I’m a bit late to this particular party:
Legiron got it about right:
I’m sure pub landlords will be delighted with Jeremy’s plan to ban those persistent smoking customers who just keep coming back in all weathers and spending their filthy smoker money, despite having it made clear to them they aren’t welcome inside. Now, thanks to Pompous Jeremy, they aren’t going to be welcome outside either, at least during the short British spells of pleasant weather. So why would they ever go back?
Yes, the regulars just keep on coming back, don’t they? Clear them all out so Jeremy can have a smoke free pub garden for a couple of weeks every summer. Next summer he’ll be sitting in an untended garden behind a closed-down pub – but it’ll be smoke free. Alcohol-free too. Bonus, eh, Jeremy?
At the time I took the screenshot (a few minutes before writing this) he had over 100 more retweets than likes. Also 14000 comments against 216 likes. On Twitter that’s called being ‘ratio’d’ which translates as ‘nobody likes you’.
A well deserved result for Jeremy Vine there, whoever he is.
Jeremy Vine is the perfect embodiment of the antismoking BBC:
Jeremy Guy Vine is a British presenter, broadcaster and journalist. He is best known as the host of his own BBC Radio 2 programme which presents news, views, interviews with live guests and popular music.
He’s the reason why I don’t watch BBC TV or listen to BBC radio, and want the BBC closed down. The BBC think they own all public debate like Jeremy Vine thinks he owns whichever pub garden he happens to be sitting in.
Several commenters have pointed out that he wasn’t “pushed off ” his table by tobacco smoke: he chose to leave. A whiff of tobacco smoke from an adjoining table is really no different from a snatch of conversation from an adjoining table. Everyone has had the experience of being sat next to people talking loudly, and having any conversation they were having being drowned out by the din. But if you don’t want to hear anyone else’s voice but your own, why go and sit in the middle of a noisy bar? Why not just stay home? Why impose your demand for a quiet, smoke-free, alcohol-free environment on people who like noisy, smoky, boozy bars?
And if you say that tobacco smoke is poisonous, and loud conversation is not, then think of those occasions when you’ve had to listen to people at an adjoining table saying things that make your blood boil? Rage can kill people too. It’s called apoplexy.
And was the smoker at Jeremy Vine’s adjoining table really being “inconsiderate”? Was he also inconsiderately talking to some companion, and inconsiderately laughing from time to time. And was his companion inconsiderately munching on a ham sandwich?
It was really Jeremy Vine who was being inconsiderate, as he called for smokers who had already been banned from smoking indoors to now be banned from smoking outdoors as well. Clearly he has no consideration for smokers. And if he has no consideration for smokers, he’ll have no consideration for anyone else either.
Of course, the arrogant, smug bastard is also a global warming alarmist:
He’s clearly one of those people who will believe everything any “expert” will tell him. He listens to authoritative voices – authoritative voices like that of the BBC, for whom he has himself become an authoritative voice.
But isn’t a radio station, broadcasting all day and all night, any different from an adjoining noisy table in a cafe or bar? Isn’t a radio station made up of loud talkers who can be heard not just a few yards away, but a few hundred miles away? Isn’t Jeremy Vine himself an arch-polluter of the public environment? If he’s going to complain about smokers in pub gardens, shouldn’t he first take note of what he himself is doing?
One last thing: his Twitter poll came out split exactly 50 – 50. Britain would seem to be as divided about smoking bans as it is about Brexit. These are both deep social divisions.
Frank Davis 
We don’t watch or listen to the BBC (16 years now), nor read newspapers for that matter.
But very occasionally Mrs. Virtualbarman has R2 playing on the Google Home which is okay until Jeremy Vine comes on (generally in the show before his to introduce his guests/topics for the day).
At that point it is switched OFF! He is a vile man and I loathe his views on everything!
Agreed, he’s vile. I much prefer his brother…
It would be nice to think that at the next election we all simply vote for whoever is standing for the first time. That would clear the decks for some proper chaos, and kick the establishment and all its vested, that is paid for, interests, firmly in the fork…..
Something has happened to Jeremy Vine over the last few years. I recall that in his early days, he was, generally speaking, pretty impartial on even contentious or divisive items, like smoking, the EU, climate change etc etc, and was unafraid of presenting opposing arguments to commonly-accepted “correct” viewpoints. He was a great improvement, for example, when he took over presenting Eggheads on TV from the seemingly star-struck Dermot Murnaghan, who was embarrassingly sycophantic towards his “heroes” the Eggheads, whereas Jeremy was much less inclined to slaver over the Eggheads team and wasn’t scared to take the mickey out of them a bit when they got things wrong. Not of late, though. These days, he’s just as cooingly adoring of the Eggheads as Murnaghan ever was.
And so, too, his presenting style has gone so “on message” over the last few years that I rarely, if ever, now listen to his lunchtime programme, which I used to enjoy. I wonder if he’s either (a) given up smoking or (b) had children in that period (or both) – the two things pretty much guaranteed to pull anyone – even well-known presenters like Vine – firmly back onto the path of conformist views and away from the path of objectivity and independent thinking, even if they’d been on the latter for many years and had made their name that way.
Also, I’m not sure I believe the 50/50 split in the vote. The tone of the comments under his tweet would indicate that there are many, many more non-smokers who feel that his suggestion would be downright unfair than there are non-smokers who think that outside bans would be a good idea. So I think that a 50/50 split in the vote is a bit suspect, to be honest.
I didn’t read any of the comments, so I must take your word for it.
Also, Legiron said that Vine had been “ratio’d’ (a new word to me)
On the social media platform Twitter, a ratio, or getting ratioed, is when replies to a tweet vastly outnumber likes or retweets. This means people are objecting to the tweet and considering its content bad.
One of the most boring broadcasters i’ve heard (not recently though, nothing from the BBC for years now), and in the BBC there’s some serious competition for boring.
I’m not a smoker and never have been, i like a smoke free for myself zone but believe in live and let live, smokers are entitled to consideration too, choice of smoking premises or not should be left up to the owner of said premises, let the customer and ultimately the market decide where they wish to be.
There are bigoted BBC and media types, as typified by Vine, that are so certain of their own omnipotence that anyone who disagrees with them is simply wrong and a bad sort.
Unfortunately many of us have suffered in times gone by, and this is usually the trick of unpleasant old women the likes of whom you’d not wish to be stuck in a lift with without an air freshener handy, who will sit as close to you as possible..eg at a food serving pub..and chain smoke to literally smoke you out of your seat.
The unpleasant and the considerate are just as prevalent on both sides of the argument, there’s enough premises for both camps.
https://twitter.com/KenLynch73/status/1145368680005550080
I think this is a bit risky for CRUK, personally. Bearing in mind the fact that virtually anyone with a pair of eyes in their heads will have repeatedly witnessed friends, family or colleagues giving up smoking and then almost immediately piling on the pounds, CRUK and their ilk have always in the past been very keen to skirt around any mention of the smoking/weight-control connection. They know only too well that it’s daft to try and pretend that something isn’t happening when thousands of people have witnessed (or are witnessing) it happening to people they personally know (or to themselves) on a regular basis, and so in the past there’s always been a bit of a “Shhh! Don’t mention ze war” attitude to the subject, in the hope that people will be dim enough to be steered away from it. Their awareness of this is evident in the number of anti-smoking adverts which insinuate that giving up smoking will lead everyone to become super-fit gym-bunnies, smilingly sweating it out in the gym or cheerily running marathons or capering about in the garden with the grandkids, and never showing any trace of any excess weight whatsoever! What’s that, if it isn’t a deliberate distraction from the reality – that the majority of people will end up so heavy and unfit that just walking to the gym will tire them out!
So to now link the two, no matter how “negatively” they’re trying to do it is, in my view, risking a lot of people reaching one of those “A-ha!” moments, even if that isn’t the intention. With the current hysteria around obesity, there’s much research going on in the field about it, and indeed researchers have already done some investigation into this and have found that the declining number of smokers is indeed the predominant factor, as indicated in this item: http://www.businessinsider.com/obesity-cigarettes-2011-9, (the link to the actual research is within the item) – which makes it even more risky for CRUK to highlight the connection now.
But hey-ho – if CRUK and their anti-smoking gang members are now themselves so brainwashed by their own rhetoric that they feel it’s safe to insinuate that the greatest of weight-control measures is in fact somehow connected to weight gain, and by so doing highlight one of the most important negative health effects of the decline in smoking, then so be it!
Our goal is to beat cancer
REALLY???? Crook hasn’t come up with a cure as yet, just some outlandish stuff never heard of again to wring more cash out of people. What again ist the wage of Crook’s CEO?
Dear Beobrigitte
In 2018 the CEO received £244,000, with no employer’s pension contribution.
P.61 Annual Report and Accounts 2017/18
http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends64/0001089464_AC_20180331_E_C.PDF
DP
This is the pillock who rides his bike in the middle of the road and takes pictures with his helmet mounted camera of motorists who try to inch past him. The BBC pay him a fortune. I believe he runs his business affairs through his own company with his daughters as paid directors. His lunchtime programme is a disgrace.
It seems that smoking or ever having smoked is protective against death from the diseases ‘caused’ by smoking.
Deaths attributed to smoking are only 29% of the deaths from the diseases said to be ‘caused’ by smoking.
Ever-smokers are about 42% of the adults population.
Ever-smokers = 42% of the adults and 29% of the deaths.
Never-smokers = 58% of the adults and 71% of the deaths from the diseases ‘caused’ by smoking.
Sources:
Tobacco control claims there are about 443,000 deaths per year to both current smokers and ex-smokers(eversmokers) from the diseases ‘caused’ by smoking.
Ever-smokers are about 42% of the adults in the USA.
Of the 1,534,327 deaths from the major diseases ‘caused’ by smoking, only 443,00 are claimed to be ‘caused’ by smoking.
That is 29%.
About 42% of adults report being ever-smokers; that is, current or ex-smokers.
That is the average for the 50 states plus DC.
Click to access mm6703a3-H.pdf
TABLE 1. Prevalence of ever-use of any tobacco product, combustible tobacco, and six tobacco products types among U.S. adults aged ≥18 years,* by state and tobacco product type — Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey, United States, 2014–2015
§ Persons who reported having used cigarette, cigar, regular pipe, or water pipe at least once during their lifetime.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_in_the_United_States
Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, accounting for approximately 443,000 deaths, or 1 of every 5 deaths, in the United States each year.
The top 10 leading causes of death in the United States
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/282929.php
Total from the leading smoking ‘caused’ diseases of heart disease,cancer, COPD, stroke, and kidney disease =
1,534,327
Frank, I have a post awaiting moderation.
If you would be so kind.
Atlanta is seeking to expand their smoking ban to eliminate smoking bars and impose comprehensive indoor and outdoor smoking bans, including eliminating smoking rooms at the airport. Some businesses are trying to push back: “Businesses that cater to smokers ask for changes to proposed Atlanta smoking ban” https://saportareport.com/businesses-that-cater-to-smokers-ask-for-changes-to-proposed-atlanta-smoking-ban/#comment-161327
The article allows comments… It’s time for smokers to be heard and shout down the tyranny promoted by the likes of Jeremy Vine.
I just added the below at CRUK’s tweets. Do they censor such things there, perhaps under the direction of Evil Skinny Russian Grandmasters?
– MJM, 50kgs of two-wheeled rollin’ obesity…
The antismokers are promoting comprehensive smoking bans at Japanese universities now. Check out “Universities divided over whether or not to enforce no-smoking rules” https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2019/06/30/national/universities-divided-whether-not-enforce-no-smoking-rules/#.XRlivy2ZPuQ Of course the comments applauding the bans while attacking smokers are evident.
Thank goodness I don’t live in Britain anymore (Southern Ireland), problems here too, but not a plethora of whingers & moaned.
Thank goodness I don’t live in Britain anymore (Southern Ireland), problems here too, but not a plethora of whingers & moaners…I meant….
He is the only 2 hours of the day I don’t listen to radio 2…what a complete Muppet..he’s so judgemental and the propaganda he spews is awful. He’s also rude because he always interrupts people’s views..and he abuses his status as an overpaid DJ to poison the minds of everyone. Bottom line? Jeremy…stay away from pubs.. theyvdont need your petty attitude…they are suffering enough due to people like you and your thoughts on smoking. What should have happened is somenpubs allow it and some pubs don’t.. then we would all have a choice whether we smoke or not..but because people like you wanted a blanket ban..you get this. Go away and annoy someone else..campaign something important…andnletbus have a smoke in a pub garden you snob!
One becomes an “expert” by practice and repetition. An expert appendix-remover is someone who has done the procedure dozens of times and knows the procedure inside and out.
Today, we have so-called “experts” at telling us the “correct” and/or “best” ways to live our lives. How does one become an “expert” at dictating how other people should live/behave? And what business do they have doing so? These people aren’t “experts,” they’re ideologues, nannies and bullies.
Sorry, replied to the wrong comment.
I feel the people realized it was Mr Vine sat next to them and did the only sensible thing……they took up smoking to get him to move
What is with this expert bashing? Would you let a non-expert remove your appendix? Why are experts in other areas to be denigrated?
What experts are you referring to?
One becomes an “expert” by practice and repetition. An expert appendix-remover is someone who has done the procedure dozens of times and knows the procedure inside and out.
Today, we have so-called “experts” at telling us the “correct” and/or “best” ways to live our lives. How does one become an “expert” at dictating how other people should live/behave? And what business do they have doing so? These people aren’t “experts,” they’re ideologues, nannies and bullies.
If he has concern about smokers move to a different table . He is just being patantic smokers can sit outside not in the pub. I can’t see why he is making a thing about next he will be going on about car exhaust fumes
I have problem with my lungs and I was sitting out side AE hospital with very large signs saying no smoking on hospital grounds
Smokers came and sat round me smoking away even though they could see I was having trouble breathing. I had to get some to help me move away from them and all the cigarette butts on the floor. At least i had the satisfaction knowing they would end up with lungs like mine.
Designate an indoor and outdoor smoking area where they don’t have to walk 10 minutes to and from and they won’t be smoking around you. That’s what you should be complaining about.
I have problem with my lungs and I was sitting out side AE hospital with very large signs saying no smoking on hospital grounds
Smokers came and sat round me smoking away even though they could see I was having trouble breathing.
I take it you are an anti-smoker who sat next to smokers who obviously had no breathing problems. I am aware there are many, many causes of breathlessness, all of which -of course- are attributed to smoking these days. It is time the anti-smoking lobby gets kicked out so we can concentrate on REAL causes of illnesses and their cures.
O/T
Last Thursday I continued my 50th year of smoking celebration year with an 8.5 mile walk up a hill (pub stoppages mandatory), followed by a legendary party on Saturday with beers, burgers and ASHTRAYS on the tables. 5 more months of celebration to go!!!
So you’re implying that your non-descript “problem with [your] lungs” was caused by your own smoking? If so, please elaborate. Otherwise, how would smokers “end up with lungs like [yours]”?
God forbid you are actually a never-smoker with lung problems who is jealous of others who smoke and yet have healthier lung function than your own. Schadenfreude doesn’t fix anything. Genetics are a bitch; don’t take your genetic shortcomings out on smokers.
I totally agree with Jeremy Vine, one should be able to relax in a pub garden without having to breath in other people’s foul smelling cigarette smoke, as a nurse of many years knowing the dangers of passive smoking why should anyone have to just accept it?
If most people felt like you pub owners would have done that already. They didn’t do it on their own neither for the indoors then nor the outdoors now so there was no real public demand for it, The demand was created by the paid anti-smokers who make a career out of anti-smoking.
Chris, the medical profession kills far more than SHS ever has.
Because the ‘dangers’ of passive smoking was and is simplistic propaganda, created to be believed by simpletons?
https://www.ft.com/content/3d78d24a-c068-11df-8a81-00144feab49a
as a nurse of many years knowing the dangers of passive smoking why should anyone have to just accept it?
A nurse who accepts that passive-smoking-lie? SERIOUSLY?
You should consult the scientific literature rather than the antismoking activist propaganda then, The risks of second hand smoke under normal conditions (and certainly outside) are near-nonexistent.
See for example: Nilsosson, R. Environmental tobacco smoke revisited: the reliability of the data used for risk assessment. Risk Anal. 2001 Aug;21(4):737-60.
Abstract:
Several epidemiological studies have found a weak, but consistent association between lung cancer in nonsmokers and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). In addition, a purported link between such exposure and coronary heart disease (CHD) has been of major concern. Although it is biologically plausible that ETS has a contributory role in the induction of lung cancer in nonsmoking individuals, dose-response extrapolation-supported by the more solid database for active smokers-gives an additional risk for lung cancer risk that is more than one order of magnitude lower than that indicated by major positive epidemiological studies. The discrepancy between available epidemiological data and dosimetric estimates seems, to a major part, to reflect certain systematic biases in the former that are difficult to control by statistical analysis when dealing with risks of such low magnitudes. These include, most importantly, misclassification of smoking status, followed by inappropriate selection of controls, as well as certain confounding factors mainly related to lifestyle, and possibly also hereditary disposition. A significant part of an association between lung cancer and exposure to ETS would disappear, if, on the average, 1 patient out of 20 nonsmoking cases had failed to tell the interviewer that he had, in fact, recently stopped smoking. In the large International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) multicenter study even lower misclassification rates would abolish the weak, statistically nonsignificant associations that were found. In the former study an apparent significant protective effect from exposure to ETS in childhood with respect to lung cancer later in life was reported, a most surprising finding. The fact that the mutation spectrum of the p53 tumor suppressor gene in lung tumors of ETS-exposed nonsmokers generally differs from that found in tumors of active smokers lends additional support to the notion that the majority of tumors found in ETS-exposed nonsmokers have nothing to do with tobacco smoke. The one-sided preoccupation with ETS as a causative factor of lung cancer in nonsmokers may seriously hinder the elucidation of the multifactorial etiology of these tumors. Due to the high prevalence of cardiovascular disease in the population, even a modest causal association with ETS would, if valid, constitute a serious public health problem. By pooling data from 20 published studies on ETS and heart disease, some of which reported higher risks than is known to be caused by active smoking, a statistically significant association with spousal smoking is obtained. However, in most of these studies, many of the most common confounding risk factors were ignored and there appears to be insufficient evidence to support an association between exposure to ETS and CHD. Further, it seems highly improbable that exposure to a concentration of tobacco smoke at a level that is generally much less than 1% of that inhaled by a smoker could result in an excess risk for CHD that-as has been claimed-is some 30% to 50% of that found in active smokers. There are certainly valid reasons to limit exposure to ETS as well as to other air pollutants in places such as offices and homes in order to improve indoor air quality. This goal can be achieved, however, without the introduction of an extremist legislation based on a negligible risk of lung cancer as well as an unsupported and highly hypothetical risk for CHD.
A significant part of an association between lung cancer and exposure to ETS would disappear, if, on the average, 1 patient out of 20 nonsmoking cases had failed to tell the interviewer that he had, in fact, recently stopped smoking.
From: Nilsson [not Nilsosson!], R. Environmental tobacco smoke revisited: the reliability of the data used for risk assessment. Risk Anal. 2001 Aug;21(4):737-60.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11726024
Which, if I’m not sadly mistaken, means that if only 5% of neversmokers were to be reclassified as eversmokers, then the havoc supposedly wreaked by ETS on “public health” at large would also have to be reclassified as non-smoking related!
Of course, the classic reaction of the ANTZ crowd and assorted government buddies to this suggestion will have to be: not on your life!
By pooling data from 20 published studies on ETS and heart disease, some of which reported higher risks than is known to be caused by active smoking, a statistically significant association with spousal smoking is obtained.
Who do they think they’re kidding? Statistically significant as these studies may be, none of them are scientifically relevant, and pooling them doesn’t help any.
Agree, pooling the dat is a means of manipulating the data to achieve their desired result. which in any other field of study would be considered academic misconduct.
Indeed the abstract recognizes that: “However, in most of these studies, many of the most common confounding risk factors were ignored and there appears to be insufficient evidence to support an association between exposure to ETS and CHD.”
Jeremy is totally on the mark with this. Smoking is a filthy habit. Nothing worse than having a nice pint in a beer garden somewhere, then being intruded by the smell of the filth.
A ”filthy” habit that brings in a hefty amount of taxes that neither the government nor the professionnal anti-smokers who are subsidized by them will forfeit. Ever wondered why none of them ever lobbies for prohibition or at least a legal age for use and possession ? Now you know. You’re welcome.
Nothing worse than that, eh? Smelling tobacco smoke is the Worst Thing that could happen to you
Wow. How much does trolling pay, anyway?
Arfon, it must be comforting to feel so special.
He’s simple minded and ugly… A smugly.
Jeremy is totally on the mark with this. Smoking is a filthy habit.
Since when? The baby-boomer generation is still happily alive so much that their pension age was raised to 65 to 67. (Who s lying to us?)
It looks like smoking is one of the many habits people have.
Smoking never was a problem until the anti-smokers started spewing their filth. Remember, everything goes full cycle.
As much as I do not like the pompous Jeremy Vine, what I dislike more is a writer who persists in using the conjunctive (and) to start a sentence !!
And?
And I don’t mind starting a sentence with “And” either!
A nice interview:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/2018701975/ellen-jovin-taking-grammar-to-the-streets
And with that I shall continue my year of 50th smoking year celebrations.
Spot on Frank .. I love it. Our poxxy TV licence fee pays gobshite vine a pornographic wage & I for one am no longer going to pay the shit fee. Regards Jon 😃
OT: (Off Topic:)
I was watching an old re-run on local TV of
Britain’s Ancient Tracks with Tony Robinson S01 – Ep02
where he’s walking the Ridgeway …
Astonishingly, somewhere along the trail, he’s reading from an old book …
I noted from memory something like
“A female smoking competition was held, with a prize of a gallon of gin to the woman who could smoke the most tobacco in an hour.”
I haven’t yet gone back to check my accuracy of recall, but you can if you like,
I think this episode:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6w8j6q
Not sure how far into it was, but hey, megaliths, passably interesting anyway … ?
_
Try 35:00 minutes in, a few seconds after that …for the reading of the book.
Found it! Haven’t checked my accuracy of quote yet though.
Burt there it is.
He complains about the odd whiff of tobacco smoke what about those who Vape and blow large clouds of that crap in the air
Crap? It is people’s choice to vape instead of smoking/stretching tobacco. What “crap” are you referring to?
Most of this outside seating didn’t exist prior to the smoking ban.
Pingback: Beautiful People | Frank Davis
Dear Mr Davis
Happy National Smokers’ Day!
Off to have one of my six a year cigarettes.
DP
It’s so ugly here …
https://www.smokefree.org.nz/smokefree-in-action/world-smokefree-day
I hope you have fresh tobacco …
I love the scent of fresh tobacco smoke …
Not the stench of commercial tailor-made, with the papers drenched in chemicals.
But organic RYO with clean papers, or cigars or pipes…
Dear RdM
It was a very old B&H Gold, last of a pack of 10. It tasted OK to me.
I prefer a small Havana cigar, H Upmann cigarillos for example. Some relatives were at Dubai airport late Sunday night. I looked up the cigarillos, but they do not appear to be made now, otherwise I would have asked for a supply. They would have arrived in plenty of time to celebrate the day.
DP
May I take your attention on the right side of the page:
Need help quitting smoking?
I need help quitting smo….
I want to help others quit
Scarry
You may not.
Absolutely not! I am a non smoker , but smokers have rights and should be allowed to smoke outside … . We all have rights even smokers Jeremy! a
I think all outside smoking should be banned.go to the coast for a day relax on beach then inconsiderate people just smoke whole time there.why should they have a right to smoke anywhere.even in town all you can smell is cigarette smoke.Ban smoking in public places.going of posts now the amount of people openly smoking cannabis is madness and they presume older adults don’t know what they are smoking absolute nonsense.
I think all outside smoking should be banned.go to the coast for a day relax on beach then inconsiderate people just smoke whole time there.
Isn’t the ceiling high enough?
Smoking should not be allowed anywhere near non smokers regardless of where it is, smokers are the most inconsiderate, selfish people on earth. Just because its outside makes no difference, the smoke is still inhaled by children who are nearby and I notice it everywhere I take my kids.
Well said ..great comment !!!
How is that a “great comment”? A truly great comment is one which presents facts and reinforces them with multiple sources. The comment from “JayH” above is nothing more than stereotypical, overused Antismoking catchphrases which play to emotions (he even made a point to mention the chiiildren!), which you can find regurgitated all over the web in comment sections which have been astroturfed by Tobacco Control (much like this one appears to have been today). In fact, I’ve got a sneaking suspicion that the comment from “JayH” and the reply from “Garry Watson” were actually written by the same person.
Smoking should not be allowed anywhere near non smokers regardless of where it is
Perhaps you should let the non-smokers speak for themselves. I most certainly am being offered an ashtray by my non-smoking friends by THEIR choice.
Yes ban smoking! I don’t particularly want to die Inhaling others disgusting cigarettes
I don’t particularly want to die Inhaling others disgusting cigarettes
I have a great life with great friends and am not worried about anything. Miserable, scared people become ill and die.
Fantastic Jeremy vine ..you don’t have to agree with him ..but we do agree he had the right to day stuff and will ..to generate debate ..he’s one of the BBC that deserve his pay..
He was ratioed on twitter……
I don’t watch him arrogant man.that doesn’t grasp about folk struggling with tv licence fees .watched him on debate about free licence for pensioners.ok for him he’s loaded.ps I don’t smoke or drink.and find it hard to keep warm in winter.but decided no more BBC for me after I listened to him.
Just stop the vapourers from smoking inside the pub while I’m eating and I’ll be happy
Why? I thought it’s the cigarette smoke that is oh-so-“dangerous”…..
Vine is unable to let anyone else have an opinion!!, Unfortunately for some bizarre reason the BBC seem to think the sun shines out of his backside
Keep looking fot a subject that enhances your profile. Ars…..
Do you know how much your radio show is so boring.
I don’t think inhaling smoke outside is pleasant and I support Jeremy in this. I gave up 45 years ago,thank goodness. As my Saxaphone teacher said if you smoke it catches up with you sooner or later. Sadly he died a few weeks later from lung cancer.
Trish Fewster
There is more than smoke in the outdoors that some people may find unpleasant. Screaming children, traffic, obnoxious and/or drunk people, body odors, people talking with their mouths full. We each have something that we find unpleasant that we would rather not to have to deal with, but it’s all about living in society. We grin and bare it or we seclude ourselves in our home.
Pingback: Maximum Contention | Frank Davis
Well done about time Jeremy Vine was shown for what he is…He is one presenter I cannot stand , smug and pompous is the polite description of the man. I am no smoker but I am sure if Jeremy had talked to the people there would have been a good outcome.
Heh, funny how the six antismoking comments in their two tight little clusters of three ALL exhibit about the same level of mild deficiency in the English language, eh?
– MJM
Heh, funny how the six antismoking comments in their two tight little clusters of three ALL exhibit about the same level of mild deficiency in the English language! LOL!
Must just be an amazing incredible coincidence, right?
– MJM