I'm not a nazi about it. It's a local issue. I don't care what scotland does. If they want smoking in bars, good on them.
In my community, banning smoking in enclosed areas, partcularly where employees have to work, makes good sense to me.
Anti-Smoking Tyrants Killing Scotland's Pubs
- Thread starter AnyOldIron
- Start date
I'm not a nazi about it. It's a local issue. I don't care what scotland does. If they want smoking in bars, good on them.
In my community, banning smoking in enclosed areas, partcularly where employees have to work, makes good sense to me.
Most good bars out here put up an area in the back with a covering and propane heaters for their smoking patrons in the winter. It really isn't all that bad. I wouldn't know why Scotland couldn't also figure out a way to make their patrons happy as well.
To me it is an intellectual exercise anyway. I'd prefer mitigation to banning. In order to mitigate the danger in flight we regulate safety features for planes, we don't ground them entirely. In order to mitigate the danger of the effluvia from autos we regulate, we don't ban. In order to "mitigate" the danger of somebody choosing to work in this environment we simply ban it?
That isn't the same as working to mitigate a danger.
To me it is an intellectual exercise anyway. I'd prefer mitigation to banning. In order to mitigate the danger in flight we regulate safety features for planes, we don't ground them entirely. In order to mitigate the danger of the effluvia from autos we regulate, we don't ban. In order to "mitigate" the danger of somebody choosing to work in this environment we simply ban it?
That isn't the same as working to mitigate a danger.
IHateGovernment
Is this your homework?
Why not just have OSHA mandate that these areas be well ventilated and have exhaust fans to quickly move the smoky air away. Why must we resort immediately to the extreme solution of banning it completely in businesses.
Here's another thing to consider. Is smoking in a private business establishment worse than in the public commons which you are saying they should smoke.
I think it worse to smoke in the commons and to me it makes more sense to ban smoking in the commons then in a private business.
As a citizen I have a right to free travel in any public commons place and as part of that I have a right to not unnecessarily be exposed to health risks as a consequence of exercising my right. When a person makes that environment unhealthy for me they have infringed upon my right to access to something which is rightfully mine by virtue of being public.
A business is not public however and thus when we conduct business there it is by people contracting in a voluntary fashion. The proprietor of the business has the right to tell patrons they may smoke or that they may not. However I am not able to have people smoking in the commons cease smoking even though I am a proprietor.
Here's another thing to consider. Is smoking in a private business establishment worse than in the public commons which you are saying they should smoke.
I think it worse to smoke in the commons and to me it makes more sense to ban smoking in the commons then in a private business.
As a citizen I have a right to free travel in any public commons place and as part of that I have a right to not unnecessarily be exposed to health risks as a consequence of exercising my right. When a person makes that environment unhealthy for me they have infringed upon my right to access to something which is rightfully mine by virtue of being public.
A business is not public however and thus when we conduct business there it is by people contracting in a voluntary fashion. The proprietor of the business has the right to tell patrons they may smoke or that they may not. However I am not able to have people smoking in the commons cease smoking even though I am a proprietor.
AnyOldIron
Atheist Missionary
If I owned three bars, two would have smoking the other would not. If they would allow me the choice.
My point exactly. Pubs aren't an essential item, therefore they should allow the market to decide.
If there is a market for non-smoking pubs, someone will open them.
My point exactly. Pubs aren't an essential item, therefore they should allow the market to decide.
If there is a market for non-smoking pubs, someone will open them.
Most good bars out here put up an area in the back with a covering and propane heaters for their smoking patrons in the winter.
That's probably the cheapest mitigation method for a small business.
Suggestions of installing interior ventalation systems, fans, and exhaust, would be prohibitivly expensive, I suspect.
That's probably the cheapest mitigation method for a small business.
Suggestions of installing interior ventalation systems, fans, and exhaust, would be prohibitivly expensive, I suspect.
IHateGovernment
Is this your homework?
Suggestions of installing interior ventalation systems, fans, and exhaust, would be prohibitivly expensive, I suspect.
Not as expensive as having it banned and losing your customers. If the business decided it was too expensive they could be non smoking.
Not as expensive as having it banned and losing your customers. If the business decided it was too expensive they could be non smoking.
uscitizen
Villified User
As others have said sveral times Alcohol for drinking is not an essential product and the market should decide. Unlike genuine food, electricity, etc...
The laws should say at most that the bar will have to offer a smoking mitigated zone for smokers, not just plain no smioking.
..
The laws should say at most that the bar will have to offer a smoking mitigated zone for smokers, not just plain no smioking.
..