should smoking be banned in pubs?

Question

good awnser gets ten points

Answer 1

Let me start off by saying I hate smoking, I start couging out my lung when I am near it and the idea of how people can smoke completely baffles me. That aside I would not want to be eating in a place with alot of smoke...so having smoking banne din restaurants is a must for me and I know for others as well. But if I go into a Pub I expect there to be smoke...its part of the drinking experience for alot of people; also many pubs would go out of business because of something like that, so no smoking should not be banned in pubs. Let the pub owner and the costumers' wants dictate whether smoking will go on inside of thier pub.

And those of you saying "Kids are there" or "Second hand smoke kills so they should not get to ruin our lungs" etc. can rot...why would you EVER bring a child to a pub? And if you don't like smoke go drink at a restaurant or at home...most of those places are smoke free.... And for those of you sticking up for the "workers" I am sorry but work somewhere else if you don't like it or put yer life at risk, its up to that individual, when you hire on you know what it is like to some degree, and if you think that "well I can't make as much money somewhere else" I now know what is important in your life and its not your health...

And those of you who are like "Make a smoke free section"....that doesn't work...its smoke...one fan or a breeze messes that plan up...even if it is another room.

Also its all well and good that you can think about yourselves, kids and workers...but workers picked the job, and parents who bring thier kids in thier are gonna mess thier child up somehow, secondhand smoke or not, think about how this affects both sides, not one, as I said befor ei hate smoke, but when I walk into Sarah's Irish Pub to buy myself a sandwich or drink I don't expect my aunt and her workers and the other people there to stop smoking, I went in knowing that. As a consumer YOU should be making up your mind about the places you go, if you go into a smoke filled place and hate it and don't talk to a manager about it, they are getting your money and not fulfilling your needs, that ain't right, and its not thier fault. It's yours. When I pick a restaurant to eat at i take into account whether it will be smoke filled or not, when i go drinking I think about that too, as consumers should, pick the place you want to give business to, don't make all businesses succomb to your needs, they have other people to take money from, and alot of them may be smokers (or non-smokers if its a non-smoking establishment in which case smokers can't complain).

Answer 2

Yes, and I am a pipe smoker of very long standing. I will tell you of the Irish experience having seen it first hand several times in the last twelve months or so. There was very little trouble introducing the legislation with only a few people smoking where they should not have done so. Most pubs have an outside lean-to where smokers congregate. Outside the front doors of pubs is also an area. I noticed that girls outnumber male smokers about three to one. Many pubs have in fact closed and are not flats. I do not know if this is because of the high value of building land or lack of business. Off-licenses are doing a roaring trade with many men now drinking at home which was totally alien to Irishmen. However, this is causing an ever increasing problem for children who are now suffering from the effects of the smoke from their parents cigarettes.................. A good thing taking everything into account and I cannot wait until it comes into force here in the UK next February..........

Answer 3

Smoking should be banned in public in general. The market shouldn't have control over this because smoking harms not only the person smoking but the general public (and the location itself)

I don't believe in a lot of the governmental restrictions on personal activities, but the government is in place to protect people from one another. If it just harmed the smoker, that would be one thing, but since it has been proven to harm others, the government does have the right to restrict it.

Those who use the arguement "If you don't like the smoke go somewhere else" fail to take into account the waitresses and other staff that don't really have that option. If a waitress becomes pregnant at a bar that allows smoking, she can either quit and hope some employer will actually hire a woman that won't be able to work in 6-9 months, or stick it out and expose, not only herself, but her unborn child to the smoke.

Answer 4

Caution coffee is extremely hot, or do not open door in flight.
Some things just dont need a warning label. I am a smoker I love to smoke. especially at the pub or casino. these are places where people go to live a lifestyle. If you are so health consious why are you at the pub? you should be jogging or at church or at the gym. Meaning the pub is a place for things that go on in the pub. and if you ask me and you did, Alcohol is proven way worse than smoking, many more homes are broken from alcoholism than from smoking. but look what happened during prohibition? so lets keep the beer flowing and pick on the smokers? lay off people and expect to have the atmosphere of the pub when you go to one.

Answer 5

NO it shouldnt be banned and it should for sure not be banned by the government (state, federal, or local) if banned then have it by the owners of the establishment.

Instead could go on a rant about the rights of smokers and how there is all the conflicting reports of the harms of second hand smoke and all the pollution and military testing of nukes in the last 70years. Face it 2nd hand smoke arguement is there cause just as many non smokers are getting lung cancer than smokers so they have to explain it somehow right.

Answer 6

Absolutely NOT.

It should be a free-market system. You should have the right to open your pub and cater to whomever you like, gay, straight, men, women, drunks, smokers and non-smokers...as long as they are of legal age.
If a pub allows smoking and you don't like it, DON'T GO THERE. Go to a non-smoking pub. Don't have one nearby? OPEN ONE! If enough people feel as strongly as you, you'll be rich.
Getting the Government to help ban areas of private business concerning LEGAL activities such as smoking is just plain craziness...or borderline communism.

And as far as harming the workers there? Please. I went to bartending school and I've waited tables. It's the one job that you can pretty much get in ANY town or city across the US. If I'm worried about my health, I'll go to a different place. Now you're not only trying to 'protect' me from my own stupidity (telling me that smoking is bad) but also where I should and shouldn't work. Stop trying to make decisions that 'protect' the masses and live your own life. People make it sound like it's a big secret that smoking is harmful. News flash...we all know. If all the smokers want to hang out in one place and do their thing, who are any of us to tell them that they can't 'for their own good'? That's just plain arrogance.

PS...I've never had a cigarette in my life, I just hate having my rights taken away.

Answer 7

Smoking question. Another issue which is completely polarized and in the end you get a bunch of people agreeing to disagree.

The simple fact of the matter is, and even smokers cannot refute this, is that non-smokers who work n the environment are at risk. YES I KNOW the old argument, you can always work somewhere else. BUT how many jobs do you know with such flexibility and great money?

So I think smoking should be history. But it will continue to be a debate about people and thier rights. Well, my right is to go out and not have noxious lethal fumes around me.

TFTP

Answer 8

There is a bar in Parma Ohio called the Fox and Hound. They have an air purification system that changes the air completely every 20 minutes. Non smokers prefer this bar, because they never go home smelling like smoke. Other establishments should follow the Fox and Hound's lead. Case closed!

Answer 9

No. If smoking is so bad, they ought to stop making and selling cigarrettes all together instead of raising taxes and making more and more restrictions that really do nothing to eliminate the problem. This all only proves that the government is capitalizing on a very real addiction. And the people who advocate such demeaning treatment of the addicts are only promoting this ability; how will they feel when it is their little hangup that gets raked over the coals?
All those taxes a smoker pays ought to at least be claimable.

Answer 10

Banned by whom? The government? If that's what you're talking about, then definitely not. A privately-owned establishment should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they allow smoking. If they choose to ban smoking, those of us who enjoy cigarettes with our beer may decide to frequent another pub. Or we can deal with it and step outside.

I am VERY against government deciding what is good for the individual. I choose to smoke. It's my choice. A pub can choose to allow smokers. It's the pub's choice. Yes, I think we all know by now that smoking is unhealthy. But it's not for the government to intervene with the decisions of private business owners and individuals.

Answer 11

Yes, because some people want to go and relax there without having to breathe second-hand smoke. And also, second-hand smoke is worse than smoking itself. So smoking SHOULD be banned in pubs. Also, children sometimes go there with their parents and it is not healthy for them and it;s a bad influence.