42 days to no smoking (UK)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,sparticus
Date: 29 Jun 07 - 05:30 AM

I wonder what the male crowd in any bar fifty years ago would have said if you announced that in the future you couldn't have a smoke while having a pint with your mate but you could marry him??

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 29 Jun 07 - 04:21 AM

Yes, Puffing Bill, definitely facist. Bring back child labour and teenage prostitution. What happened to them good old Victorian values...

And of course likening people who want to protect the majorities health to the people who murdered six million Jews makes perfect sense and offends no-one.

D.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,Puffing Bill
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 08:49 PM

Yes chase all smokers into the closet. Well they are empty now as the gays came out of them a few years ago.

Welcome to the new fascist state United Kingdom.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 12:51 PM

I like the Uitsmijters for breakfast - great value.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: The Barden of England
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 12:08 PM

They do a very nice line in chocolate cup cakes in a couple of the 'Cafes' I've been to in Amsterdam. Seeing as I don't smoke it's a nice alternative.
John Barden

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 11:43 AM

Dave
Only a certain number of cafes are legally allowed to sell drugs. They could ban smoking completely and let the cafes serve space cake instead.
Les

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 11:11 AM

"but imposes that duty on every other employer in the country."

Not quite all - prison screws aren't covered.
............................

"odd situation where tobacco smoke is banned but 'alternatives' aren't" - not so odd. In Irish pubs, I understand, herbal cigarettes aren't covered by the ban, so long as they don't contain tobacco. Of course one popular herb is affected by other legislation...

The English ban covers all types of smoking - though I don't think it applies to incense in churches, so long as it isn't polluted with tobacco.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 10:57 AM

Might be a bit difficult in the cafes, Les - All depends what they are smoking! I guess you could get the odd situation where tobacco smoke is banned but 'alternatives' aren't!:-)

D.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 09:35 AM

Uncleboko
To my knowledge the Dutch haven't got a ban on smoking yet. Its a shame as we are over there in August, and I remember last year going into restuarants and cafes and people were smoking like luny's.
Hope they stop smoking soon.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,GEUST
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 09:32 AM

many smokers taste buds are so dead anyway..

they would'nt realise if you did swap a pint of it for their favourite lager !!!

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 09:01 AM

Well Don, I don't give a toss what happens at Buck Hice - I never go there and 99.999*% of the British public don't and never will either. I'm interested in what affects the huge majority, and this rule will mean that we no longer have to ingest the disgusting filth that others put out into the atmosphere.

When smokers volunteer to drink my piss, I'll support their wish to be allowed to smoke in the pub.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,Uncleboko
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 09:00 AM

Ah....2.5 days to go!

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,Uncleboko
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 08:59 AM

I used to work for a company called Maas International UK in Wapping, owned by a Dutchman called Maas - you may have seen their black vending machines. Despite having a no smoking policy, that bastard proceeded to smoke cigars whenever he visited, and nobody other than myself had the guts to say anything to him. No doubt this kind of arrogance goes on all the time and will continue to do so.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 06:46 AM

"I think the excuse is that it counts as a Royal Palace, and they are exempt too, because they aren't "public places"."

So another exemption then.

The government owes no duty of care to its employees, but imposes that duty on every other employer in the country.

Gets better and better doesn't it?

Don T.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Zany Mouse
Date: 28 Jun 07 - 06:14 AM

I've always hated smoke and have walked out of pubs before now because you could almost cut the smoke in there. Now I'm even more anti-smoke. I spent last Christmas in hospital (got taken in on Christmas Day) and spent 3 days on oxygen. Investigation showed that I now suffer from Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). When I finally convinced the medics that I had been a lifelong no-smoker and hadn't worked in the local mines, they came to the conclusion that I had it because I had lived for years with a heavy smoker. What price marriage? Broken lungs.

Rhiannon

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 07:43 PM

I think the excuse is that it counts as a Royal Palace, and they are exempt too, because they aren't "public places".

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 05:50 PM

"However, I would have much more respect for it, if the House of Commons bar hadn't been exempted - how come???"

Not just the fags either BB. That particular bar is also exempt from Public Entertainment Licensing.

Don T.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 05:37 PM

I'm not sure if all our state has a ban, but town by town has banned it in restaurants, school property,
public places, etc., over the years.
The result is that business thrives, fewer people are sick from second hand smoke, and children
have fewer smoking role models to influence them.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Jeri
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 04:42 PM

I may be living in the last state in the US that allows smoking in public establishments.

I've lived in places where a ban was instituted while I was there. Prior to it, there was a lot of speculation about how business would be ruined as smokers stayed away in droves.

What really happened was that smokers adapted, and a lot of folks who previously left early or stayed away entirely started spending more time in these smoke-free establishments and business improved almost universally.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 02:58 PM

Doug
I am convinced things will get better once the ban comes in, as you have already witnessed.
Les

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Doug Chadwick
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 02:23 PM

Yesterday, I went to an acoustic night where the music has always been good enough to override my dislike of the smoke. The pub has just been redecorated and the landlord decided to bring in a no-smoking rule a couple of weeks ahead of the law.

What I saw was a room as full as normal - in fact, there weren't enough chairs for all who wanted to sing. This morning, I read a comment on a message board from another participant (a smoker) blaming the smoking ban for the fact that the pub was only half full.

Clearly, we each saw what we wanted to see. If we can't even agree on how we interpret the effects of the restriction, any discussion of the rights and wrongs of smoking and the coming law is futile.

DC

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 01:41 PM

Dave, that was nasty - poor GUEST will be running to the therapist now.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 09:32 AM

Sorry, Guest 'yank'. No cigar this time, not that you could enjoy it anyway:-) If Zach was indeed trying to reel anyone in or 'yank' (see - there is a pun again!) their chain he or she failed dismally. It is a well known fact that USers do not understand or use irony. If Zachs post was ironic he would therefore have to be British and would understand the irony of the responses, as you have spectaculary failed to do. Unless you are British as well of course in which case you will understand that to ridicule your feeble post is in itself post modernistic irony. Or is it..?

:D

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,yank
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 09:16 AM

Zach
Reel 'em in - they've gone for it nicely !

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 09:12 AM

In the Inn At The Ball Park, Houston, Tx, USA, smoking is prohibited except in rooms designated as 'smoking' (which are a small minority) and within a few feet of the bar. In a week, last week, I saw no more than three or four people light up, all of them standing at the bar - including when the place was full of Astros supporters celebrating their win over Seattle. It was a nice, clean, filth-free hotel.

"we would not put up with this in the states"
What a load of bollocks Zach, you yanks are full of shit.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,waiting
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 09:01 AM

only 4 days.........










......till this thread dies (hopefully)

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Folkiedave
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 08:53 AM

Welcome to control police state Britain, we would not put up with this in the states
That would be the same States that does not let UK folk artists in would it?

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rog Peek
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 06:57 AM

Or having your passport confiscated because you went to Cuba! Or doesn't that happen any more?

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 06:47 AM

Or shot for crossing the street not at the proper place?
Yep, liberty is well preserved in the US of A

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 06:39 AM

Welcome to control police state Britain, we would not put up with this in the states

Been smoking in any bars in California recently, Zach? Tried to get a drink in any Dry counties lately? Been found with small ammounts of cannabis and been given a caution in Alabama?

:D

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,Zach
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 06:15 AM

Welcome to control police state Britain, we would not put up with this in the states

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 02:59 AM

>>I miss the old spitoon<<

Two mates in a pub and the one mate bets the other that he can't take a sip from the spitoon.
The other mate takes the bet on.
He gets the spitoon in his hands and starts to take a sip. However he doesn't stop until the spitton is empty.
His mate says "I didn't ask you to drink the lot"
The other one replied "I had no choice, it was in one piece"

I'll go get me breakfast.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Kampervan
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 02:41 AM

Y'all won't mind if I chaw on a plug then?

I miss the old spitoon. (No I'm not going to finish it).

Keep smiling!

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Rasener
Date: 27 Jun 07 - 02:31 AM

4 days to go.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 01:09 PM

Remember, it isn't tobacco that is barred in the bars. Just smoking it. Snuff said.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 10:52 AM

I realise I am fighting a loosing battle but just one last time (till the next)

I didn't say I won't be there

but I can't go to singarounds or music sessions

Why not? Who is stopping you? Do you not find the two statements above mutualy exclusive?

Our definitions of "The whole of my life may well change, I mmay leave folk music & charity behind me." are that vastly different that I suspect we must indeed be speaking different languages. If you leave folk music behind you will not attend the concerts singarounds etc. If you leave charity behind why would you go round putting up posters etc? Fun? Profit?

If you are happy to put up posters, plaster the place with handouts and then go drinking in the van I think you may need to evauate what it was you got out of folk music in the first place? Is that the issue? You don't realy get anything out of it so you are using the restrictions as an excuse?

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 10:51 AM

Hey guys, light up. Sorry, I meant lighten up. At least in my final hours of agony I will have the satisfaction of knowing that I have fulfilled Mr Fox's dream (as expressed the "Londonderry Air" thread).

Meanwhile, cheer up. The day is nigh. And if you are looking for a sign of the future, try this one .

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 10:32 AM

I didn't say I won't be there, I can't go to anything is the point, I have to attend to put up advertising for my events, but I can't go to singarounds or music sessions. So this year at Warwick I won't even bother to go downtown. It'll be a case of putting up a few posters, plastering the place with handouts & then drinking in the van! You are welcome to join me for a tinnie, but I will be smoking.
Skipy

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

I'm begining to feel like Columbo on the TV again.

Just one more thing...;-)

You ask Who said anything about not attending folk events?

Well, sorry skipy, you did! Is the nicotine having it's effects again?


Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy - PM
Date: 20 Jun 07 - 02:24 PM



I can't sing, I can't play anything, I can't dance, so I can always be located on the edge of events, for instance, Chippenham Fest (24 years!) I can be located in the open space next to the sing room, from here on in I will have to be outside - 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.
Skipy



Sorry. But I can't help pointing out the obvious. It is a bad habit of mine. Probably worse than smoking;-)

I'll tell you what I will do as well. I am going to bookmark this thread. On July 1st 2008 I will let you know how many pubs in my area have closed. The list of nearly 30 public houses within a 1/2 hour walk for me is listed below. You are welcome to check them yourself. There should be 1 or 2 according to what is current trends. I will be every surprised if there is more than 3 (10%).

Irlams o'th' Height

Red Lion
Wellington
Dog and Partridge
Wagon and Horses
St Lukes social club

Salford

The Hope
(There are dozens just outside the circle but I don't go in any!)

Swinton

Farmers Arms
Cricketers
White Lion
St Marys social club
Park Inn
White Swan
Staff of Life
Buckley
Bull
Football
Weavers
British Legion

Pendlebury

Royal Oak
Albert (Currently closed - may re-open yet. I dunno.)
The Pendlebury
Bowling Green
British Legion
Newmarket
Nelson
Britannia
Showboat
Borough Social

They ALL currently allow smoking everywhere.

Oh - I could do another 30 or so near where I work but my poor little fingers are tired:-)

Cheers

Dave.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:49 AM

It may be that they smoke because they are surrounded by smokers, it may be that they smoke because they breathe in smoke all day and there is a subliminal effect.
It may be a demographic issue, it may be a peer pressure issue.
We would need a large control group to find out, when bar staff leave they are usually replaced on a "Oh, my mates looking for a job, can she / he come in for an interview" thus a smoking friend introducing a smoking friend. We would need to know what % smoked before they took the job. Also if they where previous smokers, who had stopped. ETC!
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:34 AM

Oh - just cross posted. The only reason that most of the staff at your locals smoked is the same reason that most people in the trade in general smoked - It is severely biased towards the smoker. Why on earth would a non-smoker want to work in that environment? Just think what you are saying. The split of smokers to non-smokers is what? 30/70? 40/60 to be generous? You would expect that split to continue in all professions wouldn't you? Yet you openly admit that the majority of staff in your locals smoke. What is the majority? 80%? 90%? More? Have you never wondered why that is? I know you have a good brain there skipy - I have seen it it many previous threads. Just use it logicaly now.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:28 AM

Dave, I will do what you say & ask both of our landlords.
Skipy

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:24 AM

You just don't "get it", skipy. That's a shame.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:23 AM

Also I never heard anything about landlords having choices!

The landlords and/or breweries dependant on the lease or arrangement could ALWAYS designate some areas to be smoking and some to be non smoking, just in the same way as the owners or managers of ANY public building always had a say in who did what in their building. Just look at where smoking has been allowed or not allowed in the last ten or so years. Have you been able to smoke in hospitals in the last 10 years? No. Have you been able to smoke in public libraries in the last 10 years? No. Have you been able to smoke in schools in the last 10 years? No.

No need to ask yourself why smoking was allowed everywhere in most pubs is there? I have said over and over it was the 90%+ of landlords and breweries who chose NOT to have smoke free bars and areas that have forced the governments hand. I don't know how many times or different ways I can say this. The free choice that the licensed trade has had for the last 50 or more years has failed. Carry on giving them free choice and there is no indication at all that it will work in the next 50 years. This is why someone HAD to act and the only someone with the power to act was the government.

The next time a landlord comes crying to you about freedom of choice ask him why he did not do more to make sure that non-smokers had the same freedom of choice. Ask him why he did not have an area where smoke could only affect those that entered it. Ask him what he ever did to protect his staff from the effects of smoke. I think the answers from the vast majority may surprise you.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Blowzabella
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:23 AM

I am sure I posted this before but it seems to have disappeared ... no idea why. However, will try again - I will have no problem dealing with the new legislation, as I have always been more than happy to pop outside for a ciggy - often preferred it, to be honest. Chat to new people, take a break from the conversation inside etc etc. However, I would have much more respect for it, if the House of Commons bar hadn't been exempted - how come??? Also, that certain actors' roles wouldn't be exempt, for 'artistic' reasons. What? Either it is imperative to protect the nation from itself or it isn't - but please ....

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: GUEST,punkfolkrocker
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:21 AM

sat at an open air gig in the backyard of a pub last weekend..

sun was fierce enough to need to sit at a table under a parasol..



..totally surrounded by gormlessly oblivious ill seedy looking chain smokers
and wrinkly druggies smoking spliffs..


some of them had their young kids and toddlers jammed in amongst them..


the new pub restrictions are not positive & protective enough..

i'd have voted for a total ban on any smoking in all pub premises
including yards, gardens,
and within a stricly enforced wide area
surrounding all entrances and exits..

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:20 AM

Then give us a room staffed by smokers, nearly all the staff in both my locals smoke!

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Alice
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 09:11 AM

This is not a nanny state issue. The employees have to stay in smoke filled rooms
much longer than customers. The employees' health is impacted the most by
second hand smoke. It is a clear matter of public health. For the same reason
you don't want a cook with TB working in your restaurant, you should recognize
that lung and heart disease is a problem for people who have to breathe in second hand smoke
every day.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: Mr Fox
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 08:28 AM

"I think many habitual smokers have managed to convince themselves that their habit does not actually cause discomfort to other people, and that the suggestion that they should have tried to avoid smoking in confined areas, out of regard for other people's comfort, is just a matter of busybody killjoys."
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Tobacco doesn't kill people, people kill people........

Oh, they know, McGrath. They just don't care.

Subject: RE: 42 days to no smoking (UK)
From: skipy
Date: 26 Jun 07 - 08:21 AM

It didn't stop it, I'm not pretending thet it did, it just meant that I was in the legally designated area.
Skipy