Smoking bans: Good or bad?
 

In Manitoba, people are adapting (I guess) to it. I think it's cool, except it, along with rising coasts of licings, helps keep the restaurants and bars empty. It's good for clean air, but not for business.

Even if you don't smoke, let's hear your thoughts!!

Good. I'm from California and it's pretty much always been illegal to smoke indoors since I can remember.

I fucking hate it. There's nothing more awesome then smoking inside except maybe smoking inside... a hospital! ='D <3 Zhongguo.

Stats have shown that smoking bans have helped business. From what I read a while back.

Smokers still go to bars, but non-smokers who wouldn't go also go now.

Philly has yet to ban smoking, which is a joke. It's a major city, and pretty much all major cities have banned it now to make places healthier for everyone. It just shows how much of a joke the city counsil is here.

I think we need to take the smoking bans further!

"Let's smoke those smokers!"

:biggrin:

Flush those sin sticks down the toilet!

They're not sin sticks, they're death sticks! DEATH!!!! D-E-A-T-H!!!!!!!

Be afraid.

Considering cigarettes are a proven health hazard to people other than just smokers, I'm surprised its taken this long to start happening.

From the perspective of an ex-restaurant employee, I can tell you that the service industry folks will be really happy now that they don't have to cough their way through ever shift and come home smelling like shit. I wish they'd do it in my state, but that's probably never going to happen.

I haven't kept up with the news or anything, but I think a smoking ban is now effective in UK, or was that the ability of attaining a 24h drinking license o.O? I can't remember, but anywho no smoking in public places like that is awesome ^_^
I hate having a night out with friends and then coming back home smelling like total crap, everything stinks, I usually feel like I have to have a shower before I go to bed so I can get rid of the smell >.<

There are only certain places here where smoking is banned inside eating establishments. Before they banned smoking in those areas though, people smoked even inside fast food joints. Think cigarette butts near the little kids' play areas. Really sad.
Friday's though has separated their smoking from the non-smoking section by sealing the bar area completely with a glass wall so there's still some hope for all you smokers out there, I guess.


That's actually the reason I have to take a shower every night, actually. As if people here don't get the message, it's polluted, we're inhaling car emissions, everyone's coughing in my face and yet they're still smoking in the middle of the street. It's like adding fuel to the fire. Not healthy for anyone. =(

Smoking bans work for exceptionally warm states that can have outdoor seating all year round, but besides that, I pretty much dislike smoking bans. Even as an ex-smoker.

I believe there are places smoke should not be allowed, like say libraries or hospitals. And I believe certain restaurants should have it banned like any popular fast food joint. But in bars and such, I think it's going a little too far.

When I went to West Virginia, I was surprised to find that you could still ask for the smoking section in the local Denny's. (Apparently, the "nicest restaurant in town.")

I am all for a smoking ban on inside facilities, even as a smoker. Except I really think that bars should decide whats best for their own business. I think business owners generally know what their customer prefers.

I've been to uppity bars where people would NOT like having smoke all around them. Thats respectable.

But I've also been to dives where vastly EVERYONE smokes. The smoking bans on these kinds of bars really affects the business, from what I've heard from owners.

But in all other public facilities, I understand people don't want to be swamped with smoke. I've been in smoking rooms of hotels which REEK and even *I* couldn't stand it.

Smoking bans are cool - but so long as you don't tell me where to smoke when I am OUTSIDE, or tell bar owners that they can't have their own right to decide whats good for their own business, I am down with it.

It's a good thing, as long as they also ban fatty foods, alcohol and everything else that isn't good for you and annoys other people. If they don't do that then they are hypocrites.

Well, see, that all doesn't really apply.

Smoking ANNOYS other people to the point of physical irritation. They can't argue the whole health angle, in my opinion, but I know smoke can get irritating to the eyes, throat and nose temporarily.

Fatty foods, alcohol, and everything else that isn't good for you doesn't really AFFECT OTHER PEOPLE unless really BADLY abused. You can't really BADLY abuse cigarettes.

Are you stupid? You do realize that fatty foods and alcohol only affect the person eating or drinking them, right? Smoking affects EVERYONE AROUND YOU.

Damn you, Sass, for beating me to it.

Also I hope this thread doesn't get derailed with one of those circular debates.

Fat people are a drain on the NHS and by extension all the taxpayers in the U.K. Ever heard of drink driving?

I've heard of drunk driving. Still doesn't apply, though.

Isn't that illegal?

How many people are killed as a result of drunk driving?

How many people are killed by second-hand smoke?

I don't see your point. Are you trying to say "Because Second-Hand Smoke isn't QUITE as lethal as Drunk Driving it should be legal"?

Look, we're not talking about the remote possibility that you might be killed by a drunk driver. We're talking about the fact that you are WITHOUT QUESTION affected in some way by the person sitting next to you in a restaurant blowing foul-smelling air your way.

Since alcohol is responsible for at least as many fatalities as smoking, they should either both be lawful or illegal.

Drunk Driving is ILLEGAL. Also, your logic makes no sense. "Alcohol is responsible for at least as many fatalities as donating blood to the Red Cross. So both should either be lawful or illegal."