You'd think..
2 threads seem to suggest otherwise
I know, I thought the same as I wrote that. :biggrin1:
A blanket ban is undoubtably 'unfair' if one looks at it in a purely objective 'infringment of rights' perspective.
Businesses had the opportunity to take steps to provide
proper, separated facilties with real dedicated ventilation etc and, overall they failed to take full advantange, presumably because of cost, and, perhaps gambling that such a blanket ban would never materialise. They misjudged and it's too late to cry foul now. If I were on the other side of the equation I may of course feel differently. But I also like to think I can separate emotion from logic when necessary.
For the most part I spend very little time in 'smoky' evironments, but it's taken this ban to realise just how much I had adjusted my behaviour over the years to avoid the affects of 'smokers', and thus how unreasonable having to make that adjustment really was. I used to hate going to bars, even those with 'smoking areas' for example because I inevitably came back with stinking clothes and hair, never mind the potential health risk, yukk.
This doesn't apply to you, and a few other smokers here but I don't know how many times I can say that I have no, none, zero problems with anyone smoking a cigarette, but such as in a bar or pub,
I just don't want to share it with you against my will. What part of that desire do smokers arguing that a ban is 'obnoxious' or ridiculous not get?
Thanks, K.:smile: