smoking and the pub

Originally Posted by Paddy1

I agree that it is much more difficult to target econimic activity for various reasons. But to legislate for the protection of an area of employment which kills 54? bar staff a year seems to be a case of misplaced priorities.

Now now, that's a little reductionist ... it is not simply about protecting bar staff. It is about protecting everyone, including smokers themselves by providing added incentive to quit. That's a far larger constituency than the 54 in your caricature.

[Gareth]

Originally Posted by Paddy1

How often is the general non-smoker in a pub, a few nights a week on average?

I should be so lucky

Originally Posted by Paddy1

Their exposure to tobacco smoke is minimal compared to the toxins and nasty stuff that we are all breathing 24/7.

Yep, the pubs in Swindon are a lot better and more ventilated than in Scotland apparently, but the traffic jams stink - literally. I spend the best part of an hour each day in traffic... I wish I could spend the same amount of time in the pub too

Originally Posted by Gareth

I dunno, I quite liked my analogy My ban wouldn't stop you from walking alongside the road, just from walking on the road itself. Similarly, you're suggesting that smokers will be allowed to smoke near the pub, just not inside it.

I don't disagree that the ban would prevent people from having a smoke in the street, but what I'm saying (and have been all along) is that the ban takes away the fundamental choice that you and I and everyone else, as adults, currently have over what we are allowed to do and when and where. I believe vehemently in adults being given the option to choose what is right for them, this applies to smoking cigarettes in a pub, drinking alcohol, having an abortion, believing in God, standing for parliament as a member of the BNP, etc... etc... etc... However, I'm aware that some people feel that it is acceptable to have your rights removed like this. Personally, I'd like to have the choice to smoke outside or inside the pub... or even not to smoke at all if I chose to.

I'm getting a sense of dÃÃâ€*’©ja vu

You're right, we are going round in circles, because no matter how strongly you try to assert the right of the smoker to choose where and when he lights up, you fail to account for the right of the non-smoker not to breathe in the smoke.

Suggesting that the non-smoker should not go to the pub simply will not do. Why should the non-smoker be denied the right to go to the pub? It's as if the willingness to act in the best interests of our health is being portrayed as some kind of moral cowardice!

[clarie]

Originally Posted by Xaccers

1. The majority of patrons of smoking establishments are smokers. This will affect them more than the majority of non-smokers in the UK
2. You have the choice of not entering a smoking establishment, no one is forcing you
4. Where's 3?
5. Not working in a smoking establishment protects anyone who doesn't want to work there due to the smoke.
6. Your wishing to deny me the choice to enter a smoking establishment and eat affects me.

1. Currently, yes. (Although do we know this for sure?). Anyway, if smoking becomes banned in pubs, this could very well change.
2. I want to be able to go out in an evening just like everybody else, and not have to worry about damaging my health through passive smoking.
5. But as we have said a thousand times it is not always that simple, some people do not have a choice.
6. I am not denying you the right to enter or dine anywhere.

[Salu]

Originally Posted by Paddy1

I agree that it is much more difficult to target econimic activity for various reasons. But to legislate for the protection of an area of employment which kills 54? bar staff a year seems to be a case of misplaced priorities.

It would be worth it if 1 life was saved.

[clarie]

Originally Posted by Salu

It would be worth it if 1 life was saved.

Exactly!!! Never mind all of this only 54 bar staff die every year due to passive smoking. That's a hell of a lot of people!! And yet smoking should still be allowed in public places because otherwise it's an infringement of people's right to choose? ********!! There are 54 families out there mourning the loss of a family member, sod your right to choose!

[Salu]

One thing missing in the thread is tolerance. Everyone has made their rights known but what about consideration?

It's not a simple question of person A wanting X and person B wanting Y. The issue is weighted in that person A wants X but person B does not want to be damaged by X. However person B's desire does not harm anyone just slightly inconvenience them. In this situation tolerance is needed and not selfishness..

Originally Posted by Xaccers

1. The majority of patrons of smoking establishments are smokers. This will affect them more than the majority of non-smokers in the UK
2. You have the choice of not entering a smoking establishment, no one is forcing you
4. Where's 3?
5. Not working in a smoking establishment protects anyone who doesn't want to work there due to the smoke.
6. Your wishing to deny me the choice to enter a smoking establishment and eat affects me.




3. Ahh here it is

1. The group is self-selecting, because many non-smokers stay away. It is not a valid, representative group for the purposes of gathering opinion.
2. So a minority of the population make pubs effectively off limits to the majority, whose only crime is to care about their health. Conversely, no-one is forcing you to smoke, apart from your own addictive habit - which you can still indulge in outside, where it affects no-one but yourself.
4. We probably went over it a few dozen times already anyway, don't worry, I'm sure it'll be back
5. So, Johnny Chav, who left school with no GCSEs and no prospects, finds this is the only thing he is fit to do, but he's expected to turn it down (and lose what meagre benefits he might be entitled to as a result) because he cares about his health? You're living in cloud cuckoo land. A great many people are not privileged with the flexible job prospects that some of us have.
6. The only effect on you is an average five minutes added to your life for every fag you don't smoke while sitting in a non-smoking establishment. So sue me.




3. Told you it'd turn up!

[SlackDad]

http://www.thehumorarchives.com/humor/0001171.html

Well I'm giving up right now

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Chris T

<snip>5. So, Johnny Chav, who left school with no GCSEs and no prospects, finds this is the only thing he is fit to do, but he's expected to turn it down (and lose what meagre benefits he might be entitled to as a result) because he cares about his health? You're living in cloud cuckoo land. A great many people are not privileged with the flexible job prospects that some of us have.
<snip>

So bar work is only for thickos then Chris? How snobbish and judgemental do you get?

[SlackDad]

Originally Posted by Salu

One thing missing in the thread is tolerance. Everyone has made their rights known but what about consideration?

It's not a simple question of person A wanting X and person B wanting Y. The issue is weighted in that person A wants X but person B does not want to be damaged by X. However person B's desire does not harm anyone just slightly inconvenience them. In this situation tolerance is needed and not selfishness..

It's a good point. More tolerance in all aspects of life.

Originally Posted by orangebird

So bar work is only for thickos then Chris? How snobbish and judgemental do you get?

That is not what I said, not what I intended to say, and if you could stop being Miss Angry for a few seconds this afternoon it would be abundantly clear to you.

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by Chris T

That is not what I said, not what I intended to say, and if you could stop being Miss Angry for a few seconds this afternoon it would be abundantly clear to you.

You were implying that if you don't do well at school the only kind of job you'd be able to do is bar work. Or did I read it wrong?

[Gareth]

I'm afraid that's how I had interpreted it too... although I'm sure that was not what was intended

edit: oops, meant was not intended... my bad

[clarie]

He wasn't saying that bar work is only for thickos. That is twisting the words. As far as I understood, the basis of what he was saying that it is difficult to get work these days without qualifications, but bar work is one of the few things you can do. That doesn't mean only people without qualifications do bar work.