Bring back...
Oh and as for pubs closing.. that's got more to do with general anti-social trends (i.e. more likely to stay in with a curry and a tin than go out and spend £2.50+ a time on the same drink), the rise of clubs and chain-bars like Wetherspoons in city centres being more profitable and easier to supply than smaller, out-of-town individual inns, and drinking trends being more on one-night-a-week booze binges than three shorter tuesday / friday night plus sunday afternoon sessions.
"Noxious mix of poisons" - you really are brainwashed, son.Alexia wrote:However, these pale into insignificance when I am sat quite innocently in a pub enjoying a pint, when two seats down from me, a 4-inch piece of paper containing a mix of processed leaves, tar, nicotine, chemicals and more is burning, producing a noxious mix of poisons and a clothes-clinging, hair-holding smell that is infinately more unpleasant than any sweat or other smell.
If it was really **that** noxious and **that** poisonous, people would be dropping dead from it left, right and centre after only a few draws. Smoking is linked to a quarter of the deaths of people who indulge in it, normally after 30-50 years.
Second-hand smoke is 93-97% water vapour. All the "poisons" that exist in smoke exist in larger background quantities anyway. The only way you can measure for smoke scientifically is by looking for "cotinine".
You will believe anything that the pharmaceutical-sponsored health freaks make up.
Roy Castle did smoke - he enjoyed cigars.Alexia wrote:Yes, smoking is filthy. It dirties you, your lungs, but more importantly, it dirties us, our lungs, and (as lifelong non-smoker Roy Castle would attest if he was still with us) is a dangerous and life-threatening activity that those around you are forced to be complicit in because you think it's "social." .
Also, Roy Castle self-diagnosed. He had no idea what caused him cancer. There are 41 different determinants for cancer, lung cancer included.
"Life-threatening" - you really can not judge risk, can you?
Putting smokers in the same category as bigots, racists and fundamentalists really does indicate your grasp on things.Alexia wrote:Your minority is a minority for a reason. There's less people who think smoking is acceptable than those who think it isn't. And tolerance doesn't have to be extended to all minorities. I don't tolerate bigots, racists and fundementalists either. I grant them the right to speak alright, just don't ask me to spend more than 5 seconds in their company.
According to CAMRA, 56 pubs a month were closing before the ban. Now they say it is 200 a month.Alexia wrote:Oh and as for pubs closing.. that's got more to do with general anti-social trends (i.e. more likely to stay in with a curry and a tin than go out and spend £2.50+ a time on the same drink), the rise of clubs and chain-bars like Wetherspoons in city centres being more profitable and easier to supply than smaller, out-of-town individual inns, and drinking trends being more on one-night-a-week booze binges than three shorter tuesday / friday night plus sunday afternoon sessions.
Have people really become that anti-social since July 1st?
Roy Castle was a non-smoker for all his life.
Smoke is smoke... that's why those firefighter chaps wear those masks that provide them with air when they enter a burning building. And in most cases in a pub, it's not just one person two tables down, it's about 30-40 people all lighting up in one go.
The worst thing about the ban now is people flouting it. I frequently smell smoke coming from the hotel rooms as I deliver the papers in the morning, and one guest was quite openly smoking in the hallway the other day.
Similarly in our enclosed bus station there are signs all over saying "No Smoking"...and people are smoking!! For fuck's sake, you can't choose which laws to obey and which not to!
On the other hand, opinionated bastards who think the law is unjust and oppressive may think they are above this law and that it doesn't apply as it's an affront to their "human rights." I often find these people are the same people who think that being in the European Union is a bad idea...yet they often go crying to the Human Rights Act when something goes against them.
As for CAMRA - maybe Real Ale is finally going out of fashion?
Smoke is smoke... that's why those firefighter chaps wear those masks that provide them with air when they enter a burning building. And in most cases in a pub, it's not just one person two tables down, it's about 30-40 people all lighting up in one go.
The worst thing about the ban now is people flouting it. I frequently smell smoke coming from the hotel rooms as I deliver the papers in the morning, and one guest was quite openly smoking in the hallway the other day.
Similarly in our enclosed bus station there are signs all over saying "No Smoking"...and people are smoking!! For fuck's sake, you can't choose which laws to obey and which not to!
On the other hand, opinionated bastards who think the law is unjust and oppressive may think they are above this law and that it doesn't apply as it's an affront to their "human rights." I often find these people are the same people who think that being in the European Union is a bad idea...yet they often go crying to the Human Rights Act when something goes against them.
As for CAMRA - maybe Real Ale is finally going out of fashion?
I shouldn't think so Alexia, I drink it a lot, as do most of my friends who are in their 20's. Although, they all freaked out at the weekend when I drunk a pint called "Sign of Spring", it was green.Alexia wrote:As for CAMRA - maybe Real Ale is finally going out of fashion?
It's not so strange: Before the ban everyone around you who didn't smoke suffered while you enjoyed it in comfort. I think that's much less fair than the situation now.johnnyboy wrote:That is a truly strange thing to say. Because I and 10 million+ people get pleasure out of something, we should have to suffer for it?Sput wrote:The situation now is that the person who gets the pleasure also has to suffer a bit for it, and I think that's fairer.
I'm starting to tire of your repetitions, for what it's worth I'm not a fan of your xanu labour term either. It doesn't really help your arguments. Back to the argument: I couldn't give two shits about control, I'm just saying I think rooms like the ones you describe are pointless because everyone will be drawn for social reasons if it's comfortable. Then the situation's exactly like before the ban - just more people squashed into a smaller space. I think that'll happen in France too. The resulting crush to get in and out might be much less pleasant for everyone concerned.Why not allow indoor, sealed-off and ventilated smoking areas?
Oh right, I forgot. You want to control smokers and their non-smoking friends. Not very live-and-let-live.
As for live and let live. I quite like to go to DRINK and not come out reeking of SMOKE. Whether you sparked up or not nearby meant I had to go and wash my clothes more often and decided which places I could eat if I wanted to make a good impression on someone later on (by not being a smelly tramp). How's that for control? And all because you can't be bothered to get off your arse and smoke outside.
See the above about what I think is fair. You suffer but you gain pleasure. We suffered but we gained nothing except extra laundry.Thanks very much for that generous concession, oh tolerant master.Sput wrote:The worst you get is coldness for 10 minutes when it's cold.
I don't know where you get your numbers and you might be right (source would be nice), but for starters you've ignored the effects of lung irritants in smoke that you don't get in restaurants unless they're on fire.
BTW, the air in restuarants has far more carcinogens that a pub which allows smoking. It's just because it smells nicer that people do not think it is a "threat". Of course it is not a threat though - it's the dosage that counts, not the ingredient itself.
Statistically speaking it's way too early to say what the long-term effects are, that might just be a spike after the ban. How many of these pubs, for example, have been re-opened? How many of those landlords actively decided to shut down because of the ban?according to CAMRA, 56 pubs were closing each month prior to July 2007. Now it is 200 a month.
PS: I'm with you on the whole derogatory terminology thing jb, it's not really on is it.
Knight knight
When you say "I"...rfrancis51284 wrote:
I shouldn't think so Alexia, I drink it a lot, as do most of my friends who are in their 20's. Although, they all freaked out at the weekend when I drunk a pint called "Sign of Spring", it was green.
Knight knight
http://www.stonehengeales.co.uk/sign_of_spring.htmlSput wrote:When you say "I"...rfrancis51284 wrote:
I shouldn't think so Alexia, I drink it a lot, as do most of my friends who are in their 20's. Although, they all freaked out at the weekend when I drunk a pint called "Sign of Spring", it was green.
Don't believe me? I'll post a pic of me drinking it if you want... :roll:
Ah but will it be you or will it be someone else's pint of green with your face digitally imposed? Can't trust ya now rob!rfrancis51284 wrote:http://www.stonehengeales.co.uk/sign_of_spring.htmlSput wrote:When you say "I"...rfrancis51284 wrote:
I shouldn't think so Alexia, I drink it a lot, as do most of my friends who are in their 20's. Although, they all freaked out at the weekend when I drunk a pint called "Sign of Spring", it was green.
Don't believe me? I'll post a pic of me drinking it if you want... :roll:
Not funny.