What you suggest has some merit Smokie, kind of guessed you might be a smoker, however I have a number of friends that smoke as I'm sure you have friends that don't, and quite often we go out for a drink together, every smoker I know is considerate and doesn't mind "popping out for a fag", so I don't really see the need to segregate smokers and non-smokers into different establishments.

The majority of smokers are indeed considerate, and whilst the earlier comment of something like "I will pop down there tonight and light up" was probably said in jest, it is indicitive of the very small percentage of smokers who have a selfish attitude.

Owners of such establishments are caught between a rock and a hard place, smokers who cannot even be bothered to go outside for a smoke will complain they are being picked on, whilst non-smokers will want to drink in a smoke free environment and have an expectation that the law will be respected. These bars are in business to make a profit, the General Manager of the Landmark once told me that his decision to ignore the law was a commercial decision, even though they are liable for a fine of 20,000 Baht for every smoker caught, however The Londoner, who has complied with the law from day 1, is normally pretty busy - in fact I saw the manager of The Huntsman in the Londoner recently checking it out.

As I have said before I think the anti smoking regulations have probably gone to far, though I suspect they may get tougher, I have often seen smokers outside pubs in the UK, and have thought that if the smoking didn't kill them then the hypothermia might.

Or the fumes comming from cars

What you suggest has some merit Smokie, kind of guessed you might be a smoker, however I have a number of friends that smoke as I'm sure you have friends that don't, and quite often we go out for a drink together, every smoker I know is considerate and doesn't mind "popping out for a fag", so I don't really see the need to segregate smokers and non-smokers into different establishments.

The majority of smokers are indeed considerate, and whilst the earlier comment of something like "I will pop down there tonight and light up" was probably said in jest, it is indicitive of the very small percentage of smokers who have a selfish attitude.

Owners of such establishments are caught between a rock and a hard place, smokers who cannot even be bothered to go outside for a smoke will complain they are being picked on, whilst non-smokers will want to drink in a smoke free environment and have an expectation that the law will be respected. These bars are in business to make a profit, the General Manager of the Landmark once told me that his decision to ignore the law was a commercial decision, even though they are liable for a fine of 20,000 Baht for every smoker caught, however The Londoner, who has complied with the law from day 1, is normally pretty busy - in fact I saw the manager of The Huntsman in the Londoner recently checking it out.

As I have said before I think the anti smoking regulations have probably gone to far, though I suspect they may get tougher, I have often seen smokers outside pubs in the UK, and have thought that if the smoking didn't kill them then the hypothermia might.

Well smoker or not I reckon we should all have a choice of places to go. As for dining establishments I'm in full agreement that these should be non smoking. Consideration for others is fine by me....but I like a place where I can sit and have a few drinks and light up too.

If you don't want to join me there that's fine as well.....banning smoking aint the answer....but then nor is boorish behavoiur from us smokers either.

@jjfc......see you at the next party!

Seems they decided to comply after being busted twice in a week. I think each bust costs the establishment 20,000 Baht and each smoker 2,000 Baht.

Seems they decided to comply after being busted twice in a week. I think each bust costs the establishment 20,000 Baht and each smoker 2,000 Baht.

Amazing Thailand!!!