Smoking bans.
- Ronnie Rowlands
- Posts: 956
- Joined: Sun 15 Apr, 2007 14.50
- Location: North Wales
in a vague attemt to divert everyone's attention from the bootlicking that is currently occuring between Gavin and Sput (:P), what does everyone think of the doctors who refuse to treat patients who smoke?
Ronnie is victorious, vivacious in victory like a venomous dog. Vile Republicans cease living while the religious retort with rueful rhetoric. These rank thugs resort to violence and swear revenge.
But Ronnie can punch through steel so they lose anyway.
But Ronnie can punch through steel so they lose anyway.
psst! Check your pits! I think that might be you!nodnirG kraM wrote:All the no-smoking pubs I've been to just stink of booze and sweat now ... not sure which is worse!!ashley b wrote:I've been to places for a night out which already have a ban in place and find it weird waking up without my clothes smelling so much..
-
- Posts: 2027
- Joined: Sun 13 Feb, 2005 00.04
- Location: Next door to Hell
I think what irritates me the most about the whole smoking ban thing is that it is a blanket ban, with no exceptions being allowed. I don't see why a pub can't choose to be a smoking pub should they wish. For example, I go to a pub nearby every Tuesday night for the quiz they do. I'd say that about 80% of the people there smoke, including everyone in my team. I think it's pretty unacceptable that, in a few month's time, everyone will have to go outside to smoke, against the wishes of the pub owners and everybody in the pub, just because some snooty Londoners say so.
One can't help but wonder if the treasury has budgeted for the shortfall in tax that is inevitable as a result of this.
One can't help but wonder if the treasury has budgeted for the shortfall in tax that is inevitable as a result of this.
Don't worry, Phil. Labour have a tried and tested solution.all new Phil wrote:
One can't help but wonder if the treasury has budgeted for the shortfall in tax that is inevitable as a result of this.
It's called increasing tobacco tax.
User Removed
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Tue 24 Aug, 2004 17.47
- Location: From The North
So how would a ban *with* exceptions work? "Smoking is banned in all pubs, excpet those which allow it."all new Phil wrote:I think what irritates me the most about the whole smoking ban thing is that it is a blanket ban, with no exceptions being allowed. I don't see why a pub can't choose to be a smoking pub should they wish. For example, I go to a pub nearby every Tuesday night for the quiz they do. I'd say that about 80% of the people there smoke, including everyone in my team. I think it's pretty unacceptable that, in a few month's time, everyone will have to go outside to smoke, against the wishes of the pub owners and everybody in the pub, just because some snooty Londoners say so.
Interestingly I was out in town last Thursday evening, and everywhere was pretty much dead, except for the town's only non-smoking pub which was full, and always does a roaring trade.
Yes, currently many pubs are full of smokers, because the non-smoking majority is put off going there.
Agreed - I currently go out perhaps three times a month, because I hate having to wash every garment I go out in, just cos it reeks of smoke.
I'm looking forward to being able to go out and not come home smelling like an ashtray.
That, I have to say though, is all that bothers me about smoking in public - I've never particularly been bothered by the possibility of inhaling or whatever, despite being a life-long non-smoker. It's purely the vile smell it leaves on me.
I'm looking forward to being able to go out and not come home smelling like an ashtray.
That, I have to say though, is all that bothers me about smoking in public - I've never particularly been bothered by the possibility of inhaling or whatever, despite being a life-long non-smoker. It's purely the vile smell it leaves on me.
Well, as we know, they were going to allow smoking in "licences premises that serve food and members clubs", but arguments over what the exact definition of "food", the large number of places that would have been exempt (it wouldn't just have been pubs and bars, but places like nightclubs as well), plus the large amount of landlords saying they would stop serving food or become members only meant that it would have taken away much of the impact & point of the ban in the first place- and was voted out in parliament. I seem to remember reading they'd estimated around 85% of pubs in Leeds would have been exempt from a ban if the exemptions had gone ahead.Spencer For Hire wrote:So how would a ban *with* exceptions work? "Smoking is banned in all pubs, excpet those which allow it."
- Gavin Scott
- Admin
- Posts: 6442
- Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.16
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
"No Smoking Allowed"Spencer For Hire wrote:So how would a ban *with* exceptions work? "Smoking is banned in all pubs, excpet those which allow it."
"Smoking Allowed Throughout"
"Smoking in Designated Areas Only".
It's not that complicated.
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Tue 24 Aug, 2004 17.47
- Location: From The North
And how is that any different to the situation pre-legislation?Gavin Scott wrote:"No Smoking Allowed"Spencer For Hire wrote:So how would a ban *with* exceptions work? "Smoking is banned in all pubs, excpet those which allow it."
"Smoking Allowed Throughout"
"Smoking in Designated Areas Only".
It's not that complicated.