smoke free union?

[benedict]

'It often makes my ears bleed'

if the sound is sufficiently loud to actually start to affect the health of the other customers then i'd agree that the sound should either be turned down, turned off or moved somewhere else.

therefore, that does not make a dent on my earlier argument about the damages to the health of others that smoking causes.

[Plette]

A thought for those (in particular Biitchboy) who feel that restaurant and bar owners should not be forced to disallow smoking in their establishments.

Do you feel that the government is unjustified in setting other health regulations for these places? Currently there are countless rules. For example: the wearing of hairnets or caps by people preparing food, the use of disinfectants when cleaning, the regulations that meat used must be of a certain grade, rules about ventilation, vermin control, etc etc.

These rules are in place to preserve the health of the patrons. It inconveniences the owners and costs them extra money to uphold them, but the rules are there to make sure food is safe to eat. Perhaps you think that restaurant owners should be left to their own devices, to take what food sanitation measures they see fit without interference from the government? The idea frightens me.

How is it more of a stretch to make it illegal for people to smoke in a bar or restaurant? Personally, I find that inhaling smoke containing everything from cyanide to tar is just as unpleasant, if not more, than finding a hair in my salad. It's definitely more unhealthy.

It could be argued that all the regulations currently in place benefit all patrons, while eliminating smoking would inconvenience smokers as much as it benefits non-smokers. I don't care. I think if one group of two groups has to be inconvenienced, the group who is hurting the other should be the one to compromise. Perhaps smokers should shut the hell up about their right to poison everyone around them, and just step outside for 5 minutes to have their cigarette before coming back inside to have their meal.

[hr]Sola lingua bona est lingua morta.

[Biitchboy]

The regulations you mentioned are not entirely the same thing. For a start, they all apply to the owners and employees themsleves, and do not affect the patrons other than to make things safer for them.

I propose an alternative method to banning smoking in all public places. Offer temporary financial incentives to bars and restaurants, etc, to make them entirely non-smoking. And if business there is good as a result, not only would it then benefit the establishments, but it would then give the consumer the choice of whether to go to a smoking bar or a non-smoking bar. Then everyone would be happy. The smokers could smoke, the non-smokers wouldn't have to. Therefore no one feels imposed upon. Comments?

[benedict]

'The regulations you mentioned are not entirely the same thing. For a start, they all apply to the owners and employees themsleves, and do not affect the patrons other than to make things safer for them.'

agreed on that. but if a patron punched you in the face or did something else to damage your health, would you take it & accept it as your fault for enterring the establishment?

[Biitchboy]

I'm more interested in your response to alternative measures that would make everyone happy. Why does it have to be either or? Why not both?

Another idea would be instead of banning it altogether, make sure that the smoking areas and non-smoking areas were just that, and has adequate systems in place to do that

[someone]

In this situation, given the frequent complaints of non-smokers and the militant nature of smokers (of which I am one, although I'm attempting to quit), I suggest the following:

1) Ban all restaurants
2) Ban all bars

That way, nobody can complain.


[hr]someone--- disco inferno.

[benedict]

i don't think it's for me to answer that. that's more to do with economic things & depends on too many factors for me which i have not a clue about.

how much would be paid to each establishment. would any establishment take the money. what would the public reaction be & how would the public reaction affect the businesses on either side of smoking non-smoking things. etc...

[Plette]

As far as I'm concerned, any partial or alternate solution is better than nothing done at all.

If some bars were offered money to make them non-smoking, then yes I would frequent those bars. Although I doubt the government would do that, as it would cost them money.

As far as truly separate sections, that would likely be even more expensive, as installing new ventilation systems, erecting walls or dividers etc is substantial remodelling which would cost a lot.

I think the reason a ban is the favoured action of governments worldwideis that it is a very cheap and effective solution.

Also, the two solutions you mentioned leave out the staff: waitstaff and barstaff in smoking bars or the smoking sections of combined bars would still be inhaling smoke all day.

[hr]Sola lingua bona est lingua morta.

[Rapunzel]

[s]Plette wrote on 00:00, 19th Apr 2004:
Karaoke might not be fun, but I guarantee that no matter how much you listen to, you won't die.


A girl I went to school with spontaneously combusted during a particularly energetic karaoke rendition of "I'm Outta Love" by Anastacia. Karaoke... more lethal than you'd imagine.

As for the suggestion (I've read it at least twenty times on this thread) that people just go outside to smoke... I remember hearing on the news not too long along that some society (NSPCC or something) had done a study (sorry, this is pretty vague, but I definitely remember hearing it, I promise) and they'd found that people who regularly smoke outside their houses instead of inside didn't have a huge percentage difference with passive smoking levels for children inside the house, because the bits of smoke (tar/ash/whatever) had stuck to the smoker's clothes and hair and been carried inside anyway. The location of the actual smoking made a lot less difference than people assume.

That was the gist of it, anyway.

[Rapunzel]

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_pag ... 62,00.html

http://www.capeargus.co.za/index.php?fS ... eId=147909

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/jul20 ... -j24.shtml

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?click_id ... 213&set_id

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/04/ ... 31641.html

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webne ... D_DSD.html

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=126&c ... 3&set_id=1

And my personal favourite:
http://216.247.220.66/realitybites/2000/default.htm

I need a life.

[John Stewart]

Having a no-smoking area in a bar is like having a pissing corner in a swimming pool. It doesn't make it any better for those who choose not to use the pissing corner, and it violates their rights and freedoms to go out without getting pissed on.

Personally, one of the reasons I don't go out in St Andrews often is that I wake up in the morning smelling like an ashtray. I have to wash every article of clothing I wore the previous night, and some (like my jacket) just have to smell for a few days.

The only way to go is likely to be either:

1. Take all the smokers and either shoot them. Alternatively, provide them with somewhere to smoke that's actually separated (aka provide those that piss with a pissing pool).
2. Ban smoking uniformly across the whole area/country.

Unfortunately, I can't see our government doing it as all they are interested in are the tax revenues from cigarettes.

[Homer]

From a cursory look through this thread it seems that not many smokers are prepared to comment, or is it that there just aren't that many sinner smokers?

[Biitchboy]

[s]Plette wrote on 00:40, 19th Apr 2004:
Also, the two solutions you mentioned leave out the staff: waitstaff and barstaff in smoking bars or the smoking sections of combined bars would still be inhaling smoke all day.

That is very true... Well, you're beginning to convince me. Fine, ban smoking in pubs, see if i care. BUT! If they ever come after my precious alcohol, I will take up arms!

[hr]
If I gave a shit, you'd be the first person I'd give it to.

http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~lgbtsoc
*This post does not necessarily reflect the views of the society*

[Prophet Tenebrae]

I second that