|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What kind of smoking provision are you for? |
| Complete smoking ban in any public place with bans in private clubs and bars also |
|
42% |
[ 21 ] |
| Ban in public places but bars with 'smoking licenses' allowed |
|
20% |
[ 10 ] |
| Bars etc with smoking and non smoking sections |
|
22% |
[ 11 ] |
| I'll smoke wherever the heck I like. |
|
16% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 50 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 1:36 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| ^^ do you see no limits to the owner's rights (of restriction)? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LDJS
Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| ^^ do you see no limits to the owner's rights (of restriction)? |
Management has the right to refuse service. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
| ^^ do you see no limits to the owner's rights (of restriction)? |
Not when it involves an activity that people voluntarily choose to expose themselves to. This isn't like food safety or anything like that.
Restaurants and Bars are known to permit smoking. People still choose to enter.
Why should this be banned?
The activity is known to take place. People can choose to enter or not.
If they don't like it they can eat somewhere else.
This is like banning swearing on HBO. If you don't like it, don't buy the channel.
No one forces you to watch HBO, no one forces you to enter a smoking restaurant.
Therefore the owner should not face regulation in this matter.
If there are so many non-smokers then why don't they open up a string of non-smoking bars and restaurants? Should be making money hand over fist right?
When immigrants enter a country they don't demand their dish of choice, they open their own restaurants and groceries.
But it seems that non-smokers are wrapped up in the entitlement mindset. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd prefer tobacco not to be available at all since that would make it easier for me to give up. But I recognize that even if it was illegal there'd be bootleg tobacco all over the place so I'm going to have to exert willpower when I see it around. As for smoking in public places, that doesn't bother me in the slightest, and people who go on about it are hissyfitting hypochondriacs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seoulio
Joined: 02 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Alphabet_Stew wrote: |
| These days people are content to stand at bus stops and breathe in all the truck/car fumes and smog - but "smokers'! Oh NO! |
If I hear this weak example one more time I am going to throw a chair.
1) are we content to stand next to these car/truck fumes? Like do we stand there and breath it in going "Ah, I love these car fumes"
2) Standing on the street corner we are rarely if ever caught in the midst of a direct gust of the exhaust.
3) Cars are a fact of life, the roads are where they go. We can't change that. Cars are a necessary transportation ( you could argue that of course but that's beside the point) what is NOT necessary is a dick walking down the street blowing his smoke any which place, or a guy lighting up in a restaurant as I am trying to enjoy my food
4) No one denies that car exhaust harms us, everything on the planet harms us to some degree, even the Sun, but people dont stay in thier houses and never leave because of the suns rays now do they. We have to leave the house, and we are exposed to a number of different harmful elements. When we are on a public street, in a public restaurant, or leaving a public building we should be all able to do so without walking into a totally pointless cloud of poison being exhaled by selfish people for slefish pleasure.
5) Most people walk into smoke and they smell it, and feel it instantly. Its much more concentrated and noticeable than car exhaust.
6) the fact that harful things exist in our society is not your free pass to do whatever the heck you please when it harms others.
And personally I find any teacher even thinking of lighting up on school grounds, or anywhere near a student, extremely pathetic. That's just my opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeonmunka
Joined: 05 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| What I really hate is now that bars in NZ are have smoking banned they made an open-aired place for smokers out near the footpath so now innocent walkers get totally blasted with smoke as they walk by. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeonmunka wrote: |
| What I really hate is now that bars in NZ are have smoking banned they made an open-aired place for smokers out near the footpath so now innocent walkers get totally blasted with smoke as they walk by. |
This. This is why smoking should be kept indoors and away from sidewalks.
| Quote: |
| 6) the fact that harful things exist in our society is not your free pass to do whatever the heck you please when it harms others. |
| Quote: |
| or a guy lighting up in a restaurant as I am trying to enjoy my food |
But you choose to expose yourself to smoke when you enter that restaurant or bar!
The reason the exhaust argument is brought up is not to wholly counter the privacy argument, but to counter the health argument. However it does partially cover the privacy argument for intellectual theory's sake- There are plenty of people who don't drive, some voluntarily or because they are hardcore environmentalists. They are exposed to your exhaust. Don't they have the same basis of an argument as you? Perhaps even stronger considering how much more damaging exhaust is.
AS to health- which is more damaging to your health- second smoke or exhaust, mercury (societal damages), greasy food, and beer (individual consumption)?
As to privacy- how are you forced to enter a restaurant or bar that permits smoking? Just say no.
I fail to see how a night club that is 21 and up only and has a cover charge is a public space. I fail to see how bars, which are 21 and up, often have a cover charge and operate from 6PM till 4AM are public places.
And I fail to see how non-smokers simply can't own and operate non-smoking bars, restaurants, and clubs.
If 5% of the population immigrants can do such things, then surely non-smokers can. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
littlelisa
Joined: 12 Jun 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
I fail to see how a night club that is 21 and up only and has a cover charge is a public space. I fail to see how bars, which are 21 and up, often have a cover charge and operate from 6PM till 4AM are public places.
And I fail to see how non-smokers simply can't own and operate non-smoking bars, restaurants, and clubs.
If 5% of the population immigrants can do such things, then surely non-smokers can. |
Steelrails: I do routinely not go into places because they have smoking, even if nobody is smoking. Once I was with a friend and we were looking for a tea place and most of them were absolutely crowded. Then we finally found one that had place. We walked upstairs and I smelled smoke. My friend looked around, nobody was smoking. She asked if people were allowed to smoke here, and the answer was yes. We left and found somewhere else.
But that kind of thing can get annoying. If you look at places without smoking bans despite a sizeable chunk of people who would like them (see the poll results, for example), most places don't do that ON THEIR OWN. They are afraid of losing business from smokers... from a ridiculously small percentage of people. But after a ban in restaurants and bars, even most smokers say that they are happier to not come home smelling of smoke.
I don't want to have to search for a place that doesn't allow smoking. If the default is that every bar and restaurant allows smoking with some non-smoking places as exceptions, then that is not cool. I don't want to have to make a special trip across town just because I don't want to be exposed to unhealthy smoke. If it were the opposite, most places being smoke-free and a few (say, with special, expensive licenses) allowing smoking, that would be OK. But looking around at examples: of nowhere where they had a lot of non-smoking bar/restaurant environments until after a ban everywhere was in place... are you really surprised that people support the ban? I think it is a fine solution, and it seems to have worked out well everywhere they have it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Restaurants may be privately owned, but governments consider them public spaces. If "the public" is the customer base, they are justified in deeming them so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| littlelisa wrote: |
But that kind of thing can get annoying.
I don't want to have to search for a place that doesn't allow smoking. If the default is that every bar and restaurant allows smoking with some non-smoking places as exceptions, then that is not cool. I don't want to have to make a special trip across town just because I don't want to be exposed to unhealthy smoke. If it were the opposite, most places being smoke-free and a few (say, with special, expensive licenses) allowing smoking, that would be OK. |
That's being lazy. If you want to find something you have to put effort into it. It's not going to be handed to you on a silver platter.
If I want to find a restaurant that serves X food or is open 24 hours or has a good vegetarian selection I don't demand that laws be made so i don't have to look around- I go out and look around.
That's the next step after these smoking bans- mandating a certain number of entrees in a given restaurant must be vegetarian/kosher/halal or else it will be 'discriminatory'.
Anyone who supports a smoking ban should support an alcohol ban. Your alcohol DOES affect others health (drunk driving accidents, assaults, poor hygiene due to inebriation)
Open up your own bars and clubs and restaurants non-smokers!
Smokers aren't even allowed to open our own restaurants, bars, and clubs!
A restaurant that is for smokers only would be illegal. A bar that is for smokers only would be illegal.
Seriously non-smokers do you not see that that is going too far?
Smokers are mature adults enough to realize that if they want something they will pay money and costs and operate. Smoking ban people can't get that concept.
They can't understand the concept of privacy. You are not forced into these restaurants and bars. In the case of bars and clubs, these places are not even 'open to the public'. 19 year old adults who can vote or serve in the military are forbidden entry into these places. They are not public areas.
Sorry to sound all Republischpiel, but this is a case of liberal elitist nonsense that relies too much on academic thinking and "well in theory" and doesn't believe that people should have the freedom to choose or that people are responsible for their own actions. That and I'm sure the Right Wing Morals crowd had a hand in it as well.
Reasonable ways not to have smoking that preserve concepts of privacy, liberty, property, choice, and responsibility-
A)Do not enter a restaurant or bar that allows smoking.
B)Build your own restaurant or bar that is only non-smoking.
C)Allow smoking only in "Smoking Only" places.
None of these common sense solutions are acceptable. Smokers aren't even allowed to build their own restaurants and bars.
Who is being unreasonable? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
candyteacher
Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Location: where ever i want
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Anyone who supports a smoking ban should support an alcohol ban. Your alcohol DOES affect others health (drunk driving accidents, assaults, poor hygiene due to inebriation)
|
Yes but their are laws against drunk driving, assaults etc. Same way no one is banning you from smoking, just saying you cant do it where it may harm people. Yes I drink and I enjoy drinking but if i do something that harms another person due to my being drunk, then your sure as hell I'll end up with a big fine or in court. I'm fine with that, its the way it should be.
Its time to realise that smoking is harmful to both the smoker and the people around the smoker. Its not necessary, unlike cars etc. Goverments are realising the merits of smoking bans, and smokers are no longer givin the upper hand.
As far as my personal opinion, I'm for smoking bans indoors but to ban it on the streets im not to sure about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
conrad2
Joined: 05 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Are we even sure that second hand smoke in the doses we are talking about is even harmful to people? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eamo
Joined: 08 Mar 2003
Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wouldn't like to see smoking banned in bars and restaurants.......even though I quit smoking over a year ago.......Until governments make tobacco illegal it should be seen as a right to smoke in public places if you choose.
.....but I would enforce the use of seriously strong extraction fans and air cleaning machines. With the right kind of equipment the air in a bar could be quite okay even with many smoking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
[q
Anyone who supports a smoking ban should support an alcohol ban. Your alcohol DOES affect others health (drunk driving accidents, assaults, poor hygiene due to inebriation)
? |
We have laws against such things and regarding the consumption of alcohol.
And I'm fine with having similar laws for alcohol as for cigarettes.
Just as you can't walk down the street with a open can of alcohol you shouldn't be able to walk down the street with a lit cigarette.
Smoke in your car, or in your house for all I care. Just not near me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hotwire
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Location: Multiverse
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
[q
Anyone who supports a smoking ban should support an alcohol ban. Your alcohol DOES affect others health (drunk driving accidents, assaults, poor hygiene due to inebriation)
? |
We have laws against such things and regarding the consumption of alcohol.
And I'm fine with having similar laws for alcohol as for cigarettes.
Just as you can't walk down the street with a open can of alcohol you shouldn't be able to walk down the street with a lit cigarette.
Smoke in your car, or in your house for all I care. Just not near me. |
I never saw the big deal about this.
In Amsterdam you can walk around with a big fat splifferoonie and there is a park where you can inject H.
Dutch people seem pretty happy whenever I meet them.
Why are Anglo Saxons so anal about things! |
|
| 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
