Smoking Ban in Ireland / Scotland

[Phaedrus]

[quote name='stewblack' post='7728' date='May 27 2007, 06:10 PM']Speaking as a publican it's simply because I would have to alienate an enormous - and I mean overwhelming - percentage of my customers, [i][b]for the comfort of a tiny minority[/b][/i]. The non smokers drink less too. Don't ask me why. Just to avoid any confusion I reiterate I do support the ban (turkeys voting for christmas I know) but am simply pointing out the facts from a business point of view. There simply isn't a huge mass of people waiting to flood the pubs, who currently stay away because of the smoke.[/quote]

"comfort"? Surely avoiding breathing in multiple stranger's used, exhaled smoke is a bit more than a comfort? AFAIK, it's been proved that second-hand smoke is a health risk, hasn't it?

I've never smoked. I don't know anyone personally or third party who's reached my age (38) and hasn't even tried smoking.

And yet, when I was having my chest X-rayed (to confirm two broken ribs after a nasty kicking one night from 4 nackers), the doctor was aghast at my lymph nodes (IIRC) in the centre of my chest in the X-ray. They were 3 or 4 times the size of a non-smoker's and he told me I'd have to quit smoking or my lymph nodes would eventually fail in their function, which according to him, is the expunging of toxins from the lungs.

I told him that I'd never smoked in my life and he asked if my parents did. Oh yeah. My father, birth mother, step-mother, grandparents, uncles, aunts, etc. - everyone in every house I frequented growing up - all smoked all through my childhood.

Thankfully I can still scuba and play tennis and ride horses and had the largest lung capacity in my class when we did an experiment in science class (550ml, IIRC). I don't actually play tennis. And I rarely ride horses. But I could . . .

Go ahead and smoke all you want, but isn't it unfair to make other people smoke? A smoking ban is a good thing. Shouldn't it also be banned around anyone else who hasn't consciously elected to smoke themselves? Like your own children?

Mark

[stewblack]

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='7967' date='May 28 2007, 10:07 AM']"comfort"? Surely avoiding breathing in multiple stranger's used, exhaled smoke is a bit more than a comfort? AFAIK, it's[/quote]
Good point - poor choice of words on my count health and comfort would have been better, sorry.

[P-T-P]

Here in Wales I've seen no drop-off in our bookings. We're as busy now as we were at the same point last year but also have a heck of a lot more dates in the diary than we did then. That having been said, we had no Saturday night booking a couple of weeks back, first time in 18 months that's happened, which is hopefully not a sign of things to come.

I think landlords, club committees etc. are right to be concerned, it's a major change to their business, but I think the reality of it is that, even those of us who like a smoke, aren't going to forego a night out with our mates just so we can have a fag.

On the nanny state thing, personally I think it's a half-arsed, anti-tobacco lobby appeasing law. There was no need to ban smoking in public places, just make it easier for owners/employers to enforce smoking bans if they choose to put one in place. If health is the true concern, ban the damn things altogether, at least then there's no double standard. Non-smoking punters always had the choice not to enter a smoking bar/club etc. but it's easy to legislate to protect them while at far greater risk to health from second-hand smoke are kids who are forced to live in a home with parents who smoke and have no real say in the matter at all, why not legislate protect them?

[chris_b]

[quote name='P-T-P' post='8577' date='May 29 2007, 01:15 PM']On the nanny state thing, personally I think it's a half-arsed, anti-tobacco lobby appeasing law. There was no need to ban smoking in public places, just make it easier for owners/employers to enforce smoking bans if they choose to put one in place. If health is the true concern, ban the damn things altogether, at least then there's no double standard. Non-smoking punters always had the choice not to enter a smoking bar/club etc. but it's easy to legislate to protect them while at far greater risk to health from second-hand smoke are kids who are forced to live in a home with parents who smoke and have no real say in the matter at all, why not legislate protect them?[/quote]

Firstly, this is not personal. Some of my best friends are currently smoking, but you are wrong and right. Smokers are drug addicts, I know because I gave up (about a dozen times) 25 years ago and it was bloody difficult. So smokers have a selfish interest in continuing and sod the rest of us. That is understandable, but you damage other people when you smoke. A voluntary or partial ban would never have worked. This is why no other country has tried it. No one complained when my right to drive after 10 pints was curtailed, so complaints about smoker’s rights are not really the issue. Non-smokers never had that choice; one smoker can contaminate the air for 100 non-smokers. Should we be the ones who have to hide away?

I agree about the damage done to the children in smoking homes. That is a serious problem which the government has dodged.

ps I'm glad you're working so much. As I usually walk into a wall of smoke at every gig, I hope that is the case for the rest of us in England.

[P-T-P]

Chris,

You've missed my point a little, which is possibly my fault for not explaining it better. I'm not really sticking up for smoker's rights, just saying that I think the law as it was drawn up is very much nanny state, "want to be seen to be doing something about the issue without really confronting it head-on." I'm a believer in legislation where it's necessary and in letting society or community or market forces take care of business wherever possible.

The analogy between smoking and drink driving doesn't wash becuase you can walk away from a smoker or choose not to enter a smoking establishment, drink driving almost always doesn't afford it's potential victims that opportunity.

15 years ago there were hardly any non-smoking sections in pubs and restaurants, that changed and it changed because there was a demand from it. Most offices, factories etc. had confined smoking to designated areas. Couldn't tell you the last time I was on a bus or plane that didn't have a smoking ban. There were a growing number of smoke-free establishments before the ban came in. Over time there would have been establishments that catered to both sides of the divide because that's what more and more people wanted. Most smokers are considerate enough that they will not smoke in areas where they are requested not to do so.

As a smoker, if they'd banned smoking altogether I'd have been okay with it because it [i]is[/i] a stupid and dangerous thing to do, but I'm also conscious of the £3 a pack difference between a price of a 20 fags here and elsewhere in the EU which no doubt had an influence on the decision not to pursue an outright ban.

[chris_b]

OK, sorry.... guess that was my anti smoking rant!!! I'm now off to play in one of the smokiest pubs in West London.... oh joy.

[Phaedrus]

Wouldn't completely banning smoking de facto be some sort of infringement of freedoms or rights or something?

I was unfortunate enough to see that movie Thank You For Smoking recently. Utter tripe and not entertaining, but it does display the tobacco industry's position quiet well. MEGA bucks are being made from the sale of cigarettes. MEGA MEGA bucks. That's a lot of persuasive power when it comes to banning & stuff like that. The owners of the tobacco companies are worth many times more, financially, than the characters that head up the governments. Money has much more clout than morals.

In a parallel, it's just like in Ireland where the property developers are worth so much more, financially, than the politicians - a hefty brown envelope was/is all it takes to have a plot of land redesignated "residential" rather than "agricultural".

Mark

[velvetkevorkian]

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='9009' date='May 30 2007, 09:32 AM']Wouldn't completely banning smoking de facto be some sort of infringement of freedoms or rights or something?[/quote]
Only if you feel that all drugs should be unregulated; IE heroin, cocaine, marijuana should be available legally, and you should be able to get Viagra without a prescription. If you can ban those, what's the big deal about banning tobacco? Conversely, if you let people smoke, why not let them take heroin to their heart's content?
The only reason we make such a big deal over tobacco and alcohol is becasue they're socially acceptable.

[Vasquez Rich]

[quote name='Phaedrus' post='7967' date='May 28 2007, 10:07 AM']I don't know anyone personally or third party who's reached my age (38) and hasn't even tried smoking.[/quote]

That would be me then... never had the inclination, and I'm older than 38. Guess peer pressure never really meant anything. I'm looking forward to the ban. What amazes me is that in the first instance people make the [b]conscious choice [/b][i][/i]to smoke then, in the main, regret that decision. Don't want to preach to you guys, as I understand about addiction, but I saw my mother die from lung cancer, it's not nice and I wouldn't wish that on anybody, give it up if you can.

Richard
VASQUEZ

[Linz]

That's me too - My parents did, (Mum worked in the Kensitas - remember them? Then you're showing your age! - factory where they got free fags as part of the wages). The smell was enough to put me off for life. She thought I smoked because I bought No 6 when I was 18 - wrong mum, it was to pass round the group cos all my mates did...

Hope Simon reads your post - I've been with him 4 1/2 years and he's given up 3 times in that time - all because I nag him to give up, but thanks to the ban he might succeed this time cos he wont be able to smoke in pubs anymore!!

[Vasquez Rich]

It's difficult for some people, I know that, but it really is worth the effort I think. To be blunt, and I can be cos I've been on the very sharp end of it, it doesn't matter when you're dead, you're dead and that's it, a bit of pain, a bit of suffering, lots of morphine and then gone.. what matters is those that you leave behind, those that have to witness the end, those that have to carry on with their lives when something dear has been taken away in a manner that could so easily have been avoided.

Sorry to preach but if I can help one person to give up I will endure any amount of abuse I may take on this forum.

Richard
VASQUEZ

[tigerfeetLeonard]

many points have been raised in this post, but have people considered the health risks of being in bands and playing live music? How many of you have got tinitus? bad backs?
i've noticed the difference in smells in pubs with the ban. i'm a smoker.

[Vasquez Rich]

Hmm... my carrying my large cabinet won't give YOU a bad back... and as for tinitus.. yes I have it slight in my right ear, however I am very very very unlikely to die of cancer of the ear... bad examples mate, try again.

[Sibob]

Just thought I'd lend my thoughts on the matter.

As a non-smoker I'm definitely all for the smoking ban in the UK, cannot wait.

As a player, like it has been numerous times before, my clothes, hair and gear will no longer stink to high heaven. Like a few people I'm generally against 'censorships' and 'bans' and the adopted tag 'nanny state', but thats because I'm pro choice! My choice not to smoke is taken away from me when i choose to enter a pub or any public place and cannot avoid breathing in probably as much smoke as the smokers themselves. Something has to give, and since its easier to stop smoking inside public places then it is to stop the smoke entering my lungs in a smokey pub, we have the ban. I'm perfectly happy with standing outside with friends who smoke as long as theres a bit of a breeze .

With regards to 'Non-smoking areas' in restaurants etc pre-ban...... does nobody else see them as completely r-tarded?, if your sitting at a table right on the boundary of a smoking area, with it drifting over, how can that be the no-smoking area?????? Never got that!

Dwindling numbers don't really bother me either, playing to a few less punters is fine by me if it isn't having a negative effect on my health, if smokers don't want to watch live entertainment thats their [b]choice[/b] .

My personal experience is based on my nan dying from a combination of mouth and throat cancer caused directly from smoking. No-one else in my immediate family, and a large percentage of my extended family, smokes. I predict my parents will go to more gigs after 1st July too

I just had a thought actually about something Stewblack said earlier, "non-smokers drink less". Now being addicted to smoking is the same as being addicted to anything, if you have an addictive personality, its gonna happen. I wonder what percentage of alcoholics are also smokers.............hmmmmmmmmmmmm...........google here i come!

Now, as with everyone else, don't wanna piss anyone off, just my thoughts

Cheers

Si

Edited June 6, 2007 by Sibob