The Smoking Ban - 2 years on.

IMO its brilliant, BUT i wish they would give a licence to hookah shops. i personally know about 7 that closed down due to it, and now it leaves people smoking in the road, or if you know the owner, you can do it inside, illegally.

Yes the shops may have to pay for a licence, but i brings back a lot of money for them.
 
I find it almost strange to imagine people smoking indoors now in public places, it seems a distant memory. I'm glad it happened although a lot of the places I went were well air conditioned anyway.
 
semi-pro waster said:
One where you have perfect competition and the market regulates itself because demand from consumers directs them. It's not something that I believe is entirely workable myself but at the distinct risk of misrepresenting Dolph my understanding is that is what he thinks we should be aiming for rather than our current system which has some of the elements of a free market economy but also arguable over-regulation and protectionism.
Click to expand...

;)

I know the text book definition i think i was reading into it too much.
 
Richdog said:
Geneva has already gone smoke free so next is Zurich... it's being staggered. But Geneva and Zurich are by far the biggest places so its effectively most of the population.
Click to expand...

Vague, I thought it was only banned in bars, cafes and restaurants and other enclosed public places?
 
Chimerical said:
Should be gotten rid of. If people want to walk into a pub and breath in a load of second hand smoke, that's their problem.
Click to expand...
As to oposed to not walking into a pub because they don't want to breathe in smoke? You're reasoning makes no sense.

Anyway like others have said it seems very natural to have it banned in public places. I like going to pubs now and don't need to worry about where the non smoking area is. I also work in a pub now and if the ban was lifted I would be out of a job. It would be my own choice of course but one I would not like to see happen.

Also dance floors are much more fun. You don't need to worry about getting burned by some pleb who thinks it's cool to dance with a lit fag.

I can't speak for smokers but unless they are one of those local types that are in the same pub, the same time, drinking the same beer everday. I would say that it also hasn't effected them other than having to go outside in the cold or smoking less. Obviously the type of people I speak about (locals) have no life, complain and chat **** so I tend to not listen to what they say. They do make me laugh though "£2.60 for a shandy, that's the same as a pint!". Yet you still pay it and have done for the past years that you come in here 5 days a week.

Sometimes I hate my job lol
 
Tobes said:
As to oposed to not walking into a pub because they don't want to breathe in smoke? You're reasoning makes no sense.
Click to expand...

That's the landlords problem, and entirely within the landlord's power to resolve. Unfortunately the government has taken it upon itself to force property holders to behave in a certain way...
 
It's a good thing and should be extended. I don't find the places smelling of BO and farts on the downside you struggle to get into some pubs by the sheer amount of people that crowed the doors to have a smoke also outdoor seating gets taken over by smokers which is a pain/
 
Skyfall said:
The opposite is also true though: If people want to walk out of a pub to have a smoke that's "their" problem.
Click to expand...

No its not, not if they've been forced to.

Dolph has the right argument on this; the interfering Government should stay out. I'm sure this ban has caused some pubs to lose business as well.

As to oposed to not walking into a pub because they don't want to breathe in smoke? You're reasoning makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Well that's what I do...

If people want to kill themselves in some cancer room and drink to their heart's content, there is nothing that should prohibit their right to do that. I neither care if it shortens their lives nor am I interested. I don't go to pubs myself, I hate them, smoking ban or not.
 
Last edited:
I don't get it. A non smoker who didn't go into said pub because of smokers can now go into the pub.

A smoker still has the option to go into the pub. They don't NEED to smoke inside the pub. You can give me the "social" crap all you want. Smoking doesn't make your conversation any more interesting.
 
It should be extended, I used to smoke and had no problem with stepping outside to a smoking area to smoke, but now that i've stopped smoking i'm also happy that I don't have to breathe it in or smell it strongly in a pub.
 
Tobes said:
I don't get it. A non smoker who didn't go into said pub because of smokers can now go into the pub.

A smoker still has the option to go into the pub. They don't NEED to smoke inside the pub. You can give me the "social" crap all you want. Smoking doesn't make your conversation any more interesting.
Click to expand...

A non-smoker didn't need to stay away. And if enough did, then the market would address it and create more no-smoking zones. The fact that it did not shows that people didn't stay away.
 
Tobes said:
I don't get it. A non smoker who didn't go into said pub because of smokers can now go into the pub.
Click to expand...

They could go into the pub before the ban...

A smoker still has the option to go into the pub. They don't NEED to smoke inside the pub. You can give me the "social" crap all you want. Smoking doesn't make your conversation any more interesting.
Click to expand...

What if the smoker wants to smoke in the pub? 'Need' is an irrelevant argument. There is lots of things we don't need.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom