Is it acceptable to have separate smoking bars/rooms?

Question

I fully understand the side of the non smoker, and accept their right to a smoke free life. But can't smokers be allowed a separate bar/room, where everyone who has to enter or serve in this room, accepts the situation?

Answer 1

The problem is that smoke will travel into other rooms when doors are open.

I think to have outside areas for smoking everywhere would be a good idea.

I have seen that at Singapore airport.

Answer 2

I don't live in the U.K., I live in Ohio. This past Nov., voters voted for a smoking ban in all public places. This includes bars, restaurants, etc. The idea is to help/protect the health of servers, cooks, anyone who works in a public place. In the U.S., many people (I don't have the stats) are suffering from second hand smoke and contact lung cancer. The law is in place to prevent smoking-related health problems.

We did have separate sections and rooms for smokers and non-smokers. However, the smoke does travel and servers and workers were exposed to the smoke.

Many restaurants and bars in Ohio have patios and protected areas outside so smokers can continue to smoke but others are protected from smoke.

I know this is not the answer you want. The idea is to protect non-smokers from smoke.

Answer 3

I think it's a good idea to ban smoking. In many states in the U.S., this is the law. Restaurant owners thought their businesses would loose customers, but they gained customers. People came back when they knew they could eat in a 'clean' environment.

Having separate rooms will not work. What about the workers? Smoking related illnesses increase when workers are 'forced' to work in a smoky environment.

Ventilation systems really don't work. The smoky air just re-circulates and doesn't 'go anywhere.'

It's the sign of the times. Governments are also aware how costly it is becoming to treat those with smoking related illnesses- especially since it can be prevented- DON'T SMOKE. DON'T START SMOKING.

Answer 4

That would be ok - but in the case of a bar, restaurant, club or shop, how can you ensure that your staff are all smokers?! There is no way in the world you could specify in a job advert "only smokers need apply", any more than favouring someone for their skin colour or sex because they "fit in better"!

What you are suggesting is a huge legal minefield.

Answer 5

It would have to take a lot of careful (read: EXPENSIVE) building planning. If I am a non-smoker I don't want to have to walk through the smoke filled rooms to use the restroom, sit on the patio, or order a drink from the bar. It defeats the purpose of sections.

We'd have to start a separate but equal type deal. Smokers would have their own bar, restrooms, and patio. It's just not that lucrative for business owners to be required to have two of everything.

Answer 6

There's stuff that's LEGAL that needs serious reconsideration, in my opinion. But anyways, weed along with just about everything else has become more acceptable nowadays. Couldn't say "high" back in the 60s on television, now you can say everything except Fcuk. They've got Tila Tequila sewing her bisexual oats on MTV. They're selling midriff tops for 8 year-olds nowadays. Yea, it's getting, if not already, fcuked up.

Answer 7

under the new legislation this is impossible, in my opinion a room in pubs and clubs should be set aside as a smoke room,as in the old pubs, it isn't on for smokers to be forced outside,a lot of people have a smoke and a drink as a form of relaxation,before anyone jumps on me and gives me a raft of "thumbs down" I am a non smoker,yet I stand up for the rights of my friends

Answer 8

In the pubs of my youth they had a bar for the men only, a snug for the ladies, a smoking room for the smokers and a concert room for weekend entertainment. They worked perfectly. There's something perverse about a government that bans smoking but not the sale of tobacco. And also says it's ok to do drugs and get stoned on booze till the early hours of the morning.

Answer 9

I'll stop bagging on smokers when I stop seeing piles of butts at every freeway offramp. I'll stop saying "so quit already" when I stop reading about wildfires caused by carelessly tossed butts. I'll stop saying "In order to buy cigarettes, you have to be either a stupid kid or an addicted adult" as soon as I stop reading that smoking is the number one cause of home fires resulting in fatalities in the USA.

Smoking is stupid. Smokers are stupid. We're all stupid about something, but most of us don't show it on our faces five minutes out of every thirty.

Answer 10

This to me is the sensible way to do things but is not allowable due to a draconian society. I am a non smoker by the way.

Answer 11

yes becuase the ban on smoking is another example of a draconian nanny state. the ban is nonsense