Why the Smoking Ban will not work!!!

eirebhoy

There is an article in the IOS about why the smoking ban is a complete shambles and these are the few points that caught my eye:

Environmental health officers will work only between the hours of 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday.

Individuals caught smoking will not be prosecuted-it will be up to the management to enforce the law (although most of us knew this).

Owners will be notified in advance of spot checks (OMFG).

A publican who can prove he attempted - no matter how half-hearthedly - to comply with the legislation will not be prosecuted

So, to put it simply a pub owner would have know problem allowing their customer's smoking as they will be notified beforehand of a spot check.

Guy:Incognito

slightly diff Topic. If the smoking ban is properly enforced it will work, and tbh this
surprised me. Two weeks ago my aunt wen t to New York, shes a 40-60 a day smoker for the last 30 years, but when she was in New York she obviously wasnt able to smaoke but said she got used to it straght away and is now a supporter of the ban when it comes in. btw shes a regular pub goer aswll (every night bar mon & Tues) so its having a good affect on the smokers. They shud all be given a weeks holiday to New York in prparation. Bring on the ban, finally no more smelly smoke clothes after a night out

David-[RLD]-

Tasers are the only solution to enforcing this ban as long as FF are in power.

Health officer: "Hoi you, put that smoke out!"
Smoker: "No."
Health officer: "Right ho. *Pulls out taser*"
Smoker: "OH DEAR GOD!"

Maybe ninja-style officers would do better?

Guy:Incognito

im all for violence, especially since ill have a front row seat while people r being beaten or tasered around me, bring it on

Capt'n Midnight

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-
Tasers are the only solution to enforcing this ban as long as FF are in power.

Health officer: "Hoi you, put that smoke out!"
Smoker: "No."
Health officer: "Right ho. *Pulls out taser*"
Smoker: "OH DEAR GOD!"

Maybe ninja-style officers would do better?

That is so cruel - they might have a heart condition.

Simply dowse the person in ether - and leave it up to them if they want to continue smoking or not.

MeatProduct

Very humorus posts! I think for the ban to work properly it will need for people to be responsible. Since there's no chance of that happening I would fall back on the tazer option but give the tazers to non-smokers and microchip all the smokers so that the tazers will only function when it touches a microchipped smoker.

Nick

Guy:Incognito

Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
That is so cruel - they might have a heart condition.

.

well then they shudnt b smoking, see its all a vicious circle filled with smoke.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by Stekelly
well then they shudnt b smoking, see its all a vicious circle filled with smoke.

And to make the smoke-filled circle even more precarious it was probably the smoking that gave them the heart condition.

Nick

Seaneh

Reasons why it will work.

1) People like me will have no problem telling someone smoking near me in a bar exactly where he can put his ciggs.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by Seaneh
Reasons why it will work.

1) People like me will have no problem telling someone smoking near me in a bar exactly where he can put his ciggs.

Same with me but do we have a legal stance on that? Must the smoker leave or stop smoking if asked by a member of the public?

Nick

Guy:Incognito

im sure theres an anon phone line r summat where u can slip outside and discreetly make a call and get a swat team into the pub r summat.


Then they can get the smokers and theyre hatred filled smoke rings out of my lovely local, yay. They world is safe for another day

seamus

Originally posted by MeatProduct
Same with me but do we have a legal stance on that? Must the smoker leave or stop smoking if asked by a member of the public?

Nick

Same as you have a legal stance if you see someone illegally parked. You can report them.

The amount of people who have the balls to say "no" when a stranger asks something like that is really very low, and most customers would approach the publican/barman to remove the man or ask him to put out the cigarette anyway. The publican has a lot more to lose here, since if he refuses, he'll be reported & fined.

You'll still get one or two people who'll sneak smokes down the back of some dodgy, non-busy pub, but most popular bars now have bouncers continually walking around, and most of the clientele would have the respect to not smoke. It's similar to the bus situation. The majority of busses, would very rarely have to deal with someone smoking down the back (excluding the nitelinks). It's only those busses which ferry the less 'desirable' people about that have to contend with chronic ignorance of the law. I'd say the situation will be the same with pubs.

MeatProduct

Originally posted by seamus
I'd say the situation will be the same with pubs.

Well Seamus I hope you are right. I'm not a optimistic as you in that regard. I've seen enough ignorant smokers in my time. I find it the height of ignorance to smoke in public anyway if there is the chance that someone else will inhale your smoke.

Nick

The Beer Baron

2nd hand smoke is an irritant.
Cancer caused by 2nd hand smoking is a myth.
It may make non-smokers happier.
But you'll find no great decrease in cancer as a result of it.
Only a decrease in people going to pubs, and tourism, and common sense.

Oh, and an increase in irritable drunk people.

Victor

Originally posted by eirebhoy
Owners will be notified in advance of spot checks (OMFG).

I suspect this is that they will have to declare their presence when they arrive, not that they have to give two weeks notice.

jongore

Originally posted by The Beer Baron
2nd hand smoke is an irritant.
Cancer caused by 2nd hand smoking is a myth.

Er.. No. All the independent evidence (That not sponsered by the Fag industry) says that second hand smoke does cause cancer and heart disease the same as smoking does.

Guy:Incognito

Originally posted by jongore
Er.. No. All the independent evidence (That not sponsered by the Fag industry) says that second hand smoke does cause cancer and heart disease the same as smoking does.

damn right!!!

what counts as 2nd hand smoke? is it every bit of smoke that is produced from a smoker that isnt urself , ie a cigarrette left burning in an ashtray, r just what someone exhales. If it incleudes everything then if smoking causes cancer then u cant deny that 2nd hand smoke does 2 cos its the same smoke as the smoker gets. Anyway i seriously doubt that smoke that passes in and out of someone is suddenly harmless.

neXus9

2nd hand smoke is an irritant.
Cancer caused by 2nd hand smoking is a myth.
It may make non-smokers happier.
But you'll find no great decrease in cancer as a result of it.
Only a decrease in people going to pubs, and tourism, and common sense.

Oh, and an increase in irritable drunk people.

It has been scientifically proven that second hand smoke gives you cancer.

A lot of people don't go to pubs because of all that **** air that they have to breed in.

I hate going into pubs, and just seeing the mist of smoke, stuffing down my throat.

Hopefully this will be done properly, but I severly doubt it (maybe in clubs and pretty big ritzy pubs, but the smaller ones won't care less).

DapperGent

Originally posted by eirebhoy
Environmental health officers will work only between the hours of 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday

Personally I'm against the ban but this isn't true. A friend of mine is an EHO and will be doing checks at night.

NightStrike

As a non-smoker I'm looking forward to the ban. I've no major problem with people lighting up in a pub (although I do hate breathing in other people's smoke!) but it'll be nice to go to a restaurant and have a meal without it. Nothing worse than trying to eat and having some ignorant person beside you blowing smoke in your mouth.

I think a lot of smokers are for the ban in general and that those who are against it will get used to it. Its more a habit than anything else.

Plus it'll save people a fair bit of money in the long run I reckon. I just hope that cubicles of toilets etc. don't turn into the place to go for a smoke!

flogen

I just hope that cubicles of toilets etc. don't turn into the place to go for a smoke!

may as well go back to schoo!!!:d

Im for the ban, but Im not expecting that come mext monday the whole world is gonna change, if i see a large decrease in the amount of smoke in a pub within the next month, Id be happy, but Im not expecting it to stop 100% for about a year... its just gonna take time, and Im willing to wait if i can be guarenteed that everything is being done to enforce the new law... if I dont see an obvious enforcement by government AND landlords, then i wont have much faith in things being any different than they are now.

we'll just have to wait and see (im also looking forward to the disgusted looks of inexperienced smokers trying to dodge the law with herbal cigarettes, as they realise just how horrible they are)

Flogen

rubadub

the same article said health officials will not confront smokers as it is too dangerous, rather they will ask the barman to ask them to put it out. seems they are just asking for a reason why publicans cant enforce it. should be treated the exact same as somebody smoking a joint.

also it said herbal cigarettes were still legal! not sure if that is just the usual gutter press journalism. any smoke from plant matter is going to cause harm to your lungs, so why not ban all smoking?

because of this it said pubs can still leave out ashtrays.

i cant wait, finally i can smoke a joint in the pub and claim it is herbal cigarettes, and if they are freely letting people smoke tobacco what are they going to do? call the gardai???

Villain

Originally posted by eirebhoy
There is an article in the IOS about why the smoking ban is a complete shambles and these are the few points that caught my eye:

Environmental health officers will work only between the hours of 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday.

Individuals caught smoking will not be prosecuted-it will be up to the management to enforce the law (although most of us knew this).

Owners will be notified in advance of spot checks (OMFG).

A publican who can prove he attempted - no matter how half-hearthedly - to comply with the legislation will not be prosecuted

So, to put it simply a pub owner would have know problem allowing their customer's smoking as they will be notified beforehand of a spot check.

I think I pointed most of these problems out a long time ago in other threads.

I also said I supported the ban, but that the government were not going to enforce it correctly.

For once it would appear as if I was right:D