You know, it's funny Zina, but Delaware where I generally go for
sessions these days (when I go) has recently passes such a
ban. I'll let you know what difference it has made the next time I
go to a session.
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick? (US issues)
Fsnockhart, you're talking about a different country in a different mind-set. But nonetheless, it probably will stick in Ireland as it has in the US, believe it or not the most respected laws (in the US) have to do with non-smoking areas. In the US The whole issue is touchy-feely for me because I don't think the gov't (City, State or Nat'l) really has a right to ban a legal activity inside of the walls of a private business. I really think it's up to the business owner. If a client doesn't like the fact that the bar is smoking/non-smoking than that client has the option of taking their business elsewhere. However I have no oppositions to the US having a referendum on the legallity of tobacco use, in fact I'd vote for it tobacco to be banned all together. I'm just worried about my civil liberties & the rights of my fellow US citizens.
Lest you consider the Irish Govt.'s measures draconian or are in any doubt as to the health risks of smoking I refer you to the following (not for the faint hearted - which is what most smokers will become): http://www.rrcc-online.com/paprogram/LUNGHTML/LUNGIDX.HTM
I don't think these measures will work though, unfortunately, as you can imagine, some little pub in the back of beyond where the Gards rarely visit, the publican is hardly likely to enforce the ban on his few customers.
I think Domhniaill has it about right - it'll will be adhered to about as strictly as closing times are now! It will probably take another generation for the cultural change to come about. Ten years from now, things will be very different (think how fast they've changed in the UK) and in twenty, there will be very little smoking in public, and far fewer smokers - that's my guess.
I'm delighted about the ban, though! I hope we'll follow suit in the UK.
Brad, I am generally in agreement with your views. However, just for argument and to be accurate, the new regulations in Ireland as well as USA are intended to protect workers rights, not clients. Workers are much more limited in their choices, especially in hard times. That's where the real issue lies.
What's new? Tony Blair is trying to phase out sessions and any form of live music either in the pub or in the street.
Landlords without a public entertainment license have already been fined because the locals were singing Happy Birthday and others because people were swaying rhythmically (who doesn't when in the pub)?
Yeah - in 20 years time they'll all be dead. And none of the next generation will let themselves be conned into paying a lot of money for getting horrible, horrible diseases, AND allowing people who sit next to them, but who don't smoke, to be at risk of getting those diseases also.
(Having raged on, I have to admit I used to smoke, till 5 years ago, but was never proud of it, and giving up was one of the few sensible things I've done in my life!)
To be honest, since I don't smoke, I'm personally all for it. I just can't see how they're going to make it stick in a place like Ireland. Maybe in Dublin and Galway, the bigger places, but Ballykilldaferret?
I've gotten so used to it here that it's a shock to go somewhere where they *do* allow smoking...
Thank God!!! The disgusting amount of smoke at all the sessions in Ireland has been the worst thing about every visit I've made to Ireland and the number one reason I'd consider not playing in the sessions. I only wish they'd do the same here in the USA.
Chris
Won't it be just great when it can be said we all died of nothing in particular. My guess is the main cause at that point will either be boredom or suicide.
I'm always sceptical of people with stock portfolios supporting workers rights issues. If its legal, its legal and we all have to make our choices. Low wage workers have always died of crummy diseases obtained along with hardscrabble lifestyle, a fact that no smoking ban is going change. When living in LA is the same as smoking three packs a day what difference does it make if you go into a smokey bar. (Rhetorical devices aside, the air quality index for LA places average pollution at around 25x acceptable levels)
I'm with Brad on this. Outlaw the practice from the ground up: growing, processing, distribution and consumption or don't, but don't make all my choices dependent on what you're comfortable with whether you are present or not. Where's that good ol' free market attitude. If you can't get workers or customers in a hospitality business, you won't be in the hospitality business.
Just for background, I smoked Camels and Winstons for 25 years and quit 12 years ago out of disgust. But that was my choice.
Oh dear, my worst fears start to become a reality - this will result in a wholesale closure of many pubs across Ireland and vast job losses.
In the first year of the NY ban there was a 25% rise in the number of restaurant closures and 2,779 jobs were lost.
In Toronto a similar ban had to be lifted following its economic effects.
At least the UK politicians seem to have found a balance with their proposed smoking in public places measures.
The "Celtic Tiger" economy in Ireland is already on the wane (presumeably the politicians will be the last to realise this), this measure will be a severe kick in the teeth for the Irish people who've worked so hard to maintain the existing and set up new drinking holes.
Non-smoking trials in the past in Ireland have seen customers voting with their feet - after all, why pay pub prices when you can get decent draught Guinness in a can and get your friends round to your house for a session where you can exercise free will and have an occasional cigarette if you want to. A curious point that landlords noted was that smokers tended to drink substantially more than non-smokers - which meant that their loss was compounded.
If the ban holds, then in a couple of years down the road, the only sessions you'll see in Irish pubs will be the "Danny Boy" spectaculars put on for the tourists.
Scotland appears to be the only country where common sense prevails and "freedom" is a reality rather than political clap-trap.
I never cease to be amazed that people are more concerned with banning smoking than they are with GM foods, low-grade radioactive "dirty bombs", vehicle exhaust emissions, diet, drug abuse etc etc.
To the last 2 contributors - CP & AOG - yes, at least initially reduce, where possible, consumption of all the other horrible stuff you mentioned, concertina, AS WELL. Vehicle exhaust - my choice is to cycle or run to/from work & eat organic when possible, not much I can do about dirty bombs, and so on, etc....
Scotland is only now just catching up with the rest of the developed world, but Glasgow's still the Coronary Heart Disease capital of the world...common sense? Just go & try deep fried Mars Bar - not a myth - I'm from there.
I don't know where you get your facts from aog, but smoking has a proven direct link to lung cancer. Proven by Richard Dall, for which he got the Nobel prize. (It's also linked several other diseases, emphysema, ischaemic heart disease to name a few.) These diseases affect both rich AND poor people who smoke.
Yes, low wage people have higher morbidity related to working conditions and poor nutrition, but it is still possible to tackle single health issues with the correct political will.
I'm sorry if LA has such a grimy atmosphere, but as bad as 60 fags a day? So if you smoke as well as live in LA that's like smoking 80 a day, and a simple calculation tells me 80 is more than 60.
Anyway, at no point did I say I agreed with the ban. My gut feeling is it won't work. I believe, maybe like yourself, that health promotion campaigns would be far more effective than bans, but the amount spent by the UK NHS on these campaigns is a fraction (I can't remember exactly - about a 20th) of that spent by tobacco companies promoting their products. Also Ireland doesn't have an NHS. And you still think you've got free choice?
Back to basics, I just hate coming home from a session with my clothes stinking of cigarette smoke.
Domhniaill - good point about the deep fried Mars bars, I've lived in Edinburgh previously for a couple of years, but visited Glasgow recently and couldn't believe the fried food culture difference - though everyone wears tracksuits so this must imply that they're at the peak of fitness .
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that continual ingestion of less than pure air will not do you any good in the long run. Is no-one allowed to take a risk anymore ? Are we happy to sit back and let politicians and doctors run our lives ? I think I'll give up smoking, but then I'll have to drive my car really fast (or something similar) endangering life to get that risk kick.
Doctors should be shot for their attitude to smoking. I've heard hundreds of times from people that say if you have any sort of complaint and go to see the doctor and admit to being a smoker - it will be blamed on smoking. It seems to me that doctors are shirking their responsibility, now that they've latched on to the trendy "Give Up Smoking" panacea for all ills.
Funnily enough, these people often go away, don't give up smoking though when they go and see the doctor again, say that they're a non-smoker and find that a correct diagnosis of a condition totally unrelated to smoking is made.
I'm surprised being based in London that you notice the smokey aroma given the filth that comes from all the buses, lorries and cars or tube tunnels etc.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not vehemently pro-smoking, though what enrages me is the pathetic "Nanny State" attitude that the so-called civilised world seems to have accepted lying down.
Jaysus, they'll be banning foxhunting in Ireland next !!!
Well, as a smoker, I felt I needed to at least represent that small population on this post. I don't like coming home from a session smelling like smoke, either, but I also don't like the gunk I get on my shoes just from walking down a couple of New York City blocks. Just one of those things you've gotta deal with if that's where you need to go to play your music.
Why aren't we banning diet soda, electric blankets, old cars, etc?
Give us a break...not only are we helplessly addicted to a nasty drug, but now we're total outcasts in the society as well. I already do 95% of my smoking outside in below zero temps, and now we're getting kicked out of the pubs.
All those that complain should start hosting house sessions.
Hate to sound resentful, but I'm tired of being a "considerate smoker", one who goes out of her way not to offend anyone. Just tired of the complaining, I guess.
And I'm tired of being a considerate non - smoker, i.e. one who breathes in the foul, exhaled air of smokers and just has to accept it. For those of us who live in large town and cities, we have no choice but to breathe in traffic fumes, pollution etc. but at least the drivers/factoriesdon't insist on bringing their vehicles/machines into the pub. It is as if a group of people were stuck in a lift and one person insisting on farting and belching because (a)it made him feel good and (b)you folks don't really mind do you? All this comes from one who smoked for 20 years and who had no idea of the discomfort he put other people through so it comes from one who should know. Civil liberties and the "nanny state"? I don't want to be poisoned thank you very much. Now, where did I put those sackcloths and ashes and let's say a few hail marys at the same time.
Well said Niall!
I, for one, would love to be able to go out to the pubs, hang out with my friends, play some tunes and have some fun without being sickened and poisoned by a bunch of inconsiderate smokers who think that filling everyone else's lungs with their toxic exhaust is their "right".
The difference between banning smoking in public spaces and banning electric blankets, diet soda, etc (as per Irishfiddler32s suggestions) is that with those you are free to poison yourself but you don't end up egregiously poisoning everyone around you. There's a big, big difference.
I'm glad that non-smokers are finally standing up for their right to NOT be poisoned.
Chris
Irishfiddler -
Have you considered that maybe all those who want to smoke and play music at the same time could host their own "smoking and tunes" house sessions, rather than forcing those who don't want to be poisoned to start their own sessions?
Chris
The same law is just around the corner here in Australia i am a Publican and i welcome the
legislation. Fortunatly our climate allows for beer gardens and outside smoking areas.
No more will i have to look at flute and whistle players wearing face masks." fair dinkum"
Aog, I only mention the fact that the laws are enacted to protect workers rights so that the argument is presented accurately. It is a disservice to both sides of any issue to muddle the argument up with innaccurate statements and fuzzy logic.
As I said, I am in general agreement with Brad's view. I am personally opposed to the ban because I am opposed to government intrusion in general. (I do not, and never have, smoked)
As for my stock portfolio, perhaps you could tell me where I misplaced it. That would only help, of course, if I could actually recognize one if I saw it.
Folks it is'nt the Garda, government or publican who will enforce this law it will be the person standing next to you in the pub.
I think we will have alot of fisticuffs in the pubs next Jan it will be interesting to say the least.
Even though I'm probably too young to be replying here, I'm stuck in the middle of deciding smoking or no smoking in Ireland.....I have asthma, so I am glad that the pubs here don't have smoking, but in Ireland, it just seems like that's what you do in a pub....I'm not saying I'm all for smoking in Ireland, but I'm just thinking about how fewer people would attend a session if there was a smoking ban. However, if there was a smoking ban, would instruments be cleaner, voices clearer for singing, more young people allowed to join in???....just a thought.
Cultural precedent is not, on its own, a good reason for preserving a harmful activity. Think of slavery, foot binding, child labour, etc. There always were, and are, people who try to defend such heinous things with the claim that 'it's our culture!', or that the economy will collapse without it.
Here's an analogy which may sound far-fetched but is actually a close parallel. Imagine that it was common and traditional for players of Irish music to take heroin; and that people would jack up at sessions, because they wanted to and it was considered socially acceptable. Imagine that other players, and bar staff, were constantly at risk of contracting HIV, hepatitis etc, because of all the dirty needles left lying around. (OK, that bit is a trifle imaginative, but bear with me for the sake of the hypothesis). Now, if 150 Irish bar staff per year were dying from those and other diseases caught from needles, would this be tolerable? Would there be an outcry? Of course there would, because heroin is not a socially acceptable drug. Tobacco is, but only for historical reasons. It kills *vastly* more people.
While you do see plenty of children in Irish pubs, there must also be many people who keep their families out of pubs because of the smoke, and conversely, many children suffering from asthma as a result of the exposure.
Well put, Helen, if rather melodramatic. But sometimes shock tactics are the only way to get people to listen. I like the dirty needle analogy to passive smoking.
Thought this interesting tidbit from the Irish emigrant would be interesting regarding the implementation of the law. On my visits to sessions in Ireland I've noted that stopping smoking in pubs would be as hard to control on stopping the flow of beer!
--Marty
THE IRISH EMIGRANT, Editor: Liam Ferrie - February 3, 2003 - Issue No.835
I don't think the issue is much about whether cigarette smoking is bad for you. I think everyone, those addicted and those not, know it's bad for you. I'm just wondering how they're going to make the law stick or if it'll become, as Marty points out, one of those laws that regularly gets broken. Likely it'll be different for each pub (and locality), but I guess we'll have to wait and see!
You're right to reiterate your point Zina, which I for one did also state. However there's a lot of denial going round among smokers, and I should know - I've been there. Loadsa people say to themselves, only 50% (or whatever) of smokers get diseases from it - it won't happen to me.
So I think it's worth laying it on to people how really bad fags are. That's why I stuck those links on my first post on this thread.
I'm sorry, I'm a typical reformed evangelical ex-smoker.
I read on another BB an inspired comment that you should totally disregard the views of ex-smokers in a matter such as this as they have already had their cake and are now trying to eat it !
No good laying it on how bad cigarettes ("fags" may lead our American friends to assume homophobia in addition to smokeophobia) are - smokers have all seen the charred bits of lungs etc. before. If you search around the other pics. in pathology sites such as these you'll see all sorts of gruesome messed up body parts commonly found in people who have never smoked in their lives (so don't get too smug you non-smokers).
Anyway, to me the main issue is how much the fine will be, and how rigorously enforced. As breaking the law is also a "way of life" in Ireland this whole dogmatic, puritanical move may well turn out to be nothing more than a pipe dream.
Yes, who is going to suffer the fine if someone is smoking in a pub, the publican or the smoker? Or both?
A friend of mine once came home from a trip to England. He mentioned a billboard he saw there for something called Faggot's, canned food of some sort, with the text, "Surprise your wife, bring home some Faggot's tonight!" I always wondered whether he was pulling my leg...?
If you keep your pack and lighter on the bar or table, and extinguish the cigarette as soon as you catch a glimpse of the Gard(s) raiding the boozer - who can prove you were smoking ?. Your tobacco infused breath is of course a tragic result of passive smoking you can claim...and there's plenty more tricks - so I reckon the fine will have to be on the publican. If the Gard drink in the pub, they'll never bother raiding it and so the Status Quo remaineth.
As a pure guess I reckon they'll go for a discretionary fine on the publican with a sliding scale up to 1,000 Euros as that's a nice round number.
Zina - True about the faggots - it's pretty vile chopped seasoned liver shaped into a ball or sausage. It could also be a bunch of sticks though canned sticks are not normally a traditional delicacy.
It's a classic punchline for the ad., though I reckon it must be a few decades old - I can't see many people sitting down a dinner of faggots and tripe these days. If you did, you'd probably need a good few smokes afterwards to mask the taste.
I'm joinin this thread a little late, but here in Hamilton Ontario they recently passed a smoking bylaw which states that no one under the age of nineteen years old is allowed in any restaraunt, bar, pub that allows smoking. I find this preposterous. A few weeks ago I was out with my pipe band. These guys all smoke up a storm. We went to a roadhouse\bar but I wasn't allowed in -- not because they sell beer, but because they allow smoking. Since I wasn't allowed inside, we decided to sit on the patio, but soon found out we couldn't sit there because of the smoking bylaw. What is this world coming to when the government is banning sitting outside? Sigh.
It seems to me that the next obvious thing to do will be to ban drinking in pubs as well. After all there are more deaths and serious injury related to drinking than to smoking. I include in this:- the regular pub fights on a Friday night, violence in the home, drunk drivers, pedestrians getting knocked over while singing a song in the middle of the road.
Well ...... we all know what happened when that was tried out.
What next - will we have secret smoking shebeens and speakeasy's?
I can tell you that for this smoking fluter that my response will be to have a session in the house. I'll still get my musical fix [as well as my nicotine and the 10,000 other chemicals] but poor old Joe Public will have to go hunting down the illegal smoking dens - if he's lucky.
I'm all for market forces - a lesson well learned by a pub in Belfast that advertised as the first non-smoking bar in the city. Surprise, Surprise - it's now closed down.
If you non-smokers can convince the landlord that your money is more powerful than that of the smokers then you won't need any legislation - money talks and publicans listen.
We've already been turfed out of the cinemas, can't have a ciggy in the office, have to stand around street corners freezing in the rain, can't smoke in theatres, restaurants, on buses, airplanes, trains, museums, ...... need I go on. Now you want to ban us from the last refuge of freedom - the pub??????
I don't think it's unreasonable to allow us one miserable public venue where we can easy our stressed out selves with the glories of that health giving weed [at least that's how the Native Americans saw it]. It relaxes the mind, stimulates the bowels, clears the throat, and occupies the hands.
For god sake leave us alone.
MInd you - if there was a staight swap involved where we could light up a pipe of blow, or a big spliff of pure ganja I might consider it .
God sometimes I really miss a certain session in galway - a group of like minded people who dont bitch about what they prefer. I for one would personally love some pubs to be non-smoking and some to remain smoking, then we could all split into groups and those non-smokers who decide to come to a smoking pub and vice versa cannot complain. Sounds drastic but maybe we could then stop talking about this subject that seems to come up every two weeks these days. Not blaming zina for starting this thread tho - when I read the article I was really amazed - I always thought australia and england would do it first!
Just to add my tuppence here... I so wish I was as perfect as all you non-smokers out there. It must be great to wake up in the morning, and not have to worry about offending anybody in anyway, or at all imposing youself on people. You must be a joy to be around. It pains me to have to accept my imperfections in the face of such political correctness. Since you're all so right all the time, why don't you club together and get a law passed where smokers are all put up against a wall and shot??? Then you could all be pious together in perfect peace!
And since I assume none of you swear, drink alcohol or caffiene, or eat so many burgers you're over weight (take particular note of that any americans reading this) - why don't you ban bad language, alcohol coffee and unhealthy eating at the same time?
Get a grip!
bb you're supposed to be quitting. We were going to together remember?!
Everyone I shall now announce that I have quit. I haven't smoked since Sunday last week. I feel so much better for having given up and I agree with the non-smokers since I am now a non-smoker myself...
Not to change the subject, but, you know, as an avowed atheist, I'm finding it increasingly annoying that I can't go into a church without having to put up with a lot of damned praying. I mean, I absolutely love organ music and choirs, I'm fond of wine and unleavened bread, but as soon as you set foot in the door, you're confronted by a bunch of people blessing themselves and each other. Where are we atheists supposed to go to get choir music and unleavened bread? Sure, I suppose we could always form our own little gathering, where we can have these things as well as enjoying the shoulder-to-shoulder camaradery, but it just isn't the same. I wish the government would step in.
These discussions always seem to end up with sarcasm and abuse from pro-smokers towards anti-smokers. Is it difficult to defend 'smokers' rights' by resorting solely to reasoned argument? I haven't seen any vitriol directed the other way, I don't think so anyway...
I'm a non-smoker, actually. (Not an atheist either!). I just think pubs are basically dens of iniquity, and I'm comfortable with that. If I wasn't, I wouldn't go.And I hope I'd be comfortable with that as well.
I have great sympathy for both sides in the issue. Reasoned argument is especially hard on this issue because -- in my mind, anyway -- both sides have a reasonable point of view, which makes the arguments hard to reconcile.
Picture me rolling my eyes. I wish people would stop in general picking on Americans at random. We're an easy target, sure, and there's plenty to pick on, but can you please pick at Americans when the subject warrants it instead of just throwing it into a conversation at random, fer cat's sake? What does American overweightness have to do with how Ireland is going to make this legislation stick? Get a grip on yourself, drizzt.
Yes, Dow, congratulations! The beauty of it is, you'll never be sorry for it. You may wish you'd never smoked, and, like many of the posters here, you may wish others would quit, but you'll be nothing but glad you've given 'em up.
Let me give you one bit of unsolicited advice: at this point, stop paying attention to your quitting date. I think that what screws people up is they focus on how long it has been, as if the goal is to accumulate days of not smoking, when in fact quitting is the goal. You are now a non-smoker, not a guy who has gone x-days without a cigarette, right?
Cuchulain, sorry - we posted simultaneously - I was responding to Drizzt's post, in fact. *Your* sarcasm was more of the gentle ribbing variety, and I might have 'tsk!'ed but I wouldn't have taken exception to it...
I'm glad to hear that, Helen, because I thought I was being frightfully cute, so I never anticipated rancor! (In fact, I'm even blanching at the idea of being "tsk'd" at, gentle soul that I am.)
To Drizzt - I've been trying for months to wind up someone at the session, but to no great effect, till your posting... and a smoker to boot!
Double bubble!
I'm not a smoker, not for any particular reasons, except that I was a racing cyclist for 25 years when younger, but because I've never felt any urge or need to smoke. However, I've also never felt much in the way of discomfort from smoky sessions.
Tonight I spent a couple of hours at a session in the harbourside Nova Scotia pub in Bristol. About 20-25 people were in the room with the usual sprinkling of 4 or 5 smokers. This occasion was unusual in that the lights were turned out and we had a lot of nite-lite candles in saucers on the tables instead. The effect I noticed was that the candles seemed to burn up the cigarette smoke. The odour of tobacco smoke on my clothing when I got home was significantly reduced because of this. Has anyone else noticed this effect?
A friend of mine, a 40-a -day-all-his-life man in his early 60's, had a subarachnoid haemorrhage a 12-month ago, necessitating emergency brain surgery. When he was recovering from the operation the surgeon told him that if he didn't give up smoking he would be dead within 3 months. My friend took this to heart and has not smoked since. After a month of nicotine patches to help him initially he has not needed any further help and now has no desire to smoke. Incidentally, the operation was a complete success.
Regarding discussions ending up with abuse from pro-smokers towards anti-smokers... That'll be because nobody ever goes round trying to curtail the rights of the non-smoker. After all most council buildings and venues, and a lot of workplaces are non-smoking. We're the ones shivering in the cold here while you all sit about being smug. There appears to be an ever decreasing amount of tolerance in society of all differences. Where is the moderate argument that would allow both? Or would make it compulsory to have decent air/con and disallowing smoking at the bar? No that's not enough is it? You all have to scream for total non-smoking everywhere. I have no problem with there being non-smoking pubs/restaurants etc, but I guess you'll can figure which ones'll be more popular. It's already getting too expensive to drink in pubs anyway with prices rising to
It must make you feel really good about your quality of life to compare it to the worst, ie clinically obese saddos - which are found everywhere (not just America) in the developed world, including Glasgow. Why don't you compare your quality of life) to the best, ie we smug non-smokers?
Joking - God, it's so easy to torment you.
But a bit more seriously, when I did smoke, I never felt I had the arrogant right to breath poison fumes over people who were not addicted to death sticks, the way you seem to think it's ok to do. So the rights of non-smokers to breath as clean air (as is possible) are constantly being curtailed by smokers. And also, as you shiver in doorways getting your fix we're back at work.
And when not shivering in the doorway, and you're in hospital, who's footing your NHS medical bill for the removal of the primary tumours in your lungs, or for the expensive, but usually futile, chemotherapy for metastasising secondaries - futile, because usually when Carcinoma of the lung is diagnosed it is by then too late.
Smug? I don't feel it, mate. Sorry for you, yes. And annoyed when I come home from a session smelling of Fags (a term I will use for them - this is a UK based site). Even the chemicals left in the odour residue are harming my little 4- month old boy.
Although I don't think it will, I hope the ban does work in Ireland. After listening to the arrogant outpourings from a few death stick addicts on this string my position has moved and I feel more entrenched as a non-passive passive smoker.
Drizzt... I keep hearing pro-smokers claiming that 'no-one is curtailing the rights of non-smokers'. Wrong. As Domhniall points out, our rights are already curtailed and have been, throughout living memory. Just because it's been the status-quo for so long, it's easy to ignore the fact that there *is* a bias, in favour of smokers - which is now gradually being eroded.
I would like to live a normal social life and meet my friends in pubs - because in the UK, and in Ireland, that is where social life takes place. I like to go to sessions. Irish music is the most important thing in my life, yet I have to ration my participation in it, because cigarette smoke makes me ill. So, as Trevor put it, that usual sprinkling of 4 or 5 smokers is actually forcing me to live a constrained social life, so that *they* can enjoy the psychological reassurance of having something to do with their hands, and avoid the pangs of nicotine abstinence. Those people who stay home because they don't enjoy the polluted atmosphere are, by default, a silent faction, because they aren't there to protest!
This makes it conveniently easy for smokers to forget that they *are* having a profound effect on the lives of other people.
Like Domhniaill, when I was a smoker, I never would have argued that I had the *right* to do that. I was thoughtlessly unaware of the consequences of my actions, like most smokers are until they stop smoking and see it from another perspective.
Aye well...they do say there's nothing worse than a reformed smoker. Instead of having been born perfect - you've sinned, seen the light and redeemed yourself. You must be very pleased with yourself.
I think you'll notice that I've advocated a balance of smoking/non-smoking places... I totally accept that it's unreasonable to want to smoke everywhere. But then it's also unreasonable for anti-smokers to try and prevent us from smoking anywhere!
Helen, your most recent posting seems as much directed toward my tongue-in-cheek church analogy as it is directed at drizzt's comments, and I must say, it's a good argument against my church analogy. You and Danny are beginning to convince me.
My knee-jerk reaction generally is to be opposed to government intrusion in any shape or form, and I think that's not a bad position to start from. But when I usually allow myself to re-consider that position, it's in cases where private citizens or businesses cannot, will not and even should not make particular decisions for themselves, even if those decisions are generally for the best. For example, in this smoking argument, an individual pub owner would perhaps be committing economic suicide by deciding to run a non-smoking establishment, because all of the drinkers would just move to the place across the street, so no pub owner would have the chutzpah to make that decision. So here's a good place for the government to step in: make the decision for ALL pub owners, so that the playing field is even. In a sense, the government is doing a favor for all of the pub owners by taking an unpopular decision out of their hands. If smoking were banned in all pubs, it's foolish to think that people would stop going to pubs. But no pub owner wants to be the first or only one, so it won't happen until it happens to them all.
OK, where's the ballot box?
Good point about levelling the economic playing field. As it happens, I don't always favour prohibition. I'm in favour of legalising heroin and cannabis, for example, but for a completely different rationale which I won't go into here, because it doesn't have much to do with Irish Music...
I guess Zina's original point is the important one - how will it be made to work? Well, it won't, entirely, at first; but it does signify a cultural change and a willingness to tackle the problem boldly - both are great things which I welcome.
Drizzt, in case you haven't noticed, the people on this thread who, even if non-smoking, most support non-governmental interference in this matter have been, with only one exception, American. Way to hammer the nail into your own foot.
What I was objecting to was the fact that you brought obesity rates in America (and I've seen plenty of obese people in other countries) up, particularly and nastily making the point at Americans for being obese, in the face of the Americans on this post largely being in favor of not seeing the legislation go through. That smacks of bigotry and an unthought-out response.
Is there a high incidence of obesity in America? Obviously. But it was, by and large (heh), not a particularly useful addition to this discussion and all it's really done is make you look a bit of an unreasoning spoiled brat smoker.
Strong words Zina! - but deservedly so in this case. May I just clarify one thing I'd said on my penultimate post:
I do now hope the ban in Ireland works, but think it may be viewed as draconian, BUT I believe a robustly-funded health promotion campaign with a lot of support for people giving up is the best way to make this habit a thing of the past.
Then again, a ban plus the above measures may be even more potent, but, (not knowing the facts about health promotion budgets in Ireland) I suspect there won't be much money spent in health education by local health boards in Ireland (please contradict me if anyone knows better).
This thread strikes me as one of the more serious and significant we've had on this site, and also one of the most silly. Silly because I doubt that anyone firmly seated on one side of the aisle will likely change their opinion on the matter because of some argument put forth here. That said, I'm at least glad to know that Trevor, Danny, Helen, and I would get along right well at a session, even if we had to start our own in someone's kitchen to avoid the smoke down at the pub.
My home town recently passed a smoking ban in all public buildings. The anti-smokers made all the usuall arguments, and it seems like the two most powerful points were (1) you non-smokers out number smokers--why should you put up with breathing smoke when you go out for dinner or a drink? and (2) the employees at restaurants and pubs should not be forced to bear the health risks of second-hand smoke. I think the city council was in part concerned for peoples' welfare, and perhaps more concerned about their own liability for allowing smoking to create a lawsuit when some non-smoking bartender or waitress contracts lung cancer and decides the city was negligent by allowing hazardous workplace conditions.
The pro-smoking side countered these points with two main arguments of their own: (1) banning smoking will kill the bar and restaurant businesses; and (2) what right do *you* have to tell a pub owner what behavior he can and can't allow under the roof of his private establishment?
I'm a non-smoker but am of mixed mind on all of this. I don't like telling business owners what's allowed behind their doors, and it seems fair to have some dens of iniquity for people to indulge in their vices. As long as cigarettes are legal (and in the States at least, subsidized by the government--talk about two-faced policy!), it doesn't seem reasonable to ban their use. As for the employees' health, I guess I don't understand why they'd *want* to work in a place (such as a pub) well-known for being a smoker's haven. These are the choices we all make.
On the other hand, I don't understand why the minority (smokers) should have things their way in every bar and restaurant. Why should my choice to breathe clean air at dinner or when out for a pint be limited by the whims of the 25 to 30 percent of people who smoke?
Pesonally, I can't balance these issues off one another in a way that respects the valid points on both sides. So when it came time to cast my vote in the local election, despite my misgivings about bashing private property rights, I went with my personal desire to visit pubs without breathing everyone else's nicotine and tar.
But I think the election (and subsequent ordinance banning smoking in all buildings open to the public) was too black and white. I'd prefer to see a wiser solution, I just don't know what it would be.
When I organized our local session (the only Irish session in town), we made it a point to find a smoke-free pub. There were two in town--this was before the smoking ban--and we ended up playing at both. It has taken a few years, but word has gotten around that our session offers a smoke-free alternative to the normal culture of bars. And I think this is what needs to happen on a wider scale--non-smokers (and even non-drinkers) need to discover the fun and social value of going to a pub. Of course, pub owners and us session folks should help give them a reason...for me, it's bringing friends and neighbors together around an evening of tunes, songs, dancing, bad jokes, and the chit chat between tunes. Smokers too are welcome, as long as they step outside or into the pub next door (where smoking is allowed while the ban is being appealed) when they light up. I don't want to make it sound overly idyllic, but I think our Tuesday evenings at the taproom have rekindled a sense of community among a diverse crowd, and people are finding their balance again between equal amounts of tolerance/respect for differences and asserting their own self-interests. That's the power of a good session.
Zina spoke while I was composing my saga...but I too am offended by drizzit's "ugly american" ridicule. I didn't address this in my post because I thought he was doing enough damage to his own argument very well on his own.....
Round here (Denver/Boulder, Colorado, US), there's generally a smoking section and a non-smoking section in restaurants. Both are usually occupied by the appropriate parties, no troubles. Its tougher in establishments with only one smaller room.
"And since I assume none of you swear, drink alcohol or caffiene, or eat so many burgers you're over weight...why don't you ban bad language, alcohol coffee and unhealthy eating..."
It all boils down to when personal behavior becomes harmful to others around you. All laws exist to regulate the effects of the individual on everyone else.
Well, as for swearing...freedom of speech stops when it's abusive or slanderous. We aren't free to abuse other people, even verbally. Sure, you can swear at ppl, but if someone chooses to make a legal case over it, they can.
As for the rest...well, DUH...no one sitting in the same *public* establishment as you is being allowed to force-feed you their alcohol, caffiene, or burgers! In some cases, your nico addiction is an immediate danger to people nearby with certain health problems. And yes, I'm an overweight american...not due to burgers...just good Cajun food and lack of exercise. I've met ppl the world-over who are just my size or...gasp... larger...imagine that! I might sit on you or cook for you, but I won't force-feed you.
On a personal level, I stopped smoking in 1985 and have never looked back. I was making myself horribly ill, and am on allergy shots now. Being exposed to others' smoke is now a guarantee I'll be at the docs shelling out my hard-earned cash because of someone else's addiction.
Presently, I pity a cig-addicted relative who misses out on time with her grandchildren because they come for extended holidays at the non-smoking house instead. I mourn my father-in-law and all his siblings who died horrible deaths as a direct result of their heavy smoking (and he was not an obese American...got rave reviews at his yearly physical for his lung capacity and health which convinced him that smoking was not a danger in any way). I mourn the years he spent smoking outside so he wouldn't harm his grandbabies indoors...instead of not smoking and being with them. Smokers are doing enough to harm and curtail their own quality of life as well as that of their loved ones without gov. interference...their choice...sad choice. I used to be one of them.
Sure we overweight folk *from many countries* may have different quality of life from you, but I'm not sick anymore (except when I have to breath the smoke). Non-smoking is no guarantee, just as being thin is no guarantee, as to who will be struck down with some awful illness or be happier...so that comparison ends there.
I don't want the government saying you can't smoke at all if that's your wish. I want the government to make tobacco companies quit putting crazy harmful additives of all sorts in the cancer sticks. I want the government to protect me from your smoke when we both go out in public. Allow areas in establishments for those who want to smoke, and those who don't...and don't mix the air. It does me no good to sit in a non-smoking area when I'm still next to the smokers or sharing the same airspace. And yes, if you own a business, it should be your decision as to whether your place is smoking or non-smoking or both...and our decision as to whether we want to frequent your establishment. But if it's "non"...please make the "non" area truely smoke-free. There are laws about truth in advertising, right? And if I am desparate enough for a session fix to choose to go in a smoky place...knowing the smoke will make me sick...well...my choice. Sad choice, but my choice. It's all about reasonable boundaries and freedom of choice...find the middle ground.
I don't know what the solution is, but the balance will rock before it settles in the middle...hopefully in a place that's fair and safe for everyone...even fat Americans.
I dont agree with alot of the stuff on this post (as you all know) what I do want to say is, people who are overweight (no not just americans - everyone) and dont do exercise are putting themselves at great risk - personal choice tho that doesnt affect others. Although, Katiebythegate - I dont know how many drunk people youve met in your life, hanging out in pubs and playing music Ive met loads and sometime their drinking directly affects others, the amount of bar brawls and aggressive drunks Ive met (me being one is amazing. So anyone who says smoking direclty affects others but alcohol doesnt is totally kidding themselves. I dont agree with smoking in resteraunts, we have that law already.
KTBTG: I apologise unreservedly if any of MY comments were viewed as offensive - ie about 12 posts back - something like "clinically obese saddos" - I shouldn't have said that, but it was in response to 'the quair one' giving out about his/her lifestyle, and maybe I was being dragged down to that level.
At least I didn't say anything against Americans, in fact I defended youse!
Blame him/her anyway - (s)he deserves it.
snip As for the rest...well, DUH...no one sitting in the same *public* establishment /snip
In legal definitions a bar is not a public establishment, it's a private business, (unless it recieves gov't money). Post Offices, Welfare Offices, Police Stations etc etc are public places.
As for people who are intolerant to smoke, why not call your pals up for a session at your house? Why do sessions have to take place in bars anyway? Frankly the Publicans make out on sessions quite well, free live entertainment, musicians buying drinks etc. maybe you'd have a leverage on the publican to make the place non-smoking if his free entertainment dried up due to the smoke.
Another alternetive - I guess if don't play flute or whistle you could wear a gas-mask to your local session, it would serve two uses: providing clean air for you & it would muffle your pissing, whining and/or wailing at the same time.
Just thought I'd hit this one for retro-curiosity - it's not dead yet, I notice. Still some smarting nicotine freaks, writhing & wriggling, giving out to the rest of the human race about their sad little lives.
No offense taken...just some statements are irrelevant to this discussion, and I was pointing that out. I hate that facial expressions don't show because that causes many misunderstandings in online discussions.
I don't know where you are, but here in the states, a business is considered a public establishment in that it is open to the public and therefore, it must meet basic requirements that make it fair to everyone who may frequent it--within reason. It's only private in that it isn't owned by the government, and the owner/s may decide (as regards to smoking at the moment) whether to allow smoking/not allow it/set some compromise. Certain things which affect public health and the health of the workers are regulated by the government. All else is under the decisive control of the proprietor. That's how it should be.
Of course, sessions take place both at homes and in businesses. Both smokers and non-smokers make the choice to do one or the other at various times for different reasons. That fact still doesn't address this issue. Shall we all go home and stay there rather than find the common ground to effect changes to make the world as comfy as possible for everyone?
I stated already that I feel that if it's a business that allows smoking and if that is offensive or causes injury to you, don't go there or work there. I only wish that if it's a business that allows for separate areas, these areas would be required to be truely separate (not just opposite sides of the same room). All equal freedom to the proprietors and smokers--so long as I still have the choice to escape the smoke or just not be there. I'm just saying there is a middle ground, and right now, people seem to want the extremes instead. Any good struggle starts out that way. That's what I meant by the scale will rock a bit before it settles in the middle.
I don't know if it's still worth posting to this thread... however, answering the frequently made suggestion that non-smokers should go and have their own sessions at home: very few people have that luxury. I don't think I know anyone in London who could feasibly have a session in their house or flat. I myself live in a flat in a built-up area; there's no way I could have a session without seriously disturbing my neighbours. And I do care about how I get along with them - unlike Concertina Player, who has already made it quite clear he doesn't give a **** about anyone else. Now that he's bluntly said so, I can't see what point there is in attempting further discussion... at least with people who are so entrenched in the 'I don't give a ****, I'll do what I want' mindset.
In fact, that mindset is why we need laws which force people to behave in a tolerable manner. If everyone was naturally thoughtful, we wouldn't need them...
Mom always said not to worry about people who act like that toward others...they're just jealous, weak, and ineffectual in their own lives, and that the ones who resort to filthy language don't have enough intellect to be more clever, or they care so little about themselves and others that they don't bother. "God didn't make our mouths to spill filth and rudeness." Youch! My Mom can still pin your ears to the wall with words and give you a lot to think about.
There's a lovely guitar player and singer (with a beautiful big speaking voice and the thickest Irish accent you've ever heard) in the Boston area that Aoife Clancy told a story on to a friend of mine. They were traveling by plane, and he was telling her some yarn about something. (He uses "f**k" in his sentences like some people use salt on their food.) Anyway, some guy in front of them finally turns around, pins him with a beady eye, and tells him, "Listen, buddy, your language is offensive to my wife. Will you please lower your voice and tone down the profanity?" and turns back around with finality.
Aoife says that the singer looked genuinely surprised, hurt, and puzzled for a moment, then turned to her and seriously asked her (in a much quieter voice), "What the f**k did I say?"
The father of one of my friends talks about a drill sargeant he had while in the Army, who didn't believe in swearing. He says that the guy could make you feel like you were five inches high standing in the teeth of a mach 5 storm, all without uttering a single profane word. I asked him once to demonstrate, but he couldn't do it!
To whiter than white (and so much more clever and secure than me! ) katiebythegate and Helen Roche.
Unfortunately, dear old Jeremy, deleted the foul mouthed outpourings from the Mr Mackay you know as Domhniaill Mac Aoidh which my post was in response to.
As far as I can remember the last bit of his post which was deleted went something like "We don't give a flying f**k about you smokers - why don't you just go and sit in a corner and metastatise yourselves into oblivion and don't pollute my back yard - Thank you."
Oh dear - do you two not feel a pang of remorse...?
Zina - great story by the way, you've a great knack for bringing these overly heavy discussions back to some semblance of normality.
This will be my last post to this thread (unless I'm outraged by even more drivel).
Amusement rather than remorse, I'm afraid... CP, you've made your views pretty clear in this and a previous thread on the same subject. I may have over-summarised your view but I don't think I was too far off...
However, I think it's now getting to the "did... didn't... he started it..." phase, so I will also retire from this thread. It was fun...
How're they ever going to make it stick?
How're they ever going to make it stick?
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2003/01/30/breaking/latest0007.txt
# Posted on January 30th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
You know, it's funny Zina, but Delaware where I generally go for
sessions these days (when I go) has recently passes such a
ban. I'll let you know what difference it has made the next time I
go to a session.
# Posted on January 30th 2003 by Fsnockhart
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick? (US issues)
Fsnockhart, you're talking about a different country in a different mind-set. But nonetheless, it probably will stick in Ireland as it has in the US, believe it or not the most respected laws (in the US) have to do with non-smoking areas. In the US The whole issue is touchy-feely for me because I don't think the gov't (City, State or Nat'l) really has a right to ban a legal activity inside of the walls of a private business. I really think it's up to the business owner. If a client doesn't like the fact that the bar is smoking/non-smoking than that client has the option of taking their business elsewhere. However I have no oppositions to the US having a referendum on the legallity of tobacco use, in fact I'd vote for it tobacco to be banned all together. I'm just worried about my civil liberties & the rights of my fellow US citizens.
# Posted on January 30th 2003 by B Rad
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Lest you consider the Irish Govt.'s measures draconian or are in any doubt as to the health risks of smoking I refer you to the following (not for the faint hearted - which is what most smokers will become):
http://www.rrcc-online.com/paprogram/LUNGHTML/LUNGIDX.HTM
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/diseases/facts/atherosclerosis.htm
I don't think these measures will work though, unfortunately, as you can imagine, some little pub in the back of beyond where the Gards rarely visit, the publican is hardly likely to enforce the ban on his few customers.
# Posted on January 30th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I am for the prohibition of tobacco smokink in the pubs.
I am for the leagization of marjuana smoking .
# Posted on January 30th 2003 by gian marco
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I think Domhniaill has it about right - it'll will be adhered to about as strictly as closing times are now! It will probably take another generation for the cultural change to come about. Ten years from now, things will be very different (think how fast they've changed in the UK) and in twenty, there will be very little smoking in public, and far fewer smokers - that's my guess.
I'm delighted about the ban, though! I hope we'll follow suit in the UK.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Brad, I am generally in agreement with your views. However, just for argument and to be accurate, the new regulations in Ireland as well as USA are intended to protect workers rights, not clients. Workers are much more limited in their choices, especially in hard times. That's where the real issue lies.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Tusong200
Re: They will make it stick?
What's new? Tony Blair is trying to phase out sessions and any form of live music either in the pub or in the street.
Landlords without a public entertainment license have already been fined because the locals were singing Happy Birthday and others because people were swaying rhythmically (who doesn't when in the pub)?
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by geoffwright
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Yeah - in 20 years time they'll all be dead. And none of the next generation will let themselves be conned into paying a lot of money for getting horrible, horrible diseases, AND allowing people who sit next to them, but who don't smoke, to be at risk of getting those diseases also.
(Having raged on, I have to admit I used to smoke, till 5 years ago, but was never proud of it, and giving up was one of the few sensible things I've done in my life!)
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
To be honest, since I don't smoke, I'm personally all for it. I just can't see how they're going to make it stick in a place like Ireland. Maybe in Dublin and Galway, the bigger places, but Ballykilldaferret?
I've gotten so used to it here that it's a shock to go somewhere where they *do* allow smoking...
zls
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Thank God!!! The disgusting amount of smoke at all the sessions in Ireland has been the worst thing about every visit I've made to Ireland and the number one reason I'd consider not playing in the sessions. I only wish they'd do the same here in the USA.
Chris
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by ChrisLaughlin
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
So move to the West Coast, Chris.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
very strange, but we haven't heard much from smokers on this thread.....
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
They're probably all at the protest organization meetings, don't you think? ;)
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Won't it be just great when it can be said we all died of nothing in particular. My guess is the main cause at that point will either be boredom or suicide.
I'm always sceptical of people with stock portfolios supporting workers rights issues. If its legal, its legal and we all have to make our choices. Low wage workers have always died of crummy diseases obtained along with hardscrabble lifestyle, a fact that no smoking ban is going change. When living in LA is the same as smoking three packs a day what difference does it make if you go into a smokey bar. (Rhetorical devices aside, the air quality index for LA places average pollution at around 25x acceptable levels)
I'm with Brad on this. Outlaw the practice from the ground up: growing, processing, distribution and consumption or don't, but don't make all my choices dependent on what you're comfortable with whether you are present or not. Where's that good ol' free market attitude. If you can't get workers or customers in a hospitality business, you won't be in the hospitality business.
Just for background, I smoked Camels and Winstons for 25 years and quit 12 years ago out of disgust. But that was my choice.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by AOG
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Oh dear, my worst fears start to become a reality - this will result in a wholesale closure of many pubs across Ireland and vast job losses.
In the first year of the NY ban there was a 25% rise in the number of restaurant closures and 2,779 jobs were lost.
In Toronto a similar ban had to be lifted following its economic effects.
At least the UK politicians seem to have found a balance with their proposed smoking in public places measures.
The "Celtic Tiger" economy in Ireland is already on the wane (presumeably the politicians will be the last to realise this), this measure will be a severe kick in the teeth for the Irish people who've worked so hard to maintain the existing and set up new drinking holes.
Non-smoking trials in the past in Ireland have seen customers voting with their feet - after all, why pay pub prices when you can get decent draught Guinness in a can and get your friends round to your house for a session where you can exercise free will and have an occasional cigarette if you want to. A curious point that landlords noted was that smokers tended to drink substantially more than non-smokers - which meant that their loss was compounded.
If the ban holds, then in a couple of years down the road, the only sessions you'll see in Irish pubs will be the "Danny Boy" spectaculars put on for the tourists.
Scotland appears to be the only country where common sense prevails and "freedom" is a reality rather than political clap-trap.
I never cease to be amazed that people are more concerned with banning smoking than they are with GM foods, low-grade radioactive "dirty bombs", vehicle exhaust emissions, diet, drug abuse etc etc.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
To the last 2 contributors - CP & AOG - yes, at least initially reduce, where possible, consumption of all the other horrible stuff you mentioned, concertina, AS WELL. Vehicle exhaust - my choice is to cycle or run to/from work & eat organic when possible, not much I can do about dirty bombs, and so on, etc....
Scotland is only now just catching up with the rest of the developed world, but Glasgow's still the Coronary Heart Disease capital of the world...common sense? Just go & try deep fried Mars Bar - not a myth - I'm from there.
I don't know where you get your facts from aog, but smoking has a proven direct link to lung cancer. Proven by Richard Dall, for which he got the Nobel prize. (It's also linked several other diseases, emphysema, ischaemic heart disease to name a few.) These diseases affect both rich AND poor people who smoke.
Yes, low wage people have higher morbidity related to working conditions and poor nutrition, but it is still possible to tackle single health issues with the correct political will.
I'm sorry if LA has such a grimy atmosphere, but as bad as 60 fags a day? So if you smoke as well as live in LA that's like smoking 80 a day, and a simple calculation tells me 80 is more than 60.
Anyway, at no point did I say I agreed with the ban. My gut feeling is it won't work. I believe, maybe like yourself, that health promotion campaigns would be far more effective than bans, but the amount spent by the UK NHS on these campaigns is a fraction (I can't remember exactly - about a 20th) of that spent by tobacco companies promoting their products. Also Ireland doesn't have an NHS. And you still think you've got free choice?
Back to basics, I just hate coming home from a session with my clothes stinking of cigarette smoke.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Domhniaill - good point about the deep fried Mars bars, I've lived in Edinburgh previously for a couple of years, but visited Glasgow recently and couldn't believe the fried food culture difference - though everyone wears tracksuits so this must imply that they're at the peak of fitness
.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that continual ingestion of less than pure air will not do you any good in the long run. Is no-one allowed to take a risk anymore ? Are we happy to sit back and let politicians and doctors run our lives ? I think I'll give up smoking, but then I'll have to drive my car really fast (or something similar) endangering life to get that risk kick.
Doctors should be shot for their attitude to smoking. I've heard hundreds of times from people that say if you have any sort of complaint and go to see the doctor and admit to being a smoker - it will be blamed on smoking. It seems to me that doctors are shirking their responsibility, now that they've latched on to the trendy "Give Up Smoking" panacea for all ills.
Funnily enough, these people often go away, don't give up smoking though when they go and see the doctor again, say that they're a non-smoker and find that a correct diagnosis of a condition totally unrelated to smoking is made.
I'm surprised being based in London that you notice the smokey aroma given the filth that comes from all the buses, lorries and cars or tube tunnels etc.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not vehemently pro-smoking, though what enrages me is the pathetic "Nanny State" attitude that the so-called civilised world seems to have accepted lying down.
Jaysus, they'll be banning foxhunting in Ireland next !!!
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Well, as a smoker, I felt I needed to at least represent that small population on this post. I don't like coming home from a session smelling like smoke, either, but I also don't like the gunk I get on my shoes just from walking down a couple of New York City blocks. Just one of those things you've gotta deal with if that's where you need to go to play your music.
Why aren't we banning diet soda, electric blankets, old cars, etc?
Give us a break...not only are we helplessly addicted to a nasty drug, but now we're total outcasts in the society as well. I already do 95% of my smoking outside in below zero temps, and now we're getting kicked out of the pubs.
All those that complain should start hosting house sessions.
Hate to sound resentful, but I'm tired of being a "considerate smoker", one who goes out of her way not to offend anyone. Just tired of the complaining, I guess.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by irishfiddler32
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
And I'm tired of being a considerate non - smoker, i.e. one who breathes in the foul, exhaled air of smokers and just has to accept it. For those of us who live in large town and cities, we have no choice but to breathe in traffic fumes, pollution etc. but at least the drivers/factoriesdon't insist on bringing their vehicles/machines into the pub. It is as if a group of people were stuck in a lift and one person insisting on farting and belching because (a)it made him feel good and (b)you folks don't really mind do you? All this comes from one who smoked for 20 years and who had no idea of the discomfort he put other people through so it comes from one who should know. Civil liberties and the "nanny state"? I don't want to be poisoned thank you very much. Now, where did I put those sackcloths and ashes and let's say a few hail marys at the same time.
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Niall L
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Well said Niall!
I, for one, would love to be able to go out to the pubs, hang out with my friends, play some tunes and have some fun without being sickened and poisoned by a bunch of inconsiderate smokers who think that filling everyone else's lungs with their toxic exhaust is their "right".
The difference between banning smoking in public spaces and banning electric blankets, diet soda, etc (as per Irishfiddler32s suggestions) is that with those you are free to poison yourself but you don't end up egregiously poisoning everyone around you. There's a big, big difference.
I'm glad that non-smokers are finally standing up for their right to NOT be poisoned.
Chris
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by ChrisLaughlin
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Irishfiddler -
Have you considered that maybe all those who want to smoke and play music at the same time could host their own "smoking and tunes" house sessions, rather than forcing those who don't want to be poisoned to start their own sessions?
Chris
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by ChrisLaughlin
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
The same law is just around the corner here in Australia i am a Publican and i welcome the
legislation. Fortunatly our climate allows for beer gardens and outside smoking areas.
No more will i have to look at flute and whistle players wearing face masks." fair dinkum"
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Bryan
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Before you know it, high-energy protein drinks will be poured instead of beer and those pretzels will be replaced by yummy tofu crunches!
Goodnight all! I'm going to the pub in Dallas, Texas and having a beer AND a smoke at the bar and it's going to be great!
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Caoimghgin
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
hey, what's wrong with tofu crunches? *grin*
Zina
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
No fags at sessions!. Too bad if you're a chain smoking bodhran player! How welcome would you be at your local session then?
)
# Posted on January 31st 2003 by bouzyboy
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Aog, I only mention the fact that the laws are enacted to protect workers rights so that the argument is presented accurately. It is a disservice to both sides of any issue to muddle the argument up with innaccurate statements and fuzzy logic.
As I said, I am in general agreement with Brad's view. I am personally opposed to the ban because I am opposed to government intrusion in general. (I do not, and never have, smoked)
As for my stock portfolio, perhaps you could tell me where I misplaced it. That would only help, of course, if I could actually recognize one if I saw it.
# Posted on February 1st 2003 by Tusong200
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Folks it is'nt the Garda, government or publican who will enforce this law it will be the person standing next to you in the pub.
I think we will have alot of fisticuffs in the pubs next Jan it will be interesting to say the least.
# Posted on February 2nd 2003 by Northcregg
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
There are are an increasing number of sessions across in the UK that advertise the fact its non-smoke-folk.
# Posted on February 2nd 2003 by geoffwright
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Even though I'm probably too young to be replying here, I'm stuck in the middle of deciding smoking or no smoking in Ireland.....I have asthma, so I am glad that the pubs here don't have smoking, but in Ireland, it just seems like that's what you do in a pub....I'm not saying I'm all for smoking in Ireland, but I'm just thinking about how fewer people would attend a session if there was a smoking ban. However, if there was a smoking ban, would instruments be cleaner, voices clearer for singing, more young people allowed to join in???....just a thought.
Blu
# Posted on February 2nd 2003 by BluFiddle
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Cultural precedent is not, on its own, a good reason for preserving a harmful activity. Think of slavery, foot binding, child labour, etc. There always were, and are, people who try to defend such heinous things with the claim that 'it's our culture!', or that the economy will collapse without it.
Here's an analogy which may sound far-fetched but is actually a close parallel. Imagine that it was common and traditional for players of Irish music to take heroin; and that people would jack up at sessions, because they wanted to and it was considered socially acceptable. Imagine that other players, and bar staff, were constantly at risk of contracting HIV, hepatitis etc, because of all the dirty needles left lying around. (OK, that bit is a trifle imaginative, but bear with me for the sake of the hypothesis). Now, if 150 Irish bar staff per year were dying from those and other diseases caught from needles, would this be tolerable? Would there be an outcry? Of course there would, because heroin is not a socially acceptable drug. Tobacco is, but only for historical reasons. It kills *vastly* more people.
While you do see plenty of children in Irish pubs, there must also be many people who keep their families out of pubs because of the smoke, and conversely, many children suffering from asthma as a result of the exposure.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Well put, Helen, if rather melodramatic. But sometimes shock tactics are the only way to get people to listen. I like the dirty needle analogy to passive smoking.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Thought this interesting tidbit from the Irish emigrant would be interesting regarding the implementation of the law. On my visits to sessions in Ireland I've noted that stopping smoking in pubs would be as hard to control on stopping the flow of beer!
--Marty
THE IRISH EMIGRANT, Editor: Liam Ferrie - February 3, 2003 - Issue No.835
Minister for Health M
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by MTMajor
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I don't think the issue is much about whether cigarette smoking is bad for you. I think everyone, those addicted and those not, know it's bad for you. I'm just wondering how they're going to make the law stick or if it'll become, as Marty points out, one of those laws that regularly gets broken. Likely it'll be different for each pub (and locality), but I guess we'll have to wait and see!
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
You're right to reiterate your point Zina, which I for one did also state. However there's a lot of denial going round among smokers, and I should know - I've been there. Loadsa people say to themselves, only 50% (or whatever) of smokers get diseases from it - it won't happen to me.
So I think it's worth laying it on to people how really bad fags are. That's why I stuck those links on my first post on this thread.
I'm sorry, I'm a typical reformed evangelical ex-smoker.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I read on another BB an inspired comment that you should totally disregard the views of ex-smokers in a matter such as this as they have already had their cake and are now trying to eat it !
No good laying it on how bad cigarettes ("fags" may lead our American friends to assume homophobia in addition to smokeophobia) are - smokers have all seen the charred bits of lungs etc. before. If you search around the other pics. in pathology sites such as these you'll see all sorts of gruesome messed up body parts commonly found in people who have never smoked in their lives (so don't get too smug you non-smokers).
Anyway, to me the main issue is how much the fine will be, and how rigorously enforced. As breaking the law is also a "way of life" in Ireland this whole dogmatic, puritanical move may well turn out to be nothing more than a pipe dream.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Yes, who is going to suffer the fine if someone is smoking in a pub, the publican or the smoker? Or both?
A friend of mine once came home from a trip to England. He mentioned a billboard he saw there for something called Faggot's, canned food of some sort, with the text, "Surprise your wife, bring home some Faggot's tonight!" I always wondered whether he was pulling my leg...?
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Zina Lee
P.S.
The non-smokers lungs are generally worse off than the smoker's, I think, as they don't have a filter tween them and the smoke!
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
If you keep your pack and lighter on the bar or table, and extinguish the cigarette as soon as you catch a glimpse of the Gard(s) raiding the boozer - who can prove you were smoking ?. Your tobacco infused breath is of course a tragic result of passive smoking you can claim...and there's plenty more tricks - so I reckon the fine will have to be on the publican. If the Gard drink in the pub, they'll never bother raiding it and so the Status Quo remaineth.
As a pure guess I reckon they'll go for a discretionary fine on the publican with a sliding scale up to 1,000 Euros as that's a nice round number.
Zina - True about the faggots - it's pretty vile chopped seasoned liver shaped into a ball or sausage. It could also be a bunch of sticks though canned sticks are not normally a traditional delicacy.
It's a classic punchline for the ad., though I reckon it must be a few decades old - I can't see many people sitting down a dinner of faggots and tripe these days. If you did, you'd probably need a good few smokes afterwards to mask the taste.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I just knew there was a reason I didn't like canned seasoned liver! Zina, it sounded like your friend was pullin' your chain, I guess not.
Ugh!
--Marty
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by MTMajor
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Wow. Sounds like Chinese food.
Down to the tripe.
# Posted on February 3rd 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I'm joinin this thread a little late, but here in Hamilton Ontario they recently passed a smoking bylaw which states that no one under the age of nineteen years old is allowed in any restaraunt, bar, pub that allows smoking. I find this preposterous. A few weeks ago I was out with my pipe band. These guys all smoke up a storm. We went to a roadhouse\bar but I wasn't allowed in -- not because they sell beer, but because they allow smoking. Since I wasn't allowed inside, we decided to sit on the patio, but soon found out we couldn't sit there because of the smoking bylaw. What is this world coming to when the government is banning sitting outside? Sigh.
# Posted on February 4th 2003 by no longer exists
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
It seems to me that the next obvious thing to do will be to ban drinking in pubs as well. After all there are more deaths and serious injury related to drinking than to smoking. I include in this:- the regular pub fights on a Friday night, violence in the home, drunk drivers, pedestrians getting knocked over while singing a song in the middle of the road.
.
Well ...... we all know what happened when that was tried out.
What next - will we have secret smoking shebeens and speakeasy's?
I can tell you that for this smoking fluter that my response will be to have a session in the house. I'll still get my musical fix [as well as my nicotine and the 10,000 other chemicals] but poor old Joe Public will have to go hunting down the illegal smoking dens - if he's lucky.
I'm all for market forces - a lesson well learned by a pub in Belfast that advertised as the first non-smoking bar in the city. Surprise, Surprise - it's now closed down.
If you non-smokers can convince the landlord that your money is more powerful than that of the smokers then you won't need any legislation - money talks and publicans listen.
We've already been turfed out of the cinemas, can't have a ciggy in the office, have to stand around street corners freezing in the rain, can't smoke in theatres, restaurants, on buses, airplanes, trains, museums, ...... need I go on. Now you want to ban us from the last refuge of freedom - the pub??????
I don't think it's unreasonable to allow us one miserable public venue where we can easy our stressed out selves with the glories of that health giving weed [at least that's how the Native Americans saw it]. It relaxes the mind, stimulates the bowels, clears the throat, and occupies the hands.
For god sake leave us alone.
MInd you - if there was a staight swap involved where we could light up a pipe of blow, or a big spliff of pure ganja I might consider it
# Posted on February 4th 2003 by breandan
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
God sometimes I really miss a certain session in galway - a group of like minded people who dont bitch about what they prefer. I for one would personally love some pubs to be non-smoking and some to remain smoking, then we could all split into groups and those non-smokers who decide to come to a smoking pub and vice versa cannot complain. Sounds drastic but maybe we could then stop talking about this subject that seems to come up every two weeks these days. Not blaming zina for starting this thread tho - when I read the article I was really amazed - I always thought australia and england would do it first!
# Posted on February 4th 2003 by bb
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Just to add my tuppence here... I so wish I was as perfect as all you non-smokers out there. It must be great to wake up in the morning, and not have to worry about offending anybody in anyway, or at all imposing youself on people. You must be a joy to be around. It pains me to have to accept my imperfections in the face of such political correctness. Since you're all so right all the time, why don't you club together and get a law passed where smokers are all put up against a wall and shot??? Then you could all be pious together in perfect peace!
And since I assume none of you swear, drink alcohol or caffiene, or eat so many burgers you're over weight (take particular note of that any americans reading this) - why don't you ban bad language, alcohol coffee and unhealthy eating at the same time?
Get a grip!
# Posted on February 4th 2003 by drizzt
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
bb you're supposed to be quitting. We were going to together remember?!
Everyone I shall now announce that I have quit. I haven't smoked since Sunday last week. I feel so much better for having given up and I agree with the non-smokers since I am now a non-smoker myself...
# Posted on February 4th 2003 by Dr. Dow
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Not to change the subject, but, you know, as an avowed atheist, I'm finding it increasingly annoying that I can't go into a church without having to put up with a lot of damned praying. I mean, I absolutely love organ music and choirs, I'm fond of wine and unleavened bread, but as soon as you set foot in the door, you're confronted by a bunch of people blessing themselves and each other. Where are we atheists supposed to go to get choir music and unleavened bread? Sure, I suppose we could always form our own little gathering, where we can have these things as well as enjoying the shoulder-to-shoulder camaradery, but it just isn't the same. I wish the government would step in.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by cuchulain54
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
These discussions always seem to end up with sarcasm and abuse from pro-smokers towards anti-smokers. Is it difficult to defend 'smokers' rights' by resorting solely to reasoned argument? I haven't seen any vitriol directed the other way, I don't think so anyway...
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I'm a non-smoker, actually. (Not an atheist either!). I just think pubs are basically dens of iniquity, and I'm comfortable with that. If I wasn't, I wouldn't go.And I hope I'd be comfortable with that as well.
I have great sympathy for both sides in the issue. Reasoned argument is especially hard on this issue because -- in my mind, anyway -- both sides have a reasonable point of view, which makes the arguments hard to reconcile.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by cuchulain54
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Picture me rolling my eyes. I wish people would stop in general picking on Americans at random. We're an easy target, sure, and there's plenty to pick on, but can you please pick at Americans when the subject warrants it instead of just throwing it into a conversation at random, fer cat's sake? What does American overweightness have to do with how Ireland is going to make this legislation stick? Get a grip on yourself, drizzt.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
By the way, Dow, good for you! That's a tough row to hoe. Good luck with it, and now the pressure is global for you to stay a non-smoker.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Yes, Dow, congratulations! The beauty of it is, you'll never be sorry for it. You may wish you'd never smoked, and, like many of the posters here, you may wish others would quit, but you'll be nothing but glad you've given 'em up.
Let me give you one bit of unsolicited advice: at this point, stop paying attention to your quitting date. I think that what screws people up is they focus on how long it has been, as if the goal is to accumulate days of not smoking, when in fact quitting is the goal. You are now a non-smoker, not a guy who has gone x-days without a cigarette, right?
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by cuchulain54
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Cuchulain, sorry - we posted simultaneously - I was responding to Drizzt's post, in fact. *Your* sarcasm was more of the gentle ribbing variety, and I might have 'tsk!'ed but I wouldn't have taken exception to it...
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I'm glad to hear that, Helen, because I thought I was being frightfully cute, so I never anticipated rancor! (In fact, I'm even blanching at the idea of being "tsk'd" at, gentle soul that I am.)
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by cuchulain54
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
To Drizzt - I've been trying for months to wind up someone at the session, but to no great effect, till your posting... and a smoker to boot!
Double bubble!
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I'm not a smoker, not for any particular reasons, except that I was a racing cyclist for 25 years when younger, but because I've never felt any urge or need to smoke. However, I've also never felt much in the way of discomfort from smoky sessions.
Tonight I spent a couple of hours at a session in the harbourside Nova Scotia pub in Bristol. About 20-25 people were in the room with the usual sprinkling of 4 or 5 smokers. This occasion was unusual in that the lights were turned out and we had a lot of nite-lite candles in saucers on the tables instead. The effect I noticed was that the candles seemed to burn up the cigarette smoke. The odour of tobacco smoke on my clothing when I got home was significantly reduced because of this. Has anyone else noticed this effect?
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Trevor Jennings
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
A friend of mine, a 40-a -day-all-his-life man in his early 60's, had a subarachnoid haemorrhage a 12-month ago, necessitating emergency brain surgery. When he was recovering from the operation the surgeon told him that if he didn't give up smoking he would be dead within 3 months. My friend took this to heart and has not smoked since. After a month of nicotine patches to help him initially he has not needed any further help and now has no desire to smoke. Incidentally, the operation was a complete success.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Trevor Jennings
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Regarding discussions ending up with abuse from pro-smokers towards anti-smokers... That'll be because nobody ever goes round trying to curtail the rights of the non-smoker. After all most council buildings and venues, and a lot of workplaces are non-smoking. We're the ones shivering in the cold here while you all sit about being smug. There appears to be an ever decreasing amount of tolerance in society of all differences. Where is the moderate argument that would allow both? Or would make it compulsory to have decent air/con and disallowing smoking at the bar? No that's not enough is it? You all have to scream for total non-smoking everywhere. I have no problem with there being non-smoking pubs/restaurants etc, but I guess you'll can figure which ones'll be more popular. It's already getting too expensive to drink in pubs anyway with prices rising to
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by drizzt
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
It must make you feel really good about your quality of life to compare it to the worst, ie clinically obese saddos - which are found everywhere (not just America) in the developed world, including Glasgow. Why don't you compare your quality of life) to the best, ie we smug non-smokers?
Joking - God, it's so easy to torment you.
But a bit more seriously, when I did smoke, I never felt I had the arrogant right to breath poison fumes over people who were not addicted to death sticks, the way you seem to think it's ok to do. So the rights of non-smokers to breath as clean air (as is possible) are constantly being curtailed by smokers. And also, as you shiver in doorways getting your fix we're back at work.
And when not shivering in the doorway, and you're in hospital, who's footing your NHS medical bill for the removal of the primary tumours in your lungs, or for the expensive, but usually futile, chemotherapy for metastasising secondaries - futile, because usually when Carcinoma of the lung is diagnosed it is by then too late.
Smug? I don't feel it, mate. Sorry for you, yes. And annoyed when I come home from a session smelling of Fags (a term I will use for them - this is a UK based site). Even the chemicals left in the odour residue are harming my little 4- month old boy.
Although I don't think it will, I hope the ban does work in Ireland. After listening to the arrogant outpourings from a few death stick addicts on this string my position has moved and I feel more entrenched as a non-passive passive smoker.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Drizzt... I keep hearing pro-smokers claiming that 'no-one is curtailing the rights of non-smokers'. Wrong. As Domhniall points out, our rights are already curtailed and have been, throughout living memory. Just because it's been the status-quo for so long, it's easy to ignore the fact that there *is* a bias, in favour of smokers - which is now gradually being eroded.
I would like to live a normal social life and meet my friends in pubs - because in the UK, and in Ireland, that is where social life takes place. I like to go to sessions. Irish music is the most important thing in my life, yet I have to ration my participation in it, because cigarette smoke makes me ill. So, as Trevor put it, that usual sprinkling of 4 or 5 smokers is actually forcing me to live a constrained social life, so that *they* can enjoy the psychological reassurance of having something to do with their hands, and avoid the pangs of nicotine abstinence. Those people who stay home because they don't enjoy the polluted atmosphere are, by default, a silent faction, because they aren't there to protest!
This makes it conveniently easy for smokers to forget that they *are* having a profound effect on the lives of other people.
Like Domhniaill, when I was a smoker, I never would have argued that I had the *right* to do that. I was thoughtlessly unaware of the consequences of my actions, like most smokers are until they stop smoking and see it from another perspective.
# Posted on February 5th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Aye well...they do say there's nothing worse than a reformed smoker. Instead of having been born perfect - you've sinned, seen the light and redeemed yourself. You must be very pleased with yourself.
I think you'll notice that I've advocated a balance of smoking/non-smoking places... I totally accept that it's unreasonable to want to smoke everywhere. But then it's also unreasonable for anti-smokers to try and prevent us from smoking anywhere!
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by drizzt
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Who are "they" who say this?
Other smokers?
Not especially pleased with myself. Could've done with not wasting the money & lung cells, but relieved I don't have to now.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Helen, your most recent posting seems as much directed toward my tongue-in-cheek church analogy as it is directed at drizzt's comments, and I must say, it's a good argument against my church analogy. You and Danny are beginning to convince me.
My knee-jerk reaction generally is to be opposed to government intrusion in any shape or form, and I think that's not a bad position to start from. But when I usually allow myself to re-consider that position, it's in cases where private citizens or businesses cannot, will not and even should not make particular decisions for themselves, even if those decisions are generally for the best. For example, in this smoking argument, an individual pub owner would perhaps be committing economic suicide by deciding to run a non-smoking establishment, because all of the drinkers would just move to the place across the street, so no pub owner would have the chutzpah to make that decision. So here's a good place for the government to step in: make the decision for ALL pub owners, so that the playing field is even. In a sense, the government is doing a favor for all of the pub owners by taking an unpopular decision out of their hands. If smoking were banned in all pubs, it's foolish to think that people would stop going to pubs. But no pub owner wants to be the first or only one, so it won't happen until it happens to them all.
OK, where's the ballot box?
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by cuchulain54
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Good point about levelling the economic playing field. As it happens, I don't always favour prohibition. I'm in favour of legalising heroin and cannabis, for example, but for a completely different rationale which I won't go into here, because it doesn't have much to do with Irish Music...
I guess Zina's original point is the important one - how will it be made to work? Well, it won't, entirely, at first; but it does signify a cultural change and a willingness to tackle the problem boldly - both are great things which I welcome.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Drizzt, in case you haven't noticed, the people on this thread who, even if non-smoking, most support non-governmental interference in this matter have been, with only one exception, American. Way to hammer the nail into your own foot.
What I was objecting to was the fact that you brought obesity rates in America (and I've seen plenty of obese people in other countries) up, particularly and nastily making the point at Americans for being obese, in the face of the Americans on this post largely being in favor of not seeing the legislation go through. That smacks of bigotry and an unthought-out response.
Is there a high incidence of obesity in America? Obviously. But it was, by and large (heh), not a particularly useful addition to this discussion and all it's really done is make you look a bit of an unreasoning spoiled brat smoker.
Zina
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Strong words Zina! - but deservedly so in this case. May I just clarify one thing I'd said on my penultimate post:
I do now hope the ban in Ireland works, but think it may be viewed as draconian, BUT I believe a robustly-funded health promotion campaign with a lot of support for people giving up is the best way to make this habit a thing of the past.
Then again, a ban plus the above measures may be even more potent, but, (not knowing the facts about health promotion budgets in Ireland) I suspect there won't be much money spent in health education by local health boards in Ireland (please contradict me if anyone knows better).
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
This thread strikes me as one of the more serious and significant we've had on this site, and also one of the most silly. Silly because I doubt that anyone firmly seated on one side of the aisle will likely change their opinion on the matter because of some argument put forth here. That said, I'm at least glad to know that Trevor, Danny, Helen, and I would get along right well at a session, even if we had to start our own in someone's kitchen to avoid the smoke down at the pub.
My home town recently passed a smoking ban in all public buildings. The anti-smokers made all the usuall arguments, and it seems like the two most powerful points were (1) you non-smokers out number smokers--why should you put up with breathing smoke when you go out for dinner or a drink? and (2) the employees at restaurants and pubs should not be forced to bear the health risks of second-hand smoke. I think the city council was in part concerned for peoples' welfare, and perhaps more concerned about their own liability for allowing smoking to create a lawsuit when some non-smoking bartender or waitress contracts lung cancer and decides the city was negligent by allowing hazardous workplace conditions.
The pro-smoking side countered these points with two main arguments of their own: (1) banning smoking will kill the bar and restaurant businesses; and (2) what right do *you* have to tell a pub owner what behavior he can and can't allow under the roof of his private establishment?
I'm a non-smoker but am of mixed mind on all of this. I don't like telling business owners what's allowed behind their doors, and it seems fair to have some dens of iniquity for people to indulge in their vices. As long as cigarettes are legal (and in the States at least, subsidized by the government--talk about two-faced policy!), it doesn't seem reasonable to ban their use. As for the employees' health, I guess I don't understand why they'd *want* to work in a place (such as a pub) well-known for being a smoker's haven. These are the choices we all make.
On the other hand, I don't understand why the minority (smokers) should have things their way in every bar and restaurant. Why should my choice to breathe clean air at dinner or when out for a pint be limited by the whims of the 25 to 30 percent of people who smoke?
Pesonally, I can't balance these issues off one another in a way that respects the valid points on both sides. So when it came time to cast my vote in the local election, despite my misgivings about bashing private property rights, I went with my personal desire to visit pubs without breathing everyone else's nicotine and tar.
But I think the election (and subsequent ordinance banning smoking in all buildings open to the public) was too black and white. I'd prefer to see a wiser solution, I just don't know what it would be.
When I organized our local session (the only Irish session in town), we made it a point to find a smoke-free pub. There were two in town--this was before the smoking ban--and we ended up playing at both. It has taken a few years, but word has gotten around that our session offers a smoke-free alternative to the normal culture of bars. And I think this is what needs to happen on a wider scale--non-smokers (and even non-drinkers) need to discover the fun and social value of going to a pub. Of course, pub owners and us session folks should help give them a reason...for me, it's bringing friends and neighbors together around an evening of tunes, songs, dancing, bad jokes, and the chit chat between tunes. Smokers too are welcome, as long as they step outside or into the pub next door (where smoking is allowed while the ban is being appealed) when they light up. I don't want to make it sound overly idyllic, but I think our Tuesday evenings at the taproom have rekindled a sense of community among a diverse crowd, and people are finding their balance again between equal amounts of tolerance/respect for differences and asserting their own self-interests. That's the power of a good session.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Will Harmon
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Zina spoke while I was composing my saga...but I too am offended by drizzit's "ugly american" ridicule. I didn't address this in my post because I thought he was doing enough damage to his own argument very well on his own.....
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Will Harmon
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Round here (Denver/Boulder, Colorado, US), there's generally a smoking section and a non-smoking section in restaurants. Both are usually occupied by the appropriate parties, no troubles. Its tougher in establishments with only one smaller room.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Ok...I've bitten my tongue long enough...
"And since I assume none of you swear, drink alcohol or caffiene, or eat so many burgers you're over weight...why don't you ban bad language, alcohol coffee and unhealthy eating..."
It all boils down to when personal behavior becomes harmful to others around you. All laws exist to regulate the effects of the individual on everyone else.
Well, as for swearing...freedom of speech stops when it's abusive or slanderous. We aren't free to abuse other people, even verbally. Sure, you can swear at ppl, but if someone chooses to make a legal case over it, they can.
As for the rest...well, DUH...no one sitting in the same *public* establishment as you is being allowed to force-feed you their alcohol, caffiene, or burgers! In some cases, your nico addiction is an immediate danger to people nearby with certain health problems. And yes, I'm an overweight american...not due to burgers...just good Cajun food and lack of exercise. I've met ppl the world-over who are just my size or...gasp... larger...imagine that! I might sit on you or cook for you, but I won't force-feed you.
On a personal level, I stopped smoking in 1985 and have never looked back. I was making myself horribly ill, and am on allergy shots now. Being exposed to others' smoke is now a guarantee I'll be at the docs shelling out my hard-earned cash because of someone else's addiction.
Presently, I pity a cig-addicted relative who misses out on time with her grandchildren because they come for extended holidays at the non-smoking house instead. I mourn my father-in-law and all his siblings who died horrible deaths as a direct result of their heavy smoking (and he was not an obese American...got rave reviews at his yearly physical for his lung capacity and health which convinced him that smoking was not a danger in any way). I mourn the years he spent smoking outside so he wouldn't harm his grandbabies indoors...instead of not smoking and being with them. Smokers are doing enough to harm and curtail their own quality of life as well as that of their loved ones without gov. interference...their choice...sad choice. I used to be one of them.
Sure we overweight folk *from many countries* may have different quality of life from you, but I'm not sick anymore (except when I have to breath the smoke). Non-smoking is no guarantee, just as being thin is no guarantee, as to who will be struck down with some awful illness or be happier...so that comparison ends there.
I don't want the government saying you can't smoke at all if that's your wish. I want the government to make tobacco companies quit putting crazy harmful additives of all sorts in the cancer sticks. I want the government to protect me from your smoke when we both go out in public. Allow areas in establishments for those who want to smoke, and those who don't...and don't mix the air. It does me no good to sit in a non-smoking area when I'm still next to the smokers or sharing the same airspace. And yes, if you own a business, it should be your decision as to whether your place is smoking or non-smoking or both...and our decision as to whether we want to frequent your establishment. But if it's "non"...please make the "non" area truely smoke-free. There are laws about truth in advertising, right? And if I am desparate enough for a session fix to choose to go in a smoky place...knowing the smoke will make me sick...well...my choice. Sad choice, but my choice. It's all about reasonable boundaries and freedom of choice...find the middle ground.
I don't know what the solution is, but the balance will rock before it settles in the middle...hopefully in a place that's fair and safe for everyone...even fat Americans.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by katiebythegate
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I dont agree with alot of the stuff on this post (as you all know) what I do want to say is, people who are overweight (no not just americans - everyone) and dont do exercise are putting themselves at great risk - personal choice tho that doesnt affect others. Although, Katiebythegate - I dont know how many drunk people youve met in your life, hanging out in pubs and playing music Ive met loads and sometime their drinking directly affects others, the amount of bar brawls and aggressive drunks Ive met (me being one
is amazing. So anyone who says smoking direclty affects others but alcohol doesnt is totally kidding themselves. I dont agree with smoking in resteraunts, we have that law already.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by bb
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
KTBTG: I apologise unreservedly if any of MY comments were viewed as offensive - ie about 12 posts back - something like "clinically obese saddos" - I shouldn't have said that, but it was in response to 'the quair one' giving out about his/her lifestyle, and maybe I was being dragged down to that level.
At least I didn't say anything against Americans, in fact I defended youse!
Blame him/her anyway - (s)he deserves it.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
snip As for the rest...well, DUH...no one sitting in the same *public* establishment /snip
In legal definitions a bar is not a public establishment, it's a private business, (unless it recieves gov't money). Post Offices, Welfare Offices, Police Stations etc etc are public places.
As for people who are intolerant to smoke, why not call your pals up for a session at your house? Why do sessions have to take place in bars anyway? Frankly the Publicans make out on sessions quite well, free live entertainment, musicians buying drinks etc. maybe you'd have a leverage on the publican to make the place non-smoking if his free entertainment dried up due to the smoke.
Another alternetive - I guess if don't play flute or whistle you could wear a gas-mask to your local session, it would serve two uses: providing clean air for you & it would muffle your pissing, whining and/or wailing at the same time.
# Posted on February 6th 2003 by B Rad
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
bb, you mean...you're an aggressive drunk!?! *grin* Who'd have thought it!
# Posted on February 7th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Just thought I'd hit this one for retro-curiosity - it's not dead yet, I notice. Still some smarting nicotine freaks, writhing & wriggling, giving out to the rest of the human race about their sad little lives.
# Posted on February 7th 2003 by Rudall the time
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Really Mr Mackay, don't they say that when people are concerned about losing an argument they have to resort to insults....
Just for the record, we smokers don't give a tinker's toss about you ex-smokers either.
Thanks for nothing.
# Posted on February 8th 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I think they usually resort more to making superior noises and saying things like, "Oh, you'll just never be capable of understanding," CP.
# Posted on February 8th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
No offense taken...just some statements are irrelevant to this discussion, and I was pointing that out. I hate that facial expressions don't show because that causes many misunderstandings in online discussions.
I don't know where you are, but here in the states, a business is considered a public establishment in that it is open to the public and therefore, it must meet basic requirements that make it fair to everyone who may frequent it--within reason. It's only private in that it isn't owned by the government, and the owner/s may decide (as regards to smoking at the moment) whether to allow smoking/not allow it/set some compromise. Certain things which affect public health and the health of the workers are regulated by the government. All else is under the decisive control of the proprietor. That's how it should be.
Of course, sessions take place both at homes and in businesses. Both smokers and non-smokers make the choice to do one or the other at various times for different reasons. That fact still doesn't address this issue. Shall we all go home and stay there rather than find the common ground to effect changes to make the world as comfy as possible for everyone?
I stated already that I feel that if it's a business that allows smoking and if that is offensive or causes injury to you, don't go there or work there. I only wish that if it's a business that allows for separate areas, these areas would be required to be truely separate (not just opposite sides of the same room). All equal freedom to the proprietors and smokers--so long as I still have the choice to escape the smoke or just not be there. I'm just saying there is a middle ground, and right now, people seem to want the extremes instead. Any good struggle starts out that way. That's what I meant by the scale will rock a bit before it settles in the middle.
# Posted on February 8th 2003 by katiebythegate
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
I don't know if it's still worth posting to this thread... however, answering the frequently made suggestion that non-smokers should go and have their own sessions at home: very few people have that luxury. I don't think I know anyone in London who could feasibly have a session in their house or flat. I myself live in a flat in a built-up area; there's no way I could have a session without seriously disturbing my neighbours. And I do care about how I get along with them - unlike Concertina Player, who has already made it quite clear he doesn't give a **** about anyone else. Now that he's bluntly said so, I can't see what point there is in attempting further discussion... at least with people who are so entrenched in the 'I don't give a ****, I'll do what I want' mindset.
In fact, that mindset is why we need laws which force people to behave in a tolerable manner. If everyone was naturally thoughtful, we wouldn't need them...
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Mom always said not to worry about people who act like that toward others...they're just jealous, weak, and ineffectual in their own lives, and that the ones who resort to filthy language don't have enough intellect to be more clever, or they care so little about themselves and others that they don't bother. "God didn't make our mouths to spill filth and rudeness." Youch! My Mom can still pin your ears to the wall with words and give you a lot to think about.
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by katiebythegate
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
There's a lovely guitar player and singer (with a beautiful big speaking voice and the thickest Irish accent you've ever heard) in the Boston area that Aoife Clancy told a story on to a friend of mine. They were traveling by plane, and he was telling her some yarn about something. (He uses "f**k" in his sentences like some people use salt on their food.) Anyway, some guy in front of them finally turns around, pins him with a beady eye, and tells him, "Listen, buddy, your language is offensive to my wife. Will you please lower your voice and tone down the profanity?" and turns back around with finality.
Aoife says that the singer looked genuinely surprised, hurt, and puzzled for a moment, then turned to her and seriously asked her (in a much quieter voice), "What the f**k did I say?"
The father of one of my friends talks about a drill sargeant he had while in the Army, who didn't believe in swearing. He says that the guy could make you feel like you were five inches high standing in the teeth of a mach 5 storm, all without uttering a single profane word. I asked him once to demonstrate, but he couldn't do it!
zls
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by Zina Lee
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
To whiter than white (and so much more clever and secure than me! ) katiebythegate and Helen Roche.
Unfortunately, dear old Jeremy, deleted the foul mouthed outpourings from the Mr Mackay you know as Domhniaill Mac Aoidh which my post was in response to.
As far as I can remember the last bit of his post which was deleted went something like "We don't give a flying f**k about you smokers - why don't you just go and sit in a corner and metastatise yourselves into oblivion and don't pollute my back yard - Thank you."
Oh dear - do you two not feel a pang of remorse...?
Zina - great story by the way, you've a great knack for bringing these overly heavy discussions back to some semblance of normality.
This will be my last post to this thread (unless I'm outraged by even more drivel).
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by Concertina Player
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Amusement rather than remorse, I'm afraid... CP, you've made your views pretty clear in this and a previous thread on the same subject. I may have over-summarised your view but I don't think I was too far off...
However, I think it's now getting to the "did... didn't... he started it..." phase, so I will also retire from this thread. It was fun...
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by Nell
Re: How're they ever going to make it stick?
Love a person who takes the bait...and do I dare??? Yeaaaaaaaaah....drivel, drivel, drivel.
# Posted on February 9th 2003 by katiebythegate