The smoking ban has killed our night!

[xenon]

There's a jazz pub down the road from here. It actually closed down for a while. Not being a massive fan of modern jazz, I never paid to sit in the bar with the band. Most peple I knew would go in the saloon bar where you could still hear the music but have a conversation as well. The hardcore jazzers stayed round the other side. Think it's a similar thing.

 

[pogofish]

So you keep saying but you seem a bit short on detail on this one.

What is indisputable though is that the vast majority of people in the UK wanted a smoking ban of some description, even if you don't like how it was implemented.

I don't think you'll find similar nationwide support for a 'stop drinking in pubs' campaign, or whatever it is you're alluding to.

You don't really have to look very hard to find someone kicking-up a fuss about some aspect of someone else's life & demanding intervention, do you? The consultations on drink-control started in Scotland within 3 months of the Smoking ban & when, not if was the gist of it & yes, there has not been much said. Even SHAAP toned-down the website language as well. I wonder why?

No, the vast majority were at best indifferent or prefered a more equitable solution - I've pointed you at the Scottish vote & IIRC it was not much different south of the border.

ASH were thought of as a bunch of nutters 20-odd years ago but things changed once they got some financial clout & political lobbyists behind them. The same lot, RWJF (to name but one of the big drug/medical company owning think tanks) are now going after alcohol with the same proven formula (& a lot more money). Lets see what the next decade or two brings?

 

[pogofish]

Oh, and I never saw any of these non-smoking pubs or even non-smoking sections in pubs. (I tend to avoid Witherspoons, etc...)

Plenty of them & you didn't always have to go for the chains. FWIW, Wetherspoons renaged on many of their non-smoking claims anyway.

 

[jæd]

Plenty of them & you didn't always have to go for the chains. FWIW, Wetherspoons renaged on many of their non-smoking claims anyway.

So how come I never saw one non-smoking pub...?

 

[Roadkill]

So how come I never saw one non-smoking pub...?

Eh? I know of several pubs that were non-smoking before the ban, and plenty more that had non-smoking rooms.

 

[pogofish]

So how come I never saw one non-smoking pub...?

I suppose some places were better than others. Either way, they existed & is some numbers.

 

[jæd]

I suppose some places were better than others. Either way, they existed & is some numbers.

Yep...? I'm still surprised that someone who tended to go out in Central + West London managed to not find any at all... I also don't recall any in the City either.

Hid them well, didn't they...

 

[STFC]

Yep...? I'm still surprised that someone who tended to go out in Central + West London managed to not find any at all... I also don't recall any in the City either.

Hid them well, didn't they...

There was one on the corner of Threadneedle Street and Old Broad Street, it always seemed busy when I walked by. It's the only one I remember seeing though.

 

[editor]

No, the vast majority were at best indifferent or prefered a more equitable solution...

There was no practical "equitable solution" that wouldn't have involved staff being forced to work in smoking pubs. This point was discussed at some considerable length in the other smoking thread. If you wish to pursue this point, I suggest you take it up there.

Forcing people to inhale other people's toxic fumes while they're in public places will soon be seen as being as archaic, dangerous and as intrusive as smoking on tube trains.

No one's stopping you smoking and I'd be against a total smoking ban, but all this legislation does is make you act responsibly to others and preserve their right not to be endangered by your fumes. And that's a good thing, IMO.

 

[pogofish]

There was no practical "equitable solution" that wouldn't have involved staff being forced to work in smoking pubs.

Forcing people to inhale other people's toxic fumes while they're in public places

No one's stopping you smoking and I'd be against a total smoking ban, but all this legislation does is make you act responsibly to others

I'd disagree but we have spent too much time on that one as well. Remember, when they finally got round to canvassing them, the answer was no to the ban.

Will we see the whole range of other toxic fumes we are exposed to reduced anytime soon? Smoking was just one of many.

Smokers have for a very long time now been used to only lighting-up in a very limited range of public places. - Quite responsable enough?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Fuck me, I can't believe people are still arguing over this.

The health twats won, end of really