Thread: My Stupid Fucking State Just Passed A Smoking Ban

A similar ban came into effect in Melbourne, Australia a few years ago. I, too, don't really have a problem with it with the exception of the cigar nights at a few of my favourite bars being ruined.

I dislike these bans purely because, as many have said, it should be the owners right to decide if they wish to allow it or not. People say "oh but I don't smoke, so what about me?", well find a place that doesn't allow it. There are lots of bars around. If you don't own the place it isn't upto you what they allow and don't allow.

Smoking is just an easy target. It is one of the few things that can be attacked. Sure smoking lowers your health and increases your chances of cancer. Sure there are alot of inconsiderate smokers who seem oblivious to non smokers and just light up wherever, even as a smoker I dislike this and when I am smoking I always move away from crowds to reduce the chance they will breathe my smoke.

However...in the UK, something like 60% of accident and emergency admissions on the weekend are alcohol related. Smoking doesn't ruin childhoods, dads don't beat up their partners in front of the kids because he had one too many marlboro lights. They don't beat up their kids because they have had too much to smoke. They don't rob kids of a childhood because of their habit, or indeed to they rob themselves of a life. Alcohol not only carries a serious health risk, it also does alot of social damage which is tolerated simply because alot of people do it.

To then have cigarettes being put up as the poster boy of bad habits really does annoy me. The message I get is that it is ok to drink, just don't smoke and I don't like it. Both are bad for you. We have the right to use both and if someone wants to allow both on their premises then that should be their choice. If you care so much about public health, what the fuck are you doing visiting a bar? Bartenders and bars are the acceptable face of drug dealing, the cancer they trade in is far worse than smoking.

I hate it when people get up on their soap box and high horse over smoking, because they want to get drunk in a smoke free environment, it is so hypocritical. Sure, rotting your brain and liver (and potentially your social life) they can take, but the lungs is just a bridge too far? Most aren't even aware of the damage alcohol does to them, they don't care because they like getting drunk, yet when it comes to smoking, so many turn into experts and because smokers are a minority it never gets judged by the same standards.

If we judged all drugs by the same standards we would either have a free market with weed, ecstacy etc, or there would be no tobacco or alcohol sales. For me the arguments in support of the bans have a very very selective scope and if applied to the substance they are visiting the bars for in the first place it is likely they would be staying at home.

I also don't like how bars and resteraunts are tied together. Granted some bars sell food and some resteraunts sell alcohol, but they are different. I can sympathise much more with non smokers when it comes to a resteraunt as it is disgusting when you are trying to eat in a cloud of smoke. Resteraunts are places where families (including young kids) should be able to go. However I still think resteraunts should have the right to decide. It is likely a resteraunt who banned smoking would do ok, however it isn't always the same with bars. It is their property. Heck, alot of places used to have a smoking section up the back away from the bar and others, I didn't see what the problem was with that.

In my small village for example, there is a high proportion of smokers. These stupid laws force people outside, even when the numbers of smokers is probably around even with that of non smokers. It is unreasonable to have a blanket ban. What if only 1 person is in? It is just stupid and unreasonable and they are just picking on smokers because it is an easy target.

Sorry, that was more of a rant than a reasoned argument and is probably riddled with incoherence.

Originally Posted by gismo

I dislike these bans purely because, as many have said, it should be the owners right to decide if they wish to allow it or not. People say "oh but I don't smoke, so what about me?", well find a place that doesn't allow it. There are lots of bars around. If you don't own the place it isn't upto you what they allow and don't allow.

Smoking is just an easy target. It is one of the few things that can be attacked. Sure smoking lowers your health and increases your chances of cancer. Sure there are alot of inconsiderate smokers who seem oblivious to non smokers and just light up wherever, even as a smoker I dislike this and when I am smoking I always move away from crowds to reduce the chance they will breathe my smoke.

However...in the UK, something like 60% of accident and emergency admissions on the weekend are alcohol related. Smoking doesn't ruin childhoods, dads don't beat up their partners in front of the kids because he had one too many marlboro lights. They don't beat up their kids because they have had too much to smoke. They don't rob kids of a childhood because of their habit, or indeed to they rob themselves of a life. Alcohol not only carries a serious health risk, it also does alot of social damage which is tolerated simply because alot of people do it.

To then have cigarettes being put up as the poster boy of bad habits really does annoy me. The message I get is that it is ok to drink, just don't smoke and I don't like it. Both are bad for you. We have the right to use both and if someone wants to allow both on their premises then that should be their choice. If you care so much about public health, what the fuck are you doing visiting a bar? Bartenders and bars are the acceptable face of drug dealing, the cancer they trade in is far worse than smoking.

I hate it when people get up on their soap box and high horse over smoking, because they want to get drunk in a smoke free environment, it is so hypocritical. Sure, rotting your brain and liver (and potentially your social life) they can take, but the lungs is just a bridge too far? Most aren't even aware of the damage alcohol does to them, they don't care because they like getting drunk, yet when it comes to smoking, so many turn into experts and because smokers are a minority it never gets judged by the same standards.

If we judged all drugs by the same standards we would either have a free market with weed, ecstacy etc, or there would be no tobacco or alcohol sales. For me the arguments in support of the bans have a very very selective scope and if applied to the substance they are visiting the bars for in the first place it is likely they would be staying at home.

I also don't like how bars and resteraunts are tied together. Granted some bars sell food and some resteraunts sell alcohol, but they are different. I can sympathise much more with non smokers when it comes to a resteraunt as it is disgusting when you are trying to eat in a cloud of smoke. Resteraunts are places where families (including young kids) should be able to go. However I still think resteraunts should have the right to decide. It is likely a resteraunt who banned smoking would do ok, however it isn't always the same with bars. It is their property. Heck, alot of places used to have a smoking section up the back away from the bar and others, I didn't see what the problem was with that.

In my small village for example, there is a high proportion of smokers. These stupid laws force people outside, even when the numbers of smokers is probably around even with that of non smokers. It is unreasonable to have a blanket ban. What if only 1 person is in? It is just stupid and unreasonable and they are just picking on smokers because it is an easy target.

Sorry, that was more of a rant than a reasoned argument and is probably riddled with incoherence.

see you're just too lazy to step outside to smoke, but are still willing to write up an 8 paragraph rant whining about mistreatment and iniquity

the whole issue is literally just about stepping outside - how bad is that?

Originally Posted by coqauvin

see you're just too lazy to step outside to smoke, but are still willing to write up an 8 paragraph rant whining about mistreatment and iniquity

the whole issue is literally just about stepping outside - how bad is that?

Actually I don't mind stepping outside, even before it was banned in Scotland I still did it when at pubs with friends, just to be polite. The issue isn't about stepping out side, it is about who decides, the state or owner. I have never complained about having to step outside for a smoke, I honestly don't mind it.

Gwahir, I was never trying to vindicate the habit. Just pointing out that villifying 1 habit which is no worse than some others which don't get the same criticisms, or arent villified at all, is unfair. That is called discrimination. Granted, I didn't exactly frame my argument is clarity.

Syme, that was a good post. Hit the nail on the head.