cigarette ban for anyone born after 2000

[Mich the Tester]

So you think the smoking ban in pubs was a good thing, or liberal kill-joys messing with our rights?

Liberals banning stuff? I is confoozd now.

[d000hg]

Liberals banning stuff? I is confoozd now.

Probably commies too.

[hyperD]

So you think the smoking ban in pubs was a good thing, or liberal kill-joys messing with our rights?

I would have preferred if it was optional for the landlord who knew his clientèle, which I believe was the original intent of the legislation, so that smokers and non-smokers could go to their preferred pubs or pubs that served food.

But no, the Bansturbators forced it on every pub, leaving us with the present situation.

Still, doesn't bother me, I don't smoke but I do like waving and puffing on my e-cig in restaurants and pubs, getting right up the nose of the Righteous.

[d000hg]

But no, the Bansturbators forced it on every pub, leaving us with the present situation.

I'm exceeding glad; it's one of the best changes in pubs/restaurants I can remember... but purely due to the smell, not the health implications!

Personally a smoking room seems fine to me rather than making them go and loiter outside the door so you have to run a gauntlet of builders and chavs to get in

I still remember being forced to travel in the smoking carriage on trains as a kid, maybe that just scarred be a bit.

[speling bee]

I would have preferred if it was optional for the landlord who knew his clientèle, which I believe was the original intent of the legislation, so that smokers and non-smokers could go to their preferred pubs or pubs that served food.

But no, the Bansturbators forced it on every pub, leaving us with the present situation.

Still, doesn't bother me, I don't smoke but I do like waving and puffing on my e-cig in restaurants and pubs, getting right up the nose of the Righteous.

It is about employee protection. Employees should not have to work with harmful substances if this can be easily avoided. I don't care about customers. They can come or go as they please.

[Scoobos]

Again what happened to freedom of choice?

There is no choice with addiction.

I am an ex smoker, and it took 5 years and nearly gave me a nervous breakdown to quit. It was (for me) the biggest achievement of my life.

It hasn't made me a "holier than thou" quitter though, but it has opened my eyes to just how much death, injury and disability is happening in order to feed taxes and the tobacco companies.

I reckon, if you smoke you should get a card to say so and be able to buy cigs until your death - but if we are saying we need to ban it in all public places, then why not just ban anyone new from taking it up?


utopian I know, we'll just have smuggling of it perhaps.

It just grinds my gears to see smokers who have no idea of what its like to be a non smoker , complain that their rights are being infringed by others protecting theirs; whilst the non smokers try and dictate what a smoker can do in his own property , car or even shared space...

Pubs are ruined post smoking ban IMO.

[Scoobos]

No. Ideally we'd have a system where smokers don't pay for the healthcare of non-smokers (which is what happens now).

+1.

In other news, have you started again mate?

[hyperD]

It is about employee protection. Employees should not have to work with harmful substances if this can be easily avoided. I don't care about customers. They can come or go as they please.

You are probably right SB, although the question does arise as to whether the employee would have a choice to work in a smoke-filled pub or one that does not, which would, I hope, be made clear in the interview. A case of choice, which through the recent authoritarian legislation, has been forcibly sidelined.

>> I don't care about customers

Unfortunately, the pub landlord doesn't have the fiscal luxury to sit behind that principal.

The irony of all this, as is the raison d'être of the birth of the pubs and the inevitable causations of bansturbation, is that many people have been effectively evicted from the pub causing the decline and livelihood of said business, and so they have decided to gather in like-minded fellow's houses to share a drink and a smoke as before the ban, and thus avoiding the legislation.

They call them "Smokey-Drinkies".

In days gone past, these were called public houses.

Which eventually morphed into what we now call, er, Pubs.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

[d000hg]

Giving a 18yo dullard a choice between a job or being too 'pretty' to 'get a bit smoky' is not about choice, it's about exploitation of people who don't know what they're signing up for.

[Robinho]

So you think the smoking ban in pubs was a good thing, or liberal kill-joys messing with our rights?

It should really be down to the individual pub whether you can smoke in it or not. People who didn't like smoke could then choose to go to an establishment where you can't smoke inside.