French police and customs searching UK campers

[Derek Uzzell]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 10:00 AM

 

...I do hope that nobody is taking this banter too seriously!

 

Not me - but if it persists I shall be seriously tempted to resurrect my alter ego Fiona Adams.

[Guest Tracker]

Derek Uzzell - 2012-05-28 10:08 AM

Not me - but if it persists I shall be seriously tempted to resurrect my alter ego Fiona Adams.

 

I await with much interest the photo of you suitably dressed in character then Derek!!

 

The mind boggles at the mental image that conjures up!!

[RogerC]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 10:00 AMAgreement or not there is of course no reason why French customs would object to a van load of UK duty payables when the French tax has already been paid in France?The latest scourge of smokers is all hanging around cafe and pub doorways making it a gauntlet to run for any non smokers trying to enter or leave plus almost all Pub outdoor eating areas and beer gardens are still polluted by those with no consideration for others who may be eating nearby. The sheer arrogance of smokers continues to astound me! Kill yourself if you wish but please show sufficient consideration to leave the innocent bystanders out of your death wish !I bet smokers would be the first to complain if someone on the next table played music not to their taste and too loud - what's the difference? Chemical pollution or noise pollution?I do hope that nobody is taking this banter too seriously!

 

Banter?.....after 28 years in the military where banter was rife this is about as far from 'banter' as you can get.  Your personal disclosures regarding these points illustrates a controlling streak which has unfortunately permeated the country in recent times and has severely curtailed civil liberties in oh so many ways.  This country was a much nicer place when people knew how to live and let live instead of having the 'Liberal establishment' (ha Liberal! that's an oxymoron if ever there was one)control our every waking moment.

 

Maybe you could get together a group of 'Liberal thinking persons' and tell the rest of us what we can and cannot do?.......in the meantime I for one will drink, smoke etc where it has not been banned (like pub gardens for instance  because it is the 'anti smoking gestapo who forced me outside) until some small minded 'Liberal control freak' decides to make something else illegal.

 

As a nice parallel to this anti-smoking tirade going on those of a 'religious' leaning might like to read the following from The New Scientist:

 

Burning incense exposes people to dangerous levels of smoke laden with cancer-causing chemicals.

The practice is a popular meditative and medicinal aid often used by Buddhists, Hindus and Christians in their homes and places of worship.

Levels of one chemical believed to cause lung cancer were 40 times higher in a badly ventilated temple in Taiwan than in houses where people smoke tobacco. Incense burning also creates more pollution than road traffic at a local intersection.

A PAH called benzopyrene, which is thought to cause lung cancer in smokers, was found in very high quantities inside the temple. The researchers compared benzopyrene levels inside the temple with other indoor areas, and found they were up to 45 times higher than in homes where residents smoked tobacco.

 

Maybe it is time the Catholic Church looked to itself and banned this practice?

 

 

[Guest Tracker]

Let me guess Roger - are you a smoker by any chance?

 

I don't quite see how objecting to second hand cigarette or tobacco smoke can be called controlling but I do believe the environment is getting better thanks to the anti smoking lobby.

 

I can only presume that you like the thick haze and stale smoke odours that used to contaminate every pub and make them such unpleasant places to be for non smokers and asthmatics and that now that the tables have turned I can understand how you would want to throw your teddy out of the pram in protest at being forced to breath clean air!

 

Just as well we don't live in Taiwan then isn't it.

 

And yes, this expressing of personal opinions is most definitely banter!!

[Guest pelmetman]

As a nonsmoker and a libertarian I have no problem with people smoking or indulging in any habit.......even dumping grey water.......as long as its done without affecting other people ;-)......... Personally I'd of left it up to publicans to decide whether to allow or ban smoking *-)

 

Far too much nanny state today........mind I suppose it gives someone another tax payer funded job *-)

[RogerC]

Smoker yes, drinker yes, motorcyclist yes, green lane biker...and a few other things probably that 'Liberals' would like to ban.

ban·ter/'bant?r/

Noun:

The playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks.

so by definition your 'ban it' comments are nowhere near to being 'Banter'.

 

Calling for the banning of this, that and the other is controlling.  Try telling the hundreds of pub landlords that have gone bust due to the anti smoking brigade that it is good for them!

 

Extract from a relatively recent research paper:

Almost three years after the introduction of smoking bans in the three countries, Scotland had lost 7.1% of its pub estate (467 pubs), Wales 7.3% (274), and England 7.6% (4,148). Scotland, which introduced a smoking ban a year earlier lost a further 4% of its pub estate in the fourth year after the ban, mirroring a similar decline in Ireland (11%) which banned smoking in pubs in 2004.

Total pub losses in England, Scotland and Wales since the introduction of smoking bans in all three countries are in excess of 5,500.

“If England continues to mirror the Scottish trend another 2000 pubs in England will shut down before the fourth anniversary of the ban in July 2011, and there is no indication that the closures will stop there."

Griffiths blamed the continuing decline on the loss of sociability in pubs.

“With smoking customers spending much of their time outside, some pubs may be becoming less sociable places, leading customers to question whether they want to drink there or at home.”

John Madden, executive officer of the Guild of Master Victuallers, said: "Traditional drink-led pubs have been caught in the crossfire in the war on smoking. As this report shows, the smoking ban has helped to put literally thousands out of business already and sadly we expect many more to follow, all through no fault of their own.

“Smoking rooms are allowed in most European countries, why can't we have them? They don't inconvenience non-smokers and may help us to keep our businesses going. Our pubs are part of the national character and a great place for people to meet and chat. At the time when we are supposed to be building a Big Society it just doesn't make sense to be forcing licensees out of business."

“We were told that the ban would encourage a new wave of non-smoking customers but that hasn’t happened.

 

“For the sake of our local communities, the Government must review the smoking ban. Options should include separate smoking rooms. “The Government should also relax the regulations on outdoor smoking shelters so that people can smoke outside in a warm and comfortable environment all year round".

 

Instead of 'controlling' and banning there should be 'compromise' not confrontation........live and let live.  Unfortunately there is to much of a  'do as I say' mindset in this country led by so called 'Liberals'.

 

and like it or not incense burning emits worse carcinogens than smoking does so why does the Church continue to subject it's congregations to this dangerous substance?  or is it acceptable because it is 'divine carcinogens'?

 

 

[Guest pelmetman]

I confess to being somewhat confused by our so called liberal politicians being so authoritarian, and wanting to ban everything? *-) *-)

 

But then again they're not very democratic either seeing as they're in power without being voted in :D

[Guest Tracker]

There are other oft cited reasons for so many pub closures that you failed to mention Roger.

 

One is the cost of pub booze when compared to the cost of the same stuff from the supermarkets.

 

Two is the effects of a recession on spending and leisure habits.

 

Three is that maybe there were just too many pubs in the first place for a changing society.

 

Four is that many - but by no means all - pubs that closed were in town boozers only or non food pubs and a lot that remain, particularly those that do good food are thriving so maybe the pub industry is not in decline but is evolving with the times.

 

Many industries have changed and evolved and will continue to do so over the years and the pub industry is no different.

 

You only have to look at the numbers of people making cars or running the railways for example to see how those industries to name but two are evolving to meet 21st century needs.

 

And yes - this is banter - the gentle exchange of teasing remarks - thanks for reminding me!

 

However I will agree with you that perhaps 'ban' - if I used that word - I can't remember - maybe too strong a word?

 

On the other hand until smokers treat non smokers with the same courtesy and consideration that they themselves demand from non smokers by not smoking in their presence there is little choice but to control the selfishness of smokers by legislation?

 

For myself and thousands of others the day smoking in pubs was banned was indeed a joyful day because it opened up a new source of refreshment to us without closing it to smokers - all they have to do is not smoke - is that degree of consideration for others asking too much of smokers?

[RogerC]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 12:25 PMThere are other oft cited reasons for so many pub closures that you failed to mention Roger.One is the cost of pub booze when compared to the cost of the same stuff from the supermarkets.Two is the effects of a recession on spending and leisure habits.Three is that maybe there were just too many pubs in the first place for a changing society.Four is that many - but by no means all - pubs that closed were in town boozers only or non food pubs and a lot that remain, particularly those that do good food are thriving so maybe the pub industry is not in decline but is evolving with the times.Many industries have changed and evolved and will continue to do so over the years and the pub industry is no different. You only have to look at the numbers of people making cars or running the railways for example to see how those industries to name but two are evolving to meet 21st century needs.And yes - this is banter - the gentle exchange of teasing remarks - thanks for reminding me!However I will agree with you that perhaps 'ban' - if I used that word - I can't remember - maybe too strong a word?On the other hand until smokers treat non smokers with the same courtesy and consideration that they themselves demand from non smokers by not smoking in their presence there is little choice but to control the selfishness of smokers by legislation?For myself and thousands of others the day smoking in pubs was banned was indeed a joyful day because it opened up a new source of refreshment to us without closing it to smokers - all they have to do is not smoke - is that degree of consideration for others asking too much of smokers?

 

Publicans and breweries themselves (and they should know better than other so called 'experts') have cited the smoking ban as the prime reason for their demise in ever growing numbers due to the 'demands of the anti smoking lobby' and implementation of the smoking restrictions.  That is fact.

 

The recession has not helped but the ban was killing pubs long before the financial crisis came about.

 

I was once in an hotel in Ireland where the ban had come into effect the previous week.  There were three people in the bar.  The weekend prior to the ban there was in excess of 200 people in there.  The bar staff said it was solely down to the smoking ban......information gleaned from the previous weekends customers who said they would not be back once the ban came into effect. 

 

Where were the non smokers that were supposedly going to make up the numbers?

 

Supermarkets etc have been quick to spot the potential and have marketed accordingly which was/is to be expected.

 

Pubs which had a good reputation for food as well as their liquid fare have also gone under because the 'supposed' influx of those who were deterred by smoky atmospheres has not materialised across the country.  A friend of mine whose gastro pub was a real success has closed due to this miscalculation.

 

In essence the 'banning' of smoking has been the root cause of the demise of thousands of pubs.  If, as the report suggested, the publicans were allowed to decide on smoking policy there would be less closures and those that did close then the reasons could be left on the shoulders of the publican and not blamed on legislation.

 

In a live and let live world publicans could have had designated smoking and non smoking areas which would have enticed both sides of the argument. 

 

However as the legislation has forced smokers outside those that do smoke have for the time being the outdoors areas in which to smoke.  For non smokers they have what they wished for so maybe they should stay indoors where smoking is banned and leave smokers alone............live and let live............or reap what ye sow?

 

[Guest JudgeMental]

"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"

 

Gaius Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56–ca. 117),

 

seeing that tracker is to the far right of Thacher what do you expect

 

but I do think the justification for smoking in public places indefensible, So what if less pubs around, more to do with economy and lack of money and greedy brewries...put the name "Gastro" in front of pub name, charge double and wonder why going bust. Just look at our boarded up hight streets country wide. Also where have all the smokers gone then I wonder *-)

 

Just back from Spain and bars trading there! with lager at 80p a pint, and 3 course meals from £8 with half bottle of wine....AND you cant smoke inside there either! *-)

[RogerC]

JudgeMental - 2012-05-28 1:10 PM"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"Gaius Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56–ca. 117), seeing that tracker is to the far right of Thacher what do you expect

 

At least under Thatcher smokers were not made social pariahs........hehe.

 

 

[Guest Tracker]

RogerC - 2012-05-28 1:16 PMAt least under Thatcher smokers were not made social pariahs........hehe.

 

Almost right Roger - smokers have always been social pariahs - it's just that now that fact is universally recognised - except by smokers!!Just because the breweries say something does not make it true as they too are as adept at manipulating data to suit their own ends and just as capable of blaming everyone else for circumstances beyond their control as well as for their own failings as any well trained government department!!

[Barryd999]

I enjoy emptying my grey water on a grass verge. It gives me a chance to have a fag!

 

EDIT: Ooops. Wrong thread. Ah well, same applies.

[Guest Tracker]

Barryd999 - 2012-05-28 1:45 PM

 

I enjoy emptying my grey water on a grass verge. It gives me a chance to have a fag!

 

.

 

So do I as it gives me the chance to dilute it by having a pee at the same time!!

 

Hope you don't drop your butt end in the highly polluted fat heavy grey water - might start a fire!

 

At least butt ends are biodegradeable which is more than can be said for all the McDonalds 'food' wrappers laying around many lay bys!

[RogerC]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 1:21 PM

RogerC - 2012-05-28 1:16 PMAt least under Thatcher smokers were not made social pariahs........hehe.

 

Almost right Roger - smokers have always been social pariahs - it's just that now that fact is universally recognised - except by smokers!!Just because the breweries say something does not make it true as they too are as adept at manipulating data to suit their own ends and just as capable of blaming everyone else for circumstances beyond their control as well as for their own failings as any well trained government department!!

 

Another head in the sand argument.  Yes there are a number of factors contributing to the demise of pubs etc but the 'main' one is the alienation of smokers.  Regardless of the modern understanding of 'politic speak' where 'fact' is ignored/spun or otherwise manipulated the statement is 'fact'.  Try telling a publican who has seen his business go bust after trying everything in his power to succeed and he will tell you....the introduction of the smoking ban heralded the demise of thousands of pubs.  It is fact that more smokers frequented pubs then non smokers and the trend continues.  Hence low 'punter' numbers and pub closures due to non viability.

 

'Smokers have always been social pariahs'....in your opinion and others like you maybe, and a very sweeping comment if I might observe.  Look back to the 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's and I think you'll see it was not the case amongst the majority of the 'general' population.  It is only in recent years that the 'Liberal let's ban everything we disapprove of brigade' has gained a public prominence that it has become so.   However as smoking and the purchase of cigarettes etc is not illegal it looks to me as though the the 'Ban it brigade' and the Gov't wants it both ways.  Just where would the 'Ban it brigade' get the revenue to replace the hole in received taxation if smoking was banned?

 

Live and let live.....tolerance on both sides would be nice but the 'Ban it brigade' will never agree to that.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Tracker]

RogerC - 2012-05-28 2:12 PM..tolerance on both sides would be nice but the 'Ban it brigade' will never agree to that.

 

 

 

Absolutely - so do I now hear you say that you will refrain from smoking in a pub beer garden or outside area in deference to all the non smokers trying to eat a meal or enjoy a quiet smoke free environment.It strikes me Barry that whatever I say you accuse me of all sorts of things to try and defend your own indefensible arguments that smoking in public is fair and reasonable to all yet by the same yardstick I am supposed to accept everything you claim in defence of the indefensible as being gospel - you can't have it both ways - but nice try!!It must be hard trying to defend an industry which allegedly depended for it's very existence on a habit - or habits - that are so well proven to be life endangering or shortening!!I do feel some sympathy for publicans who have lost out but then again so do I for car factory and railway workers et al whose only sin was to be one of too many and whose occupations had never encouraged any bad habits - except maybe driving too fast or spending ages waiting on a cold railway platform for another late train!!

[Barryd999]

Right. Never mind all this bollox. Get your thinking caps on and answer me new thread! http://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/forums/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=27746&posts=1

 

ITs an emergancy. If I dont get the van sorted and get away I will be here annoying you all summer!

[Guest Tracker]

I am deeply hurt that you consider this banterful - or is that banterous - discussion bollox Barry!!

[JamesFrance]

Pubs have always been exposed to political interference. The reason most of them have become restaurants filled with cooking smells, was the introduction of drink/driving laws which meant that those of us who liked a few and drove carefully home afterwards had to change our habits. Mind you I am one of those who Derek suggested could be put down in 5 years time, so I do remember all the delightful and sociable country pubs we used to drive out to, to meet our friends and have a good old natter with the regulars. Those were the days before you were expected to stay seated at a table in a corner and not mingle with everyone else. :-(

[RogerC]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 2:21 PM

RogerC - 2012-05-28 2:12 PM..tolerance on both sides would be nice but the 'Ban it brigade' will never agree to that.

 

 

 

Absolutely - so do I now hear you say that you will refrain from smoking in a pub beer garden or outside area in deference to all the non smokers trying to eat a meal or enjoy a quiet smoke free environment.

 

Nope......non smokers/the law forced smokers outside in all weathers so outside is where we/they/us smoke.  Non smokers can not dominate everywhere.......you non smokers can remain indoors with the premises all to yourselves where the law protects you from those nasty nasty social pariahs that smoke.

 

[Guest Tracker]

RogerC - 2012-05-28 3:08 PMnon smokers/the law forced smokers outside in all weathers so outside is where we/they/us smoke.  Non smokers can not dominate everywhere.......

It's not a case of domination Roger - more a case of why do you consider that non smokers do not have any rights to breath unpolluted air and smokers have every right to offend and spoil the enjoyment of the majority who do not smoke - especially those who are eating - or are you one of those awful people who smokes during a meal!!I suspect that if it were put to a vote more folks would now be anti smoking - especially in areas where food is served - and I wonder how your thoughts would be if democracy instead of legislation decided the issue - would you still be advocating smoking in public places?

[RogerC]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 3:14 PM

RogerC - 2012-05-28 3:08 PMnon smokers/the law forced smokers outside in all weathers so outside is where we/they/us smoke.  Non smokers can not dominate everywhere.......

It's not a case of domination Roger - more a case of why do you consider that non smokers do not have any rights to breath unpolluted air and smokers have every right to offend and spoil the enjoyment of the majority who do not smoke - especially those who are eating - or are you one of those awful people who smokes during a meal!!I suspect that if it were put to a vote more folks would now be anti smoking - especially in areas where food is served - and I wonder how your thoughts would be if democracy instead of legislation decided the issue - would you still be advocating smoking in public places?

 

Give and take or live and let live should be the way to live however as the Non-smoking/anti smoking lobby and legislation has forced smokers outside then you smokers can have all the clean air you want...... indoors.  If you choose to dine outdoors don't go complaining about smokers out there.....they/we were forced outdoors.  Like I said you can't have it all ways unless smoking is made illegal in which case the treasury would suffer and your/our taxes would be put up to compensate for the lost revenue.

 

No I do not smoke during a meal but when relaxing afterwards I have been known to partake....outdoors away from the 'fresh air', BO and halitosis emanating from the smoke free indoors.

 

[pepe63xnotuse]

I'm with Tracker on this..

..if smokers had've had the common courtesy not to smoke in situations where it was quite clearly inappropriate and just bad mannered(..e.g small,crowded pubs or where food was being served),then maybe a ban wouldn't have been needed in the first place.... *-)

(..it's not unlike dog owners bleating about some councils "banning" dogs from beaches..well,if they'd have picked up after them in the first place,there probably wouldn't have been an issue,would there?

*-) )

 

As for James's comments about "political interference" stopping those who,quote:

".. liked a few drinks and drove carefully home...",well,in the case of drinking and driving,lets be thankful for political interference,I say...

[Barryd999]

Tracker - 2012-05-28 2:45 PM

 

I am deeply hurt that you consider this banterful - or is that banterous - discussion bollox Barry!!

 

You have redeemed yourself somewhat for answering my thread which for once actually was motorhome related!

 

Banter on! :-D

[stantheman]

Few years ago, returning through Dover, young fresh-faced Customs Officer stuck his head through passenger window and said "got any knives on board?".

"Yeah, we've got a drawer full of them!" says my wife.

He looked around to see if anyone had heard then walked away without without saying any more.

Think he was a rookie.