"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Stuart Noble wrote:
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2007-11-11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article 473742ce@qaanaaq,
Andy Hall wrote:
The ban makes it possible to go to said pub. It doesn't guarantee
them the business. They have allowed a major deterrent to persist
for decades. Now that has gone. But.... they still need to win the
business.

There was nothing to stop a pub banning smoking before this law.
Restaurants too. In fact many of the latter did.

But even when pubs were non smoking - or had non smoking bars - they
were
the empty ones.

Garbage.

I agree. Total garbage. Once the word got around that some pubs/bars
were non-smoking they were full. The problem was that it took time
for word to get around and in the meantime the place lost some money
so they dropped the idea in many. It took too long for word to get
around. In one local pub they banned smoking at the bar and allowed
smoking only in one end. It half worked as when you walked in you
could still smell the stinking stuff and the smoke did drift over.
The partial ban inside only relieved matters for proper people - not
eliminate it.

SMOKING IS BANNED. These half-wits should live with it and accept it,
and realise it is for their own good. Many of them clearly need
therapy.

You are a nasty little control freak.

The

You must eff off as you are a smoking idiot!