Most Night Spots In Bangkok And Pattaya Stick To Smoking Rules: Survey

[Wallaby]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

If a person is smoking in the street where it is legal then it is YOU that should just move. Understood?

[DLock]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

If a person is smoking in the street where it is legal then it is YOU that should just move. Understood?

Refer to my last post citing the word "arrogance".

I do find it interesting that you use the "legality" of smoking in the street's, yet fail to apply that term to the very topic at hand - that smoking inside bars and clubs is actually illegal.

[Wallaby]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

If a person is smoking in the street where it is legal then it is YOU that should just move. Understood?

Refer to my last post citing the word "arrogance".

I do find it interesting that you use the "legality" of smoking in the street's, yet fail to apply that term to the very topic at hand - that smoking inside bars and clubs is actually illegal.

It is you that is arrogant. Many things are illegal in Thailand, namely the number 1 reason many men visit the kingdom.

If the owner of the bar does not want smoking then he is the person ask that you don't. If you don't like it that the owner allows smoking then YOU should leave.

[DLock]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

If a person is smoking in the street where it is legal then it is YOU that should just move. Understood?

Refer to my last post citing the word "arrogance".

I do find it interesting that you use the "legality" of smoking in the street's, yet fail to apply that term to the very topic at hand - that smoking inside bars and clubs is actually illegal.

It is you that is arrogant. Many things are illegal in Thailand, namely the number 1 reason many men visit the kingdom.

If the owner of the bar does not want smoking then he is the person ask that you don't. If you don't like it that the owner allows smoking then YOU should leave.

And there we have it ladies an gentleman...the reason this thread never dies.

Blaming bar owners, using examples that are irrelevant, claiming if I don't like it I should leave and being selective on the legal aspects...all to defend their nasty habit.

Fail.

[Wallaby]

And there we have it ladies an gentleman...the reason this thread never dies.

Blaming bar owners, using examples that are irrelevant, claiming if I don't like it I should leave and being selective on the legal aspects...all to defend their nasty habit.

Fail.

So you would go into a bar full of smokers and sit there and tell everyone to stop smoking so you can be happy. Simple really, ask the owner, if he wants smokers then you are free to leave.

The reason it never dies is because some non smokers want smoke free bars but bar owners don't because they fear they will lose more money. So in the end both smokers and non smokers don't have a bar to attend.

I have no need to defend a nasty habit as I am not a smoker. I just find it detestable that some think they can tell others what they have to do simply because they don't like it.

If I don't like to see naked women I won't go to a gogo bar but I won't go in their and tell the girls to put their clothes on because I don't like it.

If I don't like being harrassed by bar girls every minute then I won't go and sit myself in that bar but I won't tell the bar girls to stop doing what they do because I don't like it.

Quite simple really, you go to bars where they ban smoking and I'll go to any bar I like because it doesn't bother me.

If you don't like Thailand because there aren't enough smoke free bars then I'm afraid it is you that should move and go somewhere that meets your standards.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Wallaby

[tombkk]

And there we have it ladies an gentleman...the reason this thread never dies.

Blaming bar owners, using examples that are irrelevant, claiming if I don't like it I should leave and being selective on the legal aspects...all to defend their nasty habit.

Fail.

So you would go into a bar full of smokers and sit there and tell everyone to stop smoking so you can be happy. Simple really, ask the owner, if he wants smokers then you are free to leave.

The reason it never dies is because some non smokers want smoke free bars but bar owners don't because they fear they will lose more money. So in the end both smokers and non smokers don't have a bar to attend.

I have no need to defend a nasty habit as I am not a smoker. I just find it detestable that some think they can tell others what they have to do simply because they don't like it.

If I don't like to see naked women I won't go to a gogo bar but I won't go in their and tell the girls to put their clothes on because I don't like it.

If I don't like being harrassed by bar girls every minute then I won't go and sit myself in that bar but I won't tell the bar girls to stop doing what they do because I don't like it.

Quite simple really, you go to bars where they ban smoking and I'll go to any bar I like because it doesn't bother me.

If you don't like Thailand because there aren't enough smoke free bars then I'm afraid it is you that should move and go somewhere that meets your standards.

Same here. I don't smoke, and I avoid bars in which I think there is too much smoke - but I would never demand that those who like it there shouldn't be allowed to. How does it hurt me that they smoke in there?

I like your analogy to the gogo bars. In fact, exactly the same thing.

[Jayman]

This has been my point from post one and I will continue to say it over and over. Will your same friend that will no longer get in an airplane cause he can't smoke go to see a doctor when he is sick? Maybe he is the hypocrite by your logic?

Oh the old 'cost to the taxpayer' chestnut.

I'm sure it may be different in other countries but in mine we have taxpayer funded free medical etc. My take on it is that a person pays about $16 a packet. May be about $8 of that is tax that goes to the govt. If the govt really wants to stamp out smoking it could just make it illegal but it is making far too much money from it.

If a person gets sick from a smoking then I'm sure their $8 a day tax from the packet would cover it nicely. I should also mention that fat people go to the doctor, should they not be allowed to go because they have a bad diet?

Finally, look at how much the govt saves because smokers die at an early age. The govt doesn't have to pay for years and years of a pension because of that early death.

I think the govt is doing quite nicely out of it all and yet still finds it acceptable to make certain roads smoke free.

My post has nothing to do with the cost of healthcare and everything to do with the fact that just because you CANT smoke in a hospital doesn't mean that smokers are banned from hospitals which is a point another poster here has been trying to make. My point is nothing stops a smoker from frequenting a place where smoking is NOT allowed. This is not a bash on smokers as ppl. This is to keep the air clean for others to enjoy.

You're whole rant on taxes and how smokers have already pre paid their treatment through the purchase of cigs is just silly so I won't even start on that one.

[DLock]

And there we have it ladies an gentleman...the reason this thread never dies.

Blaming bar owners, using examples that are irrelevant, claiming if I don't like it I should leave and being selective on the legal aspects...all to defend their nasty habit.

Fail.

So you would go into a bar full of smokers and sit there and tell everyone to stop smoking so you can be happy. Simple really, ask the owner, if he wants smokers then you are free to leave.

The reason it never dies is because some non smokers want smoke free bars but bar owners don't because they fear they will lose more money. So in the end both smokers and non smokers don't have a bar to attend.

I have no need to defend a nasty habit as I am not a smoker. I just find it detestable that some think they can tell others what they have to do simply because they don't like it.

If I don't like to see naked women I won't go to a gogo bar but I won't go in their and tell the girls to put their clothes on because I don't like it.

If I don't like being harrassed by bar girls every minute then I won't go and sit myself in that bar but I won't tell the bar girls to stop doing what they do because I don't like it.

Quite simple really, you go to bars where they ban smoking and I'll go to any bar I like because it doesn't bother me.

If you don't like Thailand because there aren't enough smoke free bars then I'm afraid it is you that should move and go somewhere that meets your standards.

Now you are just being a dick for dick sake.

I don't frequent bars that allow smoking, and I don't frequent brothels go go bars. Your analogy is weak.

The old "if you don't like it leave" chestnut...the last card in a losing argument has been played.

I just want to breathe clean air and not smoke that you just exhaled. It's not too much to ask a normal, respectful person...but clearly too much for you.

[TAWP]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

Can I also request to not have to smell your perfume or body odor in the street or in the subway?

I am not joking, when I grew up strong perfume and after shave could trigger an respiratory problem. I have since outgrown it - as lucky as most people do - but would it be fair of me to campaign to have smelly (in either way) people removed from the MRT or BTS?

Can I hurl insults after you when you step into the train, sweaty and smelly?

Ps. I don't smoke. Ds.

[TAWP]

The old "if you don't like it leave" chestnut...the last card in a losing argument has been played.

Sure - unfortunately for your argument, it was played by one of your friends, the activist, earlier in the thread.

[atyclb]

You have to be kidding, one does not need a survey to see that most smoker dont give a dam_n about the rules and most owners dont challenge them for fear of losing the business. Another BS survey aimed at hiding the truth.

Have to agree; I was there about a month ago (for a stag night, over 2 days!) and with the exception of 2 premises we could smoke in every place.

And you are correct, the owners won't say anything for fear of losing the trade and that is the way it will stay until the enforced no-smoking laws are followed across the board. People want to smoke when they are drinking; this is a habit that has been ingrained over many years (decades in some cases) and if the chance to smoke is there, it will be used.

I still believe that the right to smoke should be up to the owner of the premises, and the customers who don't want to use it can go else where.

In this BS socially/politically correct world that we have created, as long as smoking material is legally sold across the counters, smokers have rights as well!!

Adults of drinking age can buy alcohol legally, by your logic they should have the right to drink and drive, pilot a passenger plane, a train, a bus. The secondary effect is people can and do get hurt and/or killed, akin to what second hand smoke does. Perhaps you would make the same argument about the BS socially/politically correct world if someone in your family was maimed or killed by an alcohol impaired person.

Seems many an expat likes Thailand as they can bend rules and laws and feel more important with a few baht in their pockets.

[daoyai]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

[Wallaby]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

[nicky1982]

I can see another hub coming next for smokers there is hub for everything else what Thailand wants to do these day's ..

[daoyai]

I agree not sad for the selfish idiots that don't care about others rights, isn't that the way it always is? By the way most of the smokers were respecting of the rules and many were outside. The (Thai) owners are the typical nonconfrontational types so.... the trash people rule the day.

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

Edited January 8, 2012 by daoyai

[DLock]

Does smoking stunt your intelligence?

Why do we always end up with multi page threads where smokers are somehow trying to defend their nasty habit and that they have rights to smoke around people who don't want to smell or inhale what they exhaled?

I don't want to smell your smoke ever. Not in a bar, not in a restaurant and not even when you walk past me in the street.

It is offensive and any attempt to defend your right to make me smell your smoke is simply arrogance and ignorance.

Smoke in your own home. Smoke in your yard. Smoke in that sad little room at the airport...but just smoke around me.

Understood?

Can I also request to not have to smell your perfume or body odor in the street or in the subway?

I am not joking, when I grew up strong perfume and after shave could trigger an respiratory problem. I have since outgrown it - as lucky as most people do - but would it be fair of me to campaign to have smelly (in either way) people removed from the MRT or BTS?

Can I hurl insults after you when you step into the train, sweaty and smelly?

Ps. I don't smoke. Ds.

Absolutely. If I smell offensive tell me.

And I fully support to remove smelly people from the BTS...problem is, all smokers would not be allowed on.

[DLock]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

Remember what I said about arrogance and ignorance?

Unfortunately that is the limited intelligence of smokers and why they are their own worst enemy, and the very reason these laws had to be put in place. Blaming the Owner to allow the few smokers to break the law and annoy other people is weak.

There was an outside smoking section. Most smokers were considerate. Just because the Owner is a pussy and the smokers are lazy, the rest of the bar had to suffer their smoke?

Nice selfish attitude jerk off.

[atyclb]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

If the patrons do not know smoking is not allowed by the government and light up it is the managers fault. If the patrons know about the "no smoking" law it is their fault. Separate or combined liability.

Some smokers are very intelligent and accomplished people. They tend to be courteous to people around them and not smoke or ask if it bothers anyone.

Being that Thailand does not seem to be a "bastion of expat intelligence" nor expat sobriety, it makes sense there would be a high % of inconsiderate smokers.

[tombkk]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

+1

[tombkk]

My post has nothing to do with the cost of healthcare and everything to do with the fact that just because you CANT smoke in a hospital doesn't mean that smokers are banned from hospitals which is a point another poster here has been trying to make. My point is nothing stops a smoker from frequenting a place where smoking is NOT allowed. This is not a bash on smokers as ppl. This is to keep the air clean for others to enjoy.

Are you serious? If smoking is not allowed in hospitals and smokers go there, the air will still be clean, as they won't be allowed to smoke. How is this not a bash on smokers?

[TAWP]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

You should inform the owners then.

[Wallaby]

I went to a music club last night with 2 other non smoking friends, the club is enclosed "no smoking" signs are displayed. There are outside tables provided for smoking, yet 4 or 5 selfish foktards polluted the entire club with their stink (smoke). We left. Sad because this is the best band playing in Chiang mai. When the smoking ban first started here, it was enforced but now, sadly the addicted are back polluting it for the rest of us.

Sad for you because you wanted to stay. Not sad for those that smoke or don't mind the smoke as they enjoyed it. The owner had no problem with the smokers so obviously allowed them to smoke. The owner would rather have the people smoking in the bar than worry about the people that leave because of the smoke.

Up to the owner on what he prefers so perhaps your disappointment should be directed at the owner.

Remember what I said about arrogance and ignorance?

Unfortunately that is the limited intelligence of smokers and why they are their own worst enemy, and the very reason these laws had to be put in place. Blaming the Owner to allow the few smokers to break the law and annoy other people is weak.

There was an outside smoking section. Most smokers were considerate. Just because the Owner is a pussy and the smokers are lazy, the rest of the bar had to suffer their smoke?

Nice selfish attitude jerk off.

Where is the selfish attitude. What has it got to do with intelligence. Can you actually read? I don't smoke, I did have one about 10 years ago but that's it. How can you say I'm being selfish and why would I be a jerk off for being a non smoker but am happy enough to leave a bar if I don't like the smoke.

And you say arrogance and ignorance. I suggest a good look in the house of mirrors for you.

The rest of the bar did NOT have to suffer. Anyone can leave at any time they want, or where all the non smokers handcuffed to the chairs?

Are you trying to say there are no non smoking bars you can go to? Or are the non smoking bars just far too boring so you'd rather go to bars that allow smoking then grumble and sook because they allow smoking. If you don't like it then just leave, simple.

I can't stand the holier than thou attitude of some non smokers. If the owner allows it then that's just tough on you and you are free to leave. If the owner doesn't allow it then that's just tough on the smokers and they are free to leave.

The whole reason most people enjoy Thailand is because it is not politically correct. Unfortunately it will be people like you that change it for the worse.

[PoodMaiDai]

I can see another hub coming next for smokers there is hub for everything else what Thailand wants to do these day's ..

This is what Thailand is all about... crackdowns and hubs.

[atyclb]

A suggestion. Shoot some candid video of smoking in the indoor a/c place and show it to the police. Give a copy to the monistry of health. INclude footage of ash trays on the tables. Paying a few 2000 baht fines should do the trick.

Edited January 8, 2012 by atyclb

[Jayman]

My post has nothing to do with the cost of healthcare and everything to do with the fact that just because you CANT smoke in a hospital doesn't mean that smokers are banned from hospitals which is a point another poster here has been trying to make. My point is nothing stops a smoker from frequenting a place where smoking is NOT allowed. This is not a bash on smokers as ppl. This is to keep the air clean for others to enjoy.

Are you serious? If smoking is not allowed in hospitals and smokers go there, the air will still be clean, as they won't be allowed to smoke. How is this not a bash on smokers?

I'm starting to think maybe English is not your first language. Let me repeat myself in simple words in hopes that you will finally understand

smoking is banned in hospitals = smokers can enter hospitals as long as they are not smoking

smoking is banned on airplanes = smokers can fly as long as they are not smoking

smoking is banned in Thai indoor restaurants = smokers can come eat in the restaurant as long as they don't smoke inside.

smoking bans = bash on smoking and NOT on smokers!

ok.. I shall step aside now so the activists can post on how they think the rules should be bent for exceptional few and the majority can just leave of they don't like it.

Edited January 8, 2012 by Jayman

[TAWP]

Some people really hate others having choices or having fun.

[atyclb]

Some people really hate others having choices or having fun.

Second hand smoke is injurious, harmful, disease producing , disease provoking, and can be deadly to other people; in addition to nasty smelling hair, clothing and even underwear.

Laws are passed to protect all people, not to punish smokers or prevent them from having fun. Is it not possible for a smoker to have fun in a restaurant, pub, disko, or other indoor and/or a/c venuse without smoking?

Is drinking alcohol not fun or enjoyable?

If I have fun and enjoy shooting other people with a BB gun and causing them to suffer, be uncomfortable, short of taking an eye out why should I not be allowed to do it? Second hand smoke is generally a lot more harmful than being stung with BB pellets.

BB guns are generally non-lethal, SHS is not.

Imagine you as a smoker go to a place that does not have a no smoking law in effect, but the non smokers are threatening violence if anyone lights up! How would you feel? Thats how non smiokers feel in places that the law prohibits smoking but certain people force it onto everyone else.

I have been to the smokiers paradise. It is Indonesia. I have been in mall food courts with a cloud of smoke. Smoking everywhere and apparently few laws. Very cheap cigarettes.

Edited January 8, 2012 by atyclb

[Jayman]

Some people really hate others having choices or having fun.

I just knew the activist for "fun and freedom" couldn't help himself to come here and chime in yet again.

Smokers have a choice to smoke at home or go out to places where smoking is banned and refrain. Fun is up to the person having it. If you think it's fun to fill your lungs full of toxic smoke then why don't you smoke? Are you not into having fun?

Edited January 8, 2012 by Jayman

[tombkk]

My post has nothing to do with the cost of healthcare and everything to do with the fact that just because you CANT smoke in a hospital doesn't mean that smokers are banned from hospitals which is a point another poster here has been trying to make. My point is nothing stops a smoker from frequenting a place where smoking is NOT allowed. This is not a bash on smokers as ppl. This is to keep the air clean for others to enjoy.

Are you serious? If smoking is not allowed in hospitals and smokers go there, the air will still be clean, as they won't be allowed to smoke. How is this not a bash on smokers?

I'm starting to think maybe English is not your first language. Let me repeat myself in simple words in hopes that you will finally understand

smoking is banned in hospitals = smokers can enter hospitals as long as they are not smoking

smoking is banned on airplanes = smokers can fly as long as they are not smoking

smoking is banned in Thai indoor restaurants = smokers can come eat in the restaurant as long as they don't smoke inside.

smoking bans = bash on smoking and NOT on smokers!

ok.. I shall step aside now so the activists can post on how they think the rules should be bent for exceptional few and the majority can just leave of they don't like it.

I agree with all of what you say except the last paragraph. Your previous posts are not consistent with what you post above, except the last paragraph.

The paragraph in your above post is not clear: Who do you think any rules should be bent for? If the majority is against smoking, then they will avoid places where smoking is allowed. In any case, the majority vote with their feet.

You don't get the point: If you are against smoking, just don't frequent places where smoking is allowed. This way, every pub will go broke, except the ones that you approve.

Easy, isn't it? Please let me know again what your point is, keeping in mind that I do not smoke.

[TAWP]

Some people really hate others having choices or having fun.

Second hand smoke is injurious, harmful, disease producing , disease provoking, and can be deadly to other people; in addition to nasty smelling hair, clothing and even underwear.

Laws are passed to protect all people, not to punish smokers or prevent them from having fun. Is it not possible for a smoker to have fun in a restaurant, pub, disko, or other indoor and/or a/c venuse without smoking?

Is drinking alcohol not fun or enjoyable?

If I have fun and enjoy shooting other people with a BB gun and causing them to suffer, be uncomfortable, short of taking an eye out why should I not be allowed to do it? Second hand smoke is generally a lot more harmful than being stung with BB pellets.

BB guns are generally non-lethal, SHS is not.

Imagine you as a smoker go to a place that does not have a no smoking law in effect, but the non smokers are threatening violence if anyone lights up! How would you feel? Thats how non smiokers feel in places that the law prohibits smoking but certain people force it onto everyone else.

I have been to the smokiers paradise. It is Indonesia. I have been in mall food courts with a cloud of smoke. Smoking everywhere and apparently few laws. Very cheap cigarettes.

I suppose it is hard for some people to understand free choice and personal responsibility. Otherwise your questions wouldn't have been asked.

You ask if you should be allowed to shoot others with a BB gun.

I am saying that if you go to a bar called 'Shoot your friends with BB guns until they bleed' and they have a sign informing people that this is going on on the premises and they encourage everyone that enters the premises to have the proper safety gear for this - or suffer their self-chosen consequences if hurt because they fail to have this kind of gear - than it is clearly up to these kind of people.

Do we allow private S&M clubs with consenting adults to operate? Well, in many countries we do not, in those that have an issue with sex - but in other we do as we understand that consenting adults that walk into this kind of establishment obviously are wanting this and shouldn't complain if they see someone being whipped on the premises. You are asking the government to be the mother that dictates what she thinks is best for people, even if it is a minor harmful thing and other more harmful thing is allowed, instead of allowing people to make conscious decisions, even of those decisions can be harmful to themselves.

I think a smoking ban that isn't followed is more harmful than allowing smoking but requiring clubs to have signs outside that indicates if they allow it or not - with full compliance if they do not allow it.