Smoking ban at home comes into effect today - call 1300 for violations

[madmen]

I am disappointed to see so many negative, nay, cynical comments about some good the Thai Government is trying to do - save many unnecessary deaths and countless suffering from bronchial problems caused by secondhand smoke spewed out from what I consider as irresponsible smokers, especially as it relates to their own family.
 
If it is scientifically proven to be true that passive smoking is a real threat to innocent people, and you know, then there shouldn't be a need for a law to protect them.
 
It seems to me therefore, that smokers, their advocates and some Members on this Forum, feel the right to think that harming the health of their own family is collateral damage in favour of their unconcerned freedom of choice.
 
I will get some metaphorical flak for this but it is better than secondhand smoke that has two lots of bad in it!

Yes but every single poster on TV claims never to have smoked around their family yet I see faring in open air resteraunts smoking like a chimney at the tables Right in front of them !

[Max69xl]

2 hours ago, madmen said:

ermmm you've lost the plot. ..this is about SECOND hand smoke in you're home. Drinking   a beer at home didn't kill anyone around me

 

comprehension skills much? 

There's no actual law against smoking in "your own home". One woman at the Ministry of Health tried to explain it a month ago. It's just about being considerate if you have small kids and maybe old people at home. No one will ever enforce this law. 

[Fred white]

7 minutes ago, madmen said:

Kill some one while drunk and your in a world of financial pain and or jail.
Kill you're non smoking wife or kid and nothing happens.

You get that right ?

Yeah I got that. I don't smoke my wife is a light smoker second hand smoke is going to take awhile to kill a drunk driver can kill with one wreck but my point is if a person is cought drunk driving didn't kill anyone depending on who they are they would only get 3 points. And as far as financial pain or jail it depends on how rich the person is

[Dumbastheycome]

6 minutes ago, ChrisKC said:

I am disappointed to see so many negative, nay, cynical comments about some good the Thai Government is trying to do - save many unnecessary deaths and countless suffering from bronchial problems caused by secondhand smoke spewed out from what I consider as irresponsible smokers, especially as it relates to their own family.

 

If it is scientifically proven to be true that passive smoking is a real threat to innocent people, and you know, then there shouldn't be a need for a law to protect them.

 

It seems to me therefore, that smokers, their advocates and some Members on this Forum, feel the right to think that harming the health of their own family is collateral damage in favour of their unconcerned freedom of choice.

 

I will get some metaphorical flak for this but it is better than secondhand smoke that has two lots of bad in it!

There is  credence in the claim cigarette smoke  either direct or indirectly inhaled can have negative health consequences. But can anyone  produce a  valid study which differentiates the cigarette smoke factor  from  the  multitudinous other air pollutant factors  that are also known to cause  respiratory illnesses and/or death?

In these times most (responsible ) smokers are aware of the social attitude based on  varied opinion and so  do not declare any right to inflict collateral damage on others by modifying their addicted behaviour in somewhat begrudging manner. Those  that don't will probably never acknowledge this  new edict anyway.

But there is astounding hypocrisy in the fact that cigarette  smoke is  demonized in isolation from equally or more common toxic risks that are ignored .

[johnarth]

6 hours ago, edwinchester said:

Friend of my wife recently died of lung cancer despite never smoking in her life. Her husband did though and doctors say she was killed by secondhand smoke.

this is insane there is no proof whatsoever that the husband caused her death how about they tell us how the animals die of lung cancer who sits in the paddocks and bush blowing smoke up animals noses? and who gives them smokes to smoke I lost a leg and doctors said from smoking when I was a kid I want much more proof than that

[madmen]

There's no actual law against smoking in "your own home". One woman at the Ministry of Health tried to explain it a month ago. It's just about being considerate if you have small kids and maybe old people at home. No one will ever enforce this law. 

Thailand's ban on smoking at home comes into law today. People can be prosecuted for domestic abuse by lighting up. 

[sawadee1947]

6 hours ago, andre47 said:

Politicians wants to control everything.

Next : silly posts on TV

[ThomasThBKK]

1 minute ago, madmen said:

Thailand's ban on smoking at home comes into law today. People can be prosecuted for domestic abuse by lighting up. 

not what they said ???? But we all know Alcohol doesn't cause violence ????

 

Quote

The rationale behind the ban is to prevent smokers, who may be in a bad mood because of smoking restrictions, from resorting to physical, verbal, or mental aggression, and causing negative health effects from tobacco smoke among other family members. The ban sees tobacco as not the direct source of violence, but one of the stimuli. There has however been no clear indication on the connection between smoking and violence towards children.

 

[Geir Rasch]

There has been a ban on smoking in public places for a long time, but so far that law has never been uphold. Guess there is nothing different with this law.

[nickmondo]

how absolutely and totally ridiculous!!!

they cant even ban people smoking in bars and restaurants, and now this???????

role on November 4th when I leave this joke

[Max69xl]

3 minutes ago, madmen said:

Thailand's ban on smoking at home comes into law today. People can be prosecuted for domestic abuse by lighting up. 

Read my post about the woman working for the Ministry of Health. I read the article in the Nation,and soon after,she emphasized that no one really have to worry. You and so many others blows everything up. Just keep smoking at home,nothing will happen. This is Thailand. 

[dcnx]

33 minutes ago, Furryman said:

Still, somehow, I can hardly ever go out to eat without someone polluting the local air with their tobacco stench.

Because nothing is enforced just like this won’t be enforced.

 

Thailand is the land of limp ***** police who are unable and unwilling  to enforce anything beyond random helmet stops targeting mostly foreigners. 
 

They can pass all the laws they want and it’s a complete waste of time when you can’t enforce them.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

[ttrd]

6 hours ago, andre47 said:

Is this a joke?

Politicians wants to control everything. Next step: mandatory cameras in the private rooms to control the smoking ban.

 

… rather Public With cameras installed ...

[geoff65]

You can thank the smokers who have no common sense on were they light up who they blow their stinking smoke over and how they dispose of their butts for the ban, so don't go whinging and bitching for something that you uneducated smokers brought on your selves. 

[ChrisKC]

19 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

There is  credence in the claim cigarette smoke  either direct or indirectly inhaled can have negative health consequences. But can anyone  produce a  valid study which differentiates the cigarette smoke factor  from  the  multitudinous other air pollutant factors  that are also known to cause  respiratory illnesses and/or death?

In these times most (responsible ) smokers are aware of the social attitude based on  varied opinion and so  do not declare any right to inflict collateral damage on others by modifying their addicted behaviour in somewhat begrudging manner. Those  that don't will probably never acknowledge this  new edict anyway.

But there is astounding hypocrisy in the fact that cigarette  smoke is  demonized in isolation from equally or more common toxic risks that are ignored .

Your homework for tonight is to check the real scientific evidence of secondhand tobacco smoke, nothing to do with atmospheric or other toxic pollutants.

[Patanawet]

7 hours ago, andre47 said:

Is this a joke?

Politicians wants to control everything. Next step: mandatory cameras in the private rooms to control the smoking ban.

 

English has a term for it --- nanny state.

[soalbundy]

1300, is that the same number for emergencies that the police don't answer either?

[chang1]

11 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

But there is astounding hypocrisy in the fact that cigarette  smoke is  demonized in isolation from equally or more common toxic risks that are ignored .

Maybe you should pay more attention to the news, before making such an uninformed comment. Just google VWs diesel gate scandal or stubble burning. Pollution of all kinds is being tackled in most countries. The difference here is it directly affects smokers rather than businesses. As many smokers are arrogant and ignorant, they will not understand why non smokers are so <deleted> off with them. This unfortunately also affects the many caring and considerate smokers. 

[bizboi]

So can you sa moooke outside on the balcony?

[ChipButty]

Just now, bizboi said:

So can you sa moooke outside on the balcony?

If you can stand 5 metre's away

[MartiniMan]

Finally!!! I will be calling this number every day and get them all banged to rights the degenerates that smoke this <deleted> need to be fined and taught a lesson - i can barely walk in the country side without smelling these morons trying to catch cancer 

Now we just need one for the road violations and I am all good I have literally hundreds of videos of thais breaking the road law - where is the phone line or email for that?

[Teacherduck]

Don't do anything about the roadkill, just bring in laws that you can't control. Stop a person smoking in their castle. Yea don't think so!!!

[BadSpottedDog]

7 hours ago, edwinchester said:

Friend of my wife recently died of lung cancer despite never smoking in her life. Her husband did though and doctors say she was killed by secondhand smoke.

That is very tragic, and so sorry for the family. However, there are other possible reasons. My Aunt died of lung cancer, and she had never smoked a day in her life. It was found that there were traces of asbestos in the basement of her home. 
Thailand's love of pesticides that are banned in many countries can be a factor too.

[Jumbo1968]

People who smoke and drink alcohol should be made too contribute for any health treatments required, self inflicted.

if both were introduced today they would both banned as dangerous drugs.

i drink not too excess although I don’t smoke, I witnessed a relative die very slowly with emphysema, not a pleasant memory. 

My own Mother died of Lung Cancer as well, life long smoker.

[fxe1200]

Thailand should ban beds in homes, as it is proven, that most people die while in bed.

[hzarry]

7 hours ago, DrTuner said:

Next up, government security cameras installed in every home. Nothing like a good crusade with a sprinkling of paranoia.

Already got smoke detectors

[Classic Ray]

7 hours ago, wgdanson said:

 

Here we go, maths again. These figures mean that 16% of the worldwide deaths are in Thailand. I think not.

Reading also required in addition to maths. Worldwide figures reported for deaths from secondhand smoke. Thailand figures for deaths from smoking. 

[Catoni]

1 hour ago, ChrisKC said:

I am disappointed to see so many negative, nay, cynical comments about some good the Thai Government is trying to do - save many unnecessary deaths and countless suffering from bronchial problems caused by secondhand smoke spewed out from what I consider as irresponsible smokers, especially as it relates to their own family.

 

If it is scientifically proven to be true that passive smoking is a real threat to innocent people, and you know, then there shouldn't be a need for a law to protect them.

 

It seems to me therefore, that smokers, their advocates and some Members on this Forum, feel the right to think that harming the health of their own family is collateral damage in favour of their unconcerned freedom of choice.

 

I will get some metaphorical flak for this but it is better than secondhand smoke that has two lots of bad in it!

A person’s “...freedom...” to choose to smoke and harm their health, should go hand in hand with the RESPONSIBILITY to be careful not to harm others with second hand smoke. 

[meand]

4 hours ago, mania said:

For sure all those things may be valid but this is a reaction to folks smoking in their own home in a Country that had the worst air quality in the world at times this past year (which was not due to cigarette smoke)

 

So looking at the one & at the other why choose the smoking in their own home as the one that gets the 1300 hotline?

 

How about a 555 hotline to call when reporting folks lighting fields at night? ????

 

THey could have had 10 times worse air quality than anyone in the world, Does not matter. 

 

Pollution is caused by things like vehicles and factories. Guess what, no vehicles or factories and you can't get a bottle of water tomorrow. You can't live. You're argument is flawed, and does not hold a drop of water ???? You could in fact get a bottle of water if there were no smoking in homes.