scotland begins pub smoking ban

Post Reply New Topic

a ban on smoking in public places - including bars and restaurants - has come into effect in scotland.

it is being hailed as a step forward for health but critics say it will cost jobs and infringe human rights.

I don't smoke. But I find that this law is nasty jobsworthery passing itself off as proper legislation. The same can be said of the other smoking bans passed in the other parts of the Union.

I know alot of people who like to have a smoke as they drink. This could be bad for business!

New Zealand hs had smoking bans for ages. It hasent effected busness that much because more non smokers are willing to stay longer in the bars.

I don't know. Something tells me these bans on smoking are a portent of worse things to come. What next? Prohibition?

Tequila wrote: Of 'violent' pornography?


Don't even get me started on porn. (the world would be better off without it)

But you do raise a good point. How much restriction of freedom are we going to allow? Fatty foods is a health risk just as cigarettes are. (although you can't get second-hand cholesterol from it....or can you? How 'bout all that fryer grease in the air at places like McDonalds? Maybe we could get the U.S. government to give us HUGE grants to determing the effects of airborne grease globules! )

I live in Canada and (at least in my province) they started smoking bans in public places... I forget how long ago. A couple of years ago? Of course people were furious at first, but it actually hasn't hurt business in places like bars like they thought it would. From what I've heard it didn't make much difference at all, if anything it helped business because it's better for the non-smoking customers. The area where I live is one of the few places where you can still smoke in public places, because as far as farming goes we're the tobacco capital of Canada. When people come here from other areas they think it's weird that people still smoke everywhere around here. Now that they're used to it the other way, even most smokers seem to appreciate smoke-free restaurants, bars etc. A province-wide ban is coming into effect in the next few weeks though and people are NOT happy here around Delhi...

I am an ex-smoker and I only smoked in my garage (not in the house) or outside (not in buildings) because I too like fresh air and I didn't want to bother people who don't smoke.
Nevertheless, this banning frenzy scares me! Sooner or later, someone more intelligent and eloquent than I is going to post the reasons against the banning in a succinct way and I am going to read it and say, "Yeah, that's what I meant!".

They have the ban in NYC and in Ct were I am I don't go out to bars so I realy don't know how it affects them or if in many places its even enforced. I don't smoke never did but I realy hate all this banning stuff whats next as you say? Junk food,govenors on cars to keep them from speeding,then there's prohibition and we all know how good that worked

They just passed such a ban in the state I live in in the US (Washington). It's particularly stringent in the Seattle area...and I've never been happier.

I view it this way: there may be people out there who get satisfaction from dumping something poisonous in their water before they drink it. If they want to do this in the privacy of their own homes, that's fine. But if they go dump it in the public water supply because they feel it would be more convenient if any drinking fountain they stopped at would have their poison in the water, that's infringing upon the rights of others, and isn't okay. You can choose to not drink alcohol. You can choose to not view pornography, if that's not your thing. You cannot, however, simply elect to not breathe. That's why I think there's a big difference between smoking bans and prohibition.

I have asthma, so perhaps I'm especially sensitive to this issue, but I'm tired of not being able to go out without having smoke blown in my face. It happened in restaurants, bus stops, clubs, bars, and I have known a number of people who have had health problems resulting from their having been exposed to smoke at work. Why not do what they're beginning to do in Japan and provide enclosed smoking areas for those who wish to be exposed to smoke so those who don't, or can't, are not restricted because of the behavioral preferences of others? I'm all for smoking booths, smoking lounges, whatever...but as smokers don't own the oxygen we all need to breathe, it's no more their right to pollute it than it's my right to throw my litter all over the ground in a public park.

This is yet another example of a parliament foisting illiberal legislation on people when a better idea would have been simply to let the market decide. I can’t wait to see how they plan to enforce this non-smoking legislation in dodgier pubs, bars and clubs. If they can’t stop people taking drugs, beating the s**t out of each other and generally committing crime how on God’s Earth do they plan to stop people having a tab with their pint? Yes, we know, everyone knows - hell, much of the world knows that smoking perhaps isn’t the best thing in the world for you and it’s not particularly pleasant when someone is smoking right next to you but people don’t care. So why not leave them in peace, hm? Meanwhile, most people will just do their smoking at home, causing more harm to any children that they might have. So younger, vulnerable people suffer. Hooray for public health.

And, as the Scottish blogger Devil's Kitchen points out (http://devilskitchen.blogspot.com/2006/03/he-who-controls-past.html), he who controls the past controls the present. In the smoking bans brought into force in Scotland, no one can smoke anywhere in a workplace, and this particularly affects television studios. Inspector Rebus will no longer smoke; nor will Churchill; those who write plays or film scripts will no longer be able to have their characters smoke. Including period films. So people will never have smoked. Even American and Canadian smoking bans do not go this far. And thus, eventually, the state will have ultimately rewritten history.

Lovely thought, isn't it?

Ah a minor issue blown out of proportion into attack on civil liberites and freedom of will. Fools

were only catching up with what the Austrians did 150 years ago in Vienna.

Lets use our initiative here and think about this in a more straightforward prospective. This is a drug you take in by setting fire to it and inhaling the fumes in a pre-fabricated roll for ease of manufacture and distribution.....

This legislation is a public smoking ban because the fumes of the drug are indiscriminate and will be breathed in by people of the local vicinity whether by consent or not. For the employee's of a work place with smokers they are subjected to it as part of their job, so in effect the rights of these individuals goes out of the window. It also goes against government health promotion initiatives to curb deaths caused by smoking, such as heart disease, lung cancer and various other respitory and heart problems. So therefore any legal licenced and state approved establishment has a duty to its employees to provide a safe environment to work in under the health and safety act so you can kinda see where im going with this and weve heard that argument in the media.

Now what you do within your own home is still your freedom your choice, but lets extend this. Do we really need the nanny state to make sure all the public houses clubs and work places are regulated like this? In London there are illegal raves, squat party's etc all the time everywhere if you want to talk about free will of an individual then goto a legal business regulated by government then your still in the nanny state.

So ok what am i getting at here. Well what im trying to say in so many words is the people who cry foul of civil liberties being violated then go to places which are regulated by the big brother state so you have a safe, protected and sheltered time out and if you cause trouble you will be dealt with by state militia (the police) You will then return to your homes where you think you are free and able to pursue whatever private perversities you have away from the scrutinising eyes of your society, but then what do you do in the morning? You goto work and slave away like the economic unit that you are.

Maybe those who feel the smoking ban is an attack on civil liberties need to read Octave Mirbeau's The Torture Garden

Laz, the Communist Dog, wrote: Fools

Is that an insult or just your arrogance popping out?

I have some concerns about smoking bans overall, but I'm not entirely sure whether or not I'm for or against it.

As for people here, try thinking of it along this line:

Say you're an aspie who is very sensitive to smoke inhalation. Say that it could become so bad that it could cause you to meltdown. If this were true, then you could never go into a restaurant or a public place, because it would be so bad. Would you still be against a smoking ban?

- Ray M -