 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues
|
|
|
Subject: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave Wynn Date: 21 Jan 01 - 04:45 PM My mate Iarf is thinking of making the folk music club he runs (with two others) a non-Smoking venue. I warned him that this would possibly be a bit devisive in that smokers may feel their freedoms violated. Of course for the duration of the club (some 18 years) non smokers have had to put up with a sometimes smokey atmosphere and the damage this can cause. Without going into the details of passive smoking being dangerous or not , do any MC'ers have experience (pos or neg) of making this change? Spot (on behalf of Iarf) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: sophocleese Date: 21 Jan 01 - 04:51 PM Well our local Tim Horton's have changed to non-smoking. They didn't think it would have an adverse effect on sales of donuts and coffee. Our local folk society has been non-smoking since it began. Its irritating for non-smokers when half the room empties during their song as all the smokers head outdoors to puff, but that's more an ettiquette issue rather than a smoking one. I suspect that you will lose a few people but ten may get others coming. If its possible to have a well ventilated smoking area away from the performers you could try that first. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:00 PM I love non-smokeing venues... and I'm a smoker... that's what breaks are for... Last time I saw James Keelaghan at The Ark in Ann Arbour... He and I were the only smokers in the place, religated to a small table, one chair and a tin-foil ashtray at the end of an unused hallway! We had a great time! LOL!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: John Routledge Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:06 PM IARF - Please give it a go As a singer I will state the obvious. My throat without smoke sounds better than with. As far as the health issue is concerned I am more relaxed! Let the Forum know of your decision. Non smokers who can occasionally put up with a smokey club will come more regularly if it is smoke-free. Cheers Geordie Broon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Tyke Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:14 PM None Smoking Folk Clubs Are Great Because I can nip out for a Smoke whilst the worst floor singers are strutting there stuff without feeking guilty. However I do smoke Hand Rolled cig's that are not fill with all the other chemicals that Taylor Made's have. This means that they go out quite a lot and do not burn away in the ashtray. The smoke from tailor made's burning away gets up my nose and I smoke. It's important to remember that unless you have private room in a pub and charge a nominal entrance fee. You are not in charge of the room and you cannot make the rule's the Liecence how ever can. Your jugement in this matter is all that counts realy. Most Young people Smoke! The most of the children of the organisers want to go somewhere that is not controled by there parent's. Would you when you were young! Should you smoke no! Should I smoke no! Anyone can tell you why a club is unsucsessfull but when it a sucsess it is never that easy to define. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: nutty Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:23 PM To a smoker making a venue smoke free is akin to making it beer free Although I have fought to give up smoking and am at present succeeding I would ask for a little tolerance. You can either have smokers in the club or outside you can't have it both ways As for a 'question of etiquette' - that also has two sides and again requires more than a modicum of tolerance |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:24 PM The move pretty well marked the start of the slow death of the Llandudno Folk Club but their were several other factors involved including the organisers not even asking the landlord (who was a smoker) if they could ban smoking in the back room of his pub on folk nights and several niggles not related to the smoking. I don't know how it would have worked out if it had have been done tactfully - I know I wouldn't have continued to attend the club unless there was a really good act that I wanted to hear but I suspect the majority of smokers might have done and it may have attracted a few others. I guess you just have to tread carefully and see how it goes. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: John Routledge Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:32 PM One person chain smoking can affect a whole room of people who are not smoking either because they do not smoke or have chosen not to at that time. It sure needs more than a modicum of tolerance on the part of the people not smoking! Good Luck with your campaign GB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: John Routledge Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:34 PM Sorry - Good luck with your campaign Nutty. GB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Deckman Date: 21 Jan 01 - 05:41 PM I simply refuse to sing in a smoking club. No if's ands or butts. It's my life, my health. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: katlaughing Date: 21 Jan 01 - 06:22 PM Same here, Deckman. I never go out to any of the bars with music or music venues around here because they are all so smoke-filled. Last year I became very ill after spending an evening in a restaurant which was filled with smokers; it took me two months to recover from that one night. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Morticia Date: 21 Jan 01 - 06:29 PM Well, like Jon, I have seen it spell the end of a club.....but it was faltering anyway....so don't take that into account.From my point of view, if I have to leave the room and miss half the turns , I'd as soon not go at all, but I'm accustomed to being in the minority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave Wynn Date: 21 Jan 01 - 06:39 PM It's a bit late but a straw poll could be useful...any future posters please indicate if they would prefer or not a non smoking club and if you are or are not a smoker. Spot (trying not to be boring) the Beagle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: bill\sables Date: 21 Jan 01 - 06:51 PM Most of the theatres closed after banning smoking Bill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: hesperis Date: 21 Jan 01 - 08:25 PM After one performance of "Like Water" at Smokey Joe's in Toronto, (which is actually called Holy Joe's,) I became extremely nauseous, and had to leave three songs before the end. I couldn't suppress my coughing anymore. They were good performers too! Since then, I have lost all desire to sing, stopped going to song circle, and have missed many local performances, including many of Hawkster's. I don't even want to leave my apartment right now. Someday I hope to sing again. I just wish we had a completely non-smoking venue in Orillia. But for someone with allergies, that's hard to guarantee. All it takes for me to have an attack is a little bit of it on someone's clothing. They could be three chairs away, and I'd still smell it. (Which is why I stopped going to Song Circle.) Of course, I'm also allergic to ALL smoke, not just tobacco, which makes it worse, but still... Hopefully I'll feel better when I have the treatment for smoke, but that's a while away yet. Just something more for you to consider. Good luck. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 21 Jan 01 - 09:06 PM I'm a non smoker. There are a few things that really piss me off. One of them is "Smokers rights" I will not go into a smokey room, let alone sing there! Fortunatly, some time ago, Maine banned smoking in all restaurants. None of them went out of business because of it, in spite of dire predictions by smokers who were afraid they would have to get through a meal without polluting the air. It's a shock to me to go into a restaurant out of state, and be asked if I want smoking, or, non smoking. EXXON didn't have the right to pollute Prince William Sound, and smokers dont have the right to pollute the air in a public place. I must breathe...you dont have to smoke. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Jan 01 - 09:06 PM No offence but if you're gonna stop to consider all allergies out there, then you may as well never open ANY venue... Yer just gonna have to make yer decision one way or the other and accept the consequneces... example...my local, the pub I play at most often, in this anti-smoking climate, had it's designation changed so that it could avoid that supid laws that the anti-smoking nazis want inforced... (What is the deal now, I can only smoke at hoime, in my room with a blanket over my head??) They's that can't or won't tolerate smoking are more than welcome to cast thier vote as consumers by not frequenting the place... where's the problem in that? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 21 Jan 01 - 09:30 PM If I you were eating at a restaurant and I decidet to plat trombone or bagpipes at the next table, you'd see that logic in banning THAT soon enough...and it isn't even strictly unhealthy! And, if tobacco were a new invention that had just been tried and was under investigation, it would NEVER get approval! The ONLY reason it still exists is because of the economic shock of stopping it all at once. And if tobacco companies were not able to sell their product in 3rd world countries, they would be hurting. For non-smokers, a smoke filled room is PAINFUL! It is unhealthy!...Your so-called 'rights' as smokers were pandered to long enough. This is one issue where not even a majority should rule....I have seen the society (in the USA) change from one in which cigarettes were everywhere and no escape, to a situation where USUALLY a smoker must go AWAY to smoke! I can well understand that it is a nuisance for one who is addicted to do things like going outside...or waiting to the end of an airplane flight...but your 'nuisance' is NOTHING compared to my comfort & health! The only reason I have EVER threatened to punch someone was for blowing smoke directly in my face. I am sorry if you are hooked and can't easily give it up...I'm even sorrier if you are one who thinks you actually 'enjoy' smoking....but that's how it is...and in 20-40 years, it will be a rare thing to see a cigarette. Thank goodness. (who, ME?..opinionated? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Sorcha Date: 21 Jan 01 - 09:50 PM I smoke, and I prefer non smoking venues. It's hard enough work up there on stage (whether you're singing or just playing) without having to deal with breathing. I go outside on breaks. Simple courtesey. Just a thought--for allergic people like hesperis, just banning smoking may not help. If a room has been smoked in for years, the smell and allergens will linger for a long time, even if the drapes, carpet, etc. are replaced. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Plume Date: 21 Jan 01 - 10:10 PM Well said, Bill. The bottom line is this: smokers may attend events at non-smoking venues without any additional risk to their health. Fifty years of hard evidence and countless deaths from lung cancer should be enough to convince anyone that the non-smoker puts him or herself at serious risk any time he or she attends an event in a venue where smoking is permitted. There is simply no comparison between a smoker's "rights" and a non-smokers right to breathe unpolluted air. I have to add that I deeply resent the term "nazi" being applied to those of us who do not wish to breathe in yours or anyone else's pollutants. I'd actually like to see an end to the use of this term to dismiss, willy-nilly, all those who happen to disagree with a particular point of view. A carpenter friend of mine keeps a sign in his shop that reads: "If I See You Smoking, I Will Assume You Are On Fire and Take Appropriate Action." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Jan 01 - 10:20 PM Plume, et al... You miss my point... my point is this... if you are a rabid, non smoker... cast your vote where it counts, economicaly... don't support business that do allow smoking... But if you are willingly in say The Kildare House in Windsor Ontario, don't expect your non-smoking requests to even be considered... It says on a sign beside the front door "tobacco friendly"... Expect nothing else... As I said aboive though.. I am a smoker, and I prefer to getor perform my music at nonsmoking venues and then hit the pub after and smoke like it's a cure for cancer... I don't "THINK" I enjoy smoking... I ENJOY smoking! I don't want your pity... and I don't want you telling me how I feel! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Deckman Date: 21 Jan 01 - 10:24 PM Here's my reply to Clinton Hammond ... You mentioned that I'm 'gonna have to make my own decision and live with it. Well, I am. And the result is this: YOU will never hear me sing,and I won't have to watch you die from stupid smokers disease. Seems to me that I win on both counts. CHEERS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: rabbitrunning Date: 21 Jan 01 - 10:46 PM I'm another allergic one. (Asthma.) I've had to give up bowling because of smoke, and I can't even walk into many stores because of strong incense or perfumes. I also avoid smoky music venues. I do believe that it's the business' right to choose whether they allow smoking or not. I want to see it posted in large letters on the door, so I know not to go in, though. (I hate "smoking or non-" restaurants, though, because I invariably have to walk through the smoky part to get to the bathrooms. Make it all one or the other, and then say that a switch from smoking to non-smoking means cleaning your carpet and ventilation systems...) If you do go to non-smoking, make it known! Put it in your ads or flyers for the first year or so, so that people like me who have given up on trying to go to listen to folk music because we can't breathe have a chance to discover that there's a place we can go now. And ask your current audiences if they know of friends who don't come any more because of the smoke. As far as the sub-issue of "a right to smoke", I think that as long as we allow people to surf in shark infested waters and drive race cars, we can't stop 'em from smoking. But I am infuriated by people who smoke in places where they know that smoking is not allowed. If I am going out of my way (and I frequently am) to avoid places where smoking is allowed, then I should be able to breathe. Inconsiderate smokers tar, if you'll forgive the pun, the reputation of every smoker. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 21 Jan 01 - 10:53 PM Hey Deckman... chill... I got to lots of non smoking events... and I have no problem at all not smoking there... but when someone tries to tell me that I can't smoke in a smoke friendly pub, I tell 'em ot get stuffed! More what I ment there, about making a decision was from a business P.O.V.... if yer gonna have a club, make it either non-smoking, or smoke friendly... there are consequences to both choices... you have to be prepared to live with those choices is all I ment... I didn't mean it in a nasty way at all... Peace eh! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: hesperis Date: 21 Jan 01 - 11:30 PM Yeah, if you took all allergies into account, nothing would exist. There's always somebody allergic to something. But when it comes to proven cancer-causing agaents... that affect the people who don't actually smoke it, I just have to say WTF do you think you're doing? Killing yourself is against the law. Killing other people is murder, and is also against the law. (Both written and moral.) HELLO! Just because judges are themselves addicted to the stuff, and just because there is an economic payoff from the tobacco industry, doesn't give people the right to kill. If we had a really non-smoking venue in town, it would be good. I might even be more tolerant of smoker's rights to kill themselves any way they please, if I had a place to go to. All we have is the Opera House, which is stuffed-shirt and expensive, both for listening and booking. And there's stale smoke in there anyway... I really like that place in Newmarket... whatever it's called. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,Sam Hudson Date: 22 Jan 01 - 02:46 AM The club I help organise went non-smoking several years ago without any problem and to general approval from our regulars. It's a small room, so smoke was very intrusive, the number of smokers attending was reducing anyway and the majority of performers prefer a smoke-free atmosphere. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,sooz(at work) Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:24 AM Go for it! Our club meets in a tiny room and one person smoking ruins it for everyone else so anyone who can't do without a drag goes down to the main bar. We haven't had any sulks or bad reactions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:03 AM Straw Poll -
Do I smoke - no Would I like my club to be non-smoking - yes Dave the coughing Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: nutty Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:30 AM Nuff said I think - there are so many perspectives on this subject there is never going to be 100% agreement But let me again stress that something arranged by negotiation is likely to be more successful than something imposed PS. I am allergic to perfume not just scent and aftershave but natural flower perfumes - carnations and hyacinths are particularly bad - and now that I am a non-smoker I will suffer all the more as my sense of smell improves. Its not just the smoke haters that suffer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: KingBrilliant Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:21 AM I used to smoke, and gave up just because I went off the taste (so I'm no evangelistic non-smoker). However, now I personally find that smoke is annoying and unpleasant if there's a lot of people smoking - and it certainly affects my throat the next day. I was at a singaround the other night where someone was smoking cigars & I was nearly gagging - yeuk!!! (I think cigar smoke is supposed to be less canciferous than ciggies though? Is that right?)
If a venue is very smoky then I'll most likely stay away. Our local folk club is non-smoking, which I like (and it means I can take my mum, who is very allergic to cigarette smoke, there). However, having said that, I suspect that it does exclude (or discourage) some people - which is a shame. But - the good thing is that there are a lot of venues locally which are not non-smoking (ie they are in the bar of a pub) & so there really is somewhere for everybody. So I'd say that it is a very good thing to have at least one non-smoking venue per locality. Could you have a trial period, and see how it goes?? Give people a chance to try it and see? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,Dita (at work) Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:07 AM Stiring Folk Club, in Scotland, one of the best, went non-smoking, two years ago. Despite the proposer thinking, prior to the AGM, that she had a battle on her hands, the motion was passed with no-one against. There has been no problems with attendences, the club goes from strength to strengh, (good committee). One point I recall being made during the pre vote debate was that many artists include a "no-smoking clause" in their contracts these days. On a personal note as a non-smoker, my pet hate is openng my guitar case at home a couple of days after playing a smoky venue. Iain MacIntosh, Scottish folk singer of renown and non-smoker, is only recenly back on the road after a serious chest illness, brought about by many years of travelling in cars etc with Hamish Imlach and other heavy smokers. love, john. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:16 AM Iain McIntosh? he and I shared the bill in Kirkaldy 10 years ago. Someone screwed up and booked both of us at the same time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:52 AM I must breathe ..you dont have to smoke.And, the truth is, you smoke to avoid the discomfort of not smoking. Do cocain snorters "enjoy" it? I doubt it. If they dont feed that addiction, it is painful to them. Same with nicotine.Denial is more than a river in Africa. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: KingBrilliant Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:20 AM Hey Animaterra - don't sit on the fence - or were you just posting very very quietly :) Kris
Oops, sorry, KB & Animaterra. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: John P Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:49 AM There are three (that I know of) non-smoking pubs in Seattle. One of them is my local. All of them are doing very well -- they are always packed with people. They are the only pubs I play music at anymore. I wish there were more non-smoking places -- I usually choose not to go hear music that I want to hear because the venue will be full of smoke. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: bill\sables Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:59 AM I agree with you all about the dirty habit of smoking in folk clubs and I think it should be banned but while we're at it why not ban the filthy habit of drinking alcohol in folk clubs. When I sit next to someone who has beer on his breath it makes me feel sick and then when it comes their time to sing they are too pissed to remember the right words and it all comes out as a slur. When they try to get up to go to the lavatory, which is quite regular, they always kick someone's guitar over which was leaning safely on a table before they decided to stumble by. At the end of the evening they get up and go to their cars and, using the car park as a dodgem arena, proceed to reverse into as many other peoples cars as they can. If they are lucky they get home without killing themselves or anyone else. Surely this is a good reason to ban alcohol in folk clubs. But why stop there, we could also ban anyone who farts in a folk club, they have no feeling for others, they seem to think that their farts smell good and generally laugh when they fart especially when it is a loud one during someone else's slow love song. We could also ban bald men because their heads reflect the light and dazzle musicians while they are playing. Fat people should also be banned because they take up too much room. Women should be banned so as the men could sing bawdy songs and not feel too embarrassed. Irish musicians should not be allowed to play either because they play too fast for everyone else to join in. We could also ban singer - songwriters because they are boring and the songs they sing are only of interest to themselves. Hunting songs should be banned because they are praising a soon to be illegal pastime. Americans should not be allowed either because of their habit of singing cowboy songs where the Native Americans always loose. In fact why not ban folk clubs all together, they attract the bearded aging hippie types who sing long boring songs. They play tunes which are not always in 4/4 time and you can't do disco dancing to them. Or would it be better to leave the clubs as they are and keep the traditions going in a world where there are too many people who want to force their own ideas on everyone else. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: black walnut Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:09 AM my two favourite clubs in Toronto are Acoustic Harvest and The Flying Cloud, in large part because they are non~smoking. i did venture into Ted's (Cough, Cough) Wrecking Yard, 3 separate times, but those were very very very special situations, worth choking and gasping for (Kelly Joe Phelps, twice, and Mary Jane Lammond). ~black walnut |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: KingBrilliant Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:43 AM Bill, you're right of course, but I still think smoking is a special case - because none of those other things give me black bogies..... Spot on about the drunks - ban 'em all - except when I are one. Oh hang on though, then what about Mark? Hmmm. Farting though. That's got to be indefensible. Oops - pardon me Here's an idea - why not issue those little white face-mask things that cyclists wear? That would muffle the long boring songs too!!! (and you could yawn behind them during said long boring songs). I can picture it...... Of course those who do indulge would have to cut holes in them to stick the ciggie through (and I'm not sure whether they're flammable or not - could be dangerous). Kris |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:47 AM I think I am pretty much with Nutty on this and repeat my previous thoughts. Try it by all means but do so tactfully and put it to every regular member. Much depends on attitudes and much of the eventual failure of the Llandudno club (of which I had previously been a member of the resident group/ organiser for 6 years) was down to a general dicttorial attitude rather than just the sudden announcement "No smoking in the club because we say so". I think perhaps the biggest mistake the club made on the immediate no-smoking policy was that most of the stronger regular floor singers were either, like myself, smokers or tolerant to smokers and that together with other unrelated issues helped to lead to the Conwy Club to be formed and survived while the other club ended up getting moved out to another pub in Llandudno that was not even a separate room and VERY smokey... Things had got so silly by that point that 2 or 3 of us had to fight and cast a vote to stop the Conwy Club being on the same night as the Llandudno Club to spite it... Anyway, I am pretty tired of folk clubs and the politics that have gone with them but I will attend if I enjoy one. For me, that means being able to sit down with a pint and having a smoke without having to go outside and they rarely (the excepeption being a performer/ group I really want to hear) offer enough for me to be put through the inconvenience of going outside. I appreciate that is just me and that I am hopelessly addicted but that is how it is with me and I am the same way at parties. I have walked out of several when I have learned that there is no smoking in the house having been invited by people who KNOW I AM A SMOKER. They seem kind of stunned to learn that I would rather have gone home to my can of beer and cigarette than to have enjoyed thier "hospitality" but that is how addicted I am. As for folk clubs, I (and others) have found the fumes from candles burning more offensive than tobbaco burning. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Mooh Date: 22 Jan 01 - 09:58 AM Second-hand smoke has kept me from gigging as much as I'd like. Please make the change to a non-smoking venue. Mooh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 22 Jan 01 - 10:00 AM Ah but Bill (S), I know your last post was (at least partially) in jest but I think I have a response. Not an original I'm afraid but a good one all the same. I am a non-smoking drinker. I do not object to anyone smoking, I used to smoke myself until the asthma kicked in. What I do object to is the by-product of smoking, used smoke. If it is OK to dispose of the by-product of smoking without leaving the room then surely it is OK to dispose of the by-product of my particular vice (drinking) in a similar manner. I'm pretty sure that no-one would be happy with me peeing over them though - or waking up in the morning smelling of stale urine. Would they? Oh - and I restrict my farting to the gents toilets as well btw! As to keeping traditions alive I am pretty confident in saying that if you was to go back a hundred years or so you would find that a large number of pubs had a smoke room where smoking was permitted and the dreaded weed was excluded from the rest of the premises. By that mark, and by comparing the difference between how long us europeans have and have not used tobacco, the tradition of NOT smoking in pubs is far older than the smoking one - so which one should we choose? As someone you have met I am sure you realise there is no animosity in this posting, but as an asthmatic who loves folk music I, for one, would benefit from having a clean air environment. I believe non-smokers are now in the majority and that it would be very little inconvenience for smokers to have a designated smoking room in most pubs. I used to smoke 4 or 5 cigarettes a night - 1 for each pint. For me it would have been no trouble to have those cigarettes outside the folk club - 12 to 15 minutes out of 3 hours would not have been a major inconvenience. And I could have had most of those between songs, in the break or during bits I was not enjoying anyway. I do not want to ban smoking or smokers - just restrict the practice to areas where the majority do not object to it. I do not want to impose my will on any other club organiser, but as an organiser myself I would be foolish not to consider all options, including non-smoking nights as well as a total ban in my club. BTW - the hand roll-ups you use are nowhere near as bad as tailor mades - If everyone went onto them we may not have a problem. Cheers and hoping to pop across to your (smoking in more ways that one!) club in the near future. Let's agree to differ and hope that there will be a time when we both have an environment where we can enjoy the music to the full. Dave the (Cough, cough, wheeeeeze) Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: MMario Date: 22 Jan 01 - 10:05 AM I am a smoker - and under normal circumstances I will go out of my way to NOT offend non-smokers. I proposed and lead the support which turned our church into a non-smoking building. (Though they kindly then put an urn for butts in the sheltered breezway for those of us who do smoke.) It does get very confusing though when you enter a non-smoking venue - and find the air so thick with incense and candle smoke that it would be difficult to detect a bad cigar! This happens more often then you would suspect. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Mike Regenstreif Date: 22 Jan 01 - 10:17 AM I ran the Golem, an 80-seat folk club in Montreal in the 1970s and '80s. Montreal is probably the smoking capital of North America. In the early-1980s I decided to ban smoking in the club. Attendance went up noticably. Many non-smokers who used to come out occasionally started coming more often. There were only a couple of complaints from smokers who had to go out in the breaks and scores of bravos from non-smokers (including myself) who found the club much more enjoyable. Most music venues in Montreal are still smoking places. I have to REALLY want to see the performer to get me to go. It's much easier to get me out to a non-smoking gig. Mike Regenstreif
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 11:09 AM I have a brother who is so hooked, he will not go ANYWHERE that he is expected to not smoke. Thats sad. It also includes his daughters home. He hasn't seen her or his grand children in years..thats not just sad, it's pitiful! Last time he came to see me,he asked if he could have a cigarette. I figured one would be ok, but, the next thing I knew, his girlfriend came in, and, in no time they were both chainsmoking. My house smelled like the mens room of a bus station for a month afterwards. Argue all you want the fact still remains I must breathe..you dont need to smoke. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Midchuck Date: 22 Jan 01 - 11:17 AM According to Visions, by Michio Kaku, an excellent book I happen to have just read: 1) Cancer kills half a million Americans a year - the second leading cause of death after heart disease; and 2) Thirty per cent of all cancers can be traced to tobacco smoking alone. Ergo: by simple arithmetic, 150,000 Americans a year die from smoking, from cancer alone. One assumes other breathing impairments and heart attacks or strokes brought on by smoking get a bunch more. It's also reasonable to assume that the percentage is higher in countries where more people smoke. Those of you in Britain and elsewhere are shocked by American gun laws, and can't understand why private citizens are allowed to own guns in spite of the fact that a relative few of them use them for purposes detrimental the public peace and safety. Yet you defend, as an absolute right, the practice of people blowing poison gas in other peoples' faces in public places; and rebuke anyone who complains for being unduly rude and fussy. Isn't there an inconsistency here? Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Mike Regenstreif Date: 22 Jan 01 - 12:04 PM Peter, Your numbers 1) and 2) need a 3)... 3) Smoking is one of the most significant causes of heart disease (and heart attacks). Mike Regenstreif
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 12:14 PM My local venue, the Acoustic Cafe, is both non-smoking and non-alcohol. It is jam-packed at 10pm on a Saturday night. Clinton, how can calling someone a nazi NOT be nasty? I don't know where Tyke is from, but in these parts, most young people do NOT smoke. Everybody has a right to take risks with their own life. Nobody has a "right" to endanger others. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,JohnB Date: 22 Jan 01 - 12:45 PM I expect never to play Carneigie Hall, if I did I do not think they would allow people to smoke. I know people do not smoke in our local Opera House because it is not allowed, I have played there. There are many venues where an isolated room at the back, used for Folk Clubs etc is a Non-Smoking Room. The Tranzac was mentioned and that is a pretty big club. I do not see the problem with a few people (smokers) having to go elsewhere for a quick drag for the general benefit of ALL, including themselves when they return to a relatively clean air environment stinking of smoke. I gave up smoking in about 1976, althogh I seem to remember back then smoking was not allowed inside the room we used for a folk club. JohnB. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 12:57 PM How about this idea..All public places must, by federal law, provide access for the handicapped. Well, smokers should have the same right.Just provide them with a shelter so they dont have to go out in the cold and rain. Sooner or later, they will all die off anyway and the shelters can be dismantled. What do you think Bill? Does this make as much sense as your suggestion? By the way, cigarettes dont smoke..People smoke! maybe we should do away with people? It's easy to get silly isn't it? |
|
Subject: Nazi's... I hate these guys... From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 01:04 PM That's not the part that I didn't mean as nasty... People who try to control my life tick me off... Especially the ones who think they're right to the exclusion of everyone else! Windsor is full of them, who want all bars and restarants totally non smoking... Everwhere, EXCEPT the precious casinio of course! For them, I have nothing but contempt, nothing but harsh words... And "nazi" is prettly low on the scale...
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 01:45 PM I am TERRIBLY sad that a proven health hazard should also be so addictive..(and yeah, perhaps pleasurable to some)...There is little we can do to make it easy for smokers & non-smokers to share venues like clubs, and it is sad to realize that there are good people and fine musicians avoiding a wonderful place just because they feel they MUST smoke, or because they can't abide smoke. All we can do is try to continue the process that has begun, so that in "X" years, almost NO tobacco will be produced and almost NO one will 'need' it. After being raised in a house where both parents smoked and my younger brother took it up as soon as he could get away with it, I now live smoke free....and my own mother had to smoke on the porch when she visited me. I HAVE attended pubs where smoking was allowed in the past, and I didn't suffer like some, but I did NOT like it...my wife, (Rita) simply cannot take smoke...she can detect when I have been anywhere near a smoker, and I need to change my shirt to hug her..so, you see how it is... *sigh* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Mrrzy Date: 22 Jan 01 - 01:55 PM I'm an ex-smoker who didn't quit out of will power (that remains the single most admirable thing I think a person can do) but because tobacco smoke started making me ill. I will go to some places where I know there will be smoke: My mom's house, and the occasional bar/other such venue. If there is a line for tables, I request First Available, not necessarily non-smoking, more often than not. I like going to bars, especially, as you can eat alone and still have conversations. But even restaurants with no smoking section here will allow smoking at the bar, and I know that. The other night I was working some puzzle and a guy came over to play, who had a cigarette, and when I waved my hand to get the smoke out of my face, promptly apologized and moved his cig; I said No biggie, I know it's a bar - and he was pathetically grateful not to be given a raft of grief and then put the cigarette out! I'd like to see Mom learn that trick, she smokes while you're eating (as long as she's finished). So I guess my take is, I'd go to anywhere to hear some people sing, in which category I'd include any mudcatters, whether there is smoke or not. BUT I'D ENJOY THE SMOKELESS GIGS MORE, and might be more likely to go early and stay late. Which might count as a vote against not smoking, now that I think about it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,petr Date: 22 Jan 01 - 02:46 PM luckily in Vancouver, BC in fact the whole province smoking has been banned in all pubs and restaurants for the last year. There was a bit of noise initially about a drop in business although places with patios did quite well and companies that supply outside gas heaters likewise. Its really nice to play in our regular session and not come home smelly and not have to breathe cancer causing substances. Clinton if a smoker asks me 'mind if I smoke' I usually say 'mind if I fart?. (my farts smell better anyway). petr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,radhost Date: 22 Jan 01 - 02:49 PM No offence but if you're gonna stop to consider all allergies out there, then you may as well never open ANY venue... Yer just gonna have to make yer decision one way or the other and accept the consequneces... example...my local, the pub I play at most often, in this anti-farting climate, had it's designation changed so that it could avoid that supid laws that the anti-farting nazis want inforced... (What is the deal now, I can only fart at hoime, in my room with a blanket over my head??) They's that can't or won't tolerate farting are more than welcome to cast thier vote as consumers by not frequenting the place... where's the problem in that? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 02:56 PM How is it that smokers always make it out to be a matter of THEIR right to poison others? Where excatly did that right come from? I don't remember reading about it in the U.S. Constitution; do they have that right in Canada? UK? Curious in Seattle |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:37 PM Ptre... If I'm in a place where smoking is unrestricted, I don't ever ask for permission... and I don't put up my hand when I have to go to the bathroom either... If I'm in a place where I can't smoke and I really gotta have one, I go the hell somewhere else... if it's so easy for a smokers to do, why is it so hard for a non-smoker to do?? We (the dreaded, insubstantial, global we) have to stop trying to tell each other what to do, and keep our noses in our own business... Taking responsibility for our own actions would be a good lesson to learn while we're at it! And Re: BC...well... if I was to ever think about opening a pub there, I'd be damned if some tosser is gonna tell me who can do what inside my building! 'cause any pub I ever open is gonna be smoker-friendly... and I don't care one lick if non-smokers don't come!! That's thier right, same as it is mine... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:43 PM Taking responsibility for our own actions would be a good lesson to learn while we're at it! For instance, non-smokers should take responsibility for BREATHING, and if the air happens to have carcinogens from some smoker smoking where it is forbidden by law or custom, THEM'S THE BREAKS. Go somewhere else. This is what you seem to be saying, Clint.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:48 PM When Maine passed that no smoking law, there were two places that refused to obey the law because they had customers who smoke. The law won. So, if you do open a place in Maine, you will obey the law or they will throw your stubborn ass into the clink, and or shut you down, Rightous wrath notwithstanding |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: MMario Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:50 PM Alex - he did say where smoking is unrestricted - and say that he went elsewhere if it was restricted. How does that become "where it is forbidden by law or custom"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:52 PM Before you get me wrong, let me say, that considering that there are signs everywhere that say No Smoking, why not have signs plainly visible that say Smoking Allowed, or, even encouraged? That way, the non smokers would know not to enter, and, if they do, tough shit..whats good for the goose is painful for a woodpecker..or something like that. It's too bad we have to have laws to get folks to do what is right by his fellow traveler. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:54 PM That's not at all what I said, MT... You folks seem to have lost the fact that I'm in favour of totaly non-smoking venues as well as smoker friendly venues... If I had young kids, I'd take them to a smoke free place before any other... But in a place where smoking is unrestriced... if yer a non-smoker or allergic... tough... life sucks... get a helmet... Just don't go there?!?! Isn't that the mature thing to do rather than going to such a place and expecting to get your own way??? I'm in favour of choice, not government policy... why should they be allowed to tell a business owner what they can and can't do on thier property?? And as someone brought up earlier... Booze is just as harmful as tobacco! What's next?? No drinking pubs?!?! You people can keep your clean, safe, dull, little, Yuppie, star-trekian utopia... me and Dennis leary will be living in the sewers eating rat burgers and living free!!! And when Quebec is the only place in the world where I can sit at the bar and have a smoke at the end of my gig, I'll be living there! Anybody else find is a little comical and frightening that most of the people who are anti-smoking are pro gun?!?! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: nutty Date: 22 Jan 01 - 03:56 PM It is difficult for non-smokers to realise that for some people smoking is an addiction every bit as real as being addicted to heroin or cocaine. In fact telling a smoker that they can't smoke will often make them crave even more for a cigarette and this can cause such anxiety that the smoker would rather avoid the places where smoking is banned While there is no real help or understanding for smokers there will be ignorance and predudice. Just because some people have given up - don't expect that everyone should be able to do it - and don't blame the smoker while the government exploit their craving to rake in the taxes. Think what an outcry there would be if the government legalised heroin in order to raise money to run a National Health Service and think how much taxes would increase without the revenue from tabacco. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:02 PM I'm in favour of legalising, monitoring and regulation all drugs!!! And hell ya, let the governemt tax the hell out of 'em and spend tha money on medial and education!! What's wrong with that?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
Oh ya... booze is every bit as addictive as tobacco, and has likely ruined more lives... Cause you don't have to die from booze to ruin yer kids lives Hell... it's just a frigg'n smoke! Aren't there more important issues in the world?!?! Better things to expend our energies on, like maybe child prostitution and global overpopulation... I donno... Do what ya want... I don't care... I'll be over here doing my own thing... leave me alone, and I'll leave you alone... Fair enough? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:05 PM Where on earth did you get the statistic that most anti-smoking people are pro-gun? Can you give us a source? I thought the question was about smoking vs. non-smoking venues, not about people forcing their non-smoking policy on smoker-friendly places. Maybe I'm in the wrong thread. Clinton, if the government can't tell a business owner what he can or can't do, then it can't tell him to hire, or serve, minorities. It can't tell him to ensure the food is free of microorganisms, or served at a safe temperature. It can't tell him to not dump toxic waste on his back 40. The whole point of having a government is to tell people what they can and can't do, whheter on their own property, or otherwise, to ensure the safety and well-being of the general public. If you open your doors to serve the public, you are licensable, and if you have a license, you must jump through the hoops that the licensing program requires. I don't see the problem with this. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:10 PM Sorry MT... that Smoking=Gun thing just came out... I was takin' through my hole... sort of a Dennis Miller rant thing goin' on... That really does seem to be the case with the people I meet though... ahhh... nevermind... I'm gonna go take a few deep breaths... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: sophocleese Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:19 PM Umm I don't like smoke or guns. It would appear, Spot The Dog, that this can be a very contentious issue. So all the comments about approaching the subject with tact and diplomacy are spot on. I'd encourage you to go with the non-smoking environment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Midchuck Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:24 PM I'll give Clinton (Hammond, not Bill - I won't give Bill much of anything) this much: I am anti-smoking and pro-gun. I don't think there's a contradiction. I am as anti-gun as anyone I know, with respect to guns in the hands of criminals, crazies, idiots, and those who think they can use a gun without proper training. I just think the guns can be taken away from those groups without taking them away from everyone in the process. And I'll defend, vigourously, the right of anyone to smoke as much as he wants, provided that he does it where nobody has to breath his secondhand smoke who doesn't wish to, and that he doesn't ask me - through my taxes or my insurance premiums - to pay for any of his medical care if (i. e. when) he gets a smoking-related illness. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Pseudolus Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:35 PM I'm a non-smoker and none of the places I play in are non-smoking. That's my choice. I do think that it's a bit humorous how the extremists come out of the woodwork on issues like this one. If I chose not to play in a "smoking room", then that would be my choice. If I didn't like the smoke, I would stay out. I agree with Kendall that going into the non-smoking section of some places is like being in the non-pissing end of a pool, but I guess if that was the choice offered, I would simply not swim and allow those that choose to swim, more room in the pool. Frank |
|
Subject: Best Uut Of 3 Falls From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 04:43 PM Pseudolus... Ta... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,petr Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:30 PM if you were to open a pub in BC and expect to allow smoking be prepared to face fines starting at $30,000 besides having your license revoked. But then you probably wouldnt open a pub here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:45 PM Yeah, but that's just $30k Canadian. If it were $30k American, I'd be worried. GRIN! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Pseudolus Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:53 PM Clinton, Ta? Is that a good thing, or a bad thing? :) Frank |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:55 PM "But then you probably wouldn't open a pub here" BINGO! tell him what he's won, Johnny! I don't know how you peopel stand living under a regiem like that?!?! It's true what I've always said.. BC isn't the west coast of Canada.. it's the north end of California! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: mousethief Date: 22 Jan 01 - 05:59 PM Them's fightin' words! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,petr Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:15 PM how can we stand living in a regime like that? its great. you know that even the worst part of town is relatively safe and that the driver next to you is not likely to have a gun in his glove compartment, when you honk at him after he cuts you off. The smokers do have a choice they can go outside, or look for a pub with a patio. (by the way, some 1st nations people (natives) had a legitimate complaint) they said "its our cultural right to smoke." after a year and a bit of complaining the law still stands. Oddly enough, the law was initially passed not to protect non-smokers but rather employees who work in bars who have to breathe the smoke continuously. They dont have as much choice as the patrons who can come and go. petr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,E.C. Koop Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:20 PM Recent scientific studies have shown that, in addition to cancer and other diseases, smoking destroys a measurable amount of brain cells. It has been determined that an average pack a day smoker will lose enough brain cells to account for the loss of a full IQ point per year of smoking. Thus, 30 years of smoking will see someone with an above average IQ of 120 be reduced to a below average IQ of 90. Posts in this thread by Clinton Hammond and several others provides anecdotal evidence in support of those studies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jeri Date: 22 Jan 01 - 06:33 PM Just out of curiousity, did you mean C. E. (Everett) Koop instead of E.C. Koop? Pedantic minds want to know... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:07 PM "Oh Dr Koop, OH Dr Koop, Won't you please to give us all the straightest poop? If I puff upon a Lucky, Will it make my lungs all yucky? (That is, if you are REALLY Eve'rt Koop) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 07:18 PM Ya ya ya guest... another post from someone without the stones to attach their name to it... and on top of it, you resort to school-yard name calling when you can't eloquently defend your point of view... Really make me wanna take your opinion seriosly... Ta... is short for thank you... :-) ptre.. that's a stand point that I have to admit, I do support... a good number of people working in bars are not working there by choice.. rather it is the only job they can get with limited experience or education... mind you, most of the pub employees that I know smoke like cigarettes contain the antidote, so I don't know that the claim is valid across the board, why then should the law apply across the board... I honestly believe that there is middle ground that can accomidate most people... but no where have I seen it in acrtion...
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:01 PM It's kinda like going back to the old home place to read some of these posts. Clinton, I used to talk just like you back when I smoked. Not only did I resent being hooked, but, I also resented being twitted for it. Frank, that remark about pissin in the pool wasn't me. It was quite graphic though! Oscar Wilde made a witty remark, and a friend said "I wish I had said thet." Wilde said "Oh, you will." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,Grim Reaper Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:12 PM Hey Clinton Hammond...Keep on smoking! You'll see me sooner than later. Oh, by the way, you do know that you stink like a filthy ashtray. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:18 PM confessions may be in order...though I have never had ONE puff from a cigarette,I tried..30 years ago to smoke a pipe. There are SUCH interesting tobaccos and elegant, interesting pipes...and it dod NOT involve inhaling...but as I read, I realized that ALL smoke has dangers, and I just never was very good at it...I'd carry the pipe around and forget to light it....so, when I met Rita, and she was allergic to it, I simply gave it up...... anyone wanta buy several VERY nice pipes? Meerschaum and a couple other quite nice,different models...*grin* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:23 PM lordy, I am tired of stupid 'guests' who bait and attack without the courage to sign their name |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave Wynn Date: 22 Jan 01 - 08:25 PM Thank you all, I have read everything to date and will talk with the other two organisers. Just to round up what I have read here. It's probably going to be difficult. We need to be very diplomatic and care for peoples freedoms while trying to cater for majority opinion. If we were to use a poll of the audience we know the majority are non smokers and we know they would support a non smoking policy. We are not a democratic club . We are three persons who own and run the club. What we say goes in the end and it's up to the club patrons to vote with their feet. This is not trying to sound hard edged but just stating the reality. We are all ex smokers who quit (3 years ago) but the real reason I asked for advice was that one night we had to put on the extractor fan because the room was uncomfortably thick with smoke and got some earache from two smokers (regular singers) about the fans noise. A jolly discussion evolved around the lines of this thread with no conclusion. Please do not continue the devisive postings ...I wanted advice and contruction not division. (or please continue if you are enjoying it , I wouldn't like to interfere with anyones freedoms ;-) I promise I will post another thread (for those who are interested) with our decision and results. Spot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 22 Jan 01 - 10:08 PM Bill D... my point exactily... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:38 AM Bill, I don't know how typical I am of smokers but there is a BIG difference between enjoying a substance and not being able to enjoy oneself without a substance. I fall into the latter category. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:07 AM Clinton says 1. "If I'm in a place where I can't smoke and I really gotta have one, I go the hell somewhere else... if it's so easy for a smokers to do, why is it so hard for a non-smoker to do??" Its so hard for me to do because there just ain't any no-smoking folk venues in my area - Are you saying that because I don't smoke I should not be allowed to attend folk clubs??? and also 2. "But in a place where smoking is unrestriced... if yer a non-smoker or allergic... tough... life sucks... get a helmet... Just don't go there?!?! Isn't that the mature thing to do rather than going to such a place and expecting to get your own way???" In a place where there is no disabled access - if you are disabled - tough - life sucks. Is this realy acceptable??? Sorry but these arguments do not realy stand up to close scrutiny. I will happily give you a good argument for smoking - You pay more taxes than non-smokers and should therefore get some additional benefits! It's the only one which I could use and keep a straight face when I used to smoke. I'll think of counter sooner or later but it is a tough one! I do agree with your general theme though - lets have non-smoking and unrestricted smoking venues. I would be more than happy with that as long as there are some non-smoking folky venues. After reading the thread I think we need to have a 'one week on - one week off' trial at our club - would that satisfy everyone??? Cheers Dave the Gnome |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:46 AM DTG, just try the non-smoking club, it could turn out to be the best move you have made (and this is coming from a hardened smoker who would be unlikely to attend). I'm not sure whether you and Spot The Dog are representing the same club or not but I seem to remember that you both live in the Manchester area (or Stockport? - all seems to me living in N Wales to be pretty much the same area) where there must be a big catchment area which is likely to have a number of people not going out to folk clubs for reasons mentioned by the non-smokers in this thread. On reflection, your situation(or situations) is rather different to where I am as folk players (and potential audience) are so few - i.e. there is a lot less room to cater for smoking and non-smoking venues here. Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Metchosin Date: 23 Jan 01 - 06:30 AM Very interesting thread, I wasn't going to touch it with a ten foot pole. The vitriol about non-smoking/smoking venues has been going on here in B.C. for about the past ten years and after awhile it gets tedious, because some feel that it gives them a God given right to be rude. But from what I have read Dave and personal experience, I don't think your week on/week off will satisfy the anti-smoking lobby.
The unfortunate thing, seemingly not satisfied having the public venue law passed in B.C., some non-smokers continue to harangue smokers, when they comply and take their habit to the street outside of public buildings. Smokers outside continue to be regaled by passing non-smokers, who use their supposed concern for others health, as an excuse to be publicly rude and intrusive into another's life, then smugly step into their fume belching cars and buses, comforting themselves with the fact that they have done a good deed and reinforcing their sense of superiority.
Clinton, further to the non-smoking situation in B.C. in bars, pubs, restaurants and other public places, from what I have observed, despite the law, quite a few smoking pubs and bars still openly exist in contravention of the by-law. Does that still give us Canadian staus? I guess smokers just butt out when the by-law enforcement officer is in the vicinity. In those pubs where there is no smoking inside, where the space is available, most owner's have got around the by-law by covering outside patios with awnings, tent walls and wall mounting gas heaters for those that still want to smoke. It works on the coast, but I have not been up to Ft. St. John to see what it is like at forty below. My brother (an ardent non-smoker), who regularly plays at one of the now totally non smoking pubs (before and after the law), has noticed a significant change and decline in clientele, particularly in the off season, since the law came into effect. The non-smokers, by and large seem to be a less gregarious and cheerful lot than those in attendance before the bylaw. He's sometimes a bit whistful. |
|
Subject: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 23 Jan 01 - 07:28 AM Dave... 1... Depends how radical a non-smoker you are... I wouldn't go to a motorcycle rally and complain about the noise...
2... You don't seriously think that being an non smoker and being handicapped are even remotly the same thing do you?!?!?! Smoking or nonsmoking is a personal choice... Disabled isn't!
What I say to you, if yer so concerned that your area has no non-smoking venue, maybe you 'd better start one... There's no pub in Windsor where I can order chinese food while getting a foot massage... and there likely won't be until -I- open one... Evidently, you local venues are doing quite well without your $$... and that's the bottom line! "less gregarious and cheerful" Sounds like a pretty damn dull crowd! LOL!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:12 AM Hi Clinton - good points but.... 1. I wouldn't complain about the noise either. You HAVE to have noise at at a motor cycle rally - you DO NOT HAVE to have smoking at a folk club. 2. I am not equating non-smokers to disabled. The anolgy was aimed your other illustration ("if yer a non-smoker or allergic... tough". How is being disabled in one of the more obvious ways different to being disabled by a dibilitating allergy? 3. Start my own non-smoking venue? This is my folk club. I started it 20 years ago with a couple of mates. I run it. I book and pay the acts. I take the flack from militant smokers when I suggest we might try the occasional non-smoking night! What else do you suggest I do? 4. The local venues do well with or without my money - so do the local pushers and prostitutes. What does this mean? 5. "less gregarious and cheerful". Dunno where this came from - not me for sure. 6. "Sounds like a pretty damn dull crowd!" - Were you not at the (smoking) Mudcat gathering in our club with others from all over the country? I guess not. 7. What has all this got to do with the original question anyway (Go to the top of the thread and look at the question). Or is this just a smokescreen.... (Yuk!) Cheers Dave the Gnome
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Julie B Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:17 AM I feel very happy to see this debate. I get very poorly from being in smokey venues...it sadly took me years to realise this; I just thought I was forever 'catching a bug!'. I even gave the office christmas party a miss this year.. and guess what? I had my first 'cold free' Christmas for years. I only go to 2 of 5 local folk clubs, as the other three are very smokey. My friends also feel and do the same. There is a big demand for smoke free pubs, but, because the non-smokers usually feel too guilty to complain and say how they feel, I don't know if you will get them very soon!!! The smokers are far more vocal! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:25 AM Apolgies Clinton - thought you was in Windsor, UK. I retract the remark about you not coming to our Mudcat 'do' - guess it was a bit far! If you had have been there or at any of our regular folk nights you would see we are far from dull. I should have guessed by the name you were in the wrong Windsor...;-) DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:35 AM I repeat.. I have to breathe..you DONT have to smoke.Look, if you are in a non smoking venue, and, you "Need" a smoke, it makes sense to take the stink outside. That only takes a few minutes. However, if I'm in a smoking venue, does it make sense for me to leave just to get some unpolluted air? You would miss a few minutes, I would miss most of the show. And that remark about "smoke belching cars" there again, we are dependent on our cars..we must drive..you dont have to smoke. Ok, enough of the devils advocate stuff..I dont go into places where smoking is permitted because they are probably in the majority, conversely, you smokers have the choice to come in or stay out. In other words When in Rome, do as Romans do. Isn't this basically what you were trying to say Clinton? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 23 Jan 01 - 08:55 AM Kinda, kendal... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Gary T Date: 23 Jan 01 - 10:06 AM I smoke. I try to be considerate towards non-smokers, and by and large I find they are considerate to me. I like pizza, but I HATE green (bell) peppers. If a pizza has been cooked with green peppers on it, the taste permeates every bite even if the peppers are taken off before I eat it. There's no getting away from it. I gather from talking to friends that smoke likewise permeates the air (even outdoors if not too far away), as well as lingering in clothing, furniture, car interiors, etc. If it's around (or has been around, in some cases), they will suffer. Reactions of non-smokers to smoke and its residue ranges from mild annoyance to significant physical sickness. Much as I appreciate the convenience of being able to light up in my seat at a restaurant or show, I must concede that it is far easier for me to step outside for 5 minutes than for someone sensitive to smoke to bear its effects the entire time they're in the place. Thus I cannot in good conscience condemn non-smoking venues, though I am allowed to resent them a bit (BG, but a grain of truth). It would seem to me that the majority of smokers can adapt to a non-smoking venue more comfortably than the majority of non-smokers can adapt to a smoking one. It helps a great deal, and is only considerate, to make accommodation for smokers when feasible--having a reasonably accessible smoking area with some protection from the elements. There are enough differences between smoking and drinking, and between smoke-sensitivity and other physical handicaps, to make comparisons and analogies in those areas valid only in certain narrow senses. I don't have a case history to share, but I would have to say that offering a smoke-free atmosphere, along with the most convenient smoking area possible, seems to make the most sense to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Bill D Date: 23 Jan 01 - 11:09 AM Jon...I do understand your differentiation about using 'substances'...I have no idea why it works that way. My brother was much like you. I suspect I may simply be lucky that I am not drawn to smoke, and can drink without abusing it. I do know that nicotine and tar are unhealthy in any amounts, while alcohol..within limits...can even be beneficial. I would never try to ban alcohol, but merely try to figure out more ways to deal with it. Tobacco, on the other hand, I would like to see gradually disappear...I wonder how those whose genetic 'wiring' makes tobacco attractive would live if they had never heard of it. ...I truly do have sympathy for those who are addicted, but I have NO sympathy for the tobacco companies who flatly LIED for many years about the truth regarding their products! (It may be hard for regular smokers to realize how difficult it can be to cope when someone CANNOT stand smoke... I had a friend who once had a reservation at a motel..and had requested a non-smoking room...When she arrived, they tried to give her a room that had simply been cleaned and ashtrays removed...and she was barely a foot inside the door when she knew...! She had to wait an hour till a REAL non-smoking room was ready...(Yeah..it was a cheaper motel...still...*sigh*) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 23 Jan 01 - 11:45 AM You make a lot of sense Bill. I am not sure what to think about drugs and legislations (I tend towards ALL drugs being legal even though nicotine and alcohol are my only 2 poisons - I am too scared to get addicted to more altough I have cannabis which makes me feel ill). I believe that your thoughts on small qtys of alcohol being beneficial may be correct... I guess I wish the damn things never existed in the first place. Jon .. mind you, non alocholic Glenmorangie Bill.... ?? ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Julie B Date: 23 Jan 01 - 12:04 PM I like the post from Gary T. The clubs I do go to have smokers, but largely of the considerate kind (i.e. just smoke one or two in the break, sometimes go out). The clubs I never returned to contained rooms full of chain smokers, who seemed to revel in their ability to 'get up the noses' of the long-suffering non-smokers (who complained to me privately, but said they didn't feel they could raise the issue publicly as "it's always been this way". I really respect those smokers who are 'big' enough to make a compromise..like you Gary!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,JohnB Date: 23 Jan 01 - 12:45 PM How would it work if the Folk Clubs followed the Lines of a Democracy?? Try having a vote on smoke free evenings and/or clubs. If you lose, have another one in about 10 years time, you will probably win. Smokers are a dying breed after all is said and done! JohnB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Clinton Hammond Date: 23 Jan 01 - 12:51 PM Ya tilly... it's supposed to be a folk club, not an AA meeting eh! Hhhhheeeeeyyyy! Maybe that's the answer... I'll join AA just so I can smoke as much as I want! LOL!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: John Routledge Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:15 PM Excellent sentiments Gary T Cheers GB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,petr Date: 23 Jan 01 - 01:46 PM dave the gnome, I would say the smokers tax & hence entitlement to more benefits doesnt really work. The tax is more than offset by medical expenses for smoking related diseases.(which arent exclusive to smokers) 5000 people die in BC due to smoking related causes. (this doesnt include people fumbling for a cigarette while driving (or getting that hot ash on their laps) and causing accidents or fires etc.) dumping their disgusting ashes all over the place |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dunc Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:33 PM As a member of the Glenfarg Village Folk Club in Perthshire, Scotland, I was going home smelling like an ashtray. One night my daughter told me not to come anywhere near her as I STANK !!! That was the last straw for me. I called a club meeting which had a near 100% turnout of the membership. It was heated, passionate and emotional, but by a massive percentage the membership passed a NO SMOKING rule at the venue. Two members were insenced and never came back but the overall membership has risen and we very rarely (if ever) get any complaints from smokers. Do it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Metchosin Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:50 PM point, set and match. Told you so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave Wynn Date: 23 Jan 01 - 03:50 PM When I smoked I tried to be sensitive to non smokers but did believe in my freedom to smoke provided it was in a smoke designated area. Now I am a non smoker I try to be sensitive to the needs of smokers provided they are in a smoke designated are. I didn't blow smoke in non smoking areas and I don't complain if a designated smoking area is smokey. It's a simple philosophy (from a simple guy!). The democracy thing is a non starter (I mean in this specific scenario not in general). It is unfair (strangely , I believe this) to force a totalitarian policy onto a minority via democracy. I would prefer to make the decision as one of the owners of the club and stand by the results. This way we take the flack and don't divide the patrons. We are occasionally lobbied by patrons and visiting performers for a no smoking venue and equally vociferously , but by fewer numerically , to remain a smoking permitted venue. We will have to bite the bullet eventually I think. Dave The G. is this the same club we a talking about? :-) Spot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,Kendall Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:09 PM Hey Dunc... I have fond memories of the Glenfarg Folk Club. I performed there 10 years ago last August and enjoyed it very much. Do you ever bump into a chap named Chick McHardy? I think he lives in Kinross...Also a duo called Gaberlunzie? Gordon Menzies set up my tour over there, and, it has been one of the high spots in my life..love Scotland, and the Scots. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dunc Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:20 PM Glenfarg Village Folk Club goes from strength to strength. It had its 21st annual festival last year. I became involved with the club about six years ago - spent 4 years as secretary and a short time as Chairman of the club. I don't know Chick McHardy but Garberlunzie still live in the village of Glenfarg and still perform all over Scotland. The guy who did all the bookings for the club when you visited was a Jim McIver from Perth. Where are you now and when are you coming back over to Perthshire? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dunc Date: 23 Jan 01 - 04:25 PM You can check out the NO SMOKING venue of Glenfarg Village Folk Club at http://www.glenfargvillagefolkclub.freeserve.co.uk/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 23 Jan 01 - 07:42 PM I've been planning to return for years now..the first trip I made there was with the love of my life who has since moved on. I still find it hard to visit certain places. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Jan 01 - 04:10 AM Spot says "Dave The G. is this the same club we a talking about? :-)" Dunno, Spot - PM to let me know who you are and I will know better! Sounds like we have the same problem even if we are in different places - perhaps we should compare notes anyway. Seeing as Swinton will be netter than your club anyway (it is better than most) you may even learn a thing or two;-) Cheers DtG
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 24 Jan 01 - 04:39 AM petr, I am not sure about your thoughts on taxes - I guess it pretty much depends on where you live. Where I live in Wales in the UK, 50g of Golden Virgina cost around œ8 and I belive that the going rate for 50g on the black market round here is œ3.50. The black market stuff will have been made over here, shipped to Europe (say France), bought legitimately over there, smuggled back to the UK and distributed and the final seller can still make a profit selling at œ4.50 less than the shops? I reckon that UK smokers make a huge and unfair contribution! Jon |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Jan 01 - 05:13 AM "will be netter than your club" - should read better than... Although, obviously, my preef rooding isn't DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Les from Hull Date: 24 Jan 01 - 03:52 PM The notice on the wall at Nellie's (White Horse Folk Club, Beverley) asks for 'minimum smoking, please.' A very sensible approach. Maggie and I share a roll-up (as mentioned much earlier in the thread, they are less 'smokey'. You see, we only smoke when were drinking. And nobody has suggested a 'non-drinking' folk club yet as far as I know. Les |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,kendall Date: 24 Jan 01 - 07:08 PM Neither is allowed in Maine folk clubs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: hesperis Date: 24 Jan 01 - 11:44 PM Wow. I haven't read this thread for a few days, so bear with me... this is going to be long!
"Just don't go there" I don't. I am almost a prisioner in my apartment because of it. Actually, I moved into a "non-smoking building" and then a year later the landlord changed his mind. Tried to find an apartment, the only non-smoking and no pets places were over $600 per month, and at the time, I was on a fixed income of $520. So I'm still living in the same place. "smoker would rather avoid the places where smoking is banned" - you think that's a convincing argument? I avoid places where smoking is, and that happens to be anywhere outside my apartment. Lovely social life I'm allowed to have because of your choices to smoke! Actually, I would rather there were no laws against smoking inside public buildings, because ever since those laws came into play, I haven't been able to avoid the stuff. Walk down the street, and get a lungful. Before, I could walk down the street, at least. I couldn't go into any stores or restaurants, but I could walk! I could get my shopping done without coughing. Yes, I know it's an addiction. But you know what, clean air is a NEED. Go without food for a few months - you'll live. Go without water for a few days - you'll live. Go without air for a few minutes - you're kaput. So go feed your addiction somewhere else! MT - you tell many smokers, (not all of them, thank god!) that you need clean air, and they will think that you are trying to force them to give it up completely, or ban smoking completely, or in any way, try to force your choices down their throats. And you know why? Because just by lighting up in a public place, theiy are forcing their choice down your throat --- and they know it. That and a lot of smokers are "trying to quit". So if you don't smoke, or need them not to smoke, they feel guilty, and try to shift the blame. pseudolus - "extremists come out of the woodwork ". Well, of course. To some people, this is a matter of health and public safety. We already know that health isn't that important a value for most smokers. DtG - 'one week on - one week off' would not satisfy everyone. Have you ever seen the inside of a building that has been smoked in, even for a little while? The walls go yellow, dark spots appear even through fresh paint, drapes and curtains still smell of smoke. It's because the particles are still in the walls. You would have to start with a new building, or a room that hasn't been smoked in, if you wanted to please non-smokers. If you wanted to please the majority of non-smokers, merely fresh paint every few months, and dry-cleaning all the fabrics in the room would be tolerable. That wouldn't help me right now, but for most people, it would be ok. I know someone who was a chainsmoker until she moved into this one place. She saw it before it had been painted, and that was it! Cold turkey. Also, did you know that most people who smoke and are addicted to it, are actually allergic to it? Metchosin - "supposed concern for others health" - God, no! I'm concerned for my own. And that of the people I care about. My mother is actually worse with smoke than I am, because she smoked for a while. A few years later, she found out that she was allergic to it, and it really makes her ill. Many smokers obviously don't care about anyone's health, and least of all their own. "The non-smokers, by and large seem to be a less gregarious and cheerful lot" Of course. You try hiding out all your life, and then finally have it be somewhat safe. See how outgoing and gregarious you are! DtG - "How is being disabled in one of the more obvious ways different to being disabled by a dibilitating allergy" Allergies aren't legally recognized. As I know from personal experience of being harassed to get a job while I was really sick at home and "on the system". And the doctors could only give me temporary exemptions for "depression", which happens to be one of the symptoms of allergy. Funny, that's also one of the symptoms of addiction withdrawal... GaryT - "having a reasonably accessible smoking area with some protection from the elements. " YES! And good education about smoking, and places that really do help people quit, for free. And legislation to phase out the tobacco industry, that actually gives them something else to play with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST Date: 25 Jan 01 - 10:40 PM Our city passed an ordinance a few years ago banning smoking from all indoor public place - except bowling alleys and bars. However, my favorite local brew pub is non-smoking and they do just fine. I'm sure it helps that "none of our beers suck" and the music and food are good, too. I go there for all of the above reasons. . . and avoid a couple other places which have good food and music, and fairly decent beer- because smoking is allowed. It all seems to be a matter of preference and I haven't heard of any place in town going out of business because smoking was no longer allowed inside. Cheers, PoohBear |
|
Subject: And then there's the extream case From: Clinton Hammond Date: 26 Jan 01 - 01:24 AM Hey Hes... no offence, but if yer so allergic to smoke that walking past a smoker outside bothers you, you have way bigger problems!! What can I say, you got dealt a lousy hand... better cross the street if ya see me coming trailing a cloud of white smoke, cause I love to walk around the wild west end in winter, puffin like a steam train... especially at night... and if we're ever in the same non-smoking folk club, ya might wanna keep yer distance, cause I'll likley reek of the one I just stomped out on my way in... Enjoy the show eh! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Dunc Date: 26 Jan 01 - 07:05 AM Hey Clinton - Are you one of the tens of thousands of smokers who don't regard cigarette ends, ash, matches, empty disposable lighters, empty cigarette packets, etc. etc. as litter? Are you one of the legions of smokers who throw the lit remnants of their cigarettes out of their vehicles as the drive along not giving a care for where it ends up? I can't be sure - but my guess is that you may be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 26 Jan 01 - 09:58 AM Bumper sticker in the USA The world is not your ashtray. |
|
Subject: In the red courner! From: Clinton Hammond Date: 26 Jan 01 - 12:29 PM Cigarette ash is NOT litter... like any other ash it's actually good for plants... I do not smoke in my car, so I don't flick butts out the window... And I light with strike anywhere matches... not that I really 'care' for the environment'... what's yer house made out of? trees, toxic paint, and fiberglass insulation I'll bet... To say nothing of the tar shingles ont he roof... So welcome to your glass house eh! And speaking of glass houses, with american choking the world with it's emissions, and clogging it's arteries with it's garbage, a few smoke packs aren't really gonna make a difference at all.... We may as well drop this whole fecking thing though... No one side is gonna convince the other, and we're so far off tipic it's not even funny! Didn't there used to be a folk music Message board around here somewhere? p.s. The world is whatever I want it to be... Don't like it? Tough! Stop me... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,LEJ Date: 26 Jan 01 - 12:50 PM I quit smoking (tobacco) in 1980, but my group plays mainly in Taverns and Roadhouses where smoking is almost a requirement. Doesn't seem to bother me much, except that your clothing becomes saturated with it. I can see where a non-smoking policy would be beneficial in most folk venues where the nature of the music is a bit more, er, subtle? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 27 Jan 01 - 09:52 AM I used to come up with some unique excuses for smoking, bur, Clinton, you are a genius at it! One of my favorites was: "Any wimp can quit smoking, it takes a man to face cancer." Another ..a friend of mine had quit for some time, then took it up again. When I commented on it he said "I just got tired of being a slave to my willpower." And, my alltime favorite, "Denial is maor than a river in AFRICA" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 27 Jan 01 - 01:27 PM thats MORE than a river.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Julie B Date: 29 Jan 01 - 08:31 AM I haven't seen any mention yet of vocal nodes/nodules within this thread. For anyone who's not familiar with them, and what they can mean for a singer, it's easy to find many sad stories on the web. For medical information, with good photos, see http://www.connectingvoices.com/current/9701/technical/9701t3_MD/9701t3_2.htm where it's expalined that the best way of avoiding vocal problems is avoiding smoke and smoky environments as often as possible. As an amateur, I don't have to sing, but my heart goes out to professionals who practice for years and then develop nodules because they cannot afford to say 'no' to singing in smoky venues. (If interested see related post from an affected singer on 'Non-smoking venues in the UK' thread). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: kendall Date: 29 Jan 01 - 09:44 AM I'm not about to defend smoking, but, it seems to me that if one can not afford to turn down a gig in a smoking venue, how can one afford the throat problems that might arise? When that happens, you cant sing at all! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Jon Freeman Date: 30 Jan 01 - 06:52 AM "How is it that smokers always make it out to be a matter of THEIR right to poison others? Where excatly did that right come from? I don't remember reading about it in the U.S. Constitution; do they have that right in Canada? UK? Curious in Seattle" I've just been re-reading this thread and question just occured to me: Don't most people, including non-smokers, defend this right to drive a car, to fly,etc. and isn't the effects of this pollution likely to do more damage than cigarette smoke? Curious in Llandudno. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: KingBrilliant Date: 30 Jan 01 - 07:03 AM Jon - that's true. But someone else's cig-smoke in your face is a much more personal and immediate form of pollution for both parties. Hence more emotive. Kris |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: GUEST,Bun Date: 30 Jan 01 - 11:29 AM I would not mind going to a non smoking folkclub, as long as someone told me in advance. the building I work in is all no smoking, I have got used to it. We stand outside like convicts! I try to be a responsible smoker, I would not dream of blowing smoke in someones face, or smoking if it upset people - I always ask. I love to in a huddle with two or three smokers, having a chat and a laugh. Its become such an anti social thing to do, that it makes you bond - a fellow leper! Bun |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Smoking vs Non Smoking Venues From: Lady McMoo Date: 30 Jan 01 - 12:00 PM I have never smoked in my life but, up until a couple of years ago, was doing up to 80 gigs a year, often in very smokey pubs. Some of these gigs were up to 4 or 5 hours. Like I think JulieB said above, I realised these gigs were actually making me feel very sick, probably a combination of a full day's day job, a couple of drinks, the excitement and adrenaline of playing, lack of sleep working into the wee hours and most of all, 4 or 5 hours of secondhand tobacco smoke. As I couldn't change the policy of the venues, and the level of smoking here in Belgium is incidentally far higher than anything I've encountered in the UK or the States and the attitude of smokers much more aggressive, the only option I had was to cut out those types of gigs completely. It was a joy to play in a couple of sessions last time I was in Boston as both pubs were non-smoking so far as I could see. I now do far fewer gigs but in places I know are smoke-free or, at least, well-ventilated. I regret this but there seems little else I can do if I'm going to keep my health. I'm not against freedom of choice in this matter but it does seem unfair that non-smokers have little choice other than to leave in many instances. Respectfully yours, mcmoo |