Smoking

[wellinghall]

[Poll #1334926]

Comments

[pellegrina.livejournal.com]

I think smoking in pubs *is* pushy. It is expecting everyone else in the room/building to breathe your smelly noxious fumes and go home having to wash every thread they are wearing if they happen not to like stinking - without even asking, just expecting that everyone will accept it. If I went around spraying complete strangers with perfume and getting on my high horse about my rights if people objected, I would probably be arrested, but it's okay if it's smoking? It's quite clear that the only way to stop people smoking is going to be to make it a social stigma on the level of smelling of sweat (which, conversely, I don't really mind the smell of - yet a billion-pound industry rests on persuading us all that we must smell of chemicals instead).

[bunn.livejournal.com]

But that assumes that one non-smoker making an occasional visit's comfort overrules that of, say 20 regulars all smoking like chimneys?

Rather than expect them all to stop, I'd rather just choose another venue.

[pellegrina.livejournal.com]

But it also assumes that one smoker making an occasional visit's comfort does not overrule that of, say, 20 regulars enjoying not breathing in noxious fumes. Rather than expecting them all to cough and wheeze, the committed smoker could just choose another venue, too.

At the end of the day I would favour the option that does not have a measurable chemical impact on bystanders to the activity in question.

Mind you, now lots of pubs smell of toilet cleaner, damp and eau de old gent's wee instead of stale tobacco, which is not the greatest improvement.

[bunn.livejournal.com]

Now, I would say that was a matter of politeness, not legislation? I agree that smoking surrounded by non-smokers is pretty damn rude, but not all smokers do this, and it's not essential to the habit. If they are prepared to do it where I don't have to breathe it, let them if they must, say I.

[sigisgrim.livejournal.com]

The problem is the vast majority of smokers don't appear to be able to realise about the politeness. This has gone on for sufficiently long to demonstrate that they never will without it being forced. This is what this legislation has done.

[pellegrina.livejournal.com]

I agree - but how many extra miles should I be expected to walk in order *not* to breathe it in public, shared spaces, when the smokers are by choice the ones with the smelly toxic habit?

[bunn.livejournal.com]

You shouldn't, no question - but I feel that there are probably middle ways between that and banning smoking everywhere but in people's own homes. What about, for example, pubs being able to offer a smoking room if it meets certain ventilation standards and 2/3 of the pub is non-smoking? Or being able to offer 'smoking nights' 2 nights in 7? Or perhaps being able to have a smoking pub if there is a non-smoking pub within a 5 minute walk? I'm sure others could be devised...

I just don't like the primary-school absolutism of bans. I agree non-smokers should not have to put up with smoking, but I don't like the 'you can't kill yourself here' aspect.