BOF Posted June 7, 2007 Moderator Share Posted June 7, 2007 Have to say that there are certain pubs and especially certain night clubs in Dublin which now STIIIINK of sweat and damp since the smoking stopped. Not to mention being able to smell every fart in the place- and drinkers tend to fart more. So there aren't too many pleasant odours around, other than the smell of beer - and if you avoid the filthy places, it is OK - but they DO exist too, so TRL is right - just choose more wisely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted June 7, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted June 7, 2007 I am delighted!!!!! I am the joint owner of the UK's biggest manufacturer and marketer of Cigarette Bins and Smokers Shelters !!!! oh happy days!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 7, 2007 Moderator Share Posted June 7, 2007 You might wanna buy into an outside heaters company too and an awning company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Oh yes and I've just noticed the price of no smoking signs has gone up Genuine question this gareth. Do you have to have "Official" no smoking signs are are you permitted to make your own, as long as they say the same thhing? I doubt many people have the facility to print on clear celluloid with adhesive on one side indeed. But i was wondering if there's anyhting stopping you simply typing up some notices on your PC and simply printing them off and sellotaping to your doors? I know it would look sh*t and tacky but if you're that upset about having to get these signs bought then it's a cheap option. I was just wondering if that was acceptable by law or not, or whther the sign has to be "official" and of a certain material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timharding Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I spent most of last summer in Europe and on my travels visited both Gothenburg and Riga. Both have no smoking policies and I found it to be very pleasent to step outside for my 'fix'. It also cut down my intake and I found my hangovers were much less severe. However this hasn't made me any less resentful. Passive smoking still hasnt been proved even though the theory has been tested continually for many years. I watched newsnight a few years back and heard what appeared to be a middle aged middle class middle of the road scottish lady rattle about how she feels restricted from going to pubs because she cant stand the smoke. She also claimed that many people like her would begin to frequent pubs once the ban in scotland came into force. I'm pretty sure after one visit to the pub, she remembered that the loud laddish environment was the real reason for her staying away. I can live with the ban but its the sneering attitude of many people who will never frequent the pub on a regular basis, claiming some victory on those who they seem to view as shit on their shoe. It would be interesting if, just to make a point, all smokers stayed out of pubs for say two weeks. And let the no smoking brigade enjoy a smoke free atmosphere in an empty pub devoid of....atmosphere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 It would be interesting if, just to make a point, all smokers stayed out of pubs for say two weeks. And let the no smoking brigade enjoy a smoke free atmosphere in an empty pub devoid of....atmosphere only smokers create an atmosphere? :? or because there are less peoeple in the pub there will be less of an atmosphere? TBH, if those that smoked stayed away and were replaced by the same amount of non smokers in the same pub, i can't see why there would be less of an atmosphere. Once the ban comes into effect, smokers are quite welcome to stay away if they wish to. they can drink at home if they wish to, it's all about personal choice. What i do/did object to was smokers polluting my immediate atmosphere with my only option of getting way from said atmosphere to leave the establishment. So in order to socialize i had to "grin & bear" this faily disgusting aroma/pullatant. That was my choice i suppose. Thankfully, the choice is now being played out the other way around, which IMO is as it should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I’m living in Wales at the moment where the smoking ban has been in effect since April. Whilst it’s been great to enjoy a smoke-free atmosphere in pubs, bars and clubs, and not have clothes stinking in the morning, there has been one significant downside. Outdoor areas are now completely monopolised by smokers. Whenever I want to sit outside it’s virtually impossible to find a space and if I do, it stinks, making it very unpleasant. I really, really hate the smell of smoke! Despite this, on the whole, it’s been a very good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 It would be interesting if, just to make a point, all smokers stayed out of pubs for say two weeks. And let the no smoking brigade enjoy a smoke free atmosphere in an empty pub devoid of....atmosphere only smokers create an atmosphere? :? or because there are less peoeple in the pub there will be less of an atmosphere? TBH, if those that smoked stayed away and were replaced by the same amount of non smokers in the same pub, i can't see why there would be less of an atmosphere. Once the ban comes into effect, smokers are quite welcome to stay away if they wish to. they can drink at home if they wish to, it's all about personal choice. What i do/did object to was smokers polluting my immediate atmosphere with my only option of getting way from said atmosphere to leave the establishment. So in order to socialize i had to "grin & bear" this faily disgusting aroma/pullatant. That was my choice i suppose. Thankfully, the choice is now being played out the other way around, which IMO is as it should be. Brilliantly put, by the way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstupid Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Hmmm.... ok, here goes... what will happen is they will probably turn some pubs into members only pubs, much like liberal or conservative etc etc clubs, in which its up to the owners. You'll get smoking pubs for smokers i imagine. but normal pubs,clubs and nightclubs will obviously be smoke free. and i think the stats show alot, 80% of this forum choose non-smoking as a good thing, which makes you wonder how ignorant the 20% of smokers are to make 100% of people smell! Your average city pub just can't afford to be a members club, i've worked in pubs for years and the profit margin just isn't that high. Hence why most barstaff are paid minimum wage for one of the most over worked and under-appreciated jobs in the service industry. (sorry, but it is) The existence of this 'private club' loophole rather than a decision that allows premises to CHOOSE whether to be non-smoking or not, only serves to aid the elitist factions of society and protect them from their own governance. Some clubs in Scotland have been looking at how to tackle this with fragrances being pumped out of fans..... I know several places that smell perpetually of vomit!, i'd avoid them, but i'm an alcoholic and there's not too much open after 1am up here. The ones that don't smell are generally full of chavs, or just shit. Such is life, but i know all these late-licence places would happily go back to smoking establishments (ie. with warning signs up telling people of the risks... anal i know, but a COMPROMISE!) as i would estimate 80-90% of their patrons smoke. There's an interesting question, would you rather work an 8 hour shift in a place that smelt of smoke, or one that smelt of vomit? The only problem is the gaggle of smokers outside the doors of pubs, offices, etc. Next step is to drive them further down the road so we don't have to walk through them to get in. After that, the next goal will be to make them congregate in a field well away from built-up areas. But only when wind conditions permit. At the risk of sounding (even more) like a civil liberties activist, if the govenment gets their way on 'public meeting' laws, there'll be a strict smoking rota of no more than two people allowed to congregate outside a pub at any one time, and they'll have to wear big yellow 'i'm a smoker' hats to avoid being gunned down by an over zealous police force using their new-found anti-terrorism powers of 'shoot first question later'!... ok, i may have exaggerated slightly. You might wanna buy into an outside heaters company too and an awning company. These things pump out an average 13kg of carbon dioxide an hour!, the irony being that yes, sales will go through the roof once the evironment polluting smokers are made to stand outside in the cold. However this hasn't made me any less resentful. Passive smoking still hasnt been proved even though the theory has been tested continually for many years. I watched newsnight a few years back and heard what appeared to be a middle aged middle class middle of the road scottish lady rattle about how she feels restricted from going to pubs because she cant stand the smoke. She also claimed that many people like her would begin to frequent pubs once the ban in scotland came into force. I'm pretty sure after one visit to the pub, she remembered that the loud laddish environment was the real reason for her staying away. I can live with the ban but its the sneering attitude of many people who will never frequent the pub on a regular basis, claiming some victory on those who they seem to view as shit on their shoe. I'd be willing to bet a fair amount of money that this was Jack McConnell's wife. Once the ban comes into effect, smokers are quite welcome to stay away if they wish to. they can drink at home if they wish to, it's all about personal choice. That's exactly my point Jon, it's NOT about personal choice for smokers, we're being dictated to by a heavy-handed law which turns smokers into the new scapegoat for societies ills and does very little towards its intended purpose. Every law has it's anomalies, but not every law is quite so ill-conceived and or down right dictatorial as this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Private members clubs are covered by the ban, so s lot of your post is rendered pointless. That's exactly my point Jon, it's NOT about personal choice for smokers It's not supposed to be, it's about protecting staff and other customers from your vile habit. Want a fag at the pub? Go outside. Don't want to do that? Stay at home. There, plenty of choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I have a non smoking house and a non smoking car and have chosen to go to pubs where I know the ventilation is good and I don't get affected by smoke. As a life long non smoker I have made my own choices and I would like to see that freedom of choice retained by smokers as long as there are plenty of premises for both smoking and non smoking customers and staff to choose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMcKenna Posted June 7, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted June 7, 2007 Private members clubs are covered by the ban, so s lot of your post is rendered pointless. That's exactly my point Jon, it's NOT about personal choice for smokers It's not supposed to be, it's about protecting staff and other customers from your vile habit. Want a fag at the pub? Go outside. Don't want to do that? Stay at home. There, plenty of choices. Correct, "Private Members Clubs" are also subject to the ban. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Had it in Norway for a few years. Lots of complaints initially but now a considerable majority seem to accept the fact that a smoking ban is a good thing. I love it personally, as I'm very sensitive to cigarette smoke. I can't imagine how much people whjo suffer from asthma and other allergies must appreciate the ban. (The point about places having to close down is basically a myth, and I don't get those who're complaining about BO either as I sure haven't noticed any significant difference there). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I would like to see that freedom of choice retained by smokers. Can anyone tell my why this "freedom of choice" for smokers is important? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 7, 2007 Moderator Share Posted June 7, 2007 We're back to civil liberties again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 I have a non smoking house and a non smoking car and have chosen to go to pubs where I know the ventilation is good and I don't get affected by smoke. As a life long non smoker I have made my own choices and I would like to see that freedom of choice retained by smokers as long as there are plenty of premises for both smoking and non smoking customers and staff to choose from. The fatal flaw in your argument - who decides which premises are smoking and which aren't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Glad it's finally kicking in as I think smokers are the most self centered people around (with apologies to those fellow VT's who smoke , obviously i don't mean you :-) ) not only do they light up at meal tables without asking , thus ruining your meal , took a look outside any office building where the smokers hang out or down any street and see where smokers have finished their fag and then thrown the butt on the floor As the government rake in huge amounts of tax from smokers I wonder what effect this will have on the economy going forward IF smoking numbers drop ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 7, 2007 Moderator Share Posted June 7, 2007 I have a non smoking house and a non smoking car and have chosen to go to pubs where I know the ventilation is good and I don't get affected by smoke. As a life long non smoker I have made my own choices and I would like to see that freedom of choice retained by smokers as long as there are plenty of premises for both smoking and non smoking customers and staff to choose from. The fatal flaw in your argument - who decides which premises are smoking and which aren't? That's a logistics and licencing decision and has nothing to do with whether a smoker should or shouldn't be able to smoke where they want to. Is a law now only passed based on how tricky it will be to implement ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 As the government rake in huge amounts of tax from smokers I wonder what effect this will have on the economy going forward IF smoking numbers drop ? No need to worry, I'd imagine. In Norway, we have higher taxes on cigarettes and have had a considerable drop in cigarette sales and consumption. I can't say we've noticed a dramatic impact on the economy, Tony, I really can't Plus, the health benefits would save the NHS quite a bit anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted June 7, 2007 VT Supporter Share Posted June 7, 2007 All the nonsense about pubs having to close because of loss of custom has been shown to be untrue On 1st July I am planning to spend an evening on the lash in my nearest local. And I intend to explain to the landlord that I will be doing so on a regular basis - indeed, that I would have been doing so for years had it not been such a stinking smokebox. Might give him food for thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts