Banning smoking in beer gardens

trotsky said:
As a publican, I agree that we should not be smoking around children. I also think smoking around people who are eating is not great. I am hoping the smoking ban will not be enforced in beer gardens where there is no food served and where children are not allowed in the pub.
Let’s make wet led pubs adult spaces only.
Click to expand...

I don’t think I should be charged 6 quid for a pint of fizzy mass produced piss water but there we go, life’s a crap chute innit.
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
“Nanny state”

“Mainstream media”

The latest catch phrase is “two tier” in the paranoid lexicon.

You don’t hear “political correctness gone mad” much anymore but I guess that’s been reduced to “woke” these days.
Click to expand...

Can smokers be woke?
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
“Nanny state”

“Mainstream media”

The latest catch phrase is “two tier” in the paranoid lexicon.

You don’t hear “political correctness gone mad” much anymore but I guess that’s been reduced to “woke” these days.
Click to expand...
What would you prefer people called it? If not nanny state?
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
What would you prefer people called it? If not nanny state?
Click to expand...


People are only just starting to get annoyed with terms like this even though they have been around absolutely ages, demeaning their description is a silencing tactic.

The term "nanny state" originated in Britain and was first used in 1965 by Conservative Member of Parliament Iain Macleod. The term is used to describe a government that is seen as overprotective, interfering, or authoritarian, and is often compared to the role of a nanny in child rearing.
Click to expand...
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
Only if you smoke rollies while reading the socialist worker
Click to expand...
Of course

What about if they are drinking alcopops?

Anyway, back on topic, we don't need any police or landlords to police our glorious leaders new smoking ban, just have fire extinguishers handy and the more law abiding of society will gladly do it for him, quick blast in the face, job sorted.
 
For the record I’m just wumming on this thread.

I actually couldn’t give a toss either way about banning smoking in beer gardens.

Smoking is disgusting and I’m glad it’s banned indoors as it fucking stinks and smokers are a load of tramps but outdoors it doesn’t really bother me.

Funny how people are up in arms about it though. Just give up, save yourself a fortune and you won’t smell like Frank Gallagher’s arsehole.

Or not. Just don’t blow your fumes in my direction or else you’re getting glassed in the throat.
 
Winchester said:
I don't remember drinking becoming connected to Associated breathing problems
Click to expand...

That isn't what I said although I don't remember smoking being associated with being glassed or attacked in a pub.

What I said quite clearly is that in a pub designated as a smoking pub you'll still get some misfit walking up to a group of smokers and start coughing, if a smoker found a corner in cherfuckinobyl you'd find someone with their hands over their mouths.

It's a smoking pub
Don't care
Can't you go to a non smoking pub
Want all the pubs


Think of the fucking children!
 
It was 2005, these exact same discussions were being had, almost word for word (minus the vaping sideshow).

Those that resist any kind of change were bleating on about freedom of speech, the right to destroy your own health, nanny states, whataboutery, obesity, alcohol, and how an upcoming smoking ban would destroy the pubs and hospitality as an industry.

Having seen similar bans successful applied to offices, hospitals, flights, trains, etc. With the same discussions each decade.

Pubs thrived, health improved, staff are happier, and there has been a reduction in the percentage of the population smoking. Just like they did with every other ban.

It is 2024. Are people STILL that fucking antiquated? It is smoking ffs, there is no good to it. There never was.

I am all for it. If it is a step closer incrementally getting rid of smoking altogether, fucking amazing. If not, it will make outdoor spaces far more pleasant, safe and desirable in the meantim. Might give some smokers the encouragement they need to quit altogether, might give others something to complain about, eventually they will settle into smoking less by default. The troglodytes will bemoan and pound their chests from the side, but whatever, society has always had those layers of selfishness and always will. If it comes in, it will be great, and in a decade we can add it to the list of smoking bans that people were wrong about.
 
mexico1970 said:
I do mate although (Hold onto your hat) I am now contactless mainly because I might fancy some chips at the Etihad.
Click to expand...

I heard they’re banning chips as it could influence kids into becoming obese

The nanny state is replacing them for carrot sticks next season and if you want chips you have to get them from an unbranded special counter and eat them in the south stand toilets with all the other chip addicts, breathing your filthy chip breath all over the children
 
Johnny Mars Bar said:
I heard they’re banning chips as it could influence kids into becoming obese

The nanny state is replacing them for carrot sticks next season and if you want chips you have to get them from an unbranded special counter and eat them in the south stand toilets with all the other chip addicts, breathing your filthy chip breath all over the children
Click to expand...


I support that ban, nobody likes fat kids.
 
mexico1970 said:
People are only just starting to get annoyed with terms like this even though they have been around absolutely ages, demeaning their description is a silencing tactic.
Click to expand...

Think we all knew what the term meant, thanks. It was the knee-jerk application that got the reaction. It's not like they proposed bubblewrapping pillow corners. You would be surprised at how many people would welcome this.
 
Coatigan said:
It was 2005, these exact same discussions were being had, almost word for word (minus the vaping sideshow).

Those that resist any kind of change were bleating on about freedom of speech, the right to destroy your own health, nanny states, whataboutery, obesity, alcohol, and how an upcoming smoking ban would destroy the pubs and hospitality as an industry.

Having seen similar bans successful applied to offices, hospitals, flights, trains, etc. With the same discussions each decade.

Pubs thrived, health improved, staff are happier, and there has been a reduction in the percentage of the population smoking. Just like they did with every other ban.

It is 2024. Are people STILL that fucking antiquated? It is smoking ffs, there is no good to it. There never was.

I am all for it. If it is a step closer incrementally getting rid of smoking altogether, fucking amazing. If not, it will make outdoor spaces far more pleasant, safe and desirable in the meantim. Might give some smokers the encouragement they need to quit altogether, might give others something to complain about, eventually they will settle into smoking less by default. The troglodytes will bemoan and pound their chests from the side, but whatever, society has always had those layers of selfishness and always will. If it comes in, it will be great, and in a decade we can add it to the list of smoking bans that people were wrong about.
Click to expand...
Pubs thrived?? Lol. I guess you just don't go in many pubs. The UK lost thousands of pubs after the smoking ban was introduced.
 
Coatigan said:
Think we all knew what the term meant, thanks. It was the knee-jerk application that got the reaction. It's not like they proposed bubblewrapping pillow corners. You would be surprised at how many people would welcome this.
Click to expand...


To be fair there is a whole lot of difference between knowing what it means and accepting it's a real thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top