Smoking Ban

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 2:47 PM

Originally posted by Macy
So that stops you going to the pub now does it?

People smoking stops me going to pubs as much as I might otherwise do.

What I cant understand is the logic of non-publician anti-ban people.

Its your right to smoke? What about everyone elses right not to have tar in their lungs?

Is their another arguement?

**tiktok** · 04/03/2004, 3:00 PM

Originally posted by Macy
So that stops you going to the pub now does it?

Where I live there are three pubs within a few minutes walk, the one that is now my regular, I chose because the other two have low ceilings and were very smoky. Simple as that.

As for tobacco being outlawed, brilliant bloody idea! Not going to happen though with the amount of tax the government takes in on it.

**Macy** · 04/03/2004, 3:02 PM

Originally posted by tiktok
As for tobacco being outlawed, brilliant bloody idea! Not going to happen though with the amount of tax the government takes in on it.

Exactly, so they should ditch the "health of the nation" rhetoric...

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 3:07 PM

Originally posted by Macy

Open up pub licences only to non-smoking pubs, and give customers and workers the choice of which they prefer. Or are they scared of the answer?

Choice????? In this poxy country? Not a chance.

And SoC and others there's the argument above from Macy. SoC have you ever left a Wetherspoons boozer smelling of smoke?

I have no problem with a ban IF there's an element of choice. No smoking where food is served, no smoking at the bar etc but what about a pub like for instance the Horse and Jockey? Will the ban be enforced there? Of course not, and there's hundreds of working class/local pubs across the country like that.

If ******* who read the Irish Times and visit the pub a couple of times a year to eat bruschetta and have a glass of merlot want a smoke free environment fair enough. What about the actual drinkers? Where's our choice?

I'll be smoking in every pub I go in - I hope I meet one of you there!

KOH

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 3:09 PM

Originally posted by Macy
Exactly, so they should ditch the "health of the nation" rhetoric...

Well I know a fair few smokers who plan to give up when this comes in or who have already given up in preparation.

Add to that the amount of social smokers who wont smoke anymore.

Hence introducing this law will reduce the amount of smokers which is good for the health of the nation.

Banning fags would just force them underground. They would carry health warning etc.

Better way is, just like this, through education and policy make it socially unacceptable to smoke. If people dont buy them the companies who sell them wont continue to do so.

**Dodge** · 04/03/2004, 3:10 PM

Originally posted by Macy
What was that case outside Annabell's that was in the papers recently again?

Now thats a ban I'd actively campaign for. banning ****head public schoolboys!

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 3:14 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
Choice????? In this poxy country? Not a chance.

SoC have you ever left a Wetherspoons boozer smelling of smoke?

Yup.

But of course not as badly as other pubs. Of course Im still inhailing the stuff just by being there.

WAR makes a good point about pubs in certain areas.

Down in the Gaeltacht past Dingle, like many other rural parts of the country the pubs dont obey the licencing laws so they are not going to pay a bit of notice to this. Garda� are aware of this.

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 3:30 PM

Originally posted by S�C
Garda� are aware of this.

The Guards aren't policing it though. It's up to the individual Publican and the couple of litter/dog/smoke wardens they employ. Hence my point about it not being enforced.

The point about people giving up and social smokers stopping just proves Macy's point about the nanny state. It's nobody's business if I smoke/drink/eat Big Macs/take smack etc

Then again I'm a crazy libertarian and hate all laws and authority.

This **** jeeps up I'm off to live in Cardiff.

KOH

**max power** · 04/03/2004, 3:34 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
The Guards aren't policing it though. It's up to the individual Publican and the couple of litter/dog/smoke wardens they employ. Hence my point about it not being enforced.

The point about people giving up and social smokers stopping just proves Macy's point about the nanny state. It's nobody's business if I smoke/drink/eat Big Macs/take smack etc

Then again I'm a crazy libertarian and hate all laws and authority.

This **** jeeps up I'm off to live in Cardiff.

KOH

its noone s business if you smoke etc, well then if you i'm i pub its nobodys business if i swing my arms wildly and hit you in the face ???

its your business if you do it and it does not effect others, if youe at home smoke/f*rt/p*iss all over the place but from 29 march if your in a pub and i'm thre and you light up....don't think i for one will say or do nothing.......

**Macy** · 04/03/2004, 3:42 PM

Originally posted by max power
its your business if you do it and it does not effect others, if youe at home smoke/f*rt/p*iss all over the place but from 29 march if your in a pub and i'm thre and you light up....don't think i for one will say or do nothing.......

Scenario 1 - It's a big f�ck off weight-lifting scumbag - are you going to tell him to put out his smoke?
Scenario 2 (esp for WAR) - There's 20 Rover's fans smoking in one corner of the pub. What are you going to do then?

Some of my regular spots, the landlord would be none to impressed if started grassing (no pun intended) on smoking in their pubs.

**max power** · 04/03/2004, 3:47 PM

don't really care who they are..most pubs in dublin have door men and i know most of them ( only a few companies and i know people who work for all of them ) so no problems......and as a wise man once said, no matter how big man be, kick him between legs and he falls...

you contact management and if they refuse to deal with the problem you report tehm, same as you would with the cinema or non smoking section of a restaurant.

the real problem is a woman, can' t say anything to them or its haressment and door men hate dealing with troublesome females

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 4:02 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers

The point about people giving up and social smokers stopping just proves Macy's point about the nanny state. It's nobody's business if I smoke/drink/eat Big Macs/take smack etc

Untill you get sick and start clogging up the health care system which the Government pays for.

As for Cardiff, my lease is up in a month if ya want it. I'll even throw in a Civil Serivce job for ya.

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 4:06 PM

Originally posted by S�C
Untill you get sick and start clogging up the health care system which the Government pays for.
.

That's what I pay my taxes for! If you drive a big **** off car and crash you'd expect to get treatment. We've entered the realms of making judgement calls on people receiving health care. And that's too scary for words.

KOH

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 4:10 PM

Originally posted by max power
don't really care who they are..most pubs in dublin have door men and i know most of them ( only a few companies and i know people who work for all of them ) so no problems......and as a wise man once said, no matter how big man be, kick him between legs and he falls...

you contact management and if they refuse to deal with the problem you report tehm, same as you would with the cinema or non smoking section of a restaurant.

Vast, vast majority of Dublin pubs don't have doormen. The crappy city centre superpubs and suburban warehouse boozers do, luckily I don't drink in either kind of establishment.

"contact management....report them." That's what's known round our way as being a rat. Try telling a pub full of Rovers fans they can't smoke. Best of luck. We'll be bringing smokers to all of our away trips and we'll be smoking in your pubs.

KOH

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 4:14 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
That's what I pay my taxes for! If you drive a big **** off car and crash you'd expect to get treatment. We've entered the realms of making judgement calls on people receiving health care. And that's too scary for words.

KOH

No No ok I didnt make myself clear (again).
An extreme example:
You smoke. Grand. Your right to do so. You pay taxes like me and my 3 friends.

Me and my 3 friends dont smoke. But becuase you smoke we end up in hospital, just like you. Now if you didnt smoke then we wouldnt have ended up in hospital.

Government looks at that and says; "Hey if this guy didnt smoke in public places then only he would have ended up in here giving us four free beds. If we had an active anti-smoking policy we'd save a **** load and free up beds."

Hence your rights are infringed. Ours are not.
Public Policy, Public Health, Public Security are accepted as ground for denying rights.

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 4:21 PM

Originally posted by S�C
No No ok I didnt make myself clear (again).
An extreme example:
You smoke. Grand. Your right to do so. You pay taxes like me and my 3 friends.

Me and my 3 friends dont smoke. But becuase you smoke we end up in hospital, just like you. Now if you didnt smoke then we wouldnt have ended up in hospital.

As you said it's an extreme example but even still it's ridiculous. When the day comes that 1 smoker can hospitalise 3 innocent passive smokers I'll be the first one charging the gates of PJ Carrolls.

My only point is that yes you have a right to a smoke free environment, I fully accept that but what if punters/staff and management of a particular pub want to allow smoking? Where is the harm? Who has the right to tell all these consenting adults what to do?

If someone walks into just such a "smoking" pub and doesn't like it they can take their business elsewhere. It's called choice and it's what makes our capitalist world go round. But it makes too much sense for our so-called leaders.

As you can tell I'm pretty wound up by this but it's the nanny state aspect of it that particularly annoys.

KOH

**eoinh** · 04/03/2004, 4:37 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
When the day comes that 1 smoker can hospitalise 3 innocent passive smokers I'll be the first one charging the gates of PJ Carrolls.

youre right they dont put them into hospital - they kill them !

**S�C** · 04/03/2004, 4:40 PM

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
As you said it's an extreme example but even still it's ridiculous. When the day comes that 1 smoker can hospitalise 3 innocent passive smokers I'll be the first one charging the gates of PJ Carrolls.

ok 1 smoker wont put 3 in hospitial. 1 million might effect 3 million peoples health though.

My only point is that yes you have a right to a smoke free environment, I fully accept that but what if punters/staff and management of a particular pub want to allow smoking? Where is the harm? Who has the right to tell all these consenting adults what to do?

Problem is that employers are duty bound by law to provide a safe working environment. Its grand to say the employees dont mind working there, until 20 years later they come back and sue. Even if there contract had an express term saying that they dont mind working in a smoking pub a court could strike such a contract down on a number of grounds.

It annoys me too to an extent that they go after smoking in workplaces becuase it grabs headlines but then decide not to have an extra taxes etc on those big industires who put tonnes of smoke and gases out each and every day.

**my left foot** · 04/03/2004, 4:41 PM

personally i cant wait for the new law forcin all of you poisonous drivers to drive your cars only in the privacy of your own garages.it`ll put a stop to the rise in childhood asthma ......mebbe

**WeAreRovers** · 04/03/2004, 5:16 PM

Originally posted by S�C
ok 1 smoker wont put 3 in hospitial. 1 million might effect 3 million peoples health though.

Problem is that employers are duty bound by law to provide a safe working environment. Its grand to say the employees dont mind working there, until 20 years later they come back and sue. Even if there contract had an express term saying that they dont mind working in a smoking pub a court could strike such a contract down on a number of grounds.

It annoys me too to an extent that they go after smoking in workplaces becuase it grabs headlines but then decide not to have an extra taxes etc on those big industires who put tonnes of smoke and gases out each and every day.

This is my last post on this, for today anyway - I'm off to the pub for a pint (and a smoke)

The workplace thing is a sham. Martin used the Barworker's union (Impact?) to bring this in. They represent less than 30% of barworkers.

I'm not defending the fact that only 30% are in unions merely that they don't represent barworkers. This will cost jobs but hey the one's with with jobs will be healthy.

And Conor, top post apart from the apologetic FF sign-off.

KOH