42 days to no smoking (UK)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 06:05 AM

It's not that I don't want to continue, this ban has taken everything out of me & from me.
I am too tired & depressed to continue.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 06:03 AM

Awwww - c'mon guys. At least let me know why. I put all that work in building the idea. You can't demolish it just by saying no! Anyway, my Dad's bigger than yours... :-)

D.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 05:56 AM

Correct Les, it wouldn't.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 05:13 AM

No

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 04:52 AM

BTW - I heard from skipy that he didn't want to continue the debate so it now falls to me to argue both sides. Bugger!

The questions I last posed were to concentrate the mind on a better solution that did suit everyone. How about this. A smoke room licence. We have always had to have a licence for pubs. We now need a licence for music. TV watching is taxed and even dogs need their bit of paper! (Is that still true?) What is wrong with having a licensed smoke room? It would need to be sealed off from the rest of the premises with ventilation capable of ensuring that the smoke or smells did not carry. It could be inspected every year and at random to make sure it still did the job. There could be a charge for it, generating more revenue for the local council and smokers would need to ensure it was kept in reasonable shape by emptying their own ashtrays into sealed containers for disposal!

Would it work?

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 04:33 AM

I don't think it will be all of a sudden - these things do take time. The experience of pubs in Scotland, Ireland and Wales is that the alcohol takings are about the same, or slightly less, but pub takings by way of food and snacks are up. That suits me fine. The breweries and distileries have made mega profits for years while landlords and managers tend to fall behind. The good landlord will now realise that food has a much better profit margin anyway and some of the money will be shifted from the big boys to the little fish and, hopefuly, keep the money in the community pub. Seems to be happening elsewhere anyway. I hope England follows suit!

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Kampervan
Date: 06 Jul 07 - 02:36 AM

Well as we all know it is now a done deal so it's a bit academic to argue about whether it was right or not.

But one undeniable fact that has arisen during the first week of the ban is that pub takings for at least one brewery are a lot lower than they were before the ban.

I'm not arguing either way about the ban, just stating a fact.

The pubs have been cleaned, polished and, in some cases redecorated, but there has been absolutely no sign of all those people who hate tobacco smoke suddenly making a bee-line for the new sweet-smelling, smoke-free environment that they were so vocal about wanting.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Kara
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 05:44 PM

Hello
I haven't read all this thread as it is so long, so if I am repeteing what has already been said I'm sorry. I live in france where there are still a lot of people who smoke, and going into bars is so unpleasantly smokey that I try to avoid it. There is a plan to ban smoking here in bars but it is getting a lot of resistance. Its is strange though that the same people who support fair trade and buy organic are also supporting a business that has been built on the back of slavery.

There are big posters in most bars here now saying " In one year my business could be closed because of the smoking ban"

In the last 3 years I have lost 3 good friends to lung cancer, thats not a "could be" thats a done thing.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 05:32 PM

Precisely. What I have in mind is that when they changed the law back in 1964 and effectively made it impossible to use coffee bars for live music in the way skiffle groups had, no one would have envisaged that folk clubs in pub function rooms would take off. Laws always have outcome that weren't quite predicted.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rog Peek
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 05:14 PM

One of course would be this:
thread.cfm?threadid=102925&messages=29

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 04:40 PM

It'll be interesting to see what social innovations come out of this.

One is going to be people finding ways of allowing social smoking indoors to continue, legally or illegally. And they will.

Another will be the return of snuff-taking in pubs and similar.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 11:58 AM

The answer, my friend GUEST the one, is blowing with the wind...

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,GALLINGER
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 11:56 AM

YER I FIND MYSELF HANGING ROUND OFFICE BUILDINGS AT BREAK TIMES

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,the one
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 11:42 AM

does any one find it hard to give up passive smoking im'e finding it hell i might try used patches pip.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 10:26 AM

Your only jelous:-) I get paid far too much and enjoy myself far too much as well!

:D

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,Busy
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 10:18 AM

Some folk have FAR too much time on their hands

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 08:18 AM

Ahhhh, that's better. I'll definitely be fighting back if you take my pint...

Oh, sorry, pOint! :-P

OK - Devils advocate hat on. If I were to agree that smoking and non-smoking pubs were a good idea, how would it work? Assuming that 30% of the population are smokers would you agree that having 30% of pubs as smoking venues would be fair? I hope so. OK. Which 30% of the pubs become the smokers ones? Who decides? Would you not then have the same situation that you are complaining about - Ie that someone is imposing their will on the pubs? If so, we would therefore need some other way of doing it.

How about 30% of pubs volunteer to be smokers pubs? Can you or I, or anyone else for that matter, be sure that the 30% would be achieved? Would more pubs volunteer because, as you believe, smoking pubs make more money? Would less volunteer because, as I believe, non-smoking pubs make more money? What if there is only one or two pubs in the area? Fine for me - There are 30, leaving me 20 to go in. What about you though with only 2 pubs? How do you get 30% of 2 and still have seperate buildings? Do we now have to start saying that 30% of ALL premises (and not just pubs!) have to be put aside for smokers? How do we achieve that? How much is it going to cost to achieve that? Who is going to pay?

How about having a division where, as suggested, smoking pubs do not serve food? DO you think the landlords will be happy to loose the high-profit food business in return for the low-profit tobacco sales? What about our folk club? There are three of us running it. 2 don't smoke, one does. Do we have to have seperate nights out from our closest friends, family and spouses because we cannot sit in the same pubs and maintain everyones rights at the same time?

I put it to you that one law for everyone and every situation is a much fairer way than what you are suggesting. Now EVERYONE is on an even footing. All pubs are safe in the knowledge that non of them have any unfair advantage. All non-smokers are happy that they can go inside a pub without being subjected to smoke. All smokers are happy in that they can smoke OUTSIDE whichever pub they like.

Explain to me a workable model of what you suggest, covering all the above points and I will agree that it is better idea than the ban. If nothing else please think it through.

Beats doing what I am supposed to be doing anyday...:-D

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 07:38 AM

I take your point & agree if yoy read back you will see that I have supported the right for non smokers to have clean air, hence my desire for non smoking pubs & smoking pubs.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 07:32 AM

Well done indeed that man:-) There is nothing in there I can argue with apart from one point of pedantry - but just for old times sake I will mention it:-)

It is not 'erosion of rights' it should be 'erosion of MY rights'. The fact that your rights to smoke where you like no longer exist is a sore point but the right for people to not breathe your smoke has increased enormously. The rights of 70% of people to not breathe smoke are more than double the rights of the 30% of smokers so, therefore, on balance, rights have actualy INCREASED rather than decreased. I will let it go though because I think everyone understands that you are refering to your own personal rights rather than good of the majority.

What am I going to do with the rest of my day now...;-)

Cheers

Dave.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 06:38 AM

Well done Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 06:35 AM

BNP are going to challenge the smoking ban, now here is the big confession!
I didn't even sign their petition because there is no way that I am willingly going to give them my email address!
Yes, I am furious that nothing has been done for smokers, I am furious about the errosion of rights & the constant PC crap that we bow down to.
I am carrying on because the non smokers do need my help! Albiet begrudgingly I will help where I can, it's in my nature.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 06:24 AM

I am realy glad to hear that you are not with the BNP, skipy, but you must understand how I was so confused over your politcal affiliations. These are all your own posts...

I have become active with a "smaller" party ????

BNP ?????

CORRECT
Skipy

BNP is not the party it used to be, check their web site, read what they have to say.

Acctually I don't think the BNP does support smoking I don't know for sure I haven't checked but there again have you?

You then moved on to

O/K "active" means I read their bloody website, about once a fortnight, if I remember to do so! Thats ALL!

and finaly

My connection with the BNP is that I have read their site as they are preparing to counter attack on the smoking law, no other connection at all! Most of what I have read is abstract lunacy.

All in the space of a week or two! I guess you are just using the BNP view to counterpoint those of the others but it is very difficult to spot what your views actualy are if you keep giving us conflicting information!

You have also changed considerably on another front!

Remember saying -

what is the point of that, so why go, so why run a charity, why bother to run a festival! The whole of my life may well change, I mmay leave folk music & charity behind me.

Well, you did.

What about

Tonight however I signed the cheques for the staff of the Old Mill Hall for the last time, end of an era - 11 years of attending a meeting every Monday, so who is going to do it from hereon in? well they will have to find a non smoker! There should be a meeting this Friday for the events of the weekend, non smoker needed or it will not be monitored for sound, health & safety etc.
Scout meeting next week, I won't be there, cub meeting the following week, well get someone else to repair the building, because I won't be there.

Yep, you said that as well.

You now say -

Also last night I agreed to carry on with my work...

What has caused these huge changes of viewpoint and attitude may I ask? For a man with an IQ of over 140 you seem to struggle a bit with logic and consistancy. May I suggest that rather than using inconsistant devices and false logic to back up your specious claims it would be better if you just admit that you are annoyed at the legislation for political and personal reasons? No-one will think any less of you.

I am more than happy to admit that I am arguing now just because I am enjoying it. I don't feel the need to justify myself. I also freely admit that some of your principles are spot on. I actualy bought a packet of cigars last week so I could smoke in a pub for one last time. People SHOULD have the right to smoke and drink. Pubs SHOULD have done something sensible for non-smokers rather than being forced to. Unfortunately they didn't and no amount of harping on about it will change history. Particularly when the harps are so badly tuned? :-)

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 04:48 AM

Dave
My connection with the BNP is that I have read their site as they are preparing to counter attack on the smoking law, no other connection at all! Most of what I have read is abstract lunacy.
I am conservative throuh & through (being 26 years in the military this is not surprising!) I even deliver leaflets for the local conservative candidate because he has had a stoke! Just for the record he ran a folk club for 20+ years, which he offered to me but with my other commitments there is no way I could fit it in.
Also last night I agreed to carry on with my work, we will now be meeting at a friends house where all 4 of us will smoke as much as we can!
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 05 Jul 07 - 04:13 AM

I don't know where you are getting the idea that I am insinuationg anything about you, skipy. Does smoking cause either paranoia or the inability to read posts properly? Go back and try again and you will see that I am likening the idea of segregating differently abled persons (ie, smokers) into seperate pubs, which you are suggesting, to segregating people on the grounds of colour or creed. It makes about as much sense. How does that insinuate that you are racist? Or are you maybe feeling rather touchy at the hypocrisy of admiting to reading the BNP web site while working with and praising so many Kenyan immigrants?

The only reason that I appear to be 'firing at you' is that you are the only one on this thread remaining entrenched in the view that the pub owners are the victims here. In addition, your assertion that you will stop doing charity work as a protest is as ridiculous as it is futile. You are better than that and I am hoping to make you see sense. Like you, I do not believe the cause is lost:-)

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 07:57 PM

Naah - out in the pub garden would be much better. I quite like the smell of pipe smoke - just not indoors.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:59 PM

Only if I can smoke it in the pub.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:50 PM

Peace pipe anyone?

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:30 PM

Dave, you have really let yourself down here,
we are dug in now in trenches rather like the first world war, however only one side is hurling munitions at the other & that is the non smokers, you in particular firing at me & I am not firing back, I find your comments and insinuations about racism & anti semetic behaviour profoundly offensive, come to my place of work where I have masses of Kenyans working for me, interview as many of them as you like & I rest assured that not one of them will say a word against me.
There are many of my friends in the folk world who has heard me praise them wholeheartedly in comparison with the feckless "locals" that I have to put up with.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:12 PM

And thanks to you too, George. I'll hold you to that pint (beer for you, of course, but a 'softie' for me as I no longer take alcohol for health reasons - life's a bitch sometimes!) :-)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:08 PM

Thanks Skipy, still painful after many years. I appreciate your kind comments.
S:0)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 06:03 PM

Dave, you are really not getting this are you, I want seperate bars, sealed off from each other, or better still, non smoking & smoking pubs, chioce being up to the landlord.

Hooray! I had it ages ago, skipy, it was you that didn't! Yes, absolutley. We need seperate venues for smokers and non-smokers. That is what we now have. You smoke in your house. I don't smoke in mine. Easy. Now, about this seperate pubs idea. Would you also suggest serperate pubs for black and white people? Seperate bars for the Jews maybe? Or is it just smokers and other drug addicts that you want to segregate from normal society? No wonder you read the BNP site every couple of weeks;-)

On a more serious note, you have already said that pubs will lose money due to not allowing smokers. I don't believe it myself but how many landlords do you believe will take that chance if this wonderful idea of yours became reality? How many non-smoking pubs were there before the 'ban'? 70+%, representing the number of non-smokers? No chance. Maybe 50%? No? Perhaps 10%? I doubt it.

How many times do I have to say it. The landlords and pub owners have had the choice to make their pubs non-smoking for the last 50 years at least. They haven't done it before now. What makes you think that given the choice they would do it in the future? Your arguments are spurious at the very least and do not do you any credit. At least have the decency to give this different approach a fair chance when the old one has obviously failed.

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 05:06 PM

Backwoodsman, if the room we smoke in has no door opening into a non smoking area, e.g. it's only doors are an in / out to the street & of course a fire door to the outside at the back of the building & the bogs are internal to the building there can be no problem.
Skipy
Just for the record, I was deeply saddened to read what your went through some years ago re smoking, that must have been beyond terrible.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 04:58 PM

I am pretty certain that if I smoked I would prefer a set up where I use the same pub as my mates, and nip out for a smoke when I needed to, rather than one where we were all split up drinking in different places according to whether we smoked or not. I balance I think I'd prefer the new situation to the one skipy favours.

I know an old bloke who loves playing music, and makes instruments and all - and he'd love to be able to join in sessions, but he can't, because they are always in pubs where smoking has been allowed. Even if there's one person smoking that badly affects his breathing.

Now at last after years where the only chance of a session he ever had was sometimes in a festival, he'll have the freedom to come to local stuff.

Anyway laws can - all it takes is for a majority of MPs to come round to the idea that there should be legal smokeasies. They might take some persuading of course.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 04:12 PM

Oh dear Skipy, please read my first paragraph again, then again, and again and again and agin until you get it! Smoke travels. It can't be contained. Every time a door's opened, air containing smoke moves in and out. You can't have a 'sealed room' - if it's sealed, how do you get in and out to go to the bar or the bog? Every time you do that, the smoke (which would get pretty thick and unpleasant, even for hardened addicts, in a 'sealed room') moves out with you.

Skipy, it's not about preventing you from smoking - smoke to your heart's content and do it with my best wishes for your health and happiness. Just don't do it where it affects others who find it revolting. GO to the pub, ENJOY a few pints in the bar, SMOKE outside and do it with good grace - everyone (including the landlord and me) will LOVE you for it. :-)

S:0)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:29 PM

Alice, on the subject of non-smoking rooms getting the smoke through the ventilation system: Bar one or two exceptions, I haven't found that (I usually book non-smoking rooms despite being a smoker), but you'll be pleased to hear that the new legislations stipulates that from now on any hotel rooms where smoking would be permitted would have to be permanently assigned for the purpose and be on a separate ventilation system. I think the majority of hotels would not consider the expense worth it - could be wrong of course.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:23 PM

We can contain radiation, we can contain liquid helium, surely we can contain cigarette smoke. We don't need staff! We can be served remotely our money can be taken electronically. The venue can have it's air filtered overnight before the cleaners come in!
They could even wear suits and respirators as with asbestos! Yes, this would cost, so we would have to pay more for our beer.
Try thinking outside the box instead of just attacking smokers, believe it or not we are people too! We also have feelings!
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:21 PM

A UK news report says the smoking ban will save 600 WORKER's lives a year.
Click here
"Around three times as many workers die from passive smoking than die from workplace accidents.
Research in Scotland has already shown that workers are now exposed to 86% less smoke, and air quality in most Scottish bars is now comparable with average outdoor air quality. "


If you can save lives by simply going outside to smoke, why wouldn't you?
Doesn't the right to health and life have more importance than being able to smoke inside?
You can still smoke, just keep it outside. Even if a business wanted to be for only smoking
customers, they would not probably be able to hire a staff that is totally smokers.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:08 PM

400

Pubs were closing in the UK at 50 a month before smoking.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:07 PM

and yes, 400 comments on this subject

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 02:06 PM

and

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:36 PM

Long before there were any laws in town regulating smoking in public places, Juneau smokers didn't smoke in their own homes. I don't know even one smoker who does. I can't even imagine the shock in a music group if someone lit up.

I did have a tenant who smoked in his kitchen with the window open and a small fan operating. Every one of the others who smoked congregated outdoors.

Smokers in Juneau seem, if not content, at least resigned to it; it's just the way it is.

But then, we also leave our shoes and boots outside the door. Some people bring slippers to wear indoors, others remain in their stocking feet. It's just another way of avoiding bringing pollutants into our homes.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:32 PM

It still comes back to the employee risk of second hand smoke.
I know that some employees smoke, too, but NOT ALL bar
employees smoke, and they are the ones that are working in
that environment every working day. Please read the research
in the article I linked to. This is a matter of preventing DEATH and
health problems in non-smokers who have to work around smokers.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:28 PM

<<<<>>>

Ok, I see then that the problem is that you think if you are in a separate
room then no one has to breathe your smoke. The fact is that a separate
room does not keep the smoke away from other people in the building.
Smokers do not realize that the smell and the carcinogens permeate a
building where smoking is going on. It does not just stay in the smoking room.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:26 PM

Dave, you are really not getting this are you, I want seperate bars, sealed off from each other, or better still, non smoking & smoking pubs, chioce being up to the landlord.
As said previously, I never pretended that pushing my chair back made a differance, I just obey the rules!
Regards Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:14 PM

...have the right to smoke, that should read.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 01:11 PM

This is about choices and errosion of rights. I TOTALLY respect your right not to breathe my smoke

What rights did I have to go in a pub near me and not breathe second hand smoke? None at all. Where were my rights when the breweries and landlords had the choice to do something? Canceled by bar profits.

however I TOTALLY believe that smokers have rights too.

You DO still have the smoke. You can just no longer pretend that pushing your chair back behind the imaginery smoke barrier makes it OK for you to poison other people.

Dave.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 12:57 PM

our house is naturally a non-smoking home..

a few weeks ago a delivery driver knockeed on the front door with a parcel

he had a fag hanging out of his mouth..

in the minute or 2 it took to inspect and sign for the delivry,
even though he was standing outside on the front doorstep,
he exhaled enough of his noxious crap-cloud
to stink out our hallway and landing for at least a few hours later..

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 12:54 PM

My intractabilty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I attended Highworth folk club for many years before their self imposed smoking ban, and for many years after!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This can be checked out & has already been mentioned by a Highworth regular way back in the thread.
Do I smoke in singarounds anywhere, NO, do I / have I ever bleasted about it - NO! Do I smoke in Restarauts NO, do I bleat, NO. Do I go to London theatres , yes, bleat NO. Have I ever tried to have a crafy fag (English usage) on an aircraft, NO! Etc. Etc.!
This is about choices and errosion of rights. I TOTALLY respect your right not to breathe my smoke, however I TOTALLY believe that smokers have rights too.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 12:27 PM

I have to travel for my job and stay in hotels/motels during the work week.
Every hotel that has smoking allowed in some rooms reeks with the smell.
I always ask for a non-smoking room, but whether the room is on a floor above
or below the smoking rooms, the smell always makes its way through the vent
system to my room. The only clean air rooms are those in hotels that are all
non-smoking or rooms in a separate building.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 04 Jul 07 - 12:16 PM

Skipy, our folk club used to be in an upstairs room of a pub, and the room was declared 'smoke-free'. The bar (and all of the smoking) was downstairs. By the end of the evening my clothes stank of fags and my eyes and throat were red-raw. I've noticed this phenomenon in many clubs which operate in seperate 'smoke-free' rooms. It's simple physics - air circulates, and takes the smoke with it.

Given the intractability of smokers such as yourself (and I'm happy to acknowledge that not all smokers are that way) the ban was inevitable and completely justified.

As has been said many times on here, if the smokers had behaved in a considerate way and gone outside for their fix, a ban would never have been necessary. You caused your own downfall by your stubbornness and now you're moaning that it's someone else's fault.