The Smoking Ban vs Civil Liberties

Is it OK to force this on everyone

  • Yes, people force their smoke on me at the moment

    Votes: 3 13.6%
  • I dont really care

    Votes: 3 13.6%
  • No, this is a threat to our freedoms, not just this one

    Votes: 12 54.5%
  • No, I wanna smoke

    Votes: 4 18.2%

  • Total voters
    22

sqoo

˙˙˙ƃuoɹʍ ǝuoƃ ǝlʞɔıʇ ɹɯ
Messages
8,129
Reaction score
1
Location
Medway
I liked this comment from the BBC news site

I went to one of the first non-smoking bars in Birmingham a couple of years ago and it didnt stink of smoke. Instead it stank of blokes armpits.
We went elsewhere.
 

Poncho

mago del señor
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
0
Location
so unfunny hit hurts
Well,
The smoking ban seems to work perfectly well in Dublin, so i see no reason why it shouldn't work here.

people can still smoke in beer gardens and the like.

yes trade will drop off for a while but it will pick up again when people get used to it.

the thing is i don't think either side will be happy with a compromise, in fact i'm not entirley sure that the people arguing about htis in parliment actually no what a compromise is.

I think that phasing it in would be prefereable to an outright ban staight away. the use of smoking rooms and the ability for Private clubs to allow smoking seem perfectly sensible ideas to me, but neither side seems to want to accept these.
 

sqoo

˙˙˙ƃuoɹʍ ǝuoƃ ǝlʞɔıʇ ɹɯ
Messages
8,129
Reaction score
1
Location
Medway
In principle I wouldnt mind. What I find chilling is the 'its for the common good at the expense of the few argument'.

I think pubs shuld have to apply for a smoking license, otherwise not be able to. And the thing about private clubs is only there coz MP are all members of at least one.
 

Poncho

mago del señor
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
0
Location
so unfunny hit hurts
I see no reason why private clubs shouldn't beable to nominate themselves as smoking clubs.

members need not join if they wish to smoke and staff need not take the job.

in my experience almost all bar staff smoke anyways.
the health benefits for them are going to be minimal if smoking is prohibited.

but i'm really not bothered by a smoking ban, i smoke but i can go outside for a fag, i do when i'm at home.

and the civil liberties argument, jeesh if smoking had no effect on others then yeah it would be an infringement on peoples liberties and choice. but it does affect other people, people die because of passive smoking.

if you want to smoke just smoke with other people that want to or don't mind you doing it.

but on that point if people were really bothered about it then non smokers wouldn't go to smokey bars and clubs, there are non smoking pubs out there but they are way more empty than the smoking ones.
 

sqoo

˙˙˙ƃuoɹʍ ǝuoƃ ǝlʞɔıʇ ɹɯ
Messages
8,129
Reaction score
1
Location
Medway
Poncho said:
but on that point if people were really bothered about it then non smokers wouldn't go to smokey bars and clubs, there are non smoking pubs out there but they are way more empty than the smoking ones.


Thats the thing, market forces have not demonstrated the need, have they?
 

Poncho

mago del señor
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
0
Location
so unfunny hit hurts
by that rational, then its the "nanny state" thing.

the government should never go against the populus, its just a bad thing.

but have there been any surveys carried out in the uk? would people support or appose a ban?
 

Monkey Do

#1 Internet Toughguy
Messages
7,495
Reaction score
2
Location
I'm touching myself as I write this post.
What about the poor pipe smokers?

Keith Garrard, The Pipe Club of Norfolk
_40055888_pipe66.jpg

66a.gif
In my local pub, 80% of the customers in my local pub smoke, so I think a ban would just about finish them. If there was a ban, a cigarette smoker could nip outside for a smoke because it only takes five minutes.


But you can't do that with a pipe; the idea is to sit and enjoy it - and sometimes you can keep it burning for an hour-and-a-half. For me, if a ban was introduced there would be no point at all in turning up to the pub, I might as well sit at home with a bottle of wine. It would kill my social life.

Years ago, all the old pubs had smoking bars set aside, but for some reason that changed and they were opened up into one big room. Maybe they should re-introduce small rooms again.
99a.gif
 

Electroencephalogram

Mr Smiles Esquire
Messages
309
Reaction score
0
Location
DK
Poncho said:
...

the government should never go against the populus, its just a bad thing.

Do you mean by not listening in general -
or by imposing their wishes on the populous? :iwink:

---- As far as i have heard (being in DK) crime rates in UK for tobacco smuggling from europe have slowly been in increase--- Any connection with not being allowed to smoke methinks, or harsh prices rising that are harsh enough... ? very likely !
 

Poncho

mago del señor
Messages
1,741
Reaction score
0
Location
so unfunny hit hurts
Well the people elect a goverment to run the conutry they way the people want it run.
Not so they can change the way we lead our lives "for our own good" we vote for them they are not and should not overstep their roles as Elected Leadership.

but thats another argument.

I call for a referendum.
 

Lyra

tranquila querida
Messages
3,479
Reaction score
2
Location
Bristol
Im definetely for a pretty much complete smoking ban. You are not allowed to smoke in public places in Norway and i enjoy so much more going out to bars and pubs there now compared to before. Also, lots more beer gardens have appeared, with roofs, and everyone goes outside to smoke! And this is in Norway remember... much milder climate here! Also, with a mum who recently passed away due to cancer, and a brother-in-law who is dying of cancer, im very much for the complete smoking ban, and i feel horribly guilty that i once upon a time actually smoked daily myself.

I guess i might be a bit biased in this situation, but the less smoke around me, the happier i will be (she says living in a house full of smokers huh :P).

And concerning civil liberties or infringing on our personal freedom, there are lots more places to smoke, i have never seen why it is such a hassle to go outside to have a cigarette. It is just a matter of getting used to it, to the routine, and then enjoy the cleaner air in pubs and restaurants.
 

Sturdy Pete

Sturdy Member
Messages
1,104
Reaction score
46
Location
Bristol
yes, smoking is bad.. but why can't they just leave it up to the landlord/landlady??

there are now 3 pubs in cambridge which have gone no-smoking, and i am told that they now have a good base of customers who dont want to go into smokey pubs.. fair enough.
but some pubs thrive on the atmosphere of a dingy, smokey room with the bar staff smoking as much as everyone else. obviously a non smoker would hate it, but if there was a choice...

but then i'm a smoker, so i want to be able to have a pint and a fag in a cosy pub when it's freezing cold and pissing it down..

i do however, support a complete ban of smoking in resteraunts. pubs that serve food should still be able to chose imho..
 

Monkey Do

#1 Internet Toughguy
Messages
7,495
Reaction score
2
Location
I'm touching myself as I write this post.
Cars are dangerous and I dare say a few non-drivers have their health seriously affected by them. Better move to ban them.

Politicians too. How many people die as a result of passive politics?

And I wouldn't be suprised if a few teetotallers ended up injured as a result of people drinking alcohol in pubs. Ban it to stop deaths from passive drunken-ness.

Actually in view of MRSA we'd better ban hospitals for fear of passive death. Doesn't matter though 'cos once we've banned cars there will be no way to get the sick and injured to hospital.

Actually, if the government do their job properly (before banning themselves obviously) there will be no sick or injured anymore as WE'LL ALL BE FORCED TO SPEND OUR ENTIRE FUCKING LIVES WRAPPED IN COTTON WOOL AND TCP!
 

JohnM

blah blah blah
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
231
Location
Sunny Sheffield
If someone wants to smoke - at the moment that is lawful and their business. The main issues as I understand it, are to do with the health & safety of others. More and more , employers (quite rightly) have a duty of care towards their employees. I'm not sure you can say to a member of bar staff - well you didn't have to work here. Employers have a duty to provide a safe working environment. If bar staff are dying of passive smoking, then it follows that the Govt would have to take some sort of action.

Though why bar staff in poorer working men's clubs should be any less worthy of protection than those in nicer pubs that sell food is not really clear...
 

Monkey Do

#1 Internet Toughguy
Messages
7,495
Reaction score
2
Location
I'm touching myself as I write this post.
JohnM said:
If someone wants to smoke - at the moment that is lawful and their business. The main issues as I understand it, are to do with the health & safety of others. More and more , employers (quite rightly) have a duty of care towards their employees.

Understandable to a point but where does it stop? If you object to smoke then either go and work in a non-smoking pub or don't take the job in the first place.

I'm exposed to staircases at work every day. Do you know how many people are seriously injured or killed as a result of staircases each year? I bet it's a lot. I think the government should ban buildings with more than one floor, and those existing multifloored buildings should be fitted with inflatable slides onto those big mats stuntmen fall onto to minimise the risk to employees.
 

JohnM

blah blah blah
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
231
Location
Sunny Sheffield
Monkey Do said:
I'm exposed to staircases at work every day. Do you know how many people are seriously injured or killed as a result of staircases each year? I bet it's a lot. I think the government should ban buildings with more than one floor, and those existing multifloored buildings should be fitted with inflatable slides onto those big mats stuntmen fall onto to minimise the risk to employees.

Taking your example - Employers have a legal duty to ensure that staircases are as safe as *reasonably* possible - i.e non slip etc etc

Taking this "humourous" example onwards... If there were people who's hobby directly affected the safety of staircases - eg they recreationally left banana skins on staircases, I'm sure the HSE or Govt would soon have words to say about their hobby - regardless of their "right" to do such a thing.
 

evilwill

definitely
Messages
2,870
Reaction score
6
Location
bristol
JohnM said:
If there were people who's hobby directly affected the safety of staircases - eg they recreationally left banana skins on staircases, I'm sure the HSE or Govt would soon have words to say about their hobby - regardless of their "right" to do such a thing.

yeah they'd probably ban all fruit from a ten mile radius of the building.

i think its fairly stupid myself, H&S continuing along with the idea that people are all too f*cking stupid to think for themselves... there's some reasonable arguements for stopping smoking, but i really don't think its unfair to say 'if you dont want to smoke then don't come here"
 
Top