• ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    All fine and dandy until the neighbours start complaining that the regulars are now smoking outside their houses which happen to be just outside the pub exclusion zone.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      They already do that anyway around me. The beer garden is on the other side of the road from the pub (Which is apparently allowable because it’s not an adopted road?).

      Anyway sometimes people somehow manage to get lost crossing the 3m road and end up outside people’s houses sitting on the walls and stuff. I do mind the drinking but I object to them smoking and then me having to smell it.

  • steeznson@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    There is the famous Yes, Minister argument about smokers being a net postitive for the NHS given that they are likely to die younger of smoking related diseases instead of requiring expensive care for more complex diseases later in life.

    A study in Finland found that each smoker contributed a net positive of 133,000 euros to their health system by dying younger (on average). Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23233699/

    I don’t think people in the UK care about this though. People seem to be consistently in favour of banning anything that they don’t personally partake in. This is despite the fact that smoking rates are at their lowest levels ever and still falling.

    Labour are looking for a policy which is cheap for them to implement but has some popular support so they can basically say, “look at us; we’re governing!”

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      People seem to be consistently in favour of banning anything that they don’t personally partake in.

      If that’s your takeaway then you’re an idiot. People can smoke all they like, 50 packs a day if you want. Go for it.

      But not near me. In your own house.

      • TWeaK@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Yes in your own house, but not in your garden or with your windows open, because that’s too close to me!

        You sound ridiculous.

        • FozzyOsbourne@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          but not in your garden or with your windows open, because that’s too close to me

          Where are you getting this from? There’s a big difference between in a beer garden full of people and in your own garden.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          If I can smell it it’s too close to me. You explain to me how it is ridiculous to demand people respect social boundaries Unless of course you’re a person who believes they should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want because they feel like it, in which case you can go walk off a short pier.

          Please do better

  • Destide@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    Ridiculous everyone should just make do and put up with my addiction,what am I supposed to do smoke at home?!

    RIP Pub workers having to put up with the “rebels” doing their upmost to take the piss I worked through the indoor ban went pretty well but there were a couple of those I am so smart I beat the system types.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      The indoor ban where i live was an absolute shitshow. Both smokers and bar owners were the biggest piss babies about it. the owners formed smoking clubs, where you had to be in the club and pay a 10 dollar fee or something, so you are not in a pub, you were in a smoking club that happened to sell drinks. Nice, now i can pay a fee and smell like an ashtray? That’s so cool.

  • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is completely okay and the people who are calling this bad are coping and should quit stinking up public places with their disgusting shit.

  • Wanderer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I never realised how much people want to be controlled by the government when I was younger.

    This is fucked.

    “But the government wants to ban something I don’t like! That’s good. They should stop others doing things I don’t like!”

    • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      That’s the purpose of the government.

      If most of the people want something to be banned, it should be banned. The government works for the people.

      Of course, the definition of “most” varies depending on the issue, it’s not always 50% (looking at you, Brexit).

      Smokers pollute the air in a huge area around them. For the “benefit” of one person they are annoying up to dozens around them.

      Every non-smoker looking to date that I know agrees that they would never date a smoker, that’s for a reason, non-smokers cannot tolerate the smoke. It’s awful.

      • Z3k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Now do vapes. I find that disgustingly sweet vapour harder to tolerate cigarette smoke. But I get pleasure of people blowing yhat crap in the air in the supermarket.

        • TWeaK@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Vapes are already banned indoors in most places, basically everywhere smoking is banned. The issue with vapes is a lack of enforcement.

          Frankly, I think vapes should be allowed in certain areas indoors, provided they are segregated from others. Vapes are drastically less unhealthy than smoking, to the point where being outside in the cold is probably a greater health risk.

          • Z3k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            You say that. But as we are talking risks to others it catches me in a way that about 50% of the time it triggers an asthma episode.

            Don’t k ow about you but I kind of like unrestricted breathing

            Edit forgot to add in this stage of the vape life cycle cigarettes were advertised with health benefits. While I don’t doubt it’s better than smoking the jury is still out on long term effects

            https://www.history.com/news/cigarette-ads-doctors-smoking-endorsement

            • TWeaK@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I’m all for more study into the long term effects, and don’t think that vaping is completely harmless or that it necessarily has positive effects. However nothing is truly harmless, and many people are considered well within their rights to do things that have the potential to cause harm to themselves - or even others. Driving, for example, carries a significant risk, and even cycling could create a situation where you crash into another person and injur them.

              I just think that allowing vaping rooms indoors would be a better solution for everyone. People who vape get to keep warm, while people who want to breathe unrestricted air could find themselves better off because the vapers are indoors and out their way.

              • Z3k3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Ahh I think you mean like the old idea of smoking break rooms, which sure everyone in there is by choice and accepts any risk.

                I dont think your analogy of driving a car fits as driving has utility it reminds me of my yank friends arguing we should allow guns or ban knives because to do otherwise is hypocritical or something

                • TWeaK@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Ahh I think you mean like the old idea of smoking break rooms

                  Yes pretty much. This was discussed and rejected in the UK when the smoking bans came in, however other places in Europe implemented indoor smoking just fine. As vaping is a lesser harm than smoking, and in particular vapors don’t linger like smoke does, it should be easier to implement. But UK politicians wants to maintain a hardline ban in spite of any rational reasoning.

                  I dont think your analogy of driving a car fits

                  It was just the first thing that came to mind, which is why I threw in cycling as well. Cycling is often done for recreation rather than utility, but does still carry risk to others nearby. Cars also pollute, though, which is a similar harm to smoking, yet people are against outright banning combustion vehicles. It generally boils down to “I do it, and I shouldn’t be banned, but I don’t do that other thing so that should be banned.”

                  For the record I don’t even smoke, in fact tobacco smoke makes me feel sick. But I don’t think people should be outright prohibited, not when a reasonable compromise can be reached.

    • BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      There is a difference between not being allowed to fuck a horse and not being allowed to stink up a place with some gross ass cancer sticks.

    • Zip2@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes, blame the government for wanting to protect people’s health.

      Absolutely trust the smokers who are clearly capable of making the correct descision instead.

  • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    As an expat who’s recently visited back, I’m astounded at how UK smokers behave. Not even on a night out either; the chef on break flicking the finished end into the street puddle, folks lighting up right outside shop entrances, or the general lack of awareness towards smoking around children. Socially learned behavior that never gets the same tutting you might a speeding car or queue jumper.

    I took a trip abroad years ago and was bewildered to see a guy light up and then pull out a foil-type pouch too. Not only did the butt go into that pouch for later disposal, but all his ash did too. I’ve heard Japan is much the same way, even Americans are far better culturally about sequestering themselves before smoking.

    • FozzyOsbourne@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      Is it? Second hand smoking still fucks you up, and it’s not like being outside completely fixes that.

      • TWeaK@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Car pollution fucks you up, too, probably more so. And before you say “people need cars to get places”, nicotine (and caffeine) fuelled the industrial revolution - nicotine makes your brain work faster, which can make people more productive.

        • FozzyOsbourne@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah and that’s why we have congestion charges and emissions zones and catalytic converters and environmental regulations on cars, to reduce the pollution that people are breathing in.

          FYI I’m not in favour of ever banning smoking completely. The freedom to damage yourself is just as important as the freedom to not be damaged by someone else.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      1987 smoking banned in London public transport following the deaths of 31 people in a fire

      2005 banned in nationwide public transport

      2008 banned in enclosed public spaces

      2018 banned in prisons

      I’m curious do you think they’re all stupid or just this one? Isn’t this one just an extension of “please don’t smoke directly in front of the hospital doors” for other public places?

      What about the proposed plans to raise the smoking age year on year every year?

      • steeznson@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        Banning smoking in prisons was insane. It was pioneered by “failing” Chris Greyling and essentially created a whole new category of contraband. I was watching a Business Insider doc on youtube about this and a former prisoner was saying that since this policy came into place, a pack of cigarettes is now valued at hundreds of pounds when traded between prisoners.

      • RobotToaster
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        An enclosed space is very different to outside. That’s why you don’t run your car indoors.

        Should we ban pubs from having car parks? Since the exhaust fumes are quite toxic.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Should we ban [cars]

          I mean, disregarding the feasibility, political polularity and media optics of it, for the continuation of earths ecosystem… probably yeah

        • then_three_more@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Should we ban pubs from having car parks? Since the exhaust fumes are quite toxic.

          No, but we should ban the sale of new ICE cars (and in so doing begin a complete phase out) for those reasons and because they’re damaging to the wider environment.

          Oh, look we are.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Lots of pubs don’t have car parks though so what’s your point?

          Just so you understand, the reason that smoking outside should be banned is not because smoking is bad (although obviously objectively it is and you shouldn’t do it) but smoking near me is bad, and I am occasionally outside at the same time as you are outside. If you want to go smoke in the middle of a field, be my guest. Your life choices should not affect me.

          • julietOscarEcho@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Everyone who chooses to drive in a city centre has a directionally similar impact (potentially bigger magnitude because vehicle traffic is pretty lethal). I don’t think anyone disagrees with the principal, they just have different thresholds for personal freedom vs impact on those around you.

            I think it’s hard not to see a culture/class aspect to this when wood burners continue to be used without much limitation.

    • glimse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Absolutely brilliant.

      Smoking is a choice and you’re choosing to make it someone else’s problem by smoking at pubs

    • Zombie@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      3 months ago

      Absolutely authoritarian.

      Education campaigns are far more effective with far less pushback than draconian bans. Let people choose for themselves.

      I remember constant campaigns in the past trying to convince the public of the ills of smoking, and it (slowly) appeared to be working. Then vaping came along, and instead of continuing the education campaigns, the health departments tactics seemed to change to “take up vaping, it’s better than smoking”.

      And now, it may just be anecdotal, but smoking appears to me at least, to be on the rise again. I wonder why?

      • FarceOfWill@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sounds like the same argument against banning smoking in pubs, which is probably the single greatest health intervention in the last fifty years and now supported by basically everyone.

        • Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Inside is very different to outside where smoke doesnt accumulate. You can instantly smell someone had a ciggarette inside even hours later, outside you cant tell (once the person has left) even a few seconds later.

          • GarrulousBrevity@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            That’s incredibly subjective, and not true for many. A lot of people can tell if you’ve been smoking outside

            • Womble@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 months ago

              Its incredibly subjective that smoke dissipates far faster outside where there is significant airflow than inside closed rooms?

              Yes your clothes might smell if you’ve been smoking outside, but if you walk away from the spot there isn’t any smoke hanging around for other people to breathe in. That is the difference when it comes to health effects from second hand smoke.

          • glimse@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            3 months ago

            outside you cant tell even a few seconds later.

            I’ve got bad news for you, smoker…we can tell. You fuckin STINK no matter where you smoke. Your breath, your clothes, your hair…yuck. Everyone knows you took that cigarette break.

            • Womble@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              A) other than a few joints in my 20s I’ve never smoked, dont be an arse and make assumptions about people you dont know.

              B) I really dont care that smokers often stink, I dont live with any. My point was that their cancer causing fumes dont linger outside for me to breathe in so I dont care that they are doing it to themselves. The opposite is true inside where they are affecting me, so I’m glad that’s banned.

              • glimse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                3 months ago

                Well you specifically mentioned the smell which is what I was referring to

                • Womble@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  I mentioned the smell merely as a way of showing that smoke fumes linger inside in a way they dont outside.

            • Zombie@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Oh no! Smells! Call the police.

              “Yes, police service please. Somebody was stressed at work and decided to take a break to calm down and in doing so inadvertently made my jumper smelly. Can you arrest them please? They’re still here. They’re behind the bar serving pints to everyone, you can’t miss them, their t-shirt is so pongy, poooooeeeyyyyy. I’ll see you in 5 minutes.”

              I worked in a pub for a few years, do you know how difficult it is to get the plod to show up? Even if there’s two blokes kicking the shit out of each other it can be a task to get them to respond to the call.

              Making it ILLEGAL to smoke outside is ridiculous. Those who say otherwise are far happier with government overreach and authority than they’d otherwise admit.

              Edit: to add, remember when we were told sitting outside kept us safe from covid, an airborne virus, because of the constant airflow? Funny how that doesn’t apply to smoking.

              • GarrulousBrevity@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                The comparison to COVID is interesting. If people can smell the smoke, they’re literally breathing in the air that the smoker is breathing out, and one can definitely smell smoke from the next table over. Maybe that’s part of why lockdown didn’t work as well as we hoped.

                Also, if you can smell it, it’s doing harm. Second and third hand smoke on your clothing is still real in outdoor spaces, and people should have the freedom to avoid that harm.

              • glimse@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                3 months ago

                In your experience, do bartenders tend to take their smoke breaks in the outdoor seating area with the patrons? If not then your post is moot - the ban isn’t for employees taking a smoke break out back.

      • hexthismess [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This reminds me of the pushback against mandatory seat belt use in the US. It’s absolutely in the public’s best interest to ban public smoking and arguing that people should make their own decisions is ridiculous. Make smoking inconvenient for smokers and allow people in pubs and bars to enjoy smoke free air.

        • Zombie@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          People IN pubs and bars already enjoy smoke free air. The discussion is about outside beer gardens. Where the wind is. There’s also nothing stopping pubs having their own rules against smoking in their beer gardens already. Why must the law be used to criminalise those who smoke?

          I’m not a smoker by the way. I’m pro-smoke reduction even, as stated by my point about education, but I’m anti-authoritarian and anti every faucet of human life being criminalised.

          • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            People IN pubs and bars already enjoy smoke free air.

            Yeah because smoking was banned, and not because the smokers had any decency or concern for everyone else. They quite happily blew smoke to your face.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah bloody government, making laws, making people’s lives better, how dare they.

        I liked it back in the old days when 4-year-olds worked down the pit and no one back an eyelid, and then died quietly of tuberculosis. Snowflakes these days…

  • Zip2@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s 2024. Why the fuck is anyone still smoking anyway? Ban it

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I don’t really care if they ban it or not I just want them to ban it in public. People want to smoke in private that’s their prerogative and they really couldn’t care one way or the other.

      But it actually has to be in private, not just sitting on your doorstep in a dressing gown at 9:30am on a Tuesday with everyone walking past you on the street. That might just be around me though.