Smoking ban to start on March 29

Ok lets do the maths here.

26 counties.

Take an average of five big towns in each and give them two inspectors .

Thats 260 officers.
Put the other 180 into the cities.

Time taken to sniff smoke in a pub=ten to fifteen seconds...
Time to write out an infringement order and notice of fine and hand same to the person behind the bar=5-10 minutes.
Rather than produce particulars given to me in confidence, I've deduced that from your own.

Smell the coffee here do ya

IgnatiusJRiley

Originally posted by irish1
Can people please stop making stupid comparisons, it's wrecking my.

Monument, how many 70 years do you know that break speed limts more than 3 times a week?

How many 70 year olds do you that go to a pub more 3 times a week.

God give me patience.;)

God give the rest of us patience. It's a valid argument. Just because it doesn't happen often doesn't mean it's not true. Basically the point he's making is that just because you're 70 doesn't mean you have a right to break the law. You used to always smoke in the pub. And now you don't. Don't like it? TOUGH!

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
Ok lets do the maths here.
26 counties.
Take an average of five big towns in each and give them two inspectors .

Thats 260 officers.
Put the other 180 into the cities.

Smell the coffee here do ya

Given that in Carlow the second smallest county and there is over 200 licenced premises that means there going to be very very busy, any word on there hours I heard 9- 5 now that would just be ingenius wouldn't it, oh and they have to catch the person in the act to fine them.

It's going to be the funniest system ever, the chances of getting caught will be so small. Oh and if you go outside for a fag and bring your drink with you, the cops will prosecute you.

Isn't Ireland a great country where laws are so well policed, I mean I only know about 10 L drivers who drive everyday on a provisional Licence without a full licenced driver.:)

Villain

Originally posted by IgnatiusJRiley
God give the rest of us patience. It's a valid argument. Just because it doesn't happen often doesn't mean it's not true. Basically the point he's making is that just because you're 70 doesn't mean you have a right to break the law. You used to always smoke in the pub. And now you don't. Don't like it? TOUGH!

Your not getting the point do, it's going to be very hard to enforce it.

I wouldn't fancy being an inspector who walks into a pub where theres 6 auld smoking and he gives them all a €3000 fine.

Originally posted by irish1

Isn't Ireland a great country where laws are so well policed, I mean I only know about 10 L drivers who drive everyday on a provisional Licence without a full licenced driver.:)

You complain about ridiculous comparisons earlier in the thread when they are perfectly valid.
Yet you post this to attack the as yet unseen policing of an as yet unimplimented law

How does an officer walking up a street and spending ten minutes in a pub and then going onto the next one compare to the policing of provisional drivers ?

The answer is it doesn't and most definitely doesn't stand up as a comparison on the subject we are talking about.

IgnatiusJRiley

Originally posted by irish1
Your not getting the point do, it's going to be very hard to enforce it.

I wouldn't fancy being an inspector who walks into a pub where theres 6 auld smoking and he gives them all a €3000 fine.

I would love to be an inspector tellin aul ones that. Them ones get their way far too often imho.... them and kids.

Villain

That was a general statement about the policing of Irish laws not directly related to this issue. Thats why I said Isn't Ireland a great country!

But if you wish to interpet it as something else thats your right, I wasn't drawing comparisons

Originally posted by irish1
That was a general statement about the policing of Irish laws not directly related to this issue. Thats why I said Isn't Ireland a great country!

But if you wish to interpet it as something else thats your right, I wasn't drawing comparisons

why bring it up in this debate then?
If I inferred from it what I did as what you were trying to say others would too.
It would be better to see the points answered and debated not skated around to be honest.

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
why bring it up in this debate then?
If I inferred from it what I did as what you were trying to say others would too.
It would be better to see the points answered and debated not skated around to be honest.

Because I felt like saying it.

What points would you like me to answer??

I think it's a bit rich you talking about skating around points when I post:

Given that in Carlow the second smallest county and there is over 200 licenced premises that means there going to be very very busy, any word on there hours I heard 9- 5 now that would just be ingenius wouldn't it, oh and they have to catch the person in the act to fine them.

It's going to be the funniest system ever, the chances of getting caught will be so small. Oh and if you go outside for a fag and bring your drink with you, the cops will prosecute you.

Isn't Ireland a great country where laws are so well policed, I mean I only know about 10 L drivers who drive everyday on a provisional Licence without a full licenced driver

And all you comment on is my last general point

Thats because I'd already addressed the other two points here

What part of the maths did you not get, or do you think that the carlow officers will be having a few pints in each of the pubs, which will delay them??

Thats not being rich, thats just me thinking I wouldn't have to repeat myself on the same page of this thread.

Villain

Yes but these pubs aren't all on 1 street it would take at least 2 hours to drive to each one.

So if the inspector comes in at 1pm and Mick comes in at 2 for a pint and asks if the inspector was around today john whos sitting at the bar says yes, He'l know he can have a few points and a few fags without getting caught.

Originally posted by irish1

So if the inspector comes in at 1pm and Mick comes in at 2 for a pint and asks if the inspector was around today john whos sitting at the bar says yes, He'l know he can have a few points and a few fags without getting caught.

So you would have to concede then that the vast majority of pubs are going to be heavily inspected by that scenario, given that they are in towns and cities?

One or two raids a month at the wrong time would be very costly for micks publican if he couldn't clear the smell of the smoke.

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
So you would have to concede then that the vast majority of pubs are going to be heavily inspected by that scenario, given that they are in towns and cities?

One or two raids a month at the wrong time would be very costly for micks publican if he couldn't clear the smell of the smoke.

Not if micks Publican has told mick to put it out it aint, I'd reckon any good Barristor could get a publican off this one.

Just Heard Jackie Healy Rae on the Last Word, now theres a man living in the real world. I wonder if the minister has ever been in small rural pubs?

Sparks

Originally posted by irish1
Just Heard Jackie Healy Rae on the Last Word, now theres a man living in the real world. I wonder if the minister has ever been in small rural pubs?

Not meaning to personally insult, irish1, but JHR isn't someone you could really use as an example for anything other than what an embarressingly corrupt politician from Kerry looks like. The man is contemptable, and that's speaking as a kerryman.

Villain

Originally posted by Sparks
Not meaning to personally insult, irish1, but JHR isn't someone you could really use as an example for anything other than what an embarressingly corrupt politician from Kerry looks like. The man is contemptable, and that's speaking as a kerryman.

Oh I completely accept that, but my point was that he would have more of an idea what go's on in a rural than a lot of the boys in suits in the Dail.

Ancient1

Don't want to interrupt your discussion there, just had to add this -

i was just browsing the "Oddly Enough" News section on Yahoo and one of the "headlines" was the Irish smoking ban!

Oddly enough, i didnt know if i should laugh or cry.

Villain

Originally posted by Ancient1
Don't want to interrupt your discussion there, just had to add this -

i was just browsing the "Oddly Enough" News section on Yahoo and one of the "headlines" was the Irish smoking ban!

Oddly enough, i didnt know if i should laugh or cry.

Feel free to join, I'm sure everyone is getting tired of my point of view.

I'd choose, no point crying.:)

monument

Originally posted by irish1
Can people please stop making stupid comparisons, it's wrecking my.

Monument, how many 70 years do you know that break speed limts more than 3 times a week?

How many 70 year olds do you that go to a pub more 3 times a week.

God give me patience.;)

I did say when the new speed limits come in?

The same applies for any new law of the same type - which could make people change their behaviour - in the long term, why should a younger person be treated differently to an older person?

Anyway, the smoking ban will not stop people from smoking (some of whom may have even been smoking most of their lives), it will only limit the places where people may smoke, and limit the amount of damage smoking does to non-smokers, and in some cases smokers.

Villain

Originally posted by monument
Anyway, the smoking ban will not stop people from smoking (some of whom may have even been smoking most of their lives), it will only limit the places where people may smoke, and limit the amount of damage smoking does to non-smokers, and in some cases smokers.

In THEORY;)

Originally posted by irish1
Not if micks Publican has told mick to put it out it aint, I'd reckon any good Barristor could get a publican off this one.

I doubt it.
If theres been a violation of the law theres been a violation.
A Barrister could in theory I suppose plead extenuating circumstances , that the publican has a fetish for smoke personally and is attending therapy for it...

Wouldn't get him off though as the law is the law , once in court regardless of whatever excuse...

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
I doubt it.
If theres been a violation of the law theres been a violation.
A Barrister could in theory I suppose plead extenuating circumstances , that the publican has a fetish for smoke personally and is attending therapy for it...

Wouldn't get him off though as the law is the law , once in court regardless of whatever excuse...

An employer who can show that they made “all reasonable efforts” to ensure compliance with the regulations may use this as a defence where proceedings are initiated against them. Therefore it is clear that employers must put in place detailed policies regarding workplace smoking, which state that breaches of such a policy will result in disciplinary action

So if a publican has made “all reasonable efforts”, i.e. asking mick to put the fag out, I'm sure that overpayed Barrister would be able to get him off.:)

Originally posted by irish1
So if a publican has made “all reasonable efforts”, i.e. asking mick to put the fag out, I'm sure that overpayed Barrister would be able to get him off.:)

Errr ... disiplinary action

We've moved from Mick's publican not giving a hoot to making all reasonable efforts have we?
Looks like your examples of exceptions to the rule are getting smaller and smaller by the post...

I'd be quite happy with that.

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
Errr ... disiplinary action

We've moved from Mick's publican not giving a hoot to making all reasonable efforts have we?
Looks like your examples of exceptions to the rule are getting smaller and smaller by the post...

I'd be quite happy with that.

LoL I love the way you interpet my posts, but if you reckon asking mick to put out the fag is the publican making all reasonable efforts and therfore meaning he can't be punished I'm with ya all the way;)

No, no, no.

let me clarify...

I'd be happy if Micks publican did give a hoot.

According to you he didn't at the start but when that was inconvenient to the direction of the discussion Micks publican appears to be more compliant with the law.

Thats what I'm happy with

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman
No, no, no.

let me clarify...

I'd be happy if Micks publican did give a hoot.

According to you he didn't at the start but when that was inconvenient to the direction of the discussion Micks publican appears to be more compliant with the law.

Thats what I'm happy with

Not nice having posts mis-interpted is it?.

I haven't changed anything, I'm saying if they tried to prosecute the Publican all he has to say is he asked Mick to put it out thus making all reasonable efforts and thus getting off!:)

sceptre

Originally posted by irish1
Just Heard Jackie Healy Rae on the Last Word, now theres a man living in the real world.

You are kidding, you surely must be kidding. Healy-Rae's heading for his own tribunal in about a decade due to the shenanigans going on in Kerry CoCo. I wouldn't trust him with a pet tortoise. Not that he's exactly a neutral case here either. What's his profession again (apart from "village idiot")?

Originally posted by irish1
Not nice having posts mis-interpted is it?.

sorry did you actually misinterpret what I said or did you deliberately misinterpret it the second time for the purposes of making your point about misinterpretations?

I haven't changed anything, I'm saying if they tried to prosecute the Publican all he has to say is he asked Mick to put it out thus making all reasonable efforts and thus getting off!

I'm stating the black and white of your posts about Micks publican, it's as clear as day for all to see.
When You first mentioned him, he didn't give a hoot, in that he was going to tell his customer that the inspector had visited and that mick could light up.

But a few posts later Micks Publican was a different man alltogether in that he was making all reasonable efforts and for the purposes of a court defence, he had guidelines that would have included disciplinery actions for his staff, were they to ignore the law.

You gave him a personality change, so it's not correct to say you didn't change.

swiss

I don't see how a smoking ban in a pub can be 'unenforcable'. Granted, it may be difficult to enforce with a rural pub, but all it takes is one telephone call by a disgruntled customer to prompt health and safety officials to raid a pub.

With regards to the publican in question not giving a damn whether someone smokes or not, I would simply say that if he is unprepared to take reasonable action to stop someone smoking, then he is perpetuating a breach of the law, which makes him as guilty as the smoker who sparks up in a pub. If all he has to argue is that he asked the smoker in question to stop smoking, then it becomes case of the publicans word against the health and safety official. How many times would this defence wash, however, for multiple breaches? At the very least the credibility of the publican would be called into question. At worst he could be held in contempt of court or charged with perjury if testifying.

This law may well turn out to be widely flaunted. Using the speeding analogy, many people every day speed with impunity, because they know that Gardaí are not going to be on a particular stretch of road at a particular time. Does that mean we should abolish the speed laws? Similarly, saying we should rescind a valuable (IMO) piece of legislation because it might be difficult to enforce is absurd.

Villain

Originally posted by Earthman

I'm stating the black and white of your posts about Micks publican, it's as clear as day for all to see.
When You first mentioned him, he didn't give a hoot, in that he was going to tell his customer that the inspector had visited and that mick could light up.

You gave him a personality change, so it's not correct to say you didn't change.

What I said was:

So if the inspector comes in at 1pm and Mick comes in at 2 for a pint and asks if the inspector was around today john whos sitting at the bar says yes, He'l know he can have a few points and a few fags without getting caught.

John is not the publican, John is a guy "who's sitting at the bar".:)

Villain

Originally posted by swiss
I don't see how a smoking ban in a pub can be 'unenforcable'. Granted, it may be difficult to enforce with a rural pub, but all it takes is one telephone call by a disgruntled customer to prompt health and safety officials to raid a pub.

But will they still be smoking?, a lot of Rural pubs not too many inspectors means this law will be very widely flaunted, a lot more than the speed limit.