Fed up with neighbour’s cigarette smoke, Tampines resident suggests increasing tobacco tax, adding levy — and caning

[True Believer]

So, you are saying non smokers have more right to the public places than smokers, right?
Same as our neighbours up north, burning and blowing the haze for all of us to suffer. The only way for us is to get out by travelling during the period. So,
non smokers can just walk away also right?

Do not use a straw man argument by putting words in my mouth.

 

[True Believer]

In case you do not know what a straw man argument is, it happens when you distort or misrepresent my actual position to make it easier to disprove. Instead of addressing the actual argument being made by me, you build up a straw man i.e. fake or weaker version of my earlier argument so it is easier to attack. You are actually targeting a position that I never took.

 

[syed putra]

Then why you want to frequent smoky places? Someone point a gun at your head?

Most drink Kaki are smokers. Plus these clubs are where the sexy willing chicks are.

 

[Truthspeak]

Please encourage smokers to indulge in more cigarettes. They will be more likely to die young.

They are likely to die young due to vaccinations than smoking. Neither smoking causes people to die young nor getting cancer from smoking

Please do not spread misinformation like the hell authorities and the government

 

[jsctan]

Do not use a straw man argument by putting words in my mouth.

It is not a strawman argument. It is a fair statement. I am not putting words in your mouth, I am asking you a question. You can say non smokers have more right or not.
By putting them into square boxes, we are basically cutting away their rights different from the non smokers. Dont you have friends and family members that are smokers? Do you like the authorities to divide smokers and non smokers that are all your friends or you like to tell them off just because they are not non smoker like you? It is a divide and conquer rule that you know very well.

 

[True Believer]

They are likely to die young due to vaccinations than smoking. Neither smoking causes people to die young nor getting cancer from smoking
Please do not spread misinformation like the hell authorities and the government

 

[True Believer]

It is not a straw argument. It is a fair statement. I am not putting words in your mouth, I am asking you a question. You can say non smokers have more right or not.
By putting them into square boxes, we are basically cutting away their rights different from the non smokers. Dont you have friends and family members that are non smokers? Do you like the authorities to divide smokers and non smokers?

There is a huge difference. When a cigarette is burned, it produces over 7,000 chemicals with at least 250 known to be harmful to human health and more than 69 which are cancer-causing. When a non-smoker crosses paths with a smoker, the latter is doing far more harm to the former. The non-smoker does absolutely no harm to the cigarette lover when they pass each other.

 

[Truthspeak]

View attachment 245409

You don’t seek true health. Therefore, knows nothing about health.

I have previously mentioned cancers, heart attacks and many more are modern diseases. “Ancient people do not have these diseases”

And now this doctor have also concluded that.

 

[Truthspeak]

There is a huge difference. When a cigarette is burned, it produces over 7,000 chemicals with at least 250 known to be harmful to human health and at more than 69 which are cancer-causing. When a non-smoker crosses paths with a smoker, the latter is doing far more harm to the former. The non-smoker does absolutely no harm to the cigarette lover when they pass each other.

Where are the 7000 chemicals?

Can observe?
Can measure?
Can test?

If NO, it is just your logical fallacy
Please do use your delusion as reality

Learn science and challenge all these back to the ones who told this made to believe science to the hell authorities and the government who misinformed everyone

 

[jsctan]

There is a huge difference. When a cigarette is burned, it produces over 7,000 chemicals with at least 250 known to be harmful to human health and at more than 69 which are cancer-causing. When a non-smoker crosses paths with a smoker, the latter is doing far more harm to the former. The non-smoker does absolutely no harm to the cigarette lover when they pass each other.

Can you just walk away or we need authority to set a law so we can tell our friends off using law?
It is a give and take situation. Considerate Smokers will auto go somewhere else and non smokers can move away if not wanting to inhale second hand smoke isnt it?
Put a law and suddenly non smokers cry blue murder. just like the bad implementation of priority seats in public transport.

 

[True Believer]

Where are the 7000 chemicals? Can observe? Can measure? Can test? If NO, it is just your logical fallacy Please do use your delusion as reality Learn science and challenge all these back to the ones who told this made to believe science to the hell authorities and the government who misinformed everyone

Surely you know how to Google, or are you illiterate?

 

[Truthspeak]

Surely you know how to Google, or are you illiterate?

I have asked you 3 questions related to these 7000 chemicals and I don’t see any answers but telling me to google lol

That only means you have no answers literally lol

 

[bobby]

Maybe the Tampines HDB owner should have worked & study harder and earn more money so he could have airconed his entire HDB flat 24/7 to avoid his neighbour’s smoke instead.

 

[True Believer]

Maybe the Tampines HDB owner should have worked & study harder and earn more money so he could have airconed his entire HDB flat 24/7 to avoid his neighbour’s smoke instead.

The Tampines flat dweller could have studied harder to afford a condo where such problems hardly occur. The few smokers at my condo step out of the back gate to light up i.e. away from the condo's premises and their fellow residents.

 

[A Singaporean]

Move out of hdb. What do you expect to live among Sinkie retards.

 

[glockman]

Fed up with neighbour’s cigarette smoke, Tampines resident suggests increasing tobacco tax, adding levy — and caning​

PHOTO ILLUSTRATIONS: THE STRAITS TIMES, ISTOCKPHOTO

Cherlynn Ng
PublishedJul 15, 2026, 12:14pm
UpdatedJul 15, 2026, 02:57pm

A man is frustrated at having to put up with second-hand cigarette smoke from his neighbour’s unit, but feels at a loss over what can be done.

Stomper Anonymous, a retiree in his 70s, said he lives in Tampines where “the flats are not so old and the units are not too close to each other”.

Even so, he is not spared from second-hand smoke. Despite wearing a mask and closing all his windows, the Stomper claims that his neighbour’s cigarette smoke still drifts into his home through small gaps.

Anonymous said: “Help! My neighbour’s second-hand smoke is ruining my health. But there’s nothing we can do lah.
https://www.stomp.sg/stomping-groun...fe-woman-who-paid-bfs-bail?ref=related-center
Describing his flat being “widely segmented between units”, the Stomper said he had enjoyed decades of smoke-free environment.

Unfortunately, this has changed since a new tenant moved into a unit upstairs weeks ago, he said.

“Dealing with smoking neighbours is challenging and stressful. Indeed, there’s nothing much we can do since it’s not illegal,” he said, adding that those living in newer Built-To-Order flats with closely knitted units are hit the hardest.

“Smokers believe it’s okay to subject their neighbours to second-hand smoke simply because they’re within the confines of their own property.”

The Stomper pointed out that this mindset is not wrong.

“It wouldn’t be right to expect someone to give up their liberties in their home,” he said. “I also don’t have the right to stop them or tell the owner to rent the unit or room only to non-smokers.”

Anonymous said not only would this be an invasion of privacy, but he also believes that “there’s no point talking to them” because smokers are not obliged to listen to his pleas.

Nonetheless, he appealed for smokers to show more empathy and understanding about the impact of their actions.

“Smokers should understand non-smokers probably aren’t complaining for no reason,” he said.

“Smoking is just about the most anti-social habit humans can engage in. You are forcing non-smokers to breathe in toxic and harmful fumes that are unpleasant and can kill.”

Besides being a health hazard, smoke also “penetrates everything”, including walls, carpets, furnishings, and bedding, said the Stomper.

“Realise that your smoke is an irritation and a potential health risk,” he said. “Be more considerate of the needs, feelings, and health concerns of people who live around you.”

No laws against smoking in own home​

Smoking is not allowed at more than 49,000 public places, including most common areas of residential buildings — such as common corridors and void decks — to reduce the public’s exposure to second-hand smoke.

“Residences do not fall under this category,” bemoaned the Stomper.

In 2025, the National Environment Agency (NEA) received about 600 cases of feedback related to second‑hand tobacco smoke from neighbouring homes.

About 30% of feedback cases received in 2025 were from repeat feedback providers, said Dr Janil Puthucheary, Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment, said in Parliament on May 6.

When NEA receives such feedback, it works with other government agencies or the relevant town council to issue advisories to surrounding residential units to encourage smokers to be considerate towards their neighbours.

“While NEA does not track whether cases are amicably resolved, most feedback cases did not recur after advisories were issued,” Dr Janil added.

“If the issue remains unresolved, the relevant agency or town council may engage residents in person. Affected residents are also encouraged to resolve the matter through mediation, such as by approaching the Community Mediation Centre.”

Stomper suggests solutions to ‘hurt smokers’ pockets’​

“So, what more can our government do?” asked the Stomper.

He provided the following suggestions:

• Continue to increase tobacco tax
• Raise the minimum legal age for smoking
• Make cigarettes available only at designated stores so that they are more inconvenient to purchase
• Impose a levy for every cigarette pack purchased, on top of existing duties
• Strengthen programmes and subsidise therapy for quitting smoking
• Step up enforcement and increase penalties, including caning, for illegal supply chains

Noting that many of these involve money, Anonymous explained: “Human nature dictates that it will hurt their pockets and they will feel the pinch.”

The Stomper acknowledged that an immediate and total ban on smoking would be “politically, legally, and practically fraught”.

“It would likely produce significant black-market activity, enforcement costs and social harms,” he added.

“Singapore’s strategy favours phased, multifaceted measures that reduce prevalence and protect public health while managing economic and social consequences.”

According to The Straits Times, MPs have repeatedly called for stronger action against second-hand smoke, including classifying second-hand smoke coming from windows and balconies of homes as a public nuisance.

However, this is challenging as it raises the question of how much the government should “intrude into the privacy of one’s own home and the behaviours that one can engage with there”.

Dr Janil said: “It’s precisely because we’ve prohibited (smoking) in so many of these areas that now we’re having to deal with the issues of what someone does in their own home when that smoke then pervades the neighbour’s home.”

This boomer better quickly go and die lah, want to disturb us peaceful smokers!!

 

[True Believer]