Where Is Smoking Banned Waiting For Public Transport In Australia?

New laws in NSW today ban smoking across station platforms, as well as at public bus stops. That's excellent news for NSW commuters, but residents of other states may still have to wait a while for completely smoke-free travel.

Image courtesy of Shutterstock

While waiting for the train I routinely catch in the morning to head to work, there's often a smoker who chooses to position himself on the same part of the platform as me. Until today, NSW law banned smoking in the covered areas of stations, but not in open areas, so I didn't have any basis to complain. It's never been quite irritating enough to make me stand elsewhere on the platform, especially since I have the practical but slightly tragic approach of boarding the train at a location which positions me so that I'll be right next to the exit when I get off at the other end. But it's still a minor annoyance.

Fortunately, it's a hassle I shouldn't have to face again. As of today, smoking anywhere at "public transport bus stops or stations" is illegal in NSW. As the Cityrail announcement helpfully explains:

Smoking is already prohibited on trains and covered stations and this ban will now be extended to include all platforms and interchanges, regardless of whether they are covered or not.

That's arguably an even bigger boon for bus travellers than for train customers. After all, I can always move elsewhere on the platform, but bus stops aren't large enough to make that possible. I can't imagine smokers will be too thrilled with the development; smoking has long been banned on buses and trains, so it's not uncommon to see people frantically smoking right up until they board. But their nicotine habit doesn't override the right of others not to get subjected to potentially health-damaging second-hand smoke.

Anyway, the new law is all well and good for the residents of NSW, but what rules apply in other states? Here's a summary (some of which draws on the comprehensive discussion of smoking-related laws at Tobacco In Australia:

  • Victoria: Smoking is prohibited in covered areas of stations, but not elsewhere.
  • Queensland: Queensland Rail bans all smoking at stations. Laws regarding smoking are determined at local council level, which would impact any potential bus stop policies.
  • Western Australia: Transperth bans smoking at all stations. There aren't any specific laws regarding bus stops, but reports suggest some bus stops do feature no smoking signs.
  • South Australia: Smoking has been banned in all covered areas since May 2012, a rule that covers both bus stops and train stations.
  • Tasmania: Smoking is banned in the Hobart bus mall and at two bus interchange areas in Launceston.
  • ACT: No specific laws appear to apply to bus stops.
  • Northern Territory: Smoking is banned at all bus waiting areas.

The smoker I usually spot wasn't at the station this morning. However, there were dozens of cigarette butts evident on the platform, suggesting that lots of people will need to change their habits. Cityrail says it will update station announcements and introduce new platform signage soon. Until that happens, I'm not sure I've got the guts to suggest to a random stranger at 6am in the morning that they need to put their cigarette out.

If you do decide to make such an approach, stay polite. After all, you can't be sure that the person in question knows that the rules have changed. You're still not guaranteed a good reception, but you can increase the odds by not being aggressive.

Lifehacker Australia editor Angus Kidman was surprised to learn that you can't even smoke in the high roller rooms at casinos in Tasmania, South Australia and the ACT. His Road Worrier column, looking at technology and organising tips for travellers, appears each week on Lifehacker.


Comments

    i wish they would just ban smoking altogether already.
    i'm a smoker, but it's just annoying how taboo this still-legal act is...
    make me quit already.

    Last edited 07/01/13 12:09 pm

      Unfortunately the government still makes too much money off the taxes - They'd need to be weened off it first and that's a long way ahead yet.

        The easiest way would just to make a birth year cutoff. eg. everyone born after the year 2000 will never be able to buy cigarettes.

          That wont solve the problem as people can buy cigarettes for others. The first part is your suggestion of an age cut off, the second part is making the act of obtaining, reselling as well as smoking a cigarette a crime if you were born after year 2000.

          Because that wouldnt make a black market for tobacco products and lead to an increase in violent crime. Not at all.

          I find it humour that the people who say "oh I'm minorly annoyed by smokers, but im too lazy to walk a few meters in the other direction, but smoking should be totally banned because I dont like it".

          Every single step of this 'campaign' is a testing ground. Their pushing the limits of how far they can take free choice out of the population and keep people agreeing with it.

      I'd rather less of a nanny state telling me what to do by banning things personally.
      I'd also rather you take responsibility for your action and quit yourself instead of wanting a law to make you do it.

        The fact is that second hand smoking does cause health problems to other people, which means it isn't a pure personal issue. Take a not so appropriate example, there's no law banning people from stabbing themselves since it isn't likely to do damages to your surroundings.

        i'm all for responsibility... though i didn't say anything about wanting to quit.
        i actually enjoy smoking.
        i would, however, prefer they just ban it already instead of raising taxes for revenue, and imposing fines. The basic idea you take away is 'hey, smoking kills. not only that, it can harm you in a third party sense too. That said, we'll allow it... but you gotto pay!'
        hence - i'd rather they just make me quit.

      My idea is to licence smoking, just like drinking. You can't drink in public, you can only drink at licensed premises. Make smoking so that you can only smoke at licensed premises too. Then businesses would buy smoking licences and set up smoking lounges away from non smokers, and government will still get paid licencing fees.

        Wow, this is the first really good idea I've heard about how to deal with smoking. This whole "BAN-THE-F*ING" attitude is really painful to watch. As people have stated above and below, if you want to stop smoking, get off your lazy ass and stop smoking, show some bloody responsibility.
        And please, fascist non-smokers show some tolerance; I hate screaming children, they pollute and are bad for my health (sleep, stress etc.); but I don't come running and screaming with torches and axes demanding the government to ban screaming children. And yes, procreation is a choice!

          @wonko, It is difficult to show tolerance for something that gives me a respiratory illness and/or makes me puke within 3 seconds, any time I get a strong exposure. I generally don't have time to engage in dialogue with smokers, as I generally have to quickly take off at a run to get away from them before I puke on them. A polite conversation just isn't possible because of time constraints. I can't be near them long enough safely. My lungs are full of scars from how badly the cr*p damages my lungs when I cross paths with smokers. I know some people go "skitty-crazy" if they can't get their fix, but the effect of them getting their fix within 3 meters of me is FAR worse on me than "skitty-crazy", so I object to them justifying it with "oh, but I just HAVE to and it doesn't hurt me, so you'll be right." Sometimes I've felt wearing a t-shirt with my lung x-ray on it, so that I could just point and say, "*DON'T*."

          I agree that it won't be banned in my lifetime, but I think something like the conventions that apply to, well, public procreation, should apply here as well. It's rude and offensive to do in public, please take it behind closed doors. The sooner that happens, the better. And no, I wouldn't object to specific 18+ smoking lounges any more than I object to brothels, although I would NOT allow them to be combined with much in the way of food or drink service (as then, before we knew it, every operator afraid of missing out would turn their restaurant or pub into a smoking lounge.)

        From memory when smoking was banned at indoor eateries, there were a few Cigar abrs that had to close down as they were now illegal to smoke in their venue whilst drinking etc.

        Banning something is never a solution. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it should be banned. I don't like Stinky hippies, but I woudln't ban them. :)

          I remember when this happened in Qld. Back in the day I used to enjoy a scotch with a cigar, so I went into a cigar bar and purchased those items. Lit up inside, then "Sorry sir, you can't smoke inside". Ok, no worries. Went to go outside but "sorry sir, you can't take your drink outside." FFS!

          Stinky hippies should have been banned 30 years ago.

        I like this idea, but the problem is: who mans the smoking lounge? Part of the reason smoking was banned in pubs was the impending workers comp claims from basically anyone who had cancer and had worked in a bar.

          From memory the owner was the main person, he did have a few other people there too. However the cigar bar I went to was so well ventilated everything pretty much got sucked right into the ceiling. It was designed that way - yet forced to close due to smoking laws.

          Also you have a choice looking for work to work in a smoking or non-smoking establishment. It should be up to the job seeker to apply to appropriate places. Just like it should be up to the consumer to not go to smoking permitted establishments and support such a place if they disagree with the smoking policy. If people hate smoking so much these establishments wouldn't survive, people wouldn't chose to work there and punters can use their freedom to chose where they want to go to smoking bars or non-smoking bars.

        Nah, it's not a good idea.

        In the past clubs, bars, restaurants could ban smoking if they wanted. Most didn't. We want to cut down smoking, and a free market approach won't work. It simply didn't in the past. People, addictions, behavior don't follow such models.

        The big issue with smoking is to discourage people taking it up and to not subject non smokers to the effects and unpleasant atmosphere it creates.

        This would only work if they had a very limited number of licences. So, say there were only a handful of smoking bars, resturants ect. With the vast majority unable to get a licence even if they wanted. Which I would totally be in favor of. Stopping cigar clubs ect is pointless. Banning in bars and nightclubs is not.

        The banning in bars and clubs has had a big impact on young people smoking. So the restriction of area's people can smoke is an effective means of reduce uptake in smoking.

        Due to the unpleasant nature of smoking, the right not to be infringed upon by that, trumps the right to do the act. Something smokers who complain about the restrictions need to understand.

        +1 .. great thinking!

      i'm sorry but I think banning things isn't the solution.. how about legalising everything & spending the money saved from policing such laws on education & public health programs. Banning cigarettes won't stop smokers, but educating people to never take up smoking certainly will go a long way towards weaning society of cigaretttes.

      ohhh, & i'm actually not a smoker, just a free thinker with radical ideas!

        They've been educating people about the health issues for decades and it doesn't work. It's just like everyone knows that drugs aren't good for you....yet people still take them. It's other pressures in peoples lives that starts them on the path.

        I was extremely happy when they banned smoking in clubs and pubs, since I didn't come home smelling like an ash tray. Smokers need to realize that smoking around other's who don't smoke is like drinking beer (or a drink of off eggs for those who like beer) and throwing it all over the people who come into your area.

          Now instead of the smell of smoke in night clubs you're greeted with the smell of stale beer, body odor and the occasional bowel movement.
          How pleasant...

      The issue is with the nicotine, if they banned that then us smokers will ween off eventually but at least the next gen will not be addicted.

    The problem in Qld at least is that they never enforce it around bus stops. It really annoys me, as the smokers are always reluctant to move away from the stop lest they should miss their bus. Choose one or the other, people. If you're so desperate for a smoke, do it on the way to the bus stop.

    Yeah they definitely need to ban it on the full platforms in Victoria. Including the ramps/paths in and out of stations. The covered sections are too tiny.

    The worst are the people who the second they get off the train light up and blow a big cloud over everyone else getting off, or the smoke blows back into the train. Or on the ramps and paths out where everyones close together at busy times, and a smoker blows a big cloud. Made ever worse with the stupid Myki slowing people down.

    So often I get off the train and the people walking down the platform to the exit are leaving a trail of smoke in my face.

    How often do we see these folk sucking in every last drop of tar in the door way until the trail leaves. When the doors start beeping they drop the butt down the gap between the train and the platform. Only to then expel the last lung full in the carriage, often while walking down the aisle in order to ensure it stinks up and annoys as much of the carriage as possible.

    It's so 'F' ing disgusting.

    Until these laws are strictly enforced they dont mean squat. "Banned" smoking areas are the biggest jokes. The north shore introduced no smokeing outside cafes, yet most of them still lay out ashtrays and nothing happens. The northern beaches has had no smoing within 10m of bus stops up for as long as I can remember and I regularly see people reading this signs while puffing away.

      Agree completely. I've seen people smoking in the underground platforms and under cover at the stations. Often right in front of Cityrail staff who say nothing.

    woohoo! I'm sick of breathing that shit in waiting for my train.

      +1. People have the right to slowly kill themselves if they want to. However they don't have the right to harm others around them in doing so.

      It's also not just the 'exhaust fumes' while it's happening - there's also the stink which permeates their clothes and breath.

      The irritation of a whiff of toxic fumes while waiting on the platform is mild compared to the nauseating stench emanating from clothes and lungs of the fellow traveller who's chosen to marinate themselves in vile fumes immediatel;y before being shut in a sealed box with others who do have a sense of smell.

      You can also always tell they know it's not allowed.

    So in other words nothing is going to happen...

    "How will this be enforced?
    NSW Health is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Smoke-free Environment Act 2000.
    NSW Health Inspectors are authorised to enforce the ban at public transport stops and stations.
    Penalties of up to $550 apply for anyone who fails to comply with the law. "

    And second-hand smoke is SOOO proven to be a contributing cause of cancer too.. yup.. it is.. oh wait.. is it? The health agencies would like you to think so.. but recent "objective", "unbiased" and more to the point research WITHOUT conflicts of interests have shown this to NOT be the case at all.

    Heck.. I was going to link to some recent studies but a VERY quick Google search will bring up pages and pages and pages of them... the knowledge is there but people would rather believe the all seeing eye of the government health agencies instead of doing their own research.

    For the record, I am not a smoker.. but I sick to death of the BS science being used as evidence for political book.

      Regardless of whether it directly causes cancer, breathing in second hand smoke is still bad for you (unless you are implying that breathing in smoke isn't bad for you, which I really hope you aren't).

      Not to mention the fact that it smells disgusting and I don't appreciate it drifting into my face if I happen to be standing downwind. And the millions of cigarette butts left on the ground and thrown on the rail lines. If there's one other single thing that is found as litter more than a cigarette butt I'd like to know what it is.

      Personally I'm going to give it a couple of months after I see the signs go up then I'll start politely asking anyone smoking near me to put it out.

      Last edited 07/01/13 3:04 pm

        I wasn't implying that of course.. heck air pollution itself is clearly not a good thing.. or any type of impurity in the air :) Just pointing out the shameful tactics that have been used for the last 20-odd years to write laws and brainwash the general population about the effects of second hand smoke (SHS).. Yes it smells foul.. and there are a lot of inconsiderate people out there that smoke "in your face" so to speak.

        However, they need to not alienate, discriminate and persecute members of the public based on junk science. There are a lot of unpleasant things that people do around us, smoking is just one of them and until they ban smoking itself.. that is, make it illegal to buy and consume tobacco through smoking, I believe that what they are doing by banning all public areas from smoking is actually discrimination.

        I'm not saying that breathing in the smoke is not bad.

        Also, before you go asking people to not smoke.. remember who you are, that is.. you are not a law enforcement officer (unless you are of course :)). You might bite off more than you can chew if you ask the wrong person to extinguish their chosen vice. :)

          I believe that what they are doing by banning all public areas from smoking is actually discrimination.

          I don't think it's discrimination at all. It's people's choice to smoke or not. They don't HAVE to smoke. I like playing drums, but there are places where I obviously can't do that, like libraries. Do I complain about being discriminated against?

          Also, before you go asking people to not smoke.. remember who you are, that is.. you are not a law enforcement officer (unless you are of course :)). You might bite off more than you can chew if you ask the wrong person to extinguish their chosen vice. :)

          That's why I said "politely asking", maybe pointing to the signs that are up :)

          Last edited 07/01/13 4:05 pm

      Smoking causes cancer, right? We are not arguing that, right? You body can not possibly filter out all of the carcinogenics before someone exhales the smoke. So how can second hand smoke not cause cancer? It may not be as much of a health risk as it is made out to be, but it does not make sense that it isn't one at all.

      It's not junk science at all. Maybe you've been watching Penn and Teller's BS when they said it didn't. Which they then later on turned around and said they were completely wrong.

      Or a criticism of the odd study here or there but study after study and the meta reviews of studies show that second hand smoke is harmful and in a variety of ways. Just a few weeks ago a new study came out about the effects of second hand smoke increasing the risk of Meningitis in babies.

      It's just one of those nonsense things that gets repeated that there's no proof or some how the research is flawed. When it's not the case at all.

      Even now preliminary studies are starting to show the health benefits from increased smoking bands.

      Further more the smoking bands do lead to more people quitting and less people starting and so there's those health benefits also.

        Actually no. Go and do your own research instead of repeating health agency and anti-smoking lobby rubbish.

        "Even now preliminary studies are starting to show the health benefits from increased smoking bands"

        Which have also proven to have been fabricated and had results skewed in favour of the anti-smoking lobbies. It's interesting that the "genuine" studies, the ones that you are believing tend to hide or ignore a bunch of results.. yet the people, who are not basement conspiracy theorists, they are scientists who have been in the industry for a long time, who expose these lies don't hide or ignore anything.. even evidence that might prove them wrong.. they bare it all..

        The EPA, the FDA, heck even our own health agencies here in Australia are either morons who can't tell a crock of shit from a proper study, or they simply don't care because it fits in with their public health safety guidelines and gives their political affiliates things to say at the next election.

        Anyway whatever.. it's the same responses as normal to this kind of thing.. that's how you've all be trained to react and it's working a treat for them. Until you go and actually research this stuff yourself and look at all the sides of the arguements not just the government and mainstream media stuff, you don't realise how corrupt it all is.

          Ah... so it's a conspiracy theory?

          It's just funny, accusing me of buying into the big lie or whatever. You do realize the entire strategy the tobacco industry has used against the negative health effects is the creation of doubt.

          It's the tried and true method when you don't like the science and can't win on it. Try and create doubt in the public's mind. The Tobacco industry pioneered it. Clearly it's still working even after all these years. The most recent and most prominent version of this strategy is the 'doubt' about the science of climate change.

          When you can't beat the science, just create doubt.

          Notice you didn't say there's plenty of studies which show the opposite. That there's no negative effects, or beneficial ones, or why smoking is harmful, but second hand smoke is not. You just dismiss and ignore the studies which all say something contrary to what you believe. They're all wrong, incorrect and flawed, but your belief is then correct by default?

    I don't mind smokers, but the ones i've come across are inconsiderate pricks. IE: Smoking in places where it's clearly banned, and not bothering to find a bin and just throw out their butts where ever they feel like.

      Yep. The discarded cigarettes all over the place is by far the most disgusting thing. I've never met a smoker that didn't just throw their butt on the ground and stomp on it, and just leave it there like it's nothing.

    I always found it funny that people whinge about smoking, cough, splutter and act annoyed around people smoking, yet don't bother covering their mouths or complaining about things like petrol fumes from cars and other more hazardous fumes around us. People seem to like targeting smoking, and the anti smoking lobby employs A LOT of people.

      Funny, I can't remember the last time a cars exhaust pipe came up next to me while I waited for a bus and started blasting me in the face. While smoking does take a fair bashing, and car exhaust is still a problem, at least car exhaust is where it is meant to be, on the road. People who are smoking where smoking is prohibited deserve every cough, splatter and annoyance they get, because they are smoking where it doesn't belong.

        Really? There's no traffic around bus stops? No vehicles (buses included) putting out fumes? Thats new to me living in the city. Perhaps you live in the middle of nowhere with no traffic.

          Your argument might have been valid 25 or more years ago, when car exhaust was filthy and noxious, but now the vast majority of vehicles put out exhaust that is relatively invisible and has only a very faint odour. Cigarette smoke is concentrated and very strong smelling. The stink gets everywhere. It's like a fart that keeps on going.

      I've been TOLD by my physician to cough HARD to expel it from my lungs any time I think I've been exposed, due to the allergic reaction that often results and morphs into respiratory illness, so sorry if smokers don't care for this, but it's more medically necessary for me to cough around their tobacco to minimise its effects on me, than using the tobacco is for them.

      And no, I do not cover my mouth when I cough for specifically that reason, although I do when I cough because I'm sick with something contagious. That would defeat the purpose. I WANT to get the crap as far from me as quickly as possible, and putting a hand or arm in the way doesn't achieve that.

    I thought Australia was a free country - guess I was wrong.

      Agreed, and the writer of this article should get off their high horse, so now we cant even stand in the rain on the platform having a smoke in the cold while waiting to commute, ohh boohooo a bit of smoke drifted your way once and annoyed you, HARDEN THE FUCK UP.

        Why don't you harden the eff up and quit cold turkey and get rid of your unhealthy, disgusting habit?

        Harden up?
        Says the slave to nicotine that can't handle perfectly valid criticism about his or her nasty habit.

      We are. You're just not free to harm the health of other people to satisfy your drug addiction.

    To clarify it is actually illegal in Victoria is smoke on any public transport property.
    So this includes bus stops, tram stops, train stations and the vicinity surrounding. So it is a lot further spread than just undercover areas.

    Next to no one in Adelaide actually knows about the ban on smoking in covered areas/shelters, and those that do don't care. Unless you're at an interchange or Adelaide train station, the chances of being caught are next to none

    Banning smoking is one thing but enforcing that ban is another let's see how it all goes.

    Cigarette butts are found just about everywhere, as smokers don't take responsibility of the disposal of those nasty butts. Since 'forever' they just toss them, step on them hoping they burn out and get on the buses, with trails of cigarette scent following them. Or else, they flick them out their car windows as they drive by. Smokers aren't dumb, just plain lazy. If going to smoke, why be a litterbug (and potentially a firebug). Burn your own lungs, not those of the planet...!

      I'll agree that there are a fair few smokers who I would call "dirty smokers" (litter, smoke anywhere etc), but you also have to see it from their point of view - there a few places left where you can smoke these days...if they can't find a bin, then what are they supposed to do with the butt?

        If they actually cared they would make sure they had something with them to dispose of butts properly, or only smoke where they can get rid of them. A bottle with a bit of water in the bottom in the car always works. Public rubbish bins are fairly common. Most people need to carry some sort of bag with them, bottle idea works here as well.

        There are solutions and if you aren't looking for them, you don't care.

          Then you would complain of the smell when they get on the train.. you don't like it move.. I don't see what the big deal is. I quit and it is really hard smelling other peoples smoke so I just move away. You have a whole platform, smokers will almost always smoke at the end of the platform away from as many people as they can.

            Almost always, is not always and the number of inconsiderate smokers far out numbers the number who are. I used to smoke, I get it, but you know what I could contain my habit to when it didn't have to be a burden on everyone around me.

            Carry deorderant and keep using it for the hell I care, you know you stink of it, all smokers are completely aware of it, so think about it. You choose to smoke, I do not get the choice to have to be around it if you choose to force it on me, so why in hell should you get more rights over it than me.

              and you think that those inconsiderate people will change there habits based on this law? I have seen people hang a leek on a dance floor twice in my life, if they do that then smoking will not change.

              Also I notice that they have banned smoking in pubs and clubs but when I am there it is always the smoking area that is packed full with less then a hand full of non smokers inside (or they could just not be smoking right then) so why is it that most pubs smoking areas are less then %30 of total space?

              I think it is unfair to hit the smokers so hard. Why not at least make a designated smoking area for them at each station\bus stop so that people can have a choice on what side of the fence they wish to be on. But non smokers don't give ground they just complain that its there way or the highway.

                If you'd seen any of my other posts I completely agree this will do nothing to fix that, people will be assholes if its breaking the law or not.

                You're damn right it should be non-smokers way or the highway, smoking is a disgusting habit that impacts other people wellbeing as well as your own. I don't see where you think you have a leg to stand on here. I don't care if you have to pack in like a sardine to have your puff, or take a 10km hike to get one for all I care.

                As far as your argument is concerned anyone who suffers from chronic masturbation should be able to whip it out where ever they like. If you don't want that creepy guy flogging it beside you just move away right?

                  I am saying that it should not be a blanket ban, they need somewhere and you need somewhere. Make half the bus stop smoking and half non-smoking, fair for the smokers and for us and no one is discriminated against.
                  That's the Australian way make it fair to all of its people. Why should non-smokers have to suffer? I don't like drunks so I think that they should ban alcohol in all pubs\clubs would this be fair? I don't like people putting there feet on the seat on trains and buses, should they remove all the seats, would this be fair?
                  Your thinking is selfish and one sided.

                  Also chronic masturbation is a mental illness and they should get treatment for that, it has nothing to do with choice, like someone choosing to smoke or not smoke, stand here or stand there. They are compelled to do this and it is mostly out of there control.

                  Do you agree with similar legislation for drinking as there is for smoking?

                  (vis-a-vis plain packaging, heavier taxation, large taboo around the subject, graphic pictures of mouth, liver and throat cancers on bottles, not being allowed to see the price of the alcohol until you've committed to buying it, not caring if you have a 10km hike to grab a sip or being crammed in to an inhumane bubble etc).

                  If not, why not?

                  Last edited 09/01/13 11:04 am

                  I cant actually reply any deeper into the thread, so don't know if either of you will get this.

                  While chronic masturbation is different in the nature of the problem, it is still not allowed in public, but like you said it is an illness and they can't help it. Why is it your smoking, a choice, should be allowed anywhere you want, while someone who cant control the habit has to hide it away in private because its frowned on and made illegal in public? Sex and sexual acts are a lot more natural (most of them) than smoking, yet we have to hide that away.

                  Yes I do believe in the same considerations on packing, cost etc for booze. I don't really agree with having to shove them away into alcoves, there is a place for drinking, its called a pub or bar, drinking in public areas is already banned but has about the same amount of policing as smoking in prohibited areas. The mere act of drinking doesn't negatively impact on the people around the drinker by the mere act of partaking in it, unlike smoking. Yes people who get drunk can cause harm to others, this is already policed and if you goto a venue that is established for drinking you should probably be ready to deal with drunks.

                  If they established smoking lounges, I wouldn't attend them, have it out with what ever you want to polute your system with, that would be the place to do it, but saying you should have some place you're allowed to do it everywhere you go merely because your habit compels you to is not really an excuse, curb your habit. I have seen enough people quit, including myself and my wife, to know it is not impossible.

                  Last edited 09/01/13 11:25 am

    This makes me extremely happy. I am sick of having smoke blown all over my face when I wait for the bus in the morning. Doesn't help that there's a public bin with a cigarette disposal thingo on top. Blah!!

    I still don't know how this will be enforced :(

      When I worked in Sydney, that wait for the bus was the worst part of my day. There was literally no way to escape the smoke and still be close enough to the bus stop to actually catch the bus. The smokers were totally oblivious to how horribly unhappy they were making people. Totally self-absorbed.

    For every cigarette I smoke- one of you driving drunk. BUT IM THE DICK.

    The Tasmania smoking rule is partly right.

    You can't actually smoke at ANY bus stops no matter where they are.

    All you do gooders are nothing more than socialist,communist .Hitler was the first one to bring in smoking banns .But hey thats fine because you dont smoke wait till they start banning things you do like and then we will see you scream discrimination.
    And by the way a law is only any good if people accept it . (ie)smokers

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now