Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: indy007 on February 27, 2005, 12:45:37 PM
-
Campaigners Demand Pub Smoking Ban (http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4186926)
Campaigners today warned health chiefs to ban smoking in all pubs – or Britain will be breaching an international tobacco treaty.
As of today, the UK entered a World Health Organisation accord aimed at tackling an annual five million tobacco-related deaths across the globe.
A total of 57 countries have agreed to end tobacco advertising, brandish large health warnings on packaging and protect people from the harmful effects of smoking in public.
Britain has already vowed to end smoking in food-serving outlets in 2008 but has critically stopped short of halting tobacco-use in all pubs and clubs.
Anti-smoking campaign group ASH claims this “illogical” reasoning will put Britain’s health chiefs at odds with designers of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
“The treaty calls for effective measures to protect people from second-hand cigarette smoke,” said director Deborah Arnott.
“The British proposals for 2008 won’t be fully effective.
“There are no grounds for exempting those places where there is the worst tobacco exposure.
“It is completely illogical.
“At its strongest, we could be found to be not complying with the treaty and get thrown out.”
But the Department of Health insisted: “The UK Government is fully complaint with the provisions of the treaty,” a spokeswoman said.
“The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control does not require countries to impose complete smoking bans, but allows for different approaches depending upon national law.
“The public health white paper sets out our policy on smoking in public places and strikes a balance between the rights of those who want to be protected against the harmful effects of other people’s smoking, and the rights of those who choose to smoke.
“We are taking action to deliver a big increase in the number of smoke-free pubs and restaurants in places where food is served while ensuring that people who still want to smoke in public can still do so.”
The accord aims to reduce the number of deaths from tobacco-related illnesses, such as cancer and heart disease, which kill around one smoker every 6.5 seconds.
-
Their nanny government is now being nannied by the UN. A double-nanny-whammy.
-
i think the no smoking in public places law is a good one.
why should i (as a non smoker) have to breath in second hand smoke from people when i go out? wake up next morning stinking of cigarette smoke?
Also it will deter people from ever starting smoking in the first place.
-
Smoking does nobody any good. It's a lot more comfortable to spend a night without sitting the whole time in some addicts toxic fumes.
-
Originally posted by Furball
i think the no smoking in public places law is a good one.
why should i (as a non smoker) have to breath in second hand smoke from people when i go out? wake up next morning stinking of cigarette smoke?
Also it will deter people from ever starting smoking in the first place.
its a pub, whining about smoke in a pub is like whining about water in a lake...which we should get rid of, god knows whos been peeing in there...not to mention the fish
-
Originally posted by vorticon
its a pub, whining about smoke in a pub is like whining about water in a lake...which we should get rid of, god knows whos been peeing in there...not to mention the fish
it doesn't really bother me, i have just accepted that when i go out to bars and clubs i will come back reeking of cigarettes - but it shouldnt be that way... i agree with the law.
-
Source: BBC news here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1998/car_crash/47357.stm) (admittedly 7 years out of date :))
"Road accidents are the single largest killer of men aged between 15 and 44."
If one is really concerned about being killed by someone else there are better places to start. The hypocrisy spewed about health sickens me. Hell, drain the planet dry of natural resources, pump filth into the atmosphere, bury radioactive sludge with a half life of 500,000 years in concrete that degrades in less than 100, drive a vehicle that would be hard put to be better designed to kill pedestrians - but god forbid you have a smoke in my presence!
GO GO PETA!!! :rofl
-
Already a law here in NY.
-
This thread will divide the addicts and non-addicts to two distinct groups.
-
smokers stink!
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
This thread will divide the addicts and non-addicts to two distinct groups.
Not true. I'm a non smoker. I don't think the gov't should tell me how to run my business, though. If people don't want to come to my bar because I allow smoking, don't. Go to a smoke free bar.
-
Didn't know you're a brit Martlet.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Not true. I'm a non smoker. I don't think the gov't should tell me how to run my business, though. If people don't want to come to my bar because I allow smoking, don't. Go to a smoke free bar.
Ditto.
-
Without government regulation there will never be smoke free bars because all the addicts will boycott them anyway. Your idealism doesn't always work so well.
-
i quit smoking, but i disagree with government mandates like these in private establishments.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Without government regulation there will never be smoke free bars because all the addicts will boycott them anyway. Your idealism doesn't always work so well.
Certainly does. There were quite a few successful smoke free bars several cities I frequented.
Like I said, I'm not a smoker.
I'll ignore your previous attempt to completely avoid the discussion and make a personal attack as well.
-
i think the important question here is, can you still smoke wile hunting foxes?
note: after i quit smoking i had to stop going to bars, could not handle the smoke, eyes burned , clothes smelled, even my car smelled just from driving home from the bar.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Without government regulation there will never be smoke free bars because all the addicts will boycott them anyway. Your idealism doesn't always work so well.
My idealism works very well. Better than the "Mommy, make the bad men stop!" idealism being shown by those legislators.
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
My idealism works very well. Better than the "Mommy, make the bad men stop!" idealism being shown by those legislators.
Which ones..the ones in New York or lots of other US cities who have similar laws...or the nanny Britsh legislators who are just getting around to discussing the topic?
:p ;)
-
Originally posted by Curval
Which ones..the ones in New York or lots of other US cities who have similar laws...or the nanny Britsh legislators who are just getting around to discussing the topic?
:p ;)
Not just cities. It's statewide in some places.
-
Its law in New Zealand now.
Talk about a massive anticlimax, smokers were screaming it was infringing on their freedoms, pubs were claiming they'd go out of business, the sky was falling...
end result: huge uptake on government funded programs to get smokers off smoking (lots of smokers noted that social smoking in pubs was one reason they never gave it up). No difference to clubs or pubs business, in fact some a reporting a business increase as there are more non-smokers in the general population than smokers.
The only losers are the dirty tobacco companies.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Its law in New Zealand now.
Talk about a massive anticlimax, smokers were screaming it was infringing on their freedoms, pubs were claiming they'd go out of business, the sky was falling...
end result: huge uptake on government funded programs to get smokers off smoking (lots of smokers noted that social smoking in pubs was one reason they never gave it up). No difference to clubs or pubs business, in fact some a reporting a business increase as there are more non-smokers in the general population than smokers.
The only losers are the dirty tobacco companies.
That isn't the point, though. My position is I don't want a nanny state. I don't want people telling me how to run my business.
-
Originally posted by vorticon
its a pub, whining about smoke in a pub is like whining about water in a lake...which we should get rid of, god knows whos been peeing in there...not to mention the fish
This is the one that always amuses me, I thought pubs were places people gathered to drink, didn't know they gathered there to make others smell bad.
dago
-
Vorticon how much experience do you have concerning pubs?
-
Originally posted by thrila
Vorticon how much experience do you have concerning pubs?
thrila's experience amounts to 'men only' pubs...
-
That's still experience.........big boy.
-
You won't know a pub untill you've tangoed in Blue Oyster.
-
I am against smoking bans mostly because it infringes on a business owners right to run his business as he sees fit. Govt offices/buildings....sure....but privately owned businesses, shouldnt it be up to the owners descretion. If a smoke free pub is the way to go than owners should adjust accordingly.
-
It doesn't infringe anything because it puts everyone in the same line. People won't stop going to pubs and nobody loses business as it's as illegal to everyone.
Everywhere that this kind of laws were created the end result has been positive, meaning the business actually got bigger than before.
-
First the smoke ...
Next the beer ...
A civilisation is dying :p
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
It doesn't infringe anything because it puts everyone in the same line. People won't stop going to pubs and nobody loses business as it's as illegal to everyone.
Everywhere that this kind of laws were created the end result has been positive, meaning the business actually got bigger than before.
For the greater good, Komrade!
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
It doesn't infringe anything because it puts everyone in the same line. People won't stop going to pubs and nobody loses business as it's as illegal to everyone.
Everywhere that this kind of laws were created the end result has been positive, meaning the business actually got bigger than before.
Every time they've done this in the states Pub/bar owners have lost revenues accorss the board. It should be up to the owners descretion. If a smoke free bar can make money than why isn't there allready smoke free bars based on the owners policy and not the govts?
The other problem is these laws are generally pretty broad and don't allow the owner to accomadate smokers by makeing a smoking sections.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
That isn't the point, though. My position is I don't want a nanny state. I don't want people telling me how to run my business.
And my point is I want to enjoy going out without sucking in someone elses smoke. Who's infringing on who's freedom when smokers are now a minority?
Nobodies stopping you from filling your lungs with carcenogens, just don't do it in the same room as the rest of us ;)
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
And my point is I want to enjoy going out without sucking in someone elses smoke. Who's infringing on who's freedom when smokers are now a minority?
Nobodies stopping you from filling your lungs with carcenogens, just don't do it in the same room as the rest of us ;)
Ahhhh, majority rules. I get it. Funny how people use that argument when it suits them, but argue against it when it doesn't.
Regardless, you're obviously a proponent of the nanny state. I'm not. I prefer to give each individual the right to run their business as they see fit and let the market dictate who they give their dollar to. If you're the majority, you shouldn't have any trouble, right? The businesses will cater to you and the smokers will be forced to find smoking bars to go to.
That isn't what you want, though. You want the government to enforce your will upon others because it benefits you.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
Ahhhh, majority rules. I get it. Funny how people use that argument when it suits them, but argue against it when it doesn't.
Regardless, you're obviously a proponent of the nanny state. I'm not. I prefer to give each individual the right to run their business as they see fit and let the market dictate who they give their dollar to. If you're the majority, you shouldn't have any trouble, right? The businesses will cater to you and the smokers will be forced to find smoking bars to go to.
That isn't what you want, though. You want the government to enforce your will upon others because it benefits you.
Perhaps if smokers ever respected the NO SMOKING signs then this would never have had to be forced down peoples throats. I've lost count of the number of times obnoxious smokers have ignored the rights of others when it comes to this.... so I guess its karma and tough biccies to you.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Perhaps if smokers ever respected the NO SMOKING signs then this would never have had to be forced down peoples throats. I've lost count of the number of times obnoxious smokers have ignored the rights of others when it comes to this.... so I guess its karma and tough biccies to you.
So they should outlaw automobiles because people speed? They should outlaw computers because people spam? They should outlaw fire because people commit arson?
I've heard some dumb arguments, but "it's karma tough biccies to you" is up towards the top of the list.
I'm not a smoker, btw. I just believe people should have the right to run their business as they'd like, just as people have the right to patronize the businesses they choose.
-
I am not a smoker, but I think it should be up to the bar owner.
Just more of the government sticking its nose were it does not belong.
-
Originally posted by Curval
Which ones..the ones in New York or lots of other US cities who have similar laws...or the nanny Britsh legislators who are just getting around to discussing the topic?
:p ;)
Both.
-
Wow, this doesn't have to be an IQ test people.
You set it up like this:
The bar owner can decide whether or not to have a non-smoking bar. The bar owner CLEARLY ADVERTISES what the bar is.
This way if you don't like smoke, you don't have to even get near the bar. If you are a smoker you can go in either bar. But you can only smoke in one.
Stop trying to make decisions for the people. Soon you'll be whiping us.
-
I hate all the tarling hubbub about this mess. Just left Columbus after the ban... moved to Cl3v3lanD now they wanna start a ban here. This law is like a plauge sweeping across the nation. Spent the winter in Vancuver and Whistler BC where the ban was allready in place. Everyone spent most of thier time freezing thier arses off puffin outside. Half the bar population was outside in sub 0 C conditions. It was pretty frekin funny. I can't even count the number of non smokers I know that have bummed cigs off me at the BAR. It's rediculous how synonomous drinking and smoking can be in the "ambiance" associated with a club/bar. All of u "nonies" should really STFU and think for a second. Resturants, fine, I won't even smoke of the presence of people eating. That's just rude and disgusting (coming from a pack at least a dayer).
.... :rolleyes: Anyways, just STFU and leave the pubs/bars/clubs out of it. Where there is smoke there is fire, and that is what the moths flock to and crave.
VIVA LA SMOKE VIVA LA BOOZE!!!!!!!!!
-
Gunslinger the very thing that makes rules necessary is that businessmen aim to maximise profits. If they set a rule that will effectively block out 40% of the customers, those customers will move to other establishments that will allow smoking. That way they lose revenue.
If the smokers would have no backup option they'd have to either cave in on the addiction or simply go to a non-smoking bar like the rest of the people.
But as long as there's an option the addicts will always take it.
-
It's already that way in Ireland, and soon all Yurop will be like that. It pi**es me off, but what can you do?
At least they are organised (there are heating lights and protection from rain in some pubs).
Since feb last year, we're no longer allowe to smoke in the office, so now you have a bunch of pple smoking outside (Luxembourg weather is far from being like Bermuda*) ... so we'll all end up with pneumonia.
*- Yes Curval, I'm jealous :)
-
Silly law for silly people.
Every pub over here have saloon for smokers and saloon for non smokers, w/o silly law for brainless sheep.
Lets see when they will get law, whitch will force them to remove toilet seat bofore using toilet and put it back after.
In fact that UK have biggest illiteracy in EU (probably whole europe) im not wondering about that. :D
-
Originally posted by Saintaw
It's already that way in Ireland, and soon all Yurop will be like that. It pi**es me off, but what can you do?
This is clearly an international conspiracy and it affects the yanks too. They won't stop at tobacco...anything potentially "dangerous" is in theur agenda.
-
Its all crap. Tobacco tax revenues are about £10.5 billion a year in the UK, total NHS expenditure on tobacco related illness about £1.5 billion. Makes you wonder who they will target to make up the initial £9 billion loss.
When all 'bad' things are illegal and we all live to be 150 and our grandchildren are working 12 hours a day till they're 95 to support all us geriatrics who wanted to live a reasonably short but indulgent life, I just hope some old fart somewhere will be having a quiet laugh and a puff while hawking up tobacco stained phlegm at all the super fit geezers who want to live (and work) forever.
-
Hope you freedom loving buisness owners are just as eager to support your first empolyee when they sue your arse for second hand smoke :aok
Tronsky
-
Cigarette smoke is a toxic poison that kills hundreds of thousands of people per year.
Alcohol, in moderation (1-3 drinks a day) will make you live longer.
-
Fireworks will be next, then cycling without a helmet and full body armour. Then caffeine, red meat, sugar, getting less than 8 hours sleep, in fact everything till we're just sat around looking at each other till we're bored to death.
-
Originally posted by -tronski-
Hope you freedom loving buisness owners are just as eager to support your first empolyee when they sue your arse for second hand smoke :aok
Tronsky
As an employeee you can choose whether or not to work in a place that allows smoking, just as you can choose to frequent an establishment that allows smoking or not.
Theres a push on for this nonesence here too.
Im all for buisness owners being allowed to run their buisness their way.
There are already plenty of establishments who by their own choice dont allow smoking just as there are plenty that do.
And thats the way it should be.