Smoking ban cop-out

[snaw]

Smoking Ban

What a complete and utter cop-out. I'm the proverbial ex-smoker and gotta say this pisses me off big-time, a real chance to do something positive for once and yet again NL comes up with some half-arsed measure. Absolute wnakers.

HTF they can ban it in food pubs but not in non food ones is beyond me. It's pretty logical - it's being banned on the basis of it being unhealthy for staff and other customers so htw do they suppose the health risks are less in non-food pubs?!?!?!

[ratewhore]

ah well, try not to get too worked up about it eh? Go on - have a fag, it'll calm you down...

[DodgyAgent]

Smoking Ban

What a complete and utter cop-out. I'm the proverbial ex-smoker and gotta say this pisses me off big-time, a real chance to do something positive for once and yet again NL comes up with some half-arsed measure. Absolute wnakers.

HTF they can ban it in food pubs but not in non food ones is beyond me. It's pretty logical - it's being banned on the basis of it being unhealthy for staff and other customers so htw do they suppose the health risks are less in non-food pubs?!?!?!

I dont understand why these people are so obsessed with smoking when they should be concentrating much more on the really dangerous drug.. Alcohol.

[The Lone Gunman]

I still dont agree with any form of ban.

Non Smokers have always had a choice. They can remove their custom or open their own non smoking premises. If there were a demand then they would be successful.
They are removing the right of smokers to have that same choice.

Dont give me the protecting the staff argument, they know what they are doing when they take the jobs.

[AtW]

the really dangerous drug.. Alcohol.

Does it give cancer to people who don't drink it?

Personally I am for complete ban of smoking in public places.

[snaw]

I still dont agree with any form of ban.

Non Smokers have always had a choice. They can remove their custom or open their own non smoking premises. If there were a demand then they would be successful.
They are removing the right of smokers to have that same choice.

Dont give me the protecting the staff argument, they know what they are doing when they take the jobs.

That arguement worked when the dangers of smoking were still debatable - now they're not. Quite simply it's a health risk - all well saying workers can get a job somewhere else but the whole point in having health and safety laws is to protect people who have no real power over their working conditions. People in bars generally don't have the luxury of picking and choosing jobs.

And as for going to non-smoking pubs, well the status quo has changed - it's not about us finding them but more about you, that arguement makes as much sense now as suggestng non smokers find smoke free buses and office twenty years ago.

I know one thing for sure on this from living in a smoke free city (Where I was anti ban and ambivalent at first to it) after one year of a smoking ban there is no way the general public would accept a return to smoking pubs.

[Denny]

Puffing Billy

I'm against a complete ban. Smoking is a legal activity and smokers' rights need to be acknowledged alongside the rights of non-smokers.

I'm fully in favour of a complete ban in offices and other dedicated workspaces. I'm also in favour smoking designated areas in pubs and restaurants as long as they are as attractive and comfortable as they are for non-smokers. Not some crummy room with no windows containing little more than non-emptied ash tray strewn tables. After all, smokers pay the same money for beverages and snacks in a cafe, the same price for food and so on as non-smokers do.

There are plenty of completely non-smoking establishments around these days - a move I welcome, and confirmed non-smokers who hate exposure to smoke can use these. Same goes for the workforce. They know what they're taking on when they apply for bar or restaurant jobs. We live in a free country (or we're meant to) and it should be down to individual proprietors to decide whether to impose a smoking ban. It shouldn't be a matter for the government.

What next? Ban cars because they pollute the atmosphere and cause asthma?

[Not So Wise]

it's being banned on the basis of it being unhealthy for staff and other customers

And that basis is total crap.
Staff: Get a job in a non smoking pub or get out of bar trade altogether, what next? object to drinking in bars?
Other customers: Go to the non smokeing bars..simple no?

[snaw]

It's one of the few things that should be a matter for the government - it's patently unsafe and has huge social costs associated with it. All very well talking about smoke free and smoking pubs but in a group people always defer to the smoker cause it's easier for smokers to go smoking than the reverse and many staff in pub's don't actually have that choice. They'll take a job where they can get it!

Thing is, once you've lived without smoking pubs for a while it's amazing how much of an non-issue it becomes for smokers (I was one when it was introduced in NY). It's no harder than popping out of the office for a quick ciggie. And once you've experienced it I defy anyone who's a non-smoker to be ambivalent about it; yu'd get the same reaction as you would if you tried to bring it back on buses and trains - not a hope in hell.

BTW Absolutely no fecking way should it be allowed in restaurants - that should have been binned years ago. There's nothing worse than tucking into a nice meal you've paid good money for when the ignorant @rsehole 5 feet or 50 feet away lights up!

[DodgyAgent]

Does it give cancer to people who don't drink it?

Personally I am for complete ban of smoking in public places.

No but alcoholics and drunks beat up their wives, children and everyone else around them in the process of killing themselves. And no one has proven conclusively that cancer can be caught from passive smoking.