Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 5th July 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Smoke gets in your ire



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 12 January 2008
By Janet Christie
MUM'S THE WORD
Queue etiquette rule no 1 – don't lecture neds about lighting up
WE ARE IN THE queue for the big wheel at Edinburgh's Winter Wonderland when one of my sons gasps at the teenagers behind us, his exclamation forming a cloud that slowly disperses into the freezing dark. "Look at them," he whispers, "that's terrible."
I look round at the boisterous bunch, but can't see anything about their piercings, body art and cutting-edge hairstyles that particularly marks them out from your average ned.

"What?"

"They're smoking," he hisses. "They can't be over 16."

I look at the teenagers again. To be honest, smoking fags looks the least of their worries, but my son is off on an anti-tobacco rant that would make the politicians and civil servants who want to raise the age limit on selling cigarettes proud.

"Turns your lungs black . . . makes your breath smell . . . takes all your money . . . kills you . . ."

"That's right. Who told you all that?"

"Did it in Drugs Ed. Nicotine, it's a drug. We should tell them."

I run through how this conversation might go in my head and estimate that we have a good 20 minutes of standing next to them ahead of us.

As if the festive season hasn't been wearing enough without having to exchange abuse with total strangers in public places. (And come off worse.)

"Er, I think they might already know," I tell him.

Son settles for shaking his head, tutting and theatrical clearing of his throat, while I position myself so his evangelism won't be misconstrued by those trying to enjoy a quiet fag behind us.

It's not just drugs education that has had such a profound effect on my children, but the ban on smoking in public places too.

One of the side-effects of the legislation is forcing smokers to puff away in the street and it is the sight of these hollowed-out husks of humanity hanging limpet-like around the portals of the licensed premises that punctuate their route to (yes, to) and from school that has been so effective as a deterrent over the past couple of years. Not only is it putting them off smoking, it's not a great advertisement for the delights of alcohol either.

Now all we need is for obese families to sit in the window of Britain's burger chains to put children off chips. Oh, wait, that already happens . . .



The full article contains 409 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 11 January 2008 2:47 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Tobacco
 
1

english charlie,

suffolk 13/01/2008 13:40:45
I agree with the mother in telling her son (I'd like to know his age) to mind his own business. He could have got into serious trouble and there are too many overpaid smoking inspectors who should do that 'job'.
As for drinking, we are told that some alcohol taken daily is good for us. I would have thought that nearly all children have eaten chips without getting fat. In fact there is a young lady (15yo) in Suffolk who has only been able to eat nothing but chips because of a medical condition.
2

David from New Mills,

U.K. 13/01/2008 15:58:00
#1, chs w.
I had deliberately refrained from commenting on this article, as I knew one of the pro-smokers brigade would jump in feet first eventually, and sure enough good old chas has not disappointed.
I would agree with chas that the lady was wise not to let her son remonstrate with the smoking youths, not because he should "mind his own business", but rather to avoid a load of abuse, or worse, from the smoking youths.
How many "overpaid smoking inspectors" does chas think there actually are? Smoking restrictions are observed by the majority, and mainly self-policed until the relevant authority has to deal with defiant smoking rebels, be they in pubs, bus stations, or on public transport.
I agree that most things in moderation should cause no great harm, but despite chas choosing to pick out the exceptional medical condition of one young lady, the increased incidence of obesity in children should be a cause for concern, or does chas think smoking is some form of antidote to obesity?
Two quotations from the actual article I found particularly apposite, namely,
"it's a drug. We should tell them.", and
"forcing smokers to puff away in the street and it is the sight of these hollowed-out husks of humanity hanging limpet-like around the portals of the licensed premises that punctuate their route to (yes, to) and from school that has been so effective as a deterrent over the past couple of years."
The second seems so much at odds with the concept of all these jolly smokers, having a wonderful social interaction outside pubs, empty but for a few sad non-smokers.
Congratulations to chas on something. His spelling's improved.
3

english charlie,

suffolk 13/01/2008 16:25:21
#2 David. I new that you could not restrain uself for long as you love to criticise everthing everybody seys. I no not no how many overpaid smoking inspectores their are. I dont fink that figure as been released. I didnt just pick out one young lady, as i said almost every kid had eaten chips. Overndolgence in everyfing is bad for u. Fanks for the the compimints regadin mi speling.
4

David from New Mills,

U.K. 13/01/2008 17:16:01
#3, chas w.
As I said, I knew some one was bound to jump in feet first. Also it's a forum open to all, sensible or otherwise.
Chas is quite right that kids have eaten, and enjoyed, chips for years, but as he so quaintly expresses it, "Overndolgence in everyfing is bad for u."
The unusual medical condition of young lady in no way answers the disturbing trend of child obesity.
The spelling remark is retracted.
5

english charlie,

suffolk 14/01/2008 11:49:59
My advice to children is 'exercise'. When I was a kid I used to meet up many others at the local park to play football and other games. We had to get there early to get a area to place jumpers etc (for goalposts). The parks then were crowded, but when I go to parks today, they are almost deserted.
6

David from New Mills,

U.K. 14/01/2008 12:02:05
#5, chas w.
Perhaps some of the explanation is that, for better or for worse, when chas was a kid, there were no t.v.s, p.c.s, or electronic games for children to hunch over.
7

english charlie,

suffolk 14/01/2008 12:11:41
#6 david. so that is your excuse for not licking sport?
8

David from New Mills,

U.K. 14/01/2008 19:01:11
#7, chas w.
Licking/ticking/sticking/likeing?
No reason offered. Just not my bag old boy.
9

english charlie,

suffolk 15/01/2008 10:46:21
My advice to youngsters is to get involved in sport. Those who do will find many friends and will be less likely to smoke and drink. Most of all they will be less likely to get obese.
10

jerrymanders,

Setting up the firing squad, take aim, fire! 24/01/2008 00:01:04
#9

Introduce a curfew for youngsters. I suggest 7pm. If caught out after that time just shoot them. Problem solved.
11

David from New Mills,

U.K. 24/01/2008 11:10:32
#10,jerrymanders,Setting up the firing squad, take aim, fire!
Seems a bit extreme. Would j. allow one warning shot over their heads to give them a chance to scurry off home?
12

Singlepoint,

Fife 09/04/2008 13:47:36
Whereas someone who is given to low and criminal behaviour is commonly called a ned, in fact, a ned behaves as he does because he has no courage nor integrity which qualities are not innate but acquired and when so acquired lend a self-respect that is virtually impossible to set aside. Such people as Janet describes in her article are not necessarily neds. Whilst I note that Janet understands that she cannot in public challenge any member of the public without becoming an equal party to the resulting proceedings, I more note the immediate resort to dehumanisation as a prelude to the discrimination, and worse, it being put forward as though it excused, and worse still, the eagerness to speak against or proceed against where right to so do is perceived, which is to say, I these days note the self-righteous anti this or that becoming more and more courageous in line with the increase of their supporters which thing is in fact not courage but the cowardice such as owned by those who where the more safe it is perceived the more boldly they go which is a bit ned-like don’t you think? I feel it likely so that rather than Janet’s son being subject to narrow-mindedness alone his proper upbringing would be best served by reading this and the like, not least because, and though I hope it will not be so, there will come a time of peril when he does not have his mother or his school or an ally beside him. It is then that we’ll know whether or not he will stand his ground and do the right thing, win or lose, or just be another ned after all.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.