Smoking establishments - Debate, not abuse.

[Bulgarian]

So we have a small pub where the public areas amount to around 800 square feet, and with 10 foot high ceilings that gives a volume of 8000 cubic feet or 226400 litres. How are we doing so far?

 

I'm bored already, if this is the kind of people you get in pubs thesedays I'm glad I don't go.

[beer]

I'm bored already, if this is the kind of people you get in pubs thesedays I'm glad I don't go.

 

Missing you already.

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOT.

[Guest]

It will never get rid of them.

 

This, I presume, is based on the purely hypothetical figures posted by beer, which are not taken from any report on smoking and are probably a product of his imagination.

 

The anti-smoking lobby are obviously clutching at straws in a bid to support their unsupportable theories.

 

None of them have managed to provide an argument except quoting the WHO, which themselves are based on guesswork and theory and which is openly admitted, cannot be proved.

 

In view of this, I still consider, as I did before, that the anti-smokers have no valid reason to show why smokers should not get together and enjoy their smoking habit in peace - that's what I wanted to prove and so consider the thread a success for the smoking fraternity.

 

The anti-smokers, just don't want us to smoke (but don't want smoking banned - funnily enough) simply because THEY DON'T LIKE IT.

 

Not a good enough reason when WE DO LIKE IT.

[Scabbydog]

This, I presume, is based on the purely hypothetical figures posted by beer, which are not taken from any report on smoking and are probably a product of his imagination.

 

The anti-smoking lobby are obviously clutching at straws in a bid to support their unsupportable theories.

 

None of them have managed to provide an argument except quoting the WHO, which themselves are based on guesswork and theory and which is openly admitted, cannot be proved.

 

In view of this, I still consider, as I did before, that the anti-smokers have no valid reason to show why smokers should not get together and enjoy their smoking habit in peace - that's what I wanted to prove and so consider the thread a success for the smoking fraternity.

 

The anti-smokers, just don't want us to smoke (but don't want smoking banned - funnily enough) simply because THEY DON'T LIKE IT.

 

Not a good enough reason when WE DO LIKE IT.

 

Taken from common sense actually. Just stating the complete blindingly obvious. It seems to have gone way above your head.

[puisseguin]

Some folk have clearly never cooked a curry.

[Bulgarian]

Some folk have clearly never cooked a curry.

 

passive garlic breath ?

[puisseguin]

passive garlic breath ?

 

I suppose there is that as well, but after you've cooked a curry you can still smell it for days afterwards because the fumes hang around. You can smell curry. You can't smell carbon monoxide.

[Guest]

Taken from common sense actually. Just stating the complete blindingly obvious. It seems to have gone way above your head.

 

 

Common sense only applies when you know what your talking about.

Make believe ALWAYS goes over my head - I deal only in FACTS.

[Harleyman]

There would be nothing wrong in having some public houses which allow smoking.

Employees would have to sign some sort of waiver that their continued employment would be acceptance of working in a smoking environment and a sign on the entrance doors stating that the establishment allowed smoking on it's property. People duly warned fair and square.

 

That wouldn't work in restaurants though IMO. It would be better if they all continued to be smoke free.

[max]

One reason for not having smoking establishments is that it would be impossible to advertise for someone to work in them. If the advertisement stated that only smokers would be employed then that would be a form of discrimination. So, in order for you to open your establishment you would need to have an exemption to the relevant legislation.

 

I have no objection to smoking establishments, it's just the logistics of opening one would be the problem.