Sligo Pubs?! Whats happened!

gold4247

Was in Sligo afew weeks ago for the first time since finishing college in 2001. It used to have a decent pub scene, what happened?!!.
I was in McGarrigles and it was shockingly bland, not like it used to be. Was a great spot one time and now even has only a downstairs bar!.
No character, no buzz, no music.
Sad times.

emcc

gold4247 wrote: »

Was in Sligo afew weeks ago for the first time since finishing college in 2001. It used to have a decent pub scene, what happened?!!.
I was in McGarrigles and it was shockingly bland, not like it used to be. Was a great spot one time and now even has only a downstairs bar!.
No character, no buzz, no music.
Sad times.

The upstairs bar in McGarrigles is still open and doing gigs

il gatto

Expensive drink, expensive taxis and cheap off licences killed off Sligo's pub scene a couple of years ago. Week nights are dead apaart from the student trail. Saturday is the only big night, and even then you could find some pubs very quiet. Most places have no entertainment any more either. No musicians, bands or even D.J.s on week nights (including Fridays). If there's no reason to go to a pub, most people won't bother going out. Locals won't drink in the house and go straight to a club in a taxi like the students do.
The whole thing feels very transient nowadays. Never know when the next pub or club is going to be shut soon.

Culchie

The smoking ban killed the pub scene everywhere...... and I'm a non smoker.

il gatto

Culchie wrote: »

The smoking ban killed the pub scene everywhere...... and I'm a non smoker.

That's true, although I smoke. I remember being in a pub shortly afterwards and hearing the bar staff warning a punter for swearing. And another night one of the lads thought it would be funny to take snuff (as in using tobacco despite the smoking ban). He took a pinch and sneezed a few times. The woman behind the bar said "if your friend doesn't stop that, he can leave, the dirty b@stard". It was a busy, typical Irish pub, the sort of place where worse things happened all the time, and I just thought, wtf. The atmosphere really changed, and for the worse imo. You can't relax in a pub like you used to.

Culchie

il gatto wrote: »

That's true, although I smoke. I remember being in a pub shortly afterwards and hearing the bar staff warning a punter for swearing. And another night one of the lads thought it would be funny to take snuff (as in using tobacco despite the smoking ban). He took a pinch and sneezed a few times. The woman behind the bar said "if your friend doesn't stop that, he can leave, the dirty b@stard". It was a busy, typical Irish pub, the sort of place where worse things happened all the time, and I just thought, wtf. The atmosphere really changed, and for the worse imo. You can't relax in a pub like you used to.

All the goody two shoes brigade got their way and wouldn't take any compromised route (filters etc...) and then when they won... did they go to the pubs they just cleaned up .... nope ... onto their next project to clean up Ireland.
80% of pub goers were smokers ... trade decimated.

darealtulip

as a non smoker (and ex smoker) I'm very happy to have the choice to be in a pub with clean air. I hate smoke and feel very bad at how selfish I was as a smoker.

We could also say that the random alcohol check killed the pub culture. It might also be that people have less money. In rotterdam new year is the biggest night in the year and in 2000 they made it really special, they made the entrance prices really special too (€250 for a party). That resulted that a lot of people made a party at home and now they are still doing that. They killed their own business.

What I'm saying is that there are a lot of factors why people don't go to the pub and I don't think you can single one reason out. Things like this are normaly a combination of factors and the smoking ban is probaly one of them but not the only one.

Sweet Cheeks

darealtulip wrote: »

as a non smoker (and ex smoker) I'm very happy to have the choice to be in a pub with clean air. I hate smoke and feel very bad at how selfish I was as a smoker.

We could also say that the random alcohol check killed the pub culture. It might also be that people have less money. In rotterdam new year is the biggest night in the year and in 2000 they made it really special, they made the entrance prices really special too (€250 for a party). That resulted that a lot of people made a party at home and now they are still doing that. They killed their own business.

What I'm saying is that there are a lot of factors why people don't go to the pub and I don't think you can single one reason out. Things like this are normaly a combination of factors and the smoking ban is probaly one of them but not the only one.

you are right, its a combination of factors. Its the smoking, the price, the atomosphere and the current economic climate. Personally, I think its less to do with the smoking and more to do with the price.

il gatto

darealtulip wrote: »

as a non smoker (and ex smoker) I'm very happy to have the choice to be in a pub with clean air. I hate smoke and feel very bad at how selfish I was as a smoker.

We could also say that the random alcohol check killed the pub culture. It might also be that people have less money. In rotterdam new year is the biggest night in the year and in 2000 they made it really special, they made the entrance prices really special too (€250 for a party). That resulted that a lot of people made a party at home and now they are still doing that. They killed their own business.

What I'm saying is that there are a lot of factors why people don't go to the pub and I don't think you can single one reason out. Things like this are normaly a combination of factors and the smoking ban is probaly one of them but not the only one.

The point is thought, that there is no choice. For all those people who smoke, or who smoked with a drink, the only choice is to leave your table, and often your drink and stand on the footpath in the wind and rain. Even many non smokers I know reakon it ruined the atmosphere with people coming and going all night. If pubs were allowed to have the choice whether to be non smoking or not, or big pubs allowed to have a smoking and non smoking section, then there would've been choice. The whole thing was a handy distraction at the time, from the infected blood scandal, which the department of health got away with relatively lightly.

Since then prices have gone up and up, partially to recoup what was lost as a result of the smoking ban and increased alcohol testing for drivers. Taxis have also increased dramatically, for whatever reasons, but increased fuel prices probably being one factor.

zonEEE

Well see it like this, at xmas i think there was miller in every household because it was something like 7 pound for a crate up the north. While you go to a pub and spend 4.50-5.00 euro for 1 bottle. I'd say it has a lot to do with the price, the smoking ban and also the random garda check points.

darealtulip

il gatto wrote: »

The point is thought, that there is no choice. For all those people who smoke, or who smoked with a drink, the only choice is to leave your table, and often your drink and stand on the footpath in the wind and rain..

Before I had no choice then to sit in the smoke. If you have a smoking section and non smoking section everybody will sit in the smoking section because the smoker won't sit any where else so the non smoker is forced to sit there with him/her. When I was a smoker I automaticly went for the smoking erea even if I had non smoker with me. Smoking makes you selfish in that way and I only found that out after I quit.

People choose to smoke, I didn't make them.

Don't I have the right to go to a pub/restaurant without breathing in the smoke of somebody else?

I had no choice before and you still have the choice to go outside and smoke.

ps. if taxi's put their prices up with the high fuel prices they should come down now. The prices for alcohol went up because the taxes went up I thought?

DenMan

Jeez....we'd a great time last night. Shenanigans was rockin.There aren't a lot of options to be fair. Heard Hargadons is supposed to be a good spot.

darealtulip

DenMan wrote: »

Jeez....we'd a great time last night. Shenanigans was rockin.There aren't a lot of options to be fair. Heard Hargadons is supposed to be a good spot.

Hargadons is a good spot for sure, I like it.

il gatto

darealtulip wrote: »

Before I had no choice then to sit in the smoke. If you have a smoking section and non smoking section everybody will sit in the smoking section because the smoker won't sit any where else so the non smoker is forced to sit there with him/her. When I was a smoker I automaticly went for the smoking erea even if I had non smoker with me. Smoking makes you selfish in that way and I only found that out after I quit.

People choose to smoke, I didn't make them.

Don't I have the right to go to a pub/restaurant without breathing in the smoke of somebody else?

I had no choice before and you still have the choice to go outside and smoke.

ps. if taxi's put their prices up with the high fuel prices they should come down now. The prices for alcohol went up because the taxes went up I thought?

Choice is not enforcing a blanket rule on everybody. If choice is allowed (as in a non smoking and smoking section/pub) and the non smoker follows the smoker to the smoking section even though they hate smoke, that is purely a matter of one's own dynamic with your company.

Smoking is one of many vices people can have, and one with the unfortunate effect of affecting others. So rather than give people a choice, smokers are put out like the rubbish, often on the footpath. That's not a choice. It's self ejection from a premises based on the fear of a €3000 fine. People get off with smaller fines for assault.

Choice is the key in this. There was no outcry for the ban. It was sprung on the public at a time the department of health was taking a battering for infecting hundreds of women with hepatitus by using sub standard blood products. The smoking ban swept all before it and the media had a field day, ignoring the departments shoddy treatment of the aforementioned women.
Smokers would not have objected to pubs providing non smoking sections, or indeed certain pubs making the decision to be completely non smoking. It wouldn't have mattered. There would've been a choice. Something people are no longer afforded in this matter.

darealtulip

il gatto wrote: »

Choice is not enforcing a blanket rule on everybody. If choice is allowed (as in a non smoking and smoking section/pub) and the non smoker follows the smoker to the smoking section even though they hate smoke, that is purely a matter of one's own dynamic with your company.

Smoking is one of many vices people can have, and one with the unfortunate effect of affecting others. So rather than give people a choice, smokers are put out like the rubbish, often on the footpath. That's not a choice. It's self ejection from a premises based on the fear of a €3000 fine. People get off with smaller fines for assault.

Choice is the key in this. There was no outcry for the ban. It was sprung on the public at a time the department of health was taking a battering for infecting hundreds of women with hepatitus by using sub standard blood products. The smoking ban swept all before it and the media had a field day, ignoring the departments shoddy treatment of the aforementioned women.
Smokers would not have objected to pubs providing non smoking sections, or indeed certain pubs making the decision to be completely non smoking. It wouldn't have mattered. There would've been a choice. Something people are no longer afforded in this matter.

People start smoking them self, I did. I choose to quit. You still have the choice to go to the pub. You choose to smoke out side, nobody says you have to smoke.

Most pubs I go to have an excellent erea outside icluding a telly and heating (Belfry for 1), you could choose to go to these pubs, by doing so you will signal other pubs to follow.

It has been tried in lots of places (country's like Holland) to make smoking sections and smoker will always dominated the non smokers. A ban is the only way to change a mentality.

Now I don't know anything about the blood issue (that was before I was here) and you might be absolutly right.

I for one are very happy I can go to a pub without any smoke. I think it's unfair to say it is the only reason for the people to go to the pub less. I think there a more factors then that. Besides that I hope this will bring a mentality change so my childern won't start to smoke, but I that's probaly not gonna happen, but hey a person can dream!

I do understand you lost a freedom but I gained a freedom I never had.

il gatto

darealtulip wrote: »

People start smoking them self, I did. I choose to quit. You still have the choice to go to the pub. You choose to smoke out side, nobody says you have to smoke.

Most pubs I go to have an excellent erea outside icluding a telly and heating (Belfry for 1), you could choose to go to these pubs, by doing so you will signal other pubs to follow.

It has been tried in lots of places (country's like Holland) to make smoking sections and smoker will always dominated the non smokers. A ban is the only way to change a mentality.

Now I don't know anything about the blood issue (that was before I was here) and you might be absolutly right.

I for one are very happy I can go to a pub without any smoke. I think it's unfair to say it is the only reason for the people to go to the pub less. I think there a more factors then that. Besides that I hope this will bring a mentality change so my childern won't start to smoke, but I that's probaly not gonna happen, but hey a person can dream!

I do understand you lost a freedom but I gained a freedom I never had.

For starters, I didn't claim it was the only reason. In fact my first post didn't even mention it.

Nobody says I have to smoke, but then nobody says anyone has to drink, and more to the point, nobody ever made a non smoker go to a smokey pub. It was their choice.

Yes, I can leave and smoke, as I can leave a library and shout, leave the country and buy an assault rifle. The only freedom afforded a smoker is that of leaving, the same one a non smoker had before.

A ban is never the way to change a mentality. Education is. A ban is the action of a nanny state and to eradicate through fear, not to create a different mindset.

You may be happy to go to a pub with no smoke, but I, and hundreds of thousands of others are not. Children shouldn't be in pubs after nine p.m. and I fail to see what banning smoking in an enviroment existing for adults to socialise in, will do to affect a future teenager's expirimentation with tobacco.

I get to a pub at most about half a dozen times a year. Twice so far this year. Work and family commitments dictate that I only have rare occassions to go out. When I do, it's usually for 4-6 pints max. Often less. On the rare occassion I do have a drink, I like to have a cigarette, yet to do this, I have to stand outside, often in poor weather. I choose not to go to the Belfry etc. as loud chart music repulses me, and having gone out to chat and catch up with friends I see only a few times a year, a loud superpub is of no use to me.

If the government wanted to do something for public health, why didn't they restrict alcohol abuse? Breath test revellers and anyone over a limit of 5 or 6 pints, prosecute. Or a voucher system, rationing people to a maximum level of consumption a day. It's addictive, does more harm to families, causes untold social disorder and has serious health implications. I see it's affects constantly, and yet as long as someone can stagger on the footpath, they're perfectly within the law. They may walk out in front of a car, choke on their own vomit or fall in the river, but that's fine apparently. If draconian restrictions of personal rights are the order of the day, it's at least as plausible as the smoking ban.

darealtulip

il gatto wrote: »

For starters, I didn't claim it was the only reason. In fact my first post didn't even mention it.

Nobody says I have to smoke, but then nobody says anyone has to drink, and more to the point, nobody ever made a non smoker go to a smokey pub. It was their choice.

Yes, I can leave and smoke, as I can leave a library and shout, leave the country and buy an assault rifle. The only freedom afforded a smoker is that of leaving, the same one a non smoker had before.

A ban is never the way to change a mentality. Education is. A ban is the action of a nanny state and to eradicate through fear, not to create a different mindset.

You may be happy to go to a pub with no smoke, but I, and hundreds of thousands of others are not. Children shouldn't be in pubs after nine p.m. and I fail to see what banning smoking in an enviroment existing for adults to socialise in, will do to affect a future teenager's expirimentation with tobacco.

I get to a pub at most about half a dozen times a year. Twice so far this year. Work and family commitments dictate that I only have rare occassions to go out. When I do, it's usually for 4-6 pints max. Often less. On the rare occassion I do have a drink, I like to have a cigarette, yet to do this, I have to stand outside, often in poor weather. I choose not to go to the Belfry etc. as loud chart music repulses me, and having gone out to chat and catch up with friends I see only a few times a year, a loud superpub is of no use to me.

If the government wanted to do something for public health, why didn't they restrict alcohol abuse? Breath test revellers and anyone over a limit of 5 or 6 pints, prosecute. Or a voucher system, rationing people to a maximum level of consumption a day. It's addictive, does more harm to families, causes untold social disorder and has serious health implications. I see it's affects constantly, and yet as long as someone can stagger on the footpath, they're perfectly within the law. They may walk out in front of a car, choke on their own vomit or fall in the river, but that's fine apparently. If draconian restrictions of personal rights are the order of the day, it's at least as plausible as the smoking ban.

First I mentioned the other factors because I that was what this post was about not as a sole reaction on your post.

You have more choices as a smoker then I had as a non smoker.

You have the choice not to smoke for the time that your in the pub.
You have the choice to go to a pub with good facility's for smokers.

That's 2 choices. I had only 1 and that was to go to a pub or not.

How is the choice from a smoker worth more then my choices? Why is your addiction worth more then my freedom?

I'm not interested in the public health issue (I just like to be in a smoke free pub) but your absolutly right that acohol is worse then any thing else and so are a lot of things.

And was the smoking ban not backed by 75% of the population accoording to pols?

You make me smoke when you smoke. I don't make you drink when I drink. I'm not a health freak, far from. I think that your freedom should end where it invades somebody elses.

When my childeren are 16 they are aloud in the pub and as you said they are allowed before 21.00 so what is your point in that? The chance of mentality will take years and I hope this change will be there before my childern will be 16, but I probaly live in fain. But hey as I said I can hope!

And most people I know, and they are smokers, understand the ban and even smoke outside their own house for the sake of their childeren.

il gatto

darealtulip wrote: »

First I mentioned the other factors because I that was what this post was about not as a sole reaction on your post.

You have more choices as a smoker then I had as a non smoker.

You have the choice not to smoke for the time that your in the pub.
You have the choice to go to a pub with good facility's for smokers.

That's 2 choices. I had only 1 and that was to go to a pub or not.

How is the choice from a smoker worth more then my choices? Why is your addiction worth more then my freedom?

I'm not interested in the public health issue (I just like to be in a smoke free pub) but your absolutly right that acohol is worse then any thing else and so are a lot of things.

And was the smoking ban not backed by 75% of the population accoording to pols?

You make me smoke when you smoke. I don't make you drink when I drink. I'm not a health freak, far from. I think that your freedom should end where it invades somebody elses.

When my childeren are 16 they are aloud in the pub and as you said they are allowed before 21.00 so what is your point in that? The chance of mentality will take years and I hope this change will be there before my childern will be 16, but I probaly live in fain. But hey as I said I can hope!

And most people I know, and they are smokers, understand the ban and even smoke outside their own house for the sake of their childeren.

You quoted my post and then said "I think it's unfair to say it is the only reason for the people to go to the pub less".

As I see it, the choices are pretty much the same. A smoker can accept there is no smoking, or leave. A non smoker's choice was to accept there was smoking, or leave.

Nobody said a smoker's choice was worth more than yours. But conversely, your choices are worth nothing more than a smokers. If we're going to start bringing up terms like freedom, surely freedom is for all, and therefore which pubs can people smoke in? None. Because there's no freedom in a ban.

The polls were highly varied in their results. I never heard a figure like that, I don't know. Even if it was as high as that, does that mean if we extrapolate that figure, 1 million Irish people want to smoke in pubs.

"You make me smoke when you smoke. I don't make you drink when I drink. I'm not a health freak, far from. I think that your freedom should end where it invades somebody elses". That's not strictly true though, as other people's drinking often impinges on others. I've had people jump in front of my car. I've been punched in the hear in a fast food. I've had to get out of my car to pull wheelie bins and traffic cones off the road. My missus has had drunks sit into her passenger seat at night. My friends had their shop window broken 4 times in a year and a half. I have a close friend who's father abused alcohol, and they had a terrible childhood. The freedom to drink has far reaching effects.

My point in saying children aren't allowed in pubs afetr 9 is that it is recognised as an adult enviroment. It is not a school or a cinema or whatever. It is a place where adults go to relax and socialise, and why should I, as an adult, change my behaviour in the one place designed specifically for adults, for people who shouldn't even be there? My mentality is just fine, and my opinion as valid as anyone elses. Most smokers I know also don't smoke in their house because of their children, wife/husband, but they still don't understand the ban in pubs, or support it. The ban even extends to truck drivers, because it is a place of work. It's the work of a nanny state and nothing more.

darealtulip

il gatto wrote: »

You quoted my post and then said "I think it's unfair to say it is the only reason for the people to go to the pub less".

I saw how I wrote it and I understand you saw it that way, it was not ment to be and I should have wrote that diferent.

darealtulip

I don't agree that you have less choice then me before. You can go to a pub like the belfry where there is a really nice heated erea for smokers. I had no pub to go to if I wanted a smoke free pub.

so that's again 1 more choice then me and again you can go out side and smoke and come back in again 1 more choice then I had. You can choose not to smoke during the time you'r drinking, again 1 more choice against my choice of going to the pub or not. That's 3:1.

About the drinking, fair point, and in my case you're probaly right but I know people that can drink and not annoy anyone, smoke will always reach a non smoker in a confined space, so not entirely the same but I get your point.

You mis understood (or rather I did not clearly explain) the point I tried to make about my childeren. I'll try and explain better; No matter what age my childeren are I would be happy if they never start to smoke, I did and I'm happy I quit. I hope that the mentality change, I hope to come from the ban in 5 or 10 years, stops them even starting. I know we can argue if that will happen and only time will tell. If all your friends smoke down the pub you're more likely to start your self, I know because I did.

The ban gave me more freedom, so it does give freedom 'only' not to you but you are still left with more choice then I had.

darealtulip

il gatto wrote: »

The ban even extends to truck drivers, because it is a place of work. It's the work of a nanny state and nothing more.

And I agree that is plain stupid, like they want the ban in Holland even in the cofee shops!

As you can see I can't do the quote per sentence yet.