Right - or wrong?
Rob Simpson writes: I'm a proud smoker who is disgusted by the draconian news laws to ban smoking in public places and I'm appalled at the tactics of the anti-smoking lobby. However, I feel your approach to this issue is hindering our cause and merely helps to polarize opinion. Claiming that smokers have a right to smoke in pubs is no argument at all and only antagonises non-smokers, creating more anti-smokers.
The vast majority of people in this country would be happy to allow smoking in smoking rooms so we should be concentrating our efforts on the weak evidence of a link between passive smoking and cancer etc, but at the same time supporting exclusions to the ban for smoking rooms, allowing bar staff to work in a smoke-free environment, not irritating non-smokers with our smoke but still allowing smokers to smoke in enclosed public places.
posted by Simon Clark @ 15:18
1 comments
1 Comments:
Rob, where have you been these past few years? Few people - and certainly not Forest - argue that smokers have a "right" to smoke in pubs, restaurants etc.
Pubs etc are private businesses. Publicans, restaurateurs should have the right to choose a policy on smoking that best suits their business - and that includes a ban on smoking.
That said, we have argued that a smoking ban should be a last resort. Options should include better ventilation, designated smoking areas, designated smoking rooms etc etc. Only if these options are impractical, or if there is overwhelming consumer demand for a ban, should a total ban be implemented.
Re passive smoking, no-one has worked harder to highlight the junk science that surrounds secondhand smoke. Take a look at our website, in particular the section on passive smoking (Key Issues), and download our 56-page report 'Prejudice & Propaganda: The Truth About Passive Smoking'.
In short, what you are proposing is exactly what Forest has been doing for years.
Post a Comment
<< Home