Discussion
I know this has been covered before but this makes me so mad!
Full story here:
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13418176,00.html
[Quote=:Cancer Research UK's chief executive Professor Alex Markham] "The vast majority of people say they would still visit pubs if they were smoke-free."
"This is supported by the experiences of places such as Ireland and New York, where there is clear evidence that going smoke-free does not damage profits."
[/quote]
This is such bollox, my local went smoke free on 1st Jan this year and I haven't stepped thru the door since.
As for the examples of Ireland etc. I was there last year and you can't get in some pubs for all the smokers huddled outside having a fag.
They'll be banning lefthandedness next.......
Full story here:
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13418176,00.html
[Quote=:Cancer Research UK's chief executive Professor Alex Markham] "The vast majority of people say they would still visit pubs if they were smoke-free."
"This is supported by the experiences of places such as Ireland and New York, where there is clear evidence that going smoke-free does not damage profits."
[/quote]
This is such bollox, my local went smoke free on 1st Jan this year and I haven't stepped thru the door since.
As for the examples of Ireland etc. I was there last year and you can't get in some pubs for all the smokers huddled outside having a fag.
They'll be banning lefthandedness next.......
Me too Vettehead. Anti smoking makes me boil.
Why is this the only thing which gets banned simply because the majority of people dont smoke.
Before anyone starts their anti-smoking spiel the chances of dying from passive smoking is equivalent to winning the lottery.
Smoke in pubs stops exactly zero people from going to them therefor it cannot be that bad can it?
Most of us dont cycle and get wound up by cyclists so why dont we ban those as well?
>> Edited by blindswelledrat on Monday 22 August 12:59
Why is this the only thing which gets banned simply because the majority of people dont smoke.
Before anyone starts their anti-smoking spiel the chances of dying from passive smoking is equivalent to winning the lottery.
Smoke in pubs stops exactly zero people from going to them therefor it cannot be that bad can it?
Most of us dont cycle and get wound up by cyclists so why dont we ban those as well?
>> Edited by blindswelledrat on Monday 22 August 12:59
Harry Flashman said:
I'm sort of looking forward to this. Reckon it will be the thing that finally makes attempt to stop - the sheer bloody inconvenience/pikiness of having to go outside for a cigarette.
Agreed. I have been travelling to and from NYC over the past 2 years, and have found bars to be packed. The smoking rule hasn't affected them one bit. It was fantastic to go out to a pub/bar, and not come home stinking like an ashtray. Also it was great not to wake up with a sore throat and a cough. My other half (who is American) won't step into pubs here, as they are always smoke filled. So bring it on.
Hmmm. Whilst I appreciate that smokers have a right to indulge in a habit they enjoy, I also have a right to visit public places and not be subjected to toxic fumes. I am generally against most forms of government intervention, but this one has real merit because there are proven links between smoking (passive or otherwise) and a host of nasty, sometimes fatal ailments.
The sooner the better IMHO.
The sooner the better IMHO. blindswelledrat said:
Me too Vettehead. Anti smoking makes me boil.
Why is this the only thing which gets banned simply because the majority of people dont smoke.
Before anyone starts their anti-smoking spiel the chances of dying from passive smoking is equivalent to winning the lottery.
Smoke in pubs stops exactly zero people from going to them therefor it cannot be that bad can it?
Most of us dont cycle and get wound up by cyclists so why dont we ban those as well?
>> Edited by blindswelledrat on Monday 22 August 12:59
Well I avoid pubs and clubs mainly because I loathe the smoking, then again smoking isn't hugely worse than the diesel pollution from a bus or truck in confined city areas. In the Sunday Times there was a report on how cyclists are actually worse off health wise because of all the diesel fumes they breathe in when cycling hard compared to relaxed motorists.
So whilst I would support the idea of smoke free pubs and clubs, I also would think it reasonable to keep at least some available maybe for smokers only, they are a dying breed after all (sorry couldn't resist...
)JagLover said:
..why not simply reverese that and have a small smoking section, with strict regulations in place to ensure that the smoke does not reach the rest of the pub
They already do.. it's called outside
Personally, I don't mind the smoking ban, the pubs are way more pleasant over here in Ireland for it. Most places have managed to secure some covered area outside so even if it's pissing rain you don't get wet nipping out for a smoke.
I think some of the town pubs have found it harder to provide such areas though.
Interesting that the article is claiming it doesn't hit proffits - that's utter bollox IMO - every landlord I've spoken to round here has seen a drop in proffit.
One thing that does happen over here though is that come closing time all the doors get locked and everyone lights up anyway. Most landlords say they have seen a huge increase in demand for after hours drinking where people are (illegally) smoking inside the pub - and they are having to cater for this to keep proffit levels.
Seems that die hard smokers only come out to drink during these hours.
best
Ex
I'm a doc and an ex-smoker (making more friends on PH) - I hate those who pollute other people's air, the smoking ban will be a great advance in public health. Liberalism is letting people do what ever they like WITHOUT harming others, regardless of what FOREST says, the data on passive smoking is in and it is unequivocal, other people's tobacco smoke is harmful.
Ostracise smokers to small fug filled rooms (not inc. Pubs!
PS One small drawback, Mrs. CwC (from the emerald isle) recently returned home to find the pubs free of fag pong, but badly affected by B.O.
- come on fellas a bit more Right Guard before popping down to the boozer!
Ostracise smokers to small fug filled rooms (not inc. Pubs!
PS One small drawback, Mrs. CwC (from the emerald isle) recently returned home to find the pubs free of fag pong, but badly affected by B.O.
- come on fellas a bit more Right Guard before popping down to the boozer!It is amusing seeing this 'selective banning', not OK to ban 4x4s, but make sure smokers are burnt at the stake because I dont agree with smoking! Dont stop me speeding, although its perfectly safe, but kick that sub-human out for having the audacity to light up 6 feet away from me!!!
All those who want to ban smoking just because they don't like it, please accept also that when 4x4s are banned, your cars are banned for whatever silly reason, please dont moan,, you started it!
Anyway, if the effects of passive smoking worry you so much, I would have thought that if you frequent these pubs so often for it to affect you, chances are your liver and kidneys will give up long before your lungs!
Sorry, I just hate hate people telling others how to act because they think they hold all the morally correct cards.
(From a non smoker since last September, apart from the odd cigar!)
>> Edited by chris watton on Monday 22 August 13:28
All those who want to ban smoking just because they don't like it, please accept also that when 4x4s are banned, your cars are banned for whatever silly reason, please dont moan,, you started it!
Anyway, if the effects of passive smoking worry you so much, I would have thought that if you frequent these pubs so often for it to affect you, chances are your liver and kidneys will give up long before your lungs!
Sorry, I just hate hate people telling others how to act because they think they hold all the morally correct cards.
(From a non smoker since last September, apart from the odd cigar!)
>> Edited by chris watton on Monday 22 August 13:28
esselte said:
Smoke in pubs stops exactly zero people from going to them therefor it cannot be that bad can it?
>> Edited by blindswelledrat on Monday 22 August 12:59
Where are the stats to prove that?
Stops me going in pubs. Hate the smell etc. But thats my personal view.
There are 3 main camps among the public here. I see this like politics - you're not going to change someone's mind so no point in arguing.
- Those who don't want a ban. Probably smokers who have no plans to give up the habit. Maybe a few people who don't get affected by the smokey environments etc.
- Those who do want a ban for health and comfort reasons and don't mind if places like pubs have separate smoking rooms (not areas - room, so the smoke doesn't travel).
- Lentil munchers who hate everything other than lentils and want a complete ban. I suspect these are a minority.
I do not smoke und admit I do not like people smoking around me... so I choose the non-smoking areas und places where they do not allow the smoking within. Ist easy enough choice really...for those of us who do not smoke.
However, heard something last week on radio which had me
Was story about someone stating that smoking in front of your children was form of "child abuse" 
und that even smoking in own home if you have children or smoking in front of children should be criminalised 
Und how will they enforce this? Ach ... they will want to put scamera in your house or tag you to keep up the extra revenue in fines und dictating und controlling lives... Ist political nonsense of course
But these people spouting this kind of clap trap just make me Ist case of being sensible around children - but you cannot dictate uind interfere to these levels. So for example, you have smoke in park... und there are children nearby? Ist "criminal" per these silly people
Ist choice - a bad choice really ... do not like the habit und agree ist harmful to lives und more we discover - more dangers we find too - und we can only publish these finding to enlighten und try to discourage the young from starting in first place und try to encourage current smoker to quit the habit.... but ist not going to work mit sledgehammer und dictating approach... und this ist nannying political correct dictating which will just make people more resolved to stick to their habit or try it "because ist a bit naughty"
Do not see much problem in smoke free restaurants und so on. As for other public places... ist choice und we go to ones which do not allow the smoking und leave the ones where ist allowed to those who wish to smoke. Ist simplest solution - does not have to be every establishment...
However, heard something last week on radio which had me
Was story about someone stating that smoking in front of your children was form of "child abuse" und that even smoking in own home if you have children or smoking in front of children should be criminalised Und how will they enforce this? Ach ... they will want to put scamera in your house or tag you to keep up the extra revenue in fines und dictating und controlling lives... Ist political nonsense of course
But these people spouting this kind of clap trap just make me
Ist case of being sensible around children - but you cannot dictate uind interfere to these levels. So for example, you have smoke in park... und there are children nearby? Ist "criminal" per these silly people Ist choice - a bad choice really ... do not like the habit und agree ist harmful to lives und more we discover - more dangers we find too - und we can only publish these finding to enlighten und try to discourage the young from starting in first place und try to encourage current smoker to quit the habit.... but ist not going to work mit sledgehammer und dictating approach... und this ist nannying political correct dictating which will just make people more resolved to stick to their habit or try it "because ist a bit naughty"
Do not see much problem in smoke free restaurants und so on. As for other public places... ist choice und we go to ones which do not allow the smoking und leave the ones where ist allowed to those who wish to smoke. Ist simplest solution - does not have to be every establishment...
chris watton said:
Sorry, I just hate hate people telling others how to act because they think they hold all the morally correct cards.
(From a non smoker since last September, apart from the odd cigar!)
>> Edited by chris watton on Monday 22 August 13:28
Nothing to do with morals Chris.I hate coming home from the pub smelling like an ashtray.
If 85% of people wanted no smoking pubs market forces would already have made it happen. It's actually 85% of an anti-smoking campaign group that want it banned.
It would be far better to have proper smoking and no smoking areas and then let people make their own decisions. It's not right for one section of the population to force their choice on another.
If smoking in pubs is so bad, how come they haven't all gone out of business?
It would be far better to have proper smoking and no smoking areas and then let people make their own decisions. It's not right for one section of the population to force their choice on another.
If smoking in pubs is so bad, how come they haven't all gone out of business?
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff