Originally posted by Brother EdwinI remember right before I moved, there was a big smoking in public places debate. Half of Louisville wanted it to be banned because of 2nd hand smoke. They said it wasn't right for their childrens health to suffer just to make someone else happy. The other half said it was their god given right to smoke where they please (although some smokers went with the other side). But of course, you're talking about a bar, which kids have no buisness being in. When I'm older though I would prefer if they smoked somewhere else. I hate it when I come home and my clothes smell like smoke. I think it smells like a skunk sprayed me. But thats just my opinion.
Should it be baned?
Originally posted by Brother EdwinI'm sure, ultimately, there should be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs.
Should it be baned?
And as long as there are jobs enough for everyone, so that everyone has a choice as to where they wish to work, then everyone can choose to either work in a smoking pub or a non-smoking pub.
Personally, with all this depleted urinanium lying around, the largest industry complex in one of the largest harbours in the world at my doorstep, and traffic jams 5 days a week...I don't think a little secondry smoke is going to damage my health noticably.
Originally posted by shavixmirI think this would cause more problems. There may be more demand for one type of job, regardless to the number of smokers.
I'm sure, ultimately, there should be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs.
And as long as there are jobs enough for everyone, so that everyone has a choice as to where they wish to work, then everyone can choose to either work in a smoking pub or a non-smoking pub.
Originally posted by shavixmirHow about if you worked at a bar as well?
Personally, with all this depleted urinanium lying around, the largest industry complex in one of the largest harbours in the world at my doorstep, and traffic jams 5 days a week...I don't think a little secondry smoke is going to damage my health noticably.
"A collector of pennies has a fortune, given time."
Originally posted by shavixmirI agree.
I'm sure, ultimately, there should be smoking pubs and non-smoking pubs.
And as long as there are jobs enough for everyone, so that everyone has a choice as to where they wish to work, then everyone can choose to either work in a smoking pub or a non-smoking pub.
Personally, with all this depleted urinanium lying around, the largest industry complex ...[text shortened]... 5 days a week...I don't think a little secondry smoke is going to damage my health noticably.
"Second-hand smoke kills one New Zealander every day."
If I were commuting 20 kilometres a day through carbon-monoxide-polluted air, the last thing I'd want is second hand smoke in my face. If smokers want to fill their lungs with poison, that's their choice, but I don't think they should be allowed to drag down others with them.
a survey took place a wee while ago to discover if pubs that had a non-smoking policy were actually healthier for you.
and the outcome? no! as -apparently- the ventilation systems not only get rid of some of the smoke, but they also take a lot of other bad stuff outta the air. so, although inefficient for smoke-they do do something.
pretty much, you're not gonna get a cold, but you might die of lung cancer. 🙂