dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Oh and fair play to the government for bringing in something that will lose them revenue. Ok they'll probably have to make it another way but still, it wasn't the easy option for them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the English government really wanted to bring in this ban did they? They were pressured into it by the non-smoking lobby after coming up with a (not very clever admittedly) compromise about non-smoking food pubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 As for non-smoking people maybe having to go along with their smoking friends to their bars rather than splitting up - that would be their choice to do so. I'm sure many smokers would also go to non-smoking bars with the majority of non-smoking friends rather than split up. What's the problem with that? I rarely go out in a group of less than 6 people and they are mixed in smoking and not smoking. The nature of smoking means people are not able to not smoke in comfort for several hours so they would wish to attend the smoking premises. That leaves the rest of the people with a choice of splitting up the group or also attending the smoking premises. That to me is not much of a choice at all and would completely nullify the whole point of having two types of premises. In reality i think the vast majority would fall into this category as we already make the decision to attend smoking premises and in the vast majority of cases still do because that's where we want to be. SO although the isea of seperate premises seems a nice simple clean split to match the simple clean split between smokers and non-smokers, in reality it isnt like that at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Oh and fair play to the government for bringing in something that will lose them revenue. Ok they'll probably have to make it another way but still, it wasn't the easy option for them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the English government really wanted to bring in this ban did they? They were pressured into it by the non-smoking lobby after coming up with a (not very clever admittedly) compromise about non-smoking food pubs. I really dont know what brought it about but i'm pretty sure if they didnt want it it wouldnt be here. I also think the disturbance to the smokers outweighs the presurre from the anti-smoking lobby and they will have known that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 It would be people's choice to split their group and go to smoking pubs if that's what they wanted Grant. But in reality I don't think that would happen too often. If smokers want to be with their mates then they will go to a non-smoking pub and stand outside in the rain when they want a fag. I'm sure the smokers would be willing to compromise sometimes and go to a non-smoking pub to keep their clean living mates happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 It would be people's choice to split their group and go to smoking pubs if that's what they wanted Grant. But in reality I don't think that would happen too often. If smokers want to be with their mates then they will go to a non-smoking pub and stand outside in the rain when they want a fag. I'm sure the smokers would be willing to compromise sometimes and go to a non-smoking pub to keep their clean living mates happy. I'm far from clean living mate, a right tramp! If i'm right about the vast majority of people are going out in mixed groups and you're right that the smokers will be prepared to go outside, then isnt that what the smoking ban in it's current format will support? A rule that suits the vast majority!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 t also must be pointed out that cars are generally running outside on the open road, where smokers are free to smoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 The important point in my scenario is people would have a choice. I think adults in a mature democracy should have a choice Eddy. Surely there's nothing wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Oh and fair play to the government for bringing in something that will lose them revenue. Ok they'll probably have to make it another way but still, it wasn't the easy option for them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the English government really wanted to bring in this ban did they? They were pressured into it by the non-smoking lobby after coming up with a (not very clever admittedly) compromise about non-smoking food pubs. was in their election manifesto I believe DV, so i guess it was a policy they were keen to introduce?! and Yes, i believe a full ban was their original election aim/promise, but then for some reason there were attempts to water it down with sh*ty compromises. Glad to see the full ban introduced as per election promise, as far too few of these are ever kept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 TRL, not sure from that post if you are pro or anti the smokng ban? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 The important point in my scenario is people would have a choice. I think adults in a mature democracy should have a choice Eddy. Surely there's nothing wrong with that. they still have a choice DV. Now it's one that doesn't involve poisoning others, surely a good thing in my book. The public at large want this ban, the people voting in this poll on VT want this ban, the only people who don't are a minority of smokers who feel they're being told what to do by the government, and demand that their right to poison others should not be impinged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 So you disagree with the idea of people having a choice then Jon? ie Smoking and non-smoking bars. People in pubs are generally poisoning themselves slowly anyway (with alcohol), so your point is ironic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 TRL, not sure from that post if you are pro or anti the smokng ban? Oh i think the smoking ban is ace. I think most people do if they get their head out of their arse. No offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 None taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 The important point in my scenario is people would have a choice. I think adults in a mature democracy should have a choice Eddy. Surely there's nothing wrong with that. In theory no, i'd agree there is nothing wrong with it. I'm not a big anti-smoker, have smoked before and don't mind a cheeky spliff now and again. But in the scenario you proposed i think there were flaws that made it unfeasible. Sorry, but i cant come around to the idea of premises that are one or the other or have seperate rooms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Why would it be unfeasable? If what people are saying on here is true then many pub customers would like to drink in a smoke-free environment. Fair enough. Smokers would presumably want to keep some 'smoking-permitted' premises. So there would be economic feasability for both types of pubs. It works in some other countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grant(aka_eddy) Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Why would it be unfeasable? If what people are saying on here is true then many pub customers would like to drink in a smoke-free environment. Fair enough. Smokers would presumably want to keep some 'smoking-permitted' premises. So there would be economic feasability for both types of pubs. It works in some other countries. I've already listed the reasons Dundee, if you dont agree with them then fair enough but i think they're valid. Agree to disagree on this one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 People in pubs are generally poisoning themselves slowly anyway (with alcohol), so your point is ironic. I have no real objection to people poisoning themselves. It's the poisoning of others i object to. How is someone consuming alcohol poisoning those around them? I am not opposed in principle to having a smoking room in a bar/pub. In practice, i don't this would work that well, and also it wouldn't be feasible for some open plan bars that don't have "rooms". It would also be an expense to implement for the pubs/bars i'd guess. Also would be much more difficult to police than an outright ban. What's wrong with outside? It's well ventilated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Touché Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dundeevilla Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Alcohol is a harmful drug and people go to pubs to consume it. Some people go on like pubs are health clubs. They are pubs, places for adults to go and relax, unwind, abuse their bodies with noxious substances. I'm not really advocating smoking rooms, I think seperate smoking and non-smoking premises would be better. Then people would have a choice. If you don't believe in choice then fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 How about the people working in these places? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts