Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
They have every right to be eating dinner with their parents in any of the tens of thousands of pubs that also function as a restaurant. Many of these have segregated seating, I accept, but I think the concept of air conditioning that keeps smoke out of the non-smoking areas is one of the greatest mis-selling scandals of our age. I have yet to go to such an establishment where the non-smoking tables anywhere near the smoking ones are free of smoke.
|
Surely their parents should not be taking them to smokey enviroments in the first place?
Is anyone holding a gun to non-smokers' heads saying "you must come into smoking establishments or else" because as a non-smoker (never ever have I been tempted to smoke) I've never felt that I could not say no and choose somewhere else to go.
Even when out with my gf who is a smoker, if it's too smokey for me, I will tell her and she understands (she's great like that).
We'd never take kids into a restaurant which has smokey non-smoking areas, to me only a bad parent would deliberately expose their children to such an environment.
I feel it is hypocritical of the goverment to remove the choice of people to partake in second hand smoking, but let people retain the choice to partake in the more dangerous first hand smoking.
Why as a non-smoker should I not be allowed to sit at a table with smokers and enjoy a meal with them "because it may damage my health" while I take up smoking which definitely would damage my health?
It should be up to the landlord/owner to decide if they're going to go non-smoking totally or not.
Sure, increase the ventilation regulations etc of establishments to reduce the danger to people, but don't let us sink further into a nanny state.