGAIN.
The only words I have thrown back at Mr. Feal-Martinez are his own.
No chewing.... No change of direction.... No failure to understand the meaning....
Mr. Feal-Martinez has proven, and no doubt will prove again, that he is indeed a cruel excuse for a human being with dubious morals. He has also proven himself to be a fraud.
There are indeed two sides to every story. Unfortunately for Mr. Feal-Martinez his side is well documented and available for all to read on these pages.
How Soon Is Now
says...
6:12pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:Then I won't give one - yes I am.
HSIN, I never asked previously but are you a reincarnation of Casual Observer.
It's OK I know I won't get an honest answer.
How Soon Is Now
says...
6:16pm Tue 7 Sep 10
If the comments section became anonymous would you feel let down because you could no longer let people know who you were?
Billy Jo
says...
8:32pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:More insults. No facts.... Just insults.
Oh dear BJ I see you have learnt to spell my name, that's an achievement. I have no need or desire to defend myself from your fallacy. You as always have chosen to taken comments out of context. It is easy to do in the knowledge that most have probably never read my comments. But continue your stupidity if you wish. It matters not to me.
I am stupid because I disagree with all that Mr. Feal - Martinez says?
No. I am a rational,intelligent
,even handed kind of chap. I am proud to say my morals are quite high and my ideals a little conservative. I read ALL of your comments with interest as I do like to see what the ridiculous and nasty side of people looks like. Thankfully you add pompous and full of hot air to the mix.
You could not defend your comments as they are indefensible.
Intelligence is not gained by ripping pages out of google and passing them off as your own opinions and ideas. Plagiarism is the tool of the fool...
Fraudulent,lying,hyp
ocritical supporter of racists... Well Done.!
Robfm
says...
8:38pm Tue 7 Sep 10
I would just add that 'self praise' is no recommendation, a trait you clearly have.
Back to the article another piece showing the damage the ban has caused to my Industry.
http://blog.iea.org.
uk/?p=4222
The IEA stands for the Institute of Economic Affairs.
Billy Jo
says...
9:12pm Tue 7 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:S0d your industry !!!
I have never knowingly plagiarised anything. Even when I may neglect to give a reference the quotes are always in inverted commas which to most indicates they come from a third party source. I would just add that 'self praise' is no recommendation, a trait you clearly have. Back to the article another piece showing the damage the ban has caused to my Industry. http://blog.iea.org. uk/?p=4222 The IEA stands for the Institute of Economic Affairs.
What about saving lives !???????
How Soon Is Now
says...
9:53pm Tue 7 Sep 10
That's not actually true is it Bob.
To "neglect to give a reference (to) the quotes" is always your excuse when you palm off stuff as being written by you. Often mingled in to your own rambling rubbish, it's easier to tell what isn't yours when the grammar suddenly improves than to expect the source to be cited by you.
Robfm
says...
8:15am Wed 8 Sep 10
BJ, 'Saving Lives'. lung cancer rates up including amongst non smokers, heart attack rates fall less than pre ban, chronic respiratory illness up. So pray tell how has the ban saved lives??
Billy Jo
says...
9:35am Wed 8 Sep 10
Robfm wrote:Every sane person is more than aware that a reduction in smoking = a reduction in loss of life.
Sorry CO I haven't knowingly plagiarised anything. BJ, 'Saving Lives'. lung cancer rates up including amongst non smokers, heart attack rates fall less than pre ban, chronic respiratory illness up. So pray tell how has the ban saved lives??
Step away from your till for a couple of minutes you greedy little merchant and look at more than just the odd "fact" that supports your ridiculous argument.
Robfm
says...
10:24am Wed 8 Sep 10
I have posted the DoH own stats to prove that smoking rates are up, illness is up and deaths haven't dropped.
As I have said many many times, if tobacco was banned I wouldn't have a problem, that would be genuine concern for health. HMG seem to want their cake and eat it.
itsamess
says...
11:44am Wed 8 Sep 10
The whole issue of smoking is perhaps one of the most controversial issues. Very little can be achieved unless folk take a balanced view rather than the gaggle of personal attacks. I have never smoked but associate with friends and colleagues who do. It is their choice to smoke. Much like drinking--what if they banned that? The facts say drink is responsible for more deaths and anti-social behaviour. There is a good case for the banning of fossil fuelled vehicles as despite the high tech advances they spew out more toxins and pollutants in a short distance than a life smoker. Plus vehicles are responsible for more deaths. Do i hear the fresh air critics cry out to ban vehicles--no. Despite the fact the modern car produces volumes of CO2 that keeps all the toxins and carcinagenics in the lower atmosphere. Overall it has to be said smoking is the lesser of 3 evils on balance.
How Soon Is Now
says...
9:22pm Wed 8 Sep 10
Robfm
says...
9:09am Thu 9 Sep 10
How Soon Is Now
says...
1:12pm Thu 9 Sep 10
Robfm
says...
1:44pm Thu 9 Sep 10
How Soon Is Now
says...
9:13pm Thu 9 Sep 10
Tell you what though Robert, I'll take a leaf out of your own book and create another login.
Unlike yourself though, I won't use the old one to back myself up in a discussion, I will abandon it completely (when I'm ready).
You never know, I may come back as you.
Robfm
says...
7:48am Fri 10 Sep 10
How Soon Is Now
says...
7:57am Fri 10 Sep 10
t feal-martinez/rfm/ro
bfm/some kid and countless unknown others
More News stories
- Nursery celebrates 20th anniversary
- GP hits out at NHS computerised medical records
- Two crashes on A419 northbound
- Council wins landmark Mechanics' Institute case
- Link Centre closed for two days because of power cut
- Workers strike outside GWH
- Engineering a design for eco classroom wins top award
- Street set to unite under police team
- Town gets ready for university challenge
- This is art that really rocks
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Robh says...
10:48am Sat 4 Sep 10