|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cj1976
Joined: 26 Oct 2005
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:16 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Smoking is a horrible habit and anything that might make me smoke less can only be a good thing. After the smoking ban, they should tackle another of my pet peeves - children in bars and kids running around in restaurants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tiger fancini
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Location: Testicles for Eyes
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drydell wrote: |
| smokers will damn well smoke anywhere they can get away with it as long as it's not made illegal.. |
Smokers usually smoke in places where there are no 'no smoking' signs.
| drydell wrote: |
| think about when it was legal on planes and in subways or basically anywhere in the past |
Yes, and now all of these places sport 'no smoking' signs and guess what? Smokers generally don't smoke there!
If restaurants, bars and nightclubs all choose to display 'no smoking' signs, then I'm guessing that smokers won't smoke there either. That seems to be the case in the UK these days. If the Korean equivalents follow suit, then as a smoker I'll have no problem obeying those rules.
But as long as cigarettes are made available to the public, then the government has to provide some places for smokers to smoke. Designating parks, mountains and busy pedestrianized streets as non smoking is fair enough. But side streets, alleyways and areas behind buildings are suitable to smoke in IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tiger fancini wrote: |
| Smokers usually smoke in places where there are no 'no smoking' signs. |
That's hilarious that you believe others will believe this after being in South Korea for even one day.
| drydell wrote: |
| Yes, and now all of these places sport 'no smoking' signs and guess what? Smokers generally don't smoke there! |
Yeah, and it took the addition of smoke detectors in the lavatories and strict enforcement of severe fines to get smokers to behave like responsible adults in airplanes.
| Quote: |
| If restaurants, bars and nightclubs all choose to display 'no smoking' signs, then I'm guessing that smokers won't smoke there either. |
Oh, yeah, right. That's been working wonders in the public schools in South Korea, hasn't it? I mean, you never see groups of people smoking on the public school grounds nor inside the public school buildings, do you? 
| Quote: |
| That seems to be the case in the UK these days. |
How did the UK manage to get people to obey the "no smoking" signs?
| Quote: |
| If the Korean equivalents follow suit, then as a smoker I'll have no problem obeying those rules. |
Glad to hear it. Too bad it's quite obviously the case that smokers in South Korea consider obeying the no smoking legislation to be a herculean, nay, nigh on impossible task.
| Quote: |
| But as long as cigarettes are made available to the public, then the government has to provide some places for smokers to smoke. |
Actually, no, the government does not have to do such a thing. The smoker can happily abuse his lungs and body and those of people around him in his home.
| Quote: |
| Designating parks, mountains and busy pedestrianized streets as non smoking is fair enough. But side streets, alleyways and areas behind buildings are suitable to smoke in IMO. |
Side streets, alleyways, and areas behind buildings aren't public venues? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actionjackson
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drydell wrote: |
| Yes, and now all of these places sport 'no smoking' signs and guess what? Smokers generally don't smoke there! |
You mean like the bathrooms and stairwells that have no smoking stickers plastered all over them, where people typically go to smoke? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eddy24
Joined: 13 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm in two minds about anti-smoking laws. I'm speaking as a someone who is really not a heavy smoker but enjoys smoking when i'm drinking. On some level I feel that the owner of a private bar should be allowed to let his customers smoke on their premises if they wish to do so. However, I also feel sympathy for non-smokers because - before the passage of these laws - there were next to no bars that didn't allow smoking. It's only fair they should have a place to go they can eat or drink without worrying about stinky second hand smoke.
I visited a Gold Bar and they were enforcing the rules. I say enforce... they seemed to be allowing smokers to go to the toilets to smoke. However, the other bars which I visited were not enforcing the rules at all.
I think it would make more sense if they did have some bars which were allowed to have smoking sections. Smokers aren't going to disappear any time soon so I think there should at least be some establishments were they can smoke on the premises. But there would also have to be a number of non-smoking places so that non-smokers have the choice.
This article does state that restaurants are allowed to operate smoking rooms in separate areas, although it doesn't make clear for how long...
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2012/12/10/2012121000841.html
Banning smoking in public places is somewhat an attack on freedom. And I'm not referring to the smokers as such but to the owners of the businesses. If they want to allow people to smoke on their premises, then shouldn't it really be up to them? This is why I think there should be smoking licenses, where the owners of businesses would have to pay extra to allow for smoking on their premises. That way, I think that you'd still have some places to smoke but also plenty of places where non-smokers can smoke too.
It will also hurt business somewhat, as I think smokers - of which there are many in korea - are going to gravitate towards establishments which are more suited to smokers. Unfortunately, some places will find it easier to adjust to the new laws than others.
However, I would strongly disagree with banning smoking in certain places outside. It's arguable that it's fair to ban in crowded places or parks, places like that. But there can get to the point when it really is an attack on someone's freedoms to be able to do what they want with their own body. Non-smokers often make the point about second hand smoke, but this argument is somewhat disingenuous in relation to smoking outdoors. Even in crowded places second hand smoke is not really going to have any effect health-wise when outdoors. Think of all the other pollutants you probably breath every day, especially in Seoul. the amount of second hand smoke from cigarettes you would encounter in a day is tiny in comparison.
Here's a thought... What's gonna happen to all the hookah bars???
Last edited by Eddy24 on Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:15 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eddy24
Joined: 13 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| actionjackson wrote: |
| drydell wrote: |
| Yes, and now all of these places sport 'no smoking' signs and guess what? Smokers generally don't smoke there! |
You mean like the bathrooms and stairwells that have no smoking stickers plastered all over them, where people typically go to smoke? |
As a smoker, I would never do that. Back home in the UK, people almost never do that. It is more of a problem in Korea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I still feel like having smoking establishment licenses that (certain) businesses can purchase would work out better for everyone. Business owners pass the costs on to the customers. Smokers are happy they can smoke freely in businesses with the license and pay a bit more for the privilege. Businesses that don't want the license are not required to get it and are thus default no-smoking. |
Sorry sir, an idea like that requires too much common sense to work.
| Quote: |
| Do you think I'm a willing customer when some a-hole lights a cigarette in a restaurant next to my kid? |
Yes you are. The second you choose to enter a restaurant that permits smoking, you are a willing customer. If you don't like it, don't enter.
What's next complaining that an R-rated movie has violence and nudity that you bought a ticket for and brought your kid into?
| Quote: |
Do you think that the restaurant employees are happy about being exposed to second-hand smoke?
|
As a former food-service worker, our industry has one of the highest rates of smoking. Mostly because of the stress of dealing with uptight, pompous, entitled jerks who like to boss other people around.
After work we love to go to a bar and light up and relax.
Instead of speaking for us, why don't you listen to us and let us speak for ourselves.
| Quote: |
| but I feel like they should go outside to do it. Second hand smoke has a negative impact on people's health not to mention many people find it disgusting. Wanna have a dart, no worries, take it ouside. |
Then the outdoor bans will follow. People will complain about walking through clouds of smoke on the sidewalk.
A large number of anti-smoking advocates will not be satisfied until the product is totally banned. They cannot be reasoned with.
| Quote: |
| Here's a thought... What's gonna happen to all the hookah bars??? |
Likely casualties in the puritanical crusade against smoking.
Did you know that smoking has been banned in such places as private clubs, like Elk's Lodges and even VFW/American Legion halls. That's right, veterans who sacrificed limbs for their country and are in their dying years aren't allowed to enjoy a smoke in the one place where they can find comrades and get treated with respect. Why? Because someone who has never entered that building in their life feels they have the right to dictate to them whether or not they should be allowed to smoke.
And again to make the Prohibition case. Do you think Prohibition and/or the Drug War started all of a sudden? No. There were gradual increases in laws and movements to ban the activity that eventually culminated into Prohibition.
Yet anti-smoking advocates, the supposed rational ones, want to repeat this pattern with tobacco. It failed with alcohol. It is failing with narcotics. What's the definition of insanity? Engaging in the same behavior over and over again and expecting a different result. MY question to anti-smoking advocates is this- Why do you expect the result to be any different? What magical evolution in human beings has occurred to prevent the same problems from occurring once again?
What would be the sensible thing? A ban on smoking, or as another poster suggested, a creation of licenses for businesses to permit smoking? Which seems like the sensible option? Which allows greater freedom? Which protects the right to choose more strongly?
It's like the choice between banning lottery pools and being shocked, shocked when a numbers racket with connections to crime starts up and having to spend more on cops and prison. OR licensing a state lottery and directing the profits towards education.
With such an alternative, how can any rational person support a ban? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tiger fancini
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Location: Testicles for Eyes
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| CentralCali wrote: |
| tiger fancini wrote: |
| Yes, and now all of these places sport 'no smoking' signs and guess what? Smokers generally don't smoke there! |
Yeah, and it took the addition of smoke detectors in the lavatories and strict enforcement of severe fines to get smokers to behave like responsible adults in airplanes. |
Yes, but it worked. Smokers now don't smoke on airplanes.
| Quote: |
| If restaurants, bars and nightclubs all choose to display 'no smoking' signs, then I'm guessing that smokers won't smoke there either. |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| Oh, yeah, right. That's been working wonders in the public schools in South Korea, hasn't it? I mean, you never see groups of people smoking on the public school grounds nor inside the public school buildings, do you? |
Smokers seem to be able to cope with not smoking in cinemas, on public transport, in family restaurants (VIPS, TGI, Outback etc) and Starbucks. Indoor shopping malls are usually smoke-free, as are most offices. These are all places in which smokers used to be able to smoke. I'm also curious about why public schools are different. Perhaps the public schools need to consult with the places I mentioned about enforcement.
| Quote: |
| That seems to be the case in the UK these days. |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| How did the UK manage to get people to obey the "no smoking" signs? |
As far as I know, they made a law. People followed.
| Quote: |
| If the Korean equivalents follow suit, then as a smoker I'll have no problem obeying those rules. |
| CentralCali wrote: |
| Glad to hear it. Too bad it's quite obviously the case that smokers in South Korea consider obeying the no smoking legislation to be a herculean, nay, nigh on impossible task. |
They manage perfectly well in the places I previously mentioned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CentralCali
Joined: 17 May 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 5:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| But they don't manage well at all: in subway stations, sometimes on the subway car, in public schools, on train station platforms, and plenty of other places where the law bans smoking. Oh, complaining to the station master about people smoking in the subway station is all kinds of useless when the station master is walking around the subway station smoking! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicwr2002
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:25 am Post subject: h |
|
|
| It is really simple for the smokers to understand. You can't control where your smoke travels. Second hand smokes is more harmful to never smokers than it is to smokers since the never smokers are receiving the full unfiltered end. A lot of people want to have a drink without having to smell smoke and having to wash their clothes because of the smoke smell in their clothes. For one, you can control whether or not you drive home drunk. Second, unless you are an irresponsible person, then you shouldn't drive drunk anyways. Being drunk doesn't mean you do things you wouldn't normally do. Third, if you want to get down to brass tax then it would be easier to monitor or stop someone who is drunk from leaving the establishment or calling a taxi for them to take home. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 6:59 am Post subject: Re: h |
|
|
| nicwr2002 wrote: |
| Being drunk doesn't mean you do things you wouldn't normally do. |
I think you just lost all credibility with that sentence. By definition being drunk means you don't do things you normally do, as you are impaired, as in "drunk".
| Quote: |
| t is really simple for the smokers to understand. You can't control where your smoke travels. |
It is really simple for anti-smokers to understand. You CAN control what businesses you patronize. If they allow people to smoke, you simply don't enter.
WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT THAT IDEA?
You don't have a right to whatever you please in a restaurant. You have a right to whatever services the establishment offers, provided you have the means to pay them.
| Quote: |
| A lot of people want to have a drink without having to smell smoke and having to wash their clothes because of the smoke smell in their clothes. |
Fine, open up a non-smoking bar and cater to the legions of non-smokers.
WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT THAT IDEA?
If I want to go to an Indian restaurant, do I demand that an Italian restaurant owner change his menu and try to pass laws mandating certain foods be available?
If enough people want a bar that caters to a certain client�le, why can't non-smokers do what the rest of humanity does and open up their own bar? The Irish do it. The Mexicans do it. Fans of jazz/country/hip-hop/classic rock do it. Young people who like to dance do it. Old people who like to dance do it. Rich people do it. Poor people do it.
Why can't you, the anti-smoking community do it? Are you really that helpless and destitute? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:46 pm Post subject: Re: h |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
Fine, open up a non-smoking bar and cater to the legions of non-smokers.
WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT THAT IDEA? |
But if they did things that way, however would the nonsmokers get to shove their opinions down the throats of those evil smokers? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Do you think I'm a willing customer when some a-hole lights a cigarette in a restaurant next to my kid? |
Yes you are. The second you choose to enter a restaurant that permits smoking, you are a willing customer. If you don't like it, don't enter.
What's next complaining that an R-rated movie has violence and nudity that you bought a ticket for and brought your kid into?
|
All restaurants allow smoking right now, which means that non-smokers have to stay at home because smokers can be dicks? Disingenuous argument, buddy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Do you think I'm a willing customer when some a-hole lights a cigarette in a restaurant next to my kid? |
Yes you are. The second you choose to enter a restaurant that permits smoking, you are a willing customer. If you don't like it, don't enter.
What's next complaining that an R-rated movie has violence and nudity that you bought a ticket for and brought your kid into?
|
All restaurants allow smoking right now, which means that non-smokers have to stay at home because smokers can be dicks? Disingenuous argument, buddy. |
Why is everything all-or-none with you? You keep skipping over the suggestion that some places be allowed to appeal to smokers and some places be allowed to ban it to appeal to nonsmokers. Why is that not a suitable solution? Is it because you're too lazy or not creative enough to convey your preference to business owners? Or do you just get off on forcing people to do things your way?
Disingenuous indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 12ax7 wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Do you think I'm a willing customer when some a-hole lights a cigarette in a restaurant next to my kid? |
Yes you are. The second you choose to enter a restaurant that permits smoking, you are a willing customer. If you don't like it, don't enter.
What's next complaining that an R-rated movie has violence and nudity that you bought a ticket for and brought your kid into?
|
All restaurants allow smoking right now, which means that non-smokers have to stay at home because smokers can be dicks? Disingenuous argument, buddy. |
Many restaurants allow smoking right now, some don't. Go eat at a non-smoking restaurant.
Again, if you don't like Italian food and want Indian food instead, you don't walk into an Italian restaurant and claim ethnic discrimination and demand that they change to make YOU happy. You go to an Indian restaurant. If there isn't one, well then you are out of luck. Guess you have to cook at home.
Entertainment is a contracted service, not an absolute right. Restaurants and bars and their staff do not exist to make you happy. They offer services and goods in exchange for cash.
Eating a meal is your responsibility. Dining at a restaurant is not a right. The restaurant does not exist to cater to your every whim. If you don't like the meal or the atmosphere you have ZERO right to dictate change.
What's next? Demanding a right to Michelin 3 Star quality food even though you can only afford McDonald's prices?
Seriously, these aren't government buildings or banks. These are restaurants. Places of entertainment. Luxuries, not necessities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
