The Most Dangerous Man That Ever Lived....

ILW

chewmylegoff wrote: »

there is no enforced lack of choice though, as you can just go outside and have a cigarette.

the only lack of choice is that you cannot choose to make others (including the staff) breathe in your smoke. there was nothing worse than some moron sparking up a hamlet next to you in a pub.

There was never anything to stop a pub declaring itself a smoke free zone. Why were there so few?

ILW

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

You might say the same about children working in mines or factories before the various factory acts of the 19th Century.

I am referring to consenting adults in a free market. So no comparison.

chewmylegoff

ILW wrote: »

There was never anything to stop a pub declaring itself a smoke free zone. Why were there so few?

because they wanted to get as many customers through the door as possible, and because they thought that if they declared themselves smoke-free zones they would have fewer customers.

you could argue that this shows that non-smokers don't care if people smoke in pubs. that however would ignore the fact that pubs are workplaces as well as drinking establishments.

ILW

I see it as similar to loud music in pubs (which also has health implcations). I used to like it but do not anymore so just go to quiet places. I would not wish it to be banned everywhere though as this would be unfair on the prople that do enjoy it.

chewmylegoff

ILW wrote: »

I see it as similar to loud music in pubs (which also has health implcations). I used to like it but do not anymore so just go to quiet places. I would not wish it to be banned everywhere though as this would be unfair on the prople that do enjoy it.

loud music isn't going to kill the other customers and the staff though, is it. it's a silly comparison in my view.

StevieJ

ILW wrote: »

I am referring to consenting adults in a free market. So no comparison.

Sometimes Nanny does know best

ILW

chewmylegoff wrote: »

loud music isn't going to kill the other customers and the staff though, is it. it's a silly comparison in my view.

Customers and staff should be able to choose the environment they enter. I am not an avid promoter of smoking, just do not like having options taken away by government. People should be allowed to make their own choices as to how private establishments are run and whether they wish to use them or not for whatever reason.

ILW

StevieJ wrote: »

Sometimes Nanny does know best

Guess thats where we differ in opinion.

Generali

There used to be a very popular non-smoking pub on Threadneedle Street.

The reason for its popularity? You could go there and come back without stinking of cigarettes which meant your boss didn't know you'd been to the pub if you didn't smoke.

ILW

Generali wrote: »

There used to be a very popular non-smoking pub on Threadneedle Street.

The reason for its popularity? You could go there and come back without stinking of cigarettes which meant your boss didn't know you'd been to the pub if you didn't smoke.

The throwing up into the pot plant may have been a bit of a giveaway though.