Smoking on QM2 after UK ban

[GAV BOY]

Gav Boy - Simply quoting other people's posts with a couple of smilies attached is pointless. At best it adds nothing to the discussion, whilst at worst it can cause all sorts of annoyance.

 

Yes, but Malcom you wont admit that smoking has health issues, how you can believe that i do not know, so correct me if im WRONG

 

1) The Medical Experts are WRONG ! ( MAJORITY)

 

2) The Goverment, and other Political Parties are WRONG ! (MAJORITY)

 

3) The Population of this Country are WRONG ! (MAJORITY) despite what you beleive.

 

So why is it being banned, just to upset the MINORITY of smokers in this country ?

 

 

Happy now ? :D

 

Regards,

 

Gavin :cool:

[guernseyguy]

Maybe 'Friends of Johnnie'

 

But if Ben & Johnnie meet on the Fantail, does that make them Friends of Dororthy ?

 

 

Time for a G&T!

 

Peter

[SeaFlint]

But if Ben & Johnnie meet on the Fantail, does that make them Friends of Dororthy ?

 

Time for a G&T!

 

Peter

 

You know, multiple memberships (or honorary memberships) could create a problem.

 

What if you had a Friends of Dorothy meeting in the Commodore Club (good move, by the way, on the part of FOD members to claim that spot as their own), and THEN a Friends of Benjamin meeting on the fantail that required you to run the length of the ship (gasping for breath, maybe), and THEN had to run down to the forward bowels of the ship for your Friends of Bill meeting in Connexions (sic?), possibly having to pass by the Friends of Gordon (the drinkers, right?) people drunk as skunks all staggering about somewhere in-between?

 

Sounds like a mess! Although it might be entertaining to watch AND a good way to work-off all those extra meals. Still, while I'd be impressed by such a feat, you would probably find me chairing my daily meeting of F.O.N. (Friends of NAP-TIME).

 

P.S. Sorry to play with the "Friends of..." theme. I DO understand the importance of such groups to the members.

[pnhmrk]

What 'choice' is that? The choice to repress others with your second hand smoke? Or the choice to enjoy your evening without being repressed by some one elses carcinogenic, life shortening habit? :rolleyes:

 

Or the choice to go into a smoking den if you want and not if you don't want.

[pnhmrk]

Friends of Dorothy

 

I was astonished to see a discussion on the Gay and Lesbian board saying that people didn't know the meaning of FOD anymore (at least those under 30:( ). Perhaps that's a good sign; it would be a pity to replace it with another group.

[GAV BOY]

Or the choice to go into a smoking den if you want and not if you don't want.

 

Your so out of touch Malcom its scarey ! :rolleyes:

 

Well the bans coming to the relief of the Majority (according to several polls i have seen or read)

 

Roll on July 1st, i will be out celebrating ! :D

 

 

regards,

 

Gavin :cool:

[SamanthasDad]

How many times have you had to skirt a puddle of vomit (or, as you suggest urine) on the pavement? How many times have you avoided drunks on the tube?

Not many on the QM2.

 

 

"I'm alright Jack"?

:confused:

 

 

If you don't like it then you don't need to go into a smoking area, in exactly the same way that if someone wants to smoke they won't go into a non-smoking area.

It's a pity that smoke doesn't recognise the boundary's between smoking and non smoking areas. I was talking about non-smoking areas.

 

I like the way that they do it in Canada where smoking areas have to be completely cut off from the non-smoking area. (Please correct me if I am wrong. It might have only been the places that we went)

[KenC]

Or the choice to go into a smoking den if you want and not if you don't want.

 

It seems perfectly simple to me - for years non-smokers had the choice of going into foul smoke filled atmospheres or probably not going out much at all. Now... smokers have a similar amount of choice, to smoke outside or not go out much at all. Seems fair to me that the majority now get the chance to have an unpolluted atmosphere after all these years - perhaps in a hundred years it will swap around again eh??? ;)

 

Only a matter of time before cruise lines follow suit and severely restrict smoking in enclosed spaces. :D

[SeaFlint]

I was astonished to see a discussion on the Gay and Lesbian board saying that people didn't know the meaning of FOD anymore (at least those under 30:( ). Perhaps that's a good sign; it would be a pity to replace it with another group.

 

For men who thought Judy Garland was HOT, HOT, HOT??? Imagine my surprise when I lied to my wife so I could go hang out with other men who drool over Judy Garland only to have her discover that... ;) Well, she'll get over it one of these days.

 

I didn't know of Friends of Dorothy or Friends of Bill (well, I know of a group of Bill Clinton donors of that name) until getting mixed-up with Cunard/QM2. And I'm over 40 and not TOO ignorant. I STILL don't know what F.O.C. is? Does anyone here?

 

Malcolm, if you're a member of FOD AND you qualify for our new "Friends of Ben" (you did say you smoke, right?), then meetings in the Commodore Club and meetings on the fantail would help you with the weight you said you put on during your last trip. Of course, it would mean leaving the QE2 for the QM2. :eek: Still, health is very important.

 

My Friends of Nap-Time chairmanship doesn't help me too much when it comes to burning off the extra calories. - sigh -

[pnhmrk]

You wont admit that smoking has health issues, how you can believe that i do not know

 

I have never denied the health implications on the smoker them self. I have only argued over the possible harm from passive smoking. If we are talking about banning all tobacco products for health reasons I'm very much in favour; If you just want to incommode smokers as much as possible whilst still keeping the revenue through taxation then I'm very much against.

 

so correct me if im WRONG

 

The last time this subject was discussed in a thread I produced information that was of a conflicting opinion to yours. They're on this thread http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=389081.

 

1) The Medical Experts are WRONG ! ( MAJORITY)

 

Some are quite wrong and some are wrong in part (and some are just lying)

 

2) The Government, and other Political Parties are WRONG ! (MAJORITY)

 

They are wrong to act in the way they are

 

3) The Population of this Country are WRONG ! (MAJORITY) despite what you believe.

 

No, the majority of the population believe in the freedom to choose. You are wrong when you say the majority want to use legislation to restrict smoking.

 

So why is it being banned, just to upset the MINORITY of smokers in this country ?

 

I could accept a ban on health grounds - no smoking anywhere. What is unacceptable is a government that won't go for an outright ban and forfeit the tax revenue but will go for a halfhearted measure to make them look good.

 

Happy now ? :D

 

I didn't realise I wasn't happy before!

[guernseyguy]

Malcolm, if you qualify for our new "Friends of Ben" (you did say you smoke, right?)

 

Pay attention at the back! I think he said he's a Friend of a Friend of Ben's (or quite possiibly more than a friend). Do keep up!

 

Ah the innocent days when Peter Cook (UK satirist) went on a US talk show, lit his cigarette (which was almost the norm in those days) and said to his stunned host : 'I can only really relax with a fag in my mouth'.

 

For the cousins, 'fag' is slang for cigarette.

 

Peter

[SeaFlint]

It seems perfectly simple to me - for years non-smokers had the choice of going into foul smoke filled atmospheres or probably not going out much at all. Now... smokers have a similar amount of choice, to smoke outside or not go out much at all. Seems fair to me that the majority now get the chance to have an unpolluted atmosphere after all these years - perhaps in a hundred years it will swap around again eh??? ;)

 

Only a matter of time before cruise lines follow suit and severely restrict smoking in enclosed spaces. :D

 

Maybe Cunard could put a few tenders over the side and CHARGE smokers for "Scenic At-Sea Smoking Odyssey"

[patwell]

Well, let's see... Friends of...um...uh... Maybe, Friends of Brigham Young???

 

My wife and I don't drink (well, maybe a few glasses of wine a year) and we'd be glad to not drink with you anywhere. In FACT, we'd be PROUD to not drink with you IN PUBLIC. :) Actually, we're good people to know on those long trips. Our steward ended-up with six bottles of champagne since we didn't drink the bottles Cunard (kindly) kept putting in our fridge.

 

Cheap date, my foot. Drinks are CHEAP! Sober dates have much more expensive tastes. ;)

 

SeaFlint...I don't like to mix my non-drinking with religion so I'll stick to the Cheap Date Club and try to restrain my expensive tastes. ;)

 

And I shall be proud to NOT drink with you and your wife at any time as long as it's the QM2. And to that end I propose that the CDC claim that wonderful spot in the Commodore Club...white seats directly in front of the model. There are probably so few of us that FOD won't even notice us camped out there. And since it's just a hop, skip to the allocated smoking section of the CC, I won't have to madly race to the fantail...works for me. I'm guessing even some of my drinking friends will want to join us in that perfect spot! Right, drinking friends? :D

 

Cheers, Penny

[SeaFlint]

Pay attention at the back! I think he said he's a Friend of a Friend of Ben's (or quite possiibly more than a friend). Do keep up!

 

Ah the innocent days when Peter Cook (UK satirist) went on a US talk show, lit his cigarette (which was almost the norm in those days) and said to his stunned host : 'I can only really relax with a fag in my mouth'.

 

For the cousins, 'fag' is slang for cigarette.

 

Peter

 

First of all, it is easier for me to sleep "in the back". I'm willing to trade ignorance for a good nap. ;)

 

But, speaking of old interviews and smoking... It is really interesting to watch old television shows, etc. where EVERYONE is smoking. It was so common years ago. My mother crossed on the original Queen Mary... I wonder how this debate would have gone over on HER?

[GAV BOY]

I have never denied the health implications on the smoker them self. I have only argued over the possible harm from passive smoking. If we are talking about banning all tobacco products for health reasons I'm very much in favour; If you just want to incommode smokers as much as possible whilst still keeping the revenue through taxation then I'm very much against.

 

 

 

The last time this subject was discussed in a thread I produced information that was of a conflicting opinion to yours. They're on this thread http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=389081.

 

 

 

Some are quite wrong and some are wrong in part (and some are just lying)

 

 

 

They are wrong to act in the way they are

 

 

 

No, the majority of the population believe in the freedom to choose. You are wrong when you say the majority want to use legislation to restrict smoking.

 

So why is it being banned, just to upset the MINORITY of smokers in this country ?

 

I could accept a ban on health grounds - no smoking anywhere. What is unacceptable is a government that won't go for an outright ban and forfeit the tax revenue but will go for a halfhearted measure to make them look good.

 

 

 

I didn't realise I wasn't happy before!

 

 

Passive Smoking is harmful (read the reports on this thread )

 

To say they are lying is terrible ( who are you to judge ?)

 

They are wrong in the way they act ?

 

They believe in the Freedom to breathe smoke free air !

 

And if people continue to smoke why shouldnt they pay tax ? (Dont get me wrong i probably hate this Goverment as much as you) but in this case they are right. !

 

Finaly you were unhappy about my smilies and lack of Disscusion !

 

In the end common Sense has Prevailed !

 

Regards,

 

Gavin :cool:

[SeaFlint]

Ooops

[guernseyguy]

No, the majority of the population believe in the freedom to choose. You are wrong when you say the majority want to use legislation to restrict smoking.

 

The picture on what the public think is far from straightforward. The pro- and anti-smoking lobbies have both conducted polls, which funnily enough both support their differing cases.

 

Malcolm, I think it is probably not accurate to deny that 'the majority want to use legislation to restrict smoking' - I think a reasonable reading of the evidence would suggest that the majority believe in some form of restriction, but the case for the majority supporting a ban as is being enacted, is much less clear.

 

An example of conflicting polls:

 

http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1572786,00.html

 

Living on a 'smoke free' island, I heartily support extending those rights to the 75% of the UK population who do not smoke.

 

Peter

[patwell]

Pay attention at the back! I think he said he's a Friend of a Friend of Ben's (or quite possiibly more than a friend). Do keep up!

 

Ah the innocent days when Peter Cook (UK satirist) went on a US talk show, lit his cigarette (which was almost the norm in those days) and said to his stunned host : 'I can only really relax with a fag in my mouth'.

 

For the cousins, 'fag' is slang for cigarette.

 

Peter[/quote

 

PHEW, Peter...thanks for that explanation. I was getting worried about the direction this thread was taking for a moment!:rolleyes: :p

 

And I believe it's PARTNER of a Friend of Ben's...am I right Malcolm?

 

Cheers, Penny...who's starting to keep a list of all the "friends" groups...I'm getting confused as to where I belong and for what reason!;)

[SeaFlint]

SeaFlint...I don't like to mix my non-drinking with religion so I'll stick to the Cheap Date Club and try to restrain my expensive tastes. ;)

 

And I shall be proud to NOT drink with you and your wife at any time as long as it's the QM2. And to that end I propose that the CDC claim that wonderful spot in the Commodore Club...white seats directly in front of the model. There are probably so few of us that FOD won't even notice us camped out there. And since it's just a hop, skip to the allocated smoking section of the CC, I won't have to madly race to the fantail...works for me. I'm guessing even some of my drinking friends will want to join us in that perfect spot! Right, drinking friends? :D

 

Cheers, Penny

 

No, no. PLEASE don't let the Center for Disease Control take over the Commodore Club. I KNOW there have been problems with Norovirus and that those CDC slugs have been on-board, but...

 

:rolleyes:

 

My wife and I hit the port side of the Commodore during the mornings after breakfast. Around 11am the place seems to fill, so we scoot.

 

Are you going to be aboard on that June/July Norway trip? That would be nice.

[SeaFlint]

 

I didn't realise I wasn't happy before!

 

If you will look at the bottom of your posts, you'll notice that you are STILL on the QE2 and quite a few days past time to get off.

 

So of COURSE you're happy.

 

One of these days the Cunard people are going to want that cabin back.

[guernseyguy]

No, no. PLEASE don't let the Center for Disease Control take over the Commodore Club.

 

I have to second that, while:

FOG

FOB - actually we've got two of these now - since Bill was there first should Ben reconsider?

FOD

 

Are all welcome, and much as (as a Scot) I am all in favour of Cheap Dates, I don't think we really want the CDC onboard. How about the Inexpensive Date Club?:cool:

 

Peter

[guernseyguy]

COTDP (Curse of the Double Post)

[patwell]

No, no. PLEASE don't let the Center for Disease Control take over the Commodore Club. I KNOW there have been problems with Norovirus and that those CDC slugs have been on-board, but...

 

:rolleyes:

 

My wife and I hit the port side of the Commodore during the mornings after breakfast. Around 11am the place seems to fill, so we scoot.

 

Are you going to be aboard on that June/July Norway trip? That would be nice.

 

I would cheerfully SELL my first and only born child to be on that trip to Norway!!!;) I'm Norwegian American...what could be better. Unfortunately not this year...already booked for Nov 10th...but next year if she does it again I have a birthday that deserves a special celebration and I shall conquer my fear of flying (somehow :eek: ). Are you doing this one? If so, can you see how green with envy I am?

 

Cheers, Penny...who would probably entertain killing to get on that trip!

[patwell]

I have to second that, while:

FOG

FOB - actually we've got two of these now - since Bill was there first should Ben reconsider?

FOD

 

Are all welcome, and much as (as a Scot) I am all in favour of Cheap Dates, I don't think we really want the CDC onboard. How about the Inexpensive Date Club?:cool:

 

Peter

 

 

OK, I can totally agree on that CDC thing....the IEC it is...kind of refreshinbg from all that "friends of..." stuff.;)

 

Cheers, Penny...a cheap date if ever there was one

[SeaFlint]

and I shall conquer my fear of flying (somehow :eek: ). Are you doing this one? If so, can you see how green with envy I am?

 

Cheers, Penny...who would probably entertain killing to get on that trip!

 

I'm not sure where you live, but if you live in the U.S., Amtrak is an enjoyable alternative to flying. It maybe be slow and often late, but if you build that in to your trip, I think you would enjoy it.

 

We are doing that trip. We like the crossing most of all, but NONE of us have been to Norway. So that will be neat. And the crew we have spoken with say it is a beauitful trip - one likes it so much he is postponing his vacation to be on-board. That from someone who has been on board for a few years.

 

Hard to tell where she'll be headed in 2008. I cannot WAIT for the new schedule. We've been told it will be out in April.