Ban on "Smoking" in licensed premises/Pubs etc, Right or Wrong ??..

sceptre

Originally posted by Paddy20
yet I have too pose the question again which you conveniently avoided answering. Which drug causes more social harm and is responsible for more avoidable deaths per annum.

I didn't avoid answering. I demonstrated clearly that it was a stupid and irrelevant question, an attempt to divert the thrust of the discussion - alcohol consumption isn't the main focus of the thread, though I'll happily discuss it elsewhere at any time.

Incidentally the answer is two-pronged. Drinking alcohol causes more social harm (this is an opinion), smoking causes more avoidable deaths per annum (this is a verifiable fact). We take steps to attempt to curb the effects of alcohol consumption (the violence, the DUIs), I mentioned this. We are now taking steps to attempt to curb the affects of cigarette consumption (the unnecessary deaths as a result of smoke in enclosed publically-accessible places), I mentioned this. The answer doesn't matter though because it was an irrelevant question, as I demonstrated in my initial answer. Go read it.

Paddy20

Lukin Black,

I would hazard a guess that employees who wish to work in a smoke free environment are free to choose where they work. Ironically, many bar staff who also happen to be smokers have for along time been banned from smoking while on duty behind the bar!.

As for me bringing up the smoking - V - alcohol arguement. I believe that in our society at present the only place left for smokers to be able to relax with a cigarrette and a pint is in licensed premises. Therefore, they are inextricably linked and it is hypocritical for any Government to so blatantly attack the smokers so viciously while still practically ignoring a greater social evil.

Personally, I would support any initiative that is sensibly and sensitively introduced over an acceptable period of time in order to give people the opportunity to adapt and be educated as to the benefits of giving up smoking!, and also in very many cases alcohol abuse which leads to alcoholism. For the good of our society as a whole. However, Mr Martins jackboot tactics will only serve to annoy the population, and the consequences could be unpleasant in the extreme both for him and the Fianna Fail party come the next election.

P.

sceptre

Originally posted by Paddy20
it is hypocritical for any Government to so blatantly attack the smokers so viciously while still practically ignoring a greater social evil.

Doesn't make it any less worthy a decision based solely on its own merits. Heaven forfend that we should take the trouble to prosecute house burglars and pickpockets while there are still murderers, rapists and tax dodgers on the loose.

Lukin Black

Originally posted by Paddy20
I would hazard a guess that employees who wish to work in a smoke free environment are free to choose where they work.

I refer you to what I wrote a couple of posts ago:

What's in question is the right of employees to work in a smoke free environment. And quit the rubbish about finding work elsewhere, it's not as though anybody with a job is going to give it up in this economic environment.

Originally posted by Paddy20
Ironically, many bar staff who also happen to be smokers have for along time been banned from smoking while on duty behind the bar!.

Nothing ironic about it. What makes them any more special than office workers who can't smoke in the office?

Originally posted by Paddy20
As for me bringing up the smoking - V - alcohol arguement. I believe that in our society at present the only place left for smokers to be able to relax with a cigarrette and a pint is in licensed premises. Therefore, they are inextricably linked and it is hypocritical for any Government to so blatantly attack the smokers so viciously while still practically ignoring a greater social evil.

Paddy, first of all they can smoke and relax at home. Secondly, you're just after calling alcohol a "greater social evil" right after you say "the only place left for smokers to be able to relax with a cigarrette and a pint is in licensed premises"? Therefore with your logic, a smoking ban that will, according to many rather biased sources, close pubs, is actually helping cure the "greater social evil"?

sceptre

Originally posted by Lukin Black
What's in question is the right of employees to work in a smoke free environment. And quit the rubbish about finding work elsewhere, it's not as though anybody with a job is going to give it up in this economic environment.

You're (of course) absolutely right there Lukin. When we decided that existing health and safety measures on construction sites and up scaffolding weren't enough to save lives a number of years ago, no-one suggested that we tell the men in hard hats that they could always sod off and work elsewhere if they didn't like it. We took measures to make sure their safety in the workplace was improved and will continue to improve these safety features and regulations. Saying "well, you choose where to work" is a cop-out even greater than saying "well, you choose where to drink"

Paddy20

SIZE=3]Re:- Ban on "Smoking" in licensed premises/Pubs etc, Right or Wrong ??..[/SIZE]

OK, Back on topic. Even as a non-smoker, and non-drinker!. I still voted that the all inclusive BAN is wrong. That is my final comment.

P.

simu

I'm in favour of the ban.

It will take more alot more than a ban on smoking to keep Irish ppl out of pubs.:)

The ban would also reduce the number of ppl who only smoke "socially" i.e. when they go to the pub.

It's not valid comparing M. Martin's plan with the prohibition of alcohol in the US as he is not banning the consumption of cigaretttes in *all* locations - ppl can still smoke at home or out in the open air.

Lukin Black

Paddy,

I'll hold off on any remarks about who took the thread off topic* , but before you leave for your self-imposed silence on this matter, I'd just like to know if you frequent licensed establishments. Your odd position as a non-smoking teetotaller championing the rights of smokers to smoke as they have a drink is rather intriguing.

* Yes, that's a contradiction in terms, and yes it was on purpose

Paddy20

Lukin,

As a matter of courtesy. I feel obliged to reply too your question:- Quote; "If you frequent licensed establishments" end quote.

Very, very rarely nowadays!. I am not as young as I was and around my area in Donegal finding a quiet peaceful pub where one can completely relax seems to be becoming something of a rarity. Crowds and loud music are no longer my scene, which I hope you will understand.

Now, I think it would be best for this thread if I make no further comments, and leave the poll to those who wish to utilise their right to vote, and the posts to those who wish to comment further. As I do believe that the - thread starter - should in fairness to all, try not to become overly involved in the other associated problems which will spring up from this contentious issue.

Regards.

Paddy20;)

Moriarty

Originally posted by Mossy Monk
if Micheál Martin is all against smoking why doesn't he ban cigarettes altogether? he is an idiot who has the health service in a shocking state

i'm against the ban

If cigerettes were banned, the trade would simply go to the black market where youd end up financing the provos or organised crime. Prohibition doesnt work. Removing the areas where people are allowed to legally smoke, on the other hand, will most likely lead to a number of smokers quitting which can only be a good thing. Even if not a single smoker quit, it would still be a good idea.

nadir

I smoke. But screw the tobacco companies, bastards, ban it. Well at least in places which promote the smoking culture. i.e pubs

IMO, legalise all drugs apart from hard addictive stuff, i.e heroin, crack, cigarretes. But monitor it, Provide proper education and support. This would seriously damage the underground scene, removing the nasty elements. Basically accept the problem is there and try to deal with it rationally, in an understaning way.
Simply.... prohibition does NOT work. Its arrogant, ignorant and forces the problem underground. You can only stick you head in the sand for so long.

bonkey

Originally posted by Paddy20
Is our nanny state, turning in to a dictatorship, or what?.

Why is it every time the government passes a law, that some people start on about "dictatorships".

I can understand people opposing this law, but these "our nanny state is a dictatorship" style of comments are about as useful in a debate/discussion of this nature as "is our government turning into Nazis" or "Why don't they just bring back slavery while they're at it".

Why don't you go and learn a bit about what that particular term (dictatorship) means and then you might just realise how ridiculous that comment is.

Or maybe I mistook your originial intention. Maybe you aren't actually interested in having a reasonable discussion about this, and only started the thread so you could go off on a rant about the government, somewhat divorced from reality.

If thats the case, find another soapbox.

jc

Boston

Originally posted by sceptre
I've seen it enforced quite a few times. Now (I'm not being smart here because I don't know how old you are), do you remember before the regulations were passed banning smoking in cinemas? The whole point of my bringing it up was that it was rather common before that, people did declare that they'd stop going, cinema owners said they'd close. Smoking in cinemas was far more common than on buses (which fell foul of the same regulation). Even in cinemas that had non-smoking sections there was a wispy cloud all around the room. It's been 13 years and it's a lot less common at worst, at best virtually non-existant. That's the change that the regulations brought on smokey cinemas.

(edit: That's probably all I have to say on the cinema issue to be honest. I'm just bringing it in to illustrate that we've already had this fight within living memory in another location. I'll obviously accept that for most people, the pub is far far more important than the flicks in their daily lives and hence affects more people)

20 years ago there where 4 cinemas in my local area, now theres one, not saying that entirely down to a smoking bad, but i know of a few people who don't go because they can't light up.

bonkey

Originally posted by Boston
20 years ago there where 4 cinemas in my local area, now theres one, not saying that entirely down to a smoking bad, but i know of a few people who don't go because they can't light up.

So what?

When plastic bags were made expensive and so on, the plastic bag manufacturers were all complaining loudly about how it would ruin their business. Should we have stopped then and said "oh - well - people might lose jobs. Better leave the bags in".

Or what about when laws were passed about BSE or the livestock trade in general. Again, people were facing job losses....should we have said "better not pass a law...might cause some extra unemployment and that would never do".

I'm not going to continue....but suffice it to say that these are two small examples from hundreds of laws that our governments have passed which have had (or at least where it has been argued that it might/would have) negative impacts on employment on the specific sectors they have targetted. Were all these laws wrong?

Laws are not just about employment. I know its a shocker, but its true....sometimes there are other factors at play.

As for my smoking mates....they rage and they rant about the injustice of it all....just as they did when they were told they couldn't smoke at their desk (and it wasn't cause Mary across the partition was pregnant).Just as it hasn't forced them to give up their dayjob, however, nor their ability to go to the cinema, travel on buses, planes, etc. etc. etc., they reckon that they can adjust once they have to.

The funny thing is...most of them don't even associate beer with smoking. They associate being in a pub with other smokers with smoking. They'll quite happily open a tinny at home without lighting a ciggie. Indeed, most people I know who quit smoking, had to stay out of pubs for a few months.....but they didn't have to give up drink. I don't know of a single ex-smoker who has given up beer because they couldn't have it without a smoke. I know one who gave up coffee for 6 months, and I know several who did a similar "publess" stint, but that was because the pub was filled with other smokers and nothing else. Its hard to see them having a problem with a pub with no smokers.

jc

Now you work it out.......

jc

Meh

Originally posted by Boston
20 years ago there where 4 cinemas in my local area, now theres one, not saying that entirely down to a smoking bad, but i know of a few people who don't go because they can't light up.

But I'll bet that one cinema has more than four screens. And cinema admissions in Ireland have been rising ever since smoking was banned:
http://www.obs.coe.int/about/oea/pr/mif2001.pdf

Cinema visits in Ireland (in millions) between 1996 and 2000:
11.48 11.49 12.39 12.45 14.88

We now have the highest rate of movie-going in Europe. Why do you assume that a smoking ban will ruin the pub business, when all the evidence is to the contrary?

literati

When plastic bags were made expensive and so on, the plastic bag manufacturers were all complaining loudly about how it would ruin their business. Should we have stopped then and said "oh - well - people might lose jobs. Better leave the bags in".

Ever try smoking a plastic bag? It's a totally different issue. Why not just tax pubs who wish to allow smoking?

sceptre

Originally posted by literati
Why not just tax pubs who wish to allow smoking?

Full-circle again.

Because it's a health and safety issue, not a financial one.

bonkey

Originally posted by literati
Ever try smoking a plastic bag? It's a totally different issue.

Did you even read what I was writing about?

I was addressing the issue that this new restriction on smoking should be opposed on the grounds that it will cost jobs.

Thats all I was talking about with that point. Nothing else. I was asking if other laws, which placed other restrictions, are also "bad laws" which should not have come in, on the grounds that they cost jobs.

So it is not a different issue at all, when you take it in context of what I was discussing.

jc

The Beer Baron

AGGGRRRHHHH!!

I hate this ****.
Oh! -bib-bib-bib-bib smoking is bad- a bibibibibibibuh- I shouldn't have to breath your smoke
**** you!- I don't like sharing the same oxygen with you plebes anyways- buncha pussies- 'fraid of a bitta cancer PAH!
I don't like hearing stupid people when I'm drinking- so will I complain about noise pollution, ban music from pubs and have us all sitting there in monastic silence?

If I did want to kill you I would do so much more efficiently than blowing Marlboro in your face. What they gonna do anyways- arrest me? **** it- if I can't smoke in a pub then I might as well smoke in style- pass me that joint- give me those matches...

I pity the poor **** who says I have to put my cigarette out. and I doubt I'll be the only one.

Christ this ****in' country!
what the ****'s going on at all- does the government even know which country they're supposed to be governing?

/me lights up a Coheba and considers a revolution.



</insane rant>

literati

I agree totally with The Beer Baron. To hell with all of this pseudo-liberal PC rubbish that we have in this country. You don't have to go to the pub if you don't want to!

Smokers should be allowed to smoke and not be hounded by the paternalistic policies of well-meaning bog-men. If you don't want to breath smoke either set up a nonsmoking pub or STAY OUT of ours.

therecklessone

Originally posted by Boston


as for the point about the mature person enjoyign a point with out smoke. Nothing is wrong with it, once he is willing to pay 20 euro a point for the pleasure, otherwise pubs will close.

Don't enact this legislation, and we'll be paying €20 for a pint, smoker or non-smoker, to cover the cost of the thousands of compensation claims made by bar workers for the damage to their health.

In addition, the state will be held responsible for its failure to tackle the problem, and will have to pick up the medical costs (as it admittedly already does)

I'm a non-smoker, who has no real problem being around smokers. However, I welcome the development. Smoke free pubs means no smelly clothes the following morning.

Emboss

all it really means is now when your going to the jax to line up your coke, you'll have to have a smoke while your chopping...

echomadman

I don't smoke,
I dont care if people smoke near me in a pub/club.


I think this law will seriously affect the social scene in ireland,
That is if its enforced, I cant see little country pubs telling 70 odd hardcore smokers to go outside to smoke, If anyone had told my grandfather that he'd have laughed at them.

this legislation was a success in california because its sunny and hot there, smokers can just sit outside.... cant see outdoor cafes/beergardens working too well in our climate

Its had a proven detrimental affect on the pub trade in new york.

Restuarants > fine, people are eating, I for one wouldnt mind seeing totally no smoking restuarants.

But in a pub you're imbibing toxins, damaging your liver, your kidneys, generally poisoning yourself anyway, you dont like smoke, fine fsck off to a non-smoking establishment.

Give people a choice, maybe despite my reservations non-smoking bars will be a roaring success, but surely it should be at the publicans discretion whether he permits it or not, if theres enough demand for non-smoking venues, the potential for profit will coax more and more publicans to bring in this policy.

We're slowly stripping away peoples personal freedoms, a glance at the state of american society should be a suitable deterrant .

The Beer Baron

I didn't see my buddies die face down in the mud so some stuttering gob****e can tell me I can't enjoy a smoke and a pint.

Damn right fight the power.

Restuarants > fine, people are eating, I for one wouldnt mind seeing totally no smoking restuarants.

which we should have introduced long ago- I'm fine with that, totally in agreement there.

We're slowly stripping away peoples personal freedoms, a glance at the state of american society should be a suitable deterrant .

There's an understatement.

I'm a non-smoker, who has no real problem being around smokers. However, I welcome the development. Smoke free pubs means no smelly clothes the following morning.

What planet are you on?
Have you ever actually been in a pub Mr Syzlak?
Christ man! If you don't sweat profusely oozing alcohol from every pore then at the very least those around you are, then you're gonna smell of beer anyways. No matter what- I defy anyone to go to a pub and not come back smelling of beer.
...weirdo

echomadman

I would love to go out on the piss and not come home stinking of other peoples pointless expensive pathetic addiction.

And after X pints of guinness, cider ect, you're a regular bed of roses arent you?

The Beer Baron

y'know- why should I have to watch soccer in every pub I go to?
I find it obnoxious and annoying listening to english sports prattle at 50decibels. I don't like to listen to whooping jock baboons shouting up at it. I HATE soccer- but I accept it as part and parcel with the pub scene.

Should we ban sport from pubs?
How about music.

How's this- we all sit down quietly, avoiding eye contact and drink prune juice.

Sand

Great idea imo. I dont smoke. All my friends do. My clothes smell like a stale ash tray after having a pint with them. The lads are making a half hearted attempt to cut down in preperation for this ban - theyre too weak willed to ever stop imo but hey its a start.

And they wont stop coming to pubs. Alcohol is addictive too you know:|

Lukin Black

Oh my God, I can't believe that this is going on again.

This is not about the health of non-smokers going to pubs. This never was about it. It doesn't matter if you're a non-smoker of the opinion "Ah gosh, I don't mind it at all, it's going to be awful strange without it".

This is about the right of employees to work without being exposed (and constantly exposed, at that) to cigarette smoke. And before you bring up that "they can get work elsewhere", and because I KNOW most of the ranters skipped most of the posts, here's what I said earlier:

What's in question is the right of employees to work in a smoke free environment. And quit the rubbish about finding work elsewhere, it's not as though anybody with a job is going to give it up in this economic environment.

Originally posted by echomadman
Its had a proven detrimental affect on the pub trade in new york.

And who's saying it? Organisations with an obvious bias. You can't believe them, and I know conversly you can't necessarily believe a lot of the other statistics saying that it's better for business. I personally believe there will be minimal effect.

Originally posted by The Beer Baron
If you don't sweat profusely oozing alcohol from every pore then at the very least those around you are, then you're gonna smell of beer anyways. No matter what- I defy anyone to go to a pub and not come back smelling of beer.

Oh, because smelling of beer AND smoke makes it all so much better. FFS.

Originally posted by The Beer Baron
Should we ban sport from pubs?

This is not about your right to smoke, this is about the employees. How many employees suffer health problems from the harmful effects of tv soccer in the workplace?

bonkey

Regarding non-smoking restaurants....

Originally posted by The Beer Baron
which we should have introduced long ago- I'm fine with that, totally in agreement there.

Regarding non-smoking bars....

Originally posted by The Beer Baron
I didn't see my buddies die face down in the mud so some stuttering gob****e can tell me I can't enjoy a smoke and a pint....

So, its okay for you to tell others they can't enjoy a few smokes when they go out for a meal....but no-one can impose the same restriction on you when you go out for a pint....

Can you actually see the hypocracy in such a stance, or are you just too caught up in your righteous indignation that the world isn't run just the way you want it???

jc

TomF

I'm for the ban because I've been smoked out of pubs in the past, and because my son has bartended in two pubs, one in Dublin, and I think the smoke was bad for him.