jh wrote:
> Steve Cobham wrote:
>> andrew s wrote:
>>> The downside for me is the smoky atmospheres. Bring on the smoking
>>> in public ban!!
[ ... ]
>> As a longtime Keef-type smoker - never happier when Im playing than
>> with a cigarette in my mouth - Im not exactly in favour of an
>> outright ban.
>> Of course, I can understand the health issues and arguments and
>> strongly believe that non-smoking venues of all sorts should be
>> encouraged, but - at the same time - keep some venues for those who
>> choose to smoke.
Thats not a runner because of the effects of Greshams Law (to the extent
that it applies to anything other than money).
[ ... ]
>> Then again, Id rather see a ban on alcohol before tobacco.
That would definitely reduce the number of opportunities for gigs...
[ ... ]
>> Some vices good, some vices bad.
Some vices hurt people who dont even want to take part in them. Theyre the
worst ones, I suggest.
>> Ask people whats really, really important and I dont reckon that
>> smoky pubs are even going to get in the top 20.
If it were necessary to wait until people saw it as the top priority of
the day, it would never get done.
Very little would ever get done.
>> In the grand scheme of things, just how important is a smoke-free
>> atmosphere really?
*Very* important.
YMMV.
>> Now wheres my packet of fags?
Quite.
:-)
Now... on to jhs post...
> however i do not favour a ban in pubs (maybe restaurants), let people
> smoke if they want to,
You mean just leave it like it is now?
> we are all aware of the dangers,
That is very true.
But when it comes to accepting other peoples secondhand smoke, the options
are not exactly plentiful, are they?
You can either leave or grin and bear it.
Why should the person who is *not* seeking to contaminate the atmosphere (or
the lungs of others) be the one who has to give way?
> the jury is out on passive smoking,
No, it isnt.
The verdict was returned decades ago.
We are now at the sentencing stage.
> perhaps landlords should be encouraged to
> have smoking and non-smoking sections, i dunno if you sit in non-
> smoking your beer is 25p cheaper or something
> its not like theres a ban on hamburgers is there? 20 of those a day
> would probably kill you off sooner than fags
I have no fear of passive burger-eating.
> and to return on-topic, no smoking in a blues club!?
YES!
I am 100% behind this initiative. It cannot come soon enough.
I do appreciate that it will royally piss off many smokers, among whom I
count a lot of friends.
But this is an idea whose time has (at last) come - and we all remember what
Voltaire said about an idea whose time has come
> would turn in his grave
His more than likely *early* grave, to which he was brought betimes by his
addictions.
Login
Search
Posted: 2005-01-23 17:13:39
![New posts [ Popular ]](images/topic_unread_hot.gif "New posts [ Popular ]"){kind=small}
![No new posts [ Popular ]](images/topic_read_hot.gif "No new posts [ Popular ]"){kind=small}
![New posts [ Locked ]](images/topic_unread_locked.gif "New posts [ Locked ]"){kind=small}
![No new posts [ Locked ]](images/topic_read_locked.gif "No new posts [ Locked ]"){kind=small}
