Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by ~*sparkle*~)
    to be fair banning smoking in pubs would be wrong on so many levels! its part of being in a pub, that you are allowed to smoke and if they were to ban it then not only would they lose custom it would cause them to lose money as well. i dont think that they would be able to ban it in all pubs as it would cause an outrage in my opinion.
    On the contrary - pubs are realising they are losing out on trade because many people do not want to be in smokey atmospheres.

    There would be a few initial moans but after that people would accept it - as evidenced in all places where bans are implemented.

    Bring on the ban!!
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by ~*sparkle*~)
    yes it is our right and our decision to smoke or not and that should be respected, not criticised by other people. and what are you talking about harming others while destroying ourselves. if you look into smoking properly and the effects it is actually statistically proven that passive smoking is relatively harmeless.
    It might be your right and your decision to smoke, but it is also the right and decision of others NOT to smoke. By smoking in their presence you are denying them that right.

    Oh for heavens sake - the only statistics that prove that passive smoking is relatively harmless are those provided by the tobacco companies :rolleyes:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ~*sparkle*~)
    yes it is our right and our decision to smoke or not and that should be respected, not criticised by other people. and what are you talking about harming others while destroying ourselves. if you look into smoking properly and the effects it is actually statistically proven that passive smoking is relatively harmeless.
    Long term for cancer its dubious but what about heart disease and asthma, and what about just wanting your clothes not to stink at the end of a night out.

    I have a right not to smell of disgusting smoke.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn)
    On the contrary - pubs are realising they are losing out on trade because many people do not want to be in smokey atmospheres.

    There would be a few initial moans but after that people would accept it - as evidenced in all places where bans are implemented.

    Bring on the ban!!
    On the contrary.

    http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/a.../09/c3323.html
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viviki)
    Long term for cancer its dubious but what about heart disease and asthma, and what about just wanting your clothes not to stink at the end of a night out.

    I have a right not to smell of disgusting smoke.
    Yes. You should have the right to drink and enjoy a night out in a smoke free environment. And I should have the right to smell like an ashtray at the end of my night out.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Howard)
    But what if the bar staff were themselves smokers and didn't obect to working in that environment? If 25% of the general population are smokers then I'd imagine that 25% of all bar workers are smokers too. I used to joint own a pub with my brother in North Herts and we didn't exactly find it difficult to find bar staff. I don't ever remember them saying "OMG it's too smokey in here" In fact, now I think of it they were pretty much all faggers anyway.

    And yes, I am a smoker (no surprise there )
    Doesn't matter whether or not the bar staff who are smokers themselves do not object to working in that environment. An employer has the responsibility of 'duty and care' towards the wellbeing of his/her staff whilst at the place of work. Just because a worker on a building site doesn't mind not wearing safety boots or a 'hard hat' it doesn't mean that his employer does not have a legal responsibilit to protect his health/safety by ensuring he wears the safety items.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Didn't they do a smoking ban in the union at leeds uni last year and then change back because they lost tons of trade?
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Howard)
    So, if Ireland does it we must follow? I don't agree. I think this should be a town hall matter which it often is in the US and which seems to work very nicely.
    We are not doing it simply because Ireland has. Ireland is a forerunner in the total banning (Norway has banned it too) we are just a little bit slow off the mark.

    I understand why you would wish it to be a local matter - you want to ensure that there will be somewhere you can conduct your filthy, harming habit!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Yes. You should have the right to drink and enjoy a night out in a smoke free environment. And I should have the right to smell like an ashtray at the end of my night out.

    Thats why I'm all for proper non smoking areas the problem is that it only really works in the bigger pubs. A few pubs have non smoking floors and I think its great. Your smoking mate can bugger off downstairs for two mins for a quick one and then come back without making you smell of smoke.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viviki)
    Didn't they do a smoking ban in the union at leeds uni last year and then change back because they lost tons of trade?
    I believe so, I don't know the geographical layout of Leeds though, also younger people seem to smoke more. I know the two pubs in Manchester have done it are have increases their trade dramatically and Wetherspoons seem to think banning smoking in their pubs will be a good commerical move.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Howard)
    I think that's about the most reasonable contribution made on this thread.
    You're biased - you're a smoker - your views don't matter.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just to add to this agan about Ireland. From what I could tell the smoking ban worked very well in Dublin, the pubs and clubs were extremely busy. I think at first people will object and stop going to pubs as a protest, but very soon they will learn to accept they are not allowed to smoke.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    usually i would run my mouth off about how smoking is foul etc* but today i actually thought about what im gonna type (shock horror) Pubs should be allowed to decide themselves. If 1 pub has mostly smokers in there then its losing a lot of money from the ban but another pub with mostly no smokers has no problem really. So pubs should be allowed to decide themselves.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    The problem is that it looks like there is no middle ground it is all or nothing. I found the Leeds info

    tudents desert smoke-free bars
    10 March 2004

    A students' union has been forced to drop a smoking ban after sales in its bars plummeted by more than �26,000. Leeds University Union voted for a four week trial of the restrictions at its AGM last month. But Tom Wong from the union admitted that sales in their bars to the university's 33,000 students were down by a third. "As the only venue in the city banning smoking, it was difficult to maintain trading levels," he said. Mr Wong told BBC News Online that union bosses were "shocked" after realising they had lost �26,450 in just 13 days. "We were expecting some kind of effect on trade, but we didn't know it would be this big," he added. "We thought we might be able to maintain sales but obviously we compete against other bars in the city centre and they don't ban smoking." Despite the apparent snub from the university's smoking population, students were surprised the trial had been abandoned. Joanne Smith, 19, an International Development student, said: "I can understand why they've done it but in the long term people would have got over it and accepted the fact they weren't allowed to smoke there. "Obviously everyone is going to boycott it in the first place if they think they can change something. "But if the union had stuck to their guns there would not have been such a hoo-ha in three or four month's time." Theology student Sheree Olbison, 30, added: "I was quite surprised because the university seems to be moving more towards a no-smoking policy across campus. "But then again, smoking is a very popular pastime for a lot of students." As part of the motion initially agreed by the union in February, information about the dangers of smoking had been made available to all students at the university. Mr Wong said the smoking ban will be officially lifted on Tuesday 16 March. "It is regrettable the trial was not a success," he said. "If every other bar decided to ban smoking then maybe it would work and we could go about creating a healthier environment for everyone."

    http://www.airinitiative.com/latestnews.asp
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viviki)
    Didn't they do a smoking ban in the union at leeds uni last year and then change back because they lost tons of trade?
    if it was a universal ban however, the trade wouldnt go elsewhere.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eric bischoff)
    usually i would run my mouth off about how smoking is foul etc* but today i actually thought about what im gonna type (shock horror) Pubs should be allowed to decide themselves. If 1 pub has mostly smokers in there then its losing a lot of money from the ban but another pub with mostly no smokers has no problem really. So pubs should be allowed to decide themselves.
    The problem is staff still have to work in them.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Most Wetherspoons are big enough to initiate proper no smoking areas if the place is more than one floor I don't see a problem. I think that the law should be that unless the pub can initiate a decent non smoking area i.e. a decent distance from the smoking area with sufficient ventilation they will be forced to be non smoking. However this would be a big headache for local planning official.s
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by technik)
    if it was a universal ban however, the trade wouldnt go elsewhere.
    But thats denying people of freedom of choice. The problem is that the middle ground is difficult which was my point.
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by Howard)
    I think you've hit the nail on the head. This has more to do with the "well, however reasonable your proposals I'm still going to object, whine, moan, and complain because I dislike smoking and regard it as a filthy habit so won't shut my fcukin mouth until it's banned and everyone lives a pure life like me" type attitude than anything else.

    "I am a holier than though non-smoker and I demand that ALL pubs meet MY personal fresh air standards and requirements and fcuk the liberty of everyone else because I am in the majority.....ME, ME, ME, I, I, I :rolleyes:

    Calm down my petal - we are not saying you can't smoke any more - just that you can't smoke out in the open, anywhere near another person. You will need to confine your addictive habit to a room where there is no risk of any of the noxious substances escaping from it.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by viviki)
    But thats denying people of freedom of choice. The problem is that the middle ground is difficult which was my point.
    so...do you deny "freedom of choice" to the majority, or more logically, the minority?
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.