| JoxerTheDeityPirate 27.04.2007 15:37 |
one of my local pubs,the peruvian arms, has petitioned the Peruvian embassy in London asking for a diplomatic status to become part of Peru. If successful it will be able to carry on allowing smoking on the premises whilst the rest of England brings in the smoking ban in a few weeks time. this cheekiness could only happen in Cornwall.thankfully. pirates to the end :-] |
| Freya is quietly judging you. 27.04.2007 19:21 |
Wish they'd do that here. Well actually I don't. The smoking ban's a good thing. I guess. |
| The Real Wizard 28.04.2007 00:27 |
Hahaha... I am totally anti-smoking, but that's just hilarious. If you guys need a place to smoke and that's the only way, then go for it! |
| Sweetie 28.04.2007 00:34 |
Smoking's bad for you, it means you go all black inside and swell up like a balloon, my dad says that only bad people smoke (Anyone else watch Black Books?) |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 05:56 |
i dont go in there all that often but a mate of mine does and says that they are now learning the peruvian national anthem just in case they need it to gain diplomatic status.they sing it at last orders.if i get a chance i shall pop in for a pint to see it for myself,i wonder if they play the anthem on panpipes? you honestly could not make this up,its actually made it onto BBC tv news now yesterday.lol |
| user name 28.04.2007 15:13 |
<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Wish they'd do that here. Well actually I don't. The smoking ban's a good thing. I guess.A smoking ban in public places is good and right. A smoking ban in a privately owned pub, restaurant, etc. is an abhorrent infringement of rights. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 15:39 |
<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote:its going to kill the pub trade in my village.you cant even enjoy a smoke on the patio outside coz its still part of the premises.<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Wish they'd do that here. Well actually I don't. The smoking ban's a good thing. I guess.A smoking ban in public places is good and right. A smoking ban in a privately owned pub, restaurant, etc. is an abhorrent infringement of rights. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 28.04.2007 16:33 |
joxerthemightypirate wrote: its going to kill the pub trade in my village.you cant even enjoy a smoke on the patio outside coz its still part of the premises.That's what everyone thought here in New York. It didn't happen. The transition from smoke filled restaurants and bars to smoke-free restaurants and bars went smoothly. I've been in the wedding business for a lot of years and caterers thought they'd receive a lot of heartache because of the no-smoking laws. They haven't. Even photographers - the venue I'm involved in - when Bridal Parties would come into the studio for their portraits, they'd be sitting there in a cloud of their own smoke. Smooth as can be it went from that to completely smoke-free. There's always going to be the occasional argument, but for the most part, the switch was easy... and businesses that were here well before the ban are still here and thriving. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 17:51 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote:nice replyjoxerthemightypirate wrote: its going to kill the pub trade in my village.you cant even enjoy a smoke on the patio outside coz its still part of the premises.That's what everyone thought here in New York. It didn't happen. The transition from smoke filled restaurants and bars to smoke-free restaurants and bars went smoothly. I've been in the wedding business for a lot of years and caterers thought they'd receive a lot of heartache because of the no-smoking laws. They haven't. Even photographers - the venue I'm involved in - when Bridal Parties would come into the studio for their portraits, they'd be sitting there in a cloud of their own smoke. Smooth as can be it went from that to completely smoke-free. There's always going to be the occasional argument, but for the most part, the switch was easy... and businesses that were here well before the ban are still here and thriving. theres only 3 pubs and 3 restaurants in the village.i live in a small cornish fishing port,so places like these are the hub of the local society.when the ban starts i honestly think that it will be hard for the businesses to survive because people are not going to go to these places during the winter months when the weather is bad knowing that if they want a amoke they are going to have to stand out in the street to have one.i feel the only business that will flourish will be the off licence which sells beer cheaper than the pub naturally but gives people the option of drinking at home knowing they can also enjoy a smoke in the dry as well.the local economy and jobs are going to suffer badly,and its bad enough now as we have to survive on tourism for a living which is a seasonal thing as it is. |
| user name 28.04.2007 18:14 |
Regardless of whether or not it will hurt businesses is irrelevant. It's still morally reprehensible to dictate that a business cannot freely operate as they wish. It should be up to businesses to decide whether or not they should allow smoking, and no one else should have any power over this. What's next? No smoking in your own house? |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 18:21 |
<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Regardless of whether or not it will hurt businesses is irrelevant. It's still morally reprehensible to dictate that a business cannot freely operate as they wish. It should be up to businesses to decide whether or not they should allow smoking, and no one else should have any power over this. What's next? No smoking in your own house?its heading that way isn't it. ironically i am still allowed to gamble on the fruit machines in a pub,even though gambling can lead to an addiction and i will be allowed to buy cigs whilst in the pub but not allowed to smoke them in it. it should as you say,be up to the licencee to choose if they want smoking on their premises or not. |
| Freya is quietly judging you. 28.04.2007 18:30 |
Apparently when the smoking ban comes in, smoking will also be banned in cars, as it is in Scotland (or so I've heard) which doesn't make too much sense to me. When does it come into place anyway? I know it's July, but is there a date yet? |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 28.04.2007 18:31 |
<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Apparently when the smoking ban comes in, smoking will also be banned in cars, as it is in Scotland (or so I've heard) which doesn't make too much sense to me. When does it come into place anyway? I know it's July, but is there a date yet?July 1st i think? |
| magicalfreddiemercury 28.04.2007 18:33 |
<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Apparently when the smoking ban comes in, smoking will also be banned in cars, as it is in Scotland (or so I've heard) which doesn't make too much sense to me.Not sure about the laws in Scotland, but over here, they tossed around the idea of banning smoking in cars while children were present. Maybe if you're alone or with a 'consenting adult' it's okay? |
| Freya is quietly judging you. 28.04.2007 18:47 |
joxerthemightypirate wrote:Right. Well on June 31st, actually the 30th, because to my knowledge, the 31st of June doesn't exist, I'm going into my local pub with many a packet of Marlboro lights and chain smoking them while crying into my pint and thinking about the proximity to the last Harry Potter books release date.<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Apparently when the smoking ban comes in, smoking will also be banned in cars, as it is in Scotland (or so I've heard) which doesn't make too much sense to me. When does it come into place anyway? I know it's July, but is there a date yet?July 1st i think? magicalfreddiemercury wrote:From what I've heard they're actually going to put a complete ban on smoking in cars whether it's just the driver in the car or not. I'm not fully sure of the reasons<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: Apparently when the smoking ban comes in, smoking will also be banned in cars, as it is in Scotland (or so I've heard) which doesn't make too much sense to me.Not sure about the laws in Scotland, but over here, they tossed around the idea of banning smoking in cars while children were present. Maybe if you're alone or with a 'consenting adult' it's okay? |
| AspiringPhilosophe 28.04.2007 22:43 |
Haha! That's great! Personally, I would love smoke free pubs and bars...that means you wouldn't have to fabreeze the hell out of your jacket and shower before you go to bed when you are out for the night. Smokers will still smoke though...they'll just have to go out in the rain and snow and cold to do it! ;-) And us non-smokers will laugh at them while they shiver so badly they can't get the cigarette to their lips |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 29.04.2007 06:44 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Haha! That's great! Personally, I would love smoke free pubs and bars...that means you wouldn't have to fabreeze the hell out of your jacket and shower before you go to bed when you are out for the night. Smokers will still smoke though...they'll just have to go out in the rain and snow and cold to do it! ;-) And us non-smokers will laugh at them while they shiver so badly they can't get the cigarette to their lipsi would sneeze in your hair if you did :-] |
| magicalfreddiemercury 29.04.2007 08:08 |
CMU HistoryGirl wrote: Haha! That's great! Personally, I would love smoke free pubs and bars...that means you wouldn't have to fabreeze the hell out of your jacket and shower before you go to bed when you are out for the night. Smokers will still smoke though...they'll just have to go out in the rain and snow and cold to do it! ;-) And us non-smokers will laugh at them while they shiver so badly they can't get the cigarette to their lipsThis entire post made me laugh aloud. Love it. :-D |
| Mr Mercury 29.04.2007 11:49 |
In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter. One way that pubs and clubs get round the smoking ban is to set up smoking areas that are not enclosed. By that I mean they dont have 4 walls and a roof. Most of them have heating as well for those poor souls who have to suffer the cold all for the sake of a ciggy. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 29.04.2007 14:19 |
<font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter. One way that pubs and clubs get round the smoking ban is to set up smoking areas that are not enclosed. By that I mean they dont have 4 walls and a roof. Most of them have heating as well for those poor souls who have to suffer the cold all for the sake of a ciggy.i dont think they are allowing smoking areas in England otherwise it wouldnt be so much of a gripe with the publicans and customers.i think its a total ban,i might be wrong though.maybe someone has more info here? |
| magicalfreddiemercury 29.04.2007 14:30 |
<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Regardless of whether or not it will hurt businesses is irrelevant. It's still morally reprehensible to dictate that a business cannot freely operate as they wish. It should be up to businesses to decide whether or not they should allow smoking, and no one else should have any power over this.I disagree. Surprised? :) Of course businesses should be able to operate as they wish, but that extends only to the business itself. They can decide what product they will sell, what uniforms their personnel will wear, what hours they'll maintain, etc. But when it comes to public safety, there are rules/laws to follow. They cannot opt to forgo the fire extinguisher or multiple safety exits. They cannot serve liquor to minors, nor can they allow animals other than guide dogs into their shop (when food service is involved). While these businesses are privately owned and operated, they're open to the public and that's why these laws can be enforced. Just like this: <font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter.Now, if private clubs - like country clubs for example, where you have to pay a fee to belong - are forced to follow these rules, then I'm inclined to agree with you. But for businesses open to the public, I think they are well within their rights to pass and enforce smoking restrictions. |
| Freya is quietly judging you. 29.04.2007 14:59 |
joxerthehippypirate wrote:I found some information about it here -<font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter. One way that pubs and clubs get round the smoking ban is to set up smoking areas that are not enclosed. By that I mean they dont have 4 walls and a roof. Most of them have heating as well for those poor souls who have to suffer the cold all for the sake of a ciggy.I found some information about it here - i dont think they are allowing smoking areas in England otherwise it wouldnt be so much of a gripe with the publicans and customers.i think its a total ban,i might be wrong though.maybe someone has more info here? link It says smoking is allowed outdoors and in places considered 'homes', such as hotels. I wonder if this means one can still smoke in an outdoors area of a restaurant.. Probably not, on reflection. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 29.04.2007 15:35 |
<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote:no one cant still smoke in an outdoors area of restaurants after the start date and yes private clubs are having to follow these rules toojoxerthehippypirate wrote:I found some information about it here - link It says smoking is allowed outdoors and in places considered 'homes', such as hotels. I wonder if this means one can still smoke in an outdoors area of a restaurant.. Probably not, on reflection.<font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter. One way that pubs and clubs get round the smoking ban is to set up smoking areas that are not enclosed. By that I mean they dont have 4 walls and a roof. Most of them have heating as well for those poor souls who have to suffer the cold all for the sake of a ciggy.I found some information about it here - i dont think they are allowing smoking areas in England otherwise it wouldnt be so much of a gripe with the publicans and customers.i think its a total ban,i might be wrong though.maybe someone has more info here? |
| user name 29.04.2007 16:22 |
magicalfreddiemercury wrote:You make a really good point, and I almost agree with you. However, when it comes to smoking, it's very clear that smokers would prefer one type of establishment, and non-smokers would prefer another. The businesses that allow smoking would attract one type, and businesses that ban smoking would attract the other. As consumers, we have the ability to dine wherever we wish. If we don't like something that goes on in one place, we don't go there.<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Regardless of whether or not it will hurt businesses is irrelevant. It's still morally reprehensible to dictate that a business cannot freely operate as they wish. It should be up to businesses to decide whether or not they should allow smoking, and no one else should have any power over this.I disagree. Surprised? :) Of course businesses should be able to operate as they wish, but that extends only to the business itself. They can decide what product they will sell, what uniforms their personnel will wear, what hours they'll maintain, etc. But when it comes to public safety, there are rules/laws to follow. They cannot opt to forgo the fire extinguisher or multiple safety exits. They cannot serve liquor to minors, nor can they allow animals other than guide dogs into their shop (when food service is involved). While these businesses are privately owned and operated, they're open to the public and that's why these laws can be enforced. Just like this:<font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter.Now, if private clubs - like country clubs for example, where you have to pay a fee to belong - are forced to follow these rules, then I'm inclined to agree with you. But for businesses open to the public, I think they are well within their rights to pass and enforce smoking restrictions. Measures as to safety are almost never a personal preference, and they don't restrict the freedom of anyone. Being reasonably safe is one thing. Restricting an activity due to a preference is another. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 29.04.2007 17:38 |
<b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: The businesses that allow smoking would attract one type, and businesses that ban smoking would attract the other. As consumers, we have the ability to dine wherever we wish. If we don't like something that goes on in one place, we don't go there.I took my daughter to Williamsburg, Virginia last summer. Apparently, in Virginia, they don't have the same non-smoking laws as we have in New York. In one theme restaurant, we were seated beside a group of smokers. I could have requested to have our seats moved, but there were other smokers in the place so I doubt it would have helped. I suppose we could have left, but we'd made reservations and were excited about having dinner in this 'period' place. Point is, the smoke affected our enjoyment of our meal. It was clear it affected the enjoyment of many other diners as well. This place appealed to smoker and nonsmoker alike. The owner would lose half her/his business if s/he had to decide which group to serve. It hardly seems practical. Or profitable. <b><font color=666600>Music Man wrote: Measures as to safety are almost never a personal preference, and they don't restrict the freedom of anyone. Being reasonably safe is one thing. Restricting an activity due to a preference is another.Well... it might be the smoker's preference, but the non-smoker doesn't have much say in it if s/he's sitting next to one. It can be argued that allowing smoking restricts the freedom of non-smokers. However, a smoker is still allowed to smoke - just not within the establishment. Frustrating for the smoker, yes, but they still have a choice whereas smoking inside eliminates the choice of non-smokers. And... there's a larger issue at stake here. Health. And not just health, but health insurance. Second-hand smoke has proved to be more dangerous than previously acknowledged. Spouses and children of smokers are suffering and dying due to the second-hand smoke they breathed for years. If a guy is smoking next to me, his smoke is directly affecting my health. And then there's health insurance. The more cases of lung cancer, emphysema and other smoking-related illnesses there are, the higher the medical expense. This affects everyone who has a monthly health care premium to pay. The more money insurance companies have to pay out, the more they charge the policy holders, which makes it harder and harder to afford simple coverage. Smoking affects everyone in a negative way. Banning it in public enclosed spaces is not as much a restriction on freedom as is permitting it. |
| user name 29.04.2007 22:19 |
I don't think there's a right to go into someone else's (a business's) property and not inhale smoke. There's really no infringement of rights there. Just like a business has the right to kick you out of the joint if you do smoke. Very importantly, I'm arguing for the rights of the business - not those of smokers. |
| great king rat 1138 30.04.2007 03:45 |
joxerthehippypirate wrote:According to the regultaions which are freely available on link, smoking will be banned in 'enclosed and substantially enclosed public places'. This means anywhere with a roof and more than two walls. There is absolutely nothing stopping people from smoking outside in beer gardens etc unless the owner decides to impose their own ban. This was the same definition that was put in place in Wales at the start of April, and things seem to be going pretty well there so far. Please try to get your facts right before sounding off!<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote:no one cant still smoke in an outdoors area of restaurants after the start date and yes private clubs are having to follow these rules toojoxerthehippypirate wrote:I found some information about it here - link It says smoking is allowed outdoors and in places considered 'homes', such as hotels. I wonder if this means one can still smoke in an outdoors area of a restaurant.. Probably not, on reflection.<font color=red>Mr Mercury</font color> wrote: In Scotland, the only vehicles you are not allowed to smoke in is buses, taxi's and trains - in other words public service vehicles. Privately owned cars is an entirely different matter. One way that pubs and clubs get round the smoking ban is to set up smoking areas that are not enclosed. By that I mean they dont have 4 walls and a roof. Most of them have heating as well for those poor souls who have to suffer the cold all for the sake of a ciggy.I found some information about it here - i dont think they are allowing smoking areas in England otherwise it wouldnt be so much of a gripe with the publicans and customers.i think its a total ban,i might be wrong though.maybe someone has more info here? As for the ban killing trade, in Ireland, Scotland and (so far) in Wales, trade has generally gone up in pubs and clubs, as a huge number of people previously chose not to go to places where they would be exposed to large amounts of second hand smoke. If people want to smoke, they can always nip outside (a fact which has meant that producers of patio-heaters are facing record profits in England this year!)and if it helps a few people decide that they may as well have a crack at giving up, all the better. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 30.04.2007 08:58 |
great king rat 1138 wrote: As for the ban killing trade, in Ireland, Scotland and (so far) in Wales, trade has generally gone up in pubs and clubs, as a huge number of people previously chose not to go to places where they would be exposed to large amounts of second hand smoke. If people want to smoke, they can always nip outside (a fact which has meant that producers of patio-heaters are facing record profits in England this year!)and if it helps a few people decide that they may as well have a crack at giving up, all the better.Excellent post. What you said about how things are going in Ireland, Scotland and Wales mirrors how things have gone in New York since the ban was imposed. Businesses were not paralyzed, no one was excluded from an establishment, and in fact, outdoor areas were beautified in order to attract and accommodate smokers. It's the new norm and no one seems all that put out about it. |
| 7Innuendo7 01.05.2007 07:16 |
In the last few weeks Mary & I went to The Black Horse pub, West End in London -- definitely smoking going on (and copius amounts of Guinness!) -- likewise O'Neills, Irish pub down the street from the Earl's Court tube station, where a 'non-smoking' section exists in front of the fireplace! :P The Clachan Pub in Drymen, Scotland, has a separate bar and lounge/restaurant area, lovely tartan carpet, but since we kept to the lounge I don't think there was much smoking going on at 6pm. However the Tennent's went well with the Scottish steak pie. Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. The Oak Tree Inn in Balmaha, Scotland, didn't have any smoking inside or on the patio outside, but there were a lot of families with young kids. Maybe later in the evening, dunno. They did have a fabulous bottle of Glengoyne to make my feet forget about hiking the Millenium Forest and Inchcailloch Island tho :D My guess is like here in West Virginia, some inspectors don't heavily enforce the reg, in a bar folks will smoke what they want when they can or until the owner gets personally invested in the ban. Monongalia County went smokeless some time ago, and it hasn't really impacted the drinking business as much as cigarette machines have disappeared... |