Bavaria's non-smoker protection law now passed

Oh yes they did...

Even chatting at normal levels outside with Keydeck (which means fairly loud for a conversation, but still definitely no shouting) just after the Arc had opened caused one of the neighbours to come down and start shouting. He calmed down pretty quickly, but nevertheless I absolutely see Hazza's point of view. I agree with BD though - it'll be made to work.

Business expense. Keeps the bar staff safer. Better than facing fines and going out of business. Many reasons on the pro list.


I live on planet Earth.

No, they would be needed on every night. Or do you think that patrons going outside for a smoke will be particularly quiet on Wednesdays? The noise tolerance from neighbours is a lot lower during the week too, for obvious reasons


OK then. If there's 40 people in the pub, then you only get a combined 500 minutes of smoking (8 hours and 20 minutes). Much better...

Ok, so persuing the tiresome mathematics of this and assuming your assumptions are correct, that 8 hours of smoking spread over an evening means an average of just over one person outside any given bar at any given time. So what song is he singing to himself while he smokes? How much noise does smoking a cigarette make? There's a bigger chance that one of the upstairs neighbours would piss on his head in protest at the smoke wafting in the windows. No, smokers just can't win can they...

are there really 200 people in a back street residential area pub on, say, a Monday night?

sure if there is a game of footy on it may be busy. but wouldn't it be possible for the barstaff to keep an eye on outside noise on quiet nights?

Great news.

Next Sunday Shopping.

And then decent customer service.

Wow, we could even end up living in a country that recognizes and encourages diversity and off the wall thinking. Though I doubt it, it's not in ordnung enough.

Wow, maybe even a country where one doesnt have ones child benefit stopped (without being informed) after 3 months while the Familenkasse confirm our address with the Anmeldenwankpigs, despite the fact that my wife works here, and I'm registered unemployed with the Arbeistsdontreallygiveafuckamt.

Or a country where you don't get reported to the police for calling your neighbor a "wanker" after he has called the police (5 times), the ordnugsbastedramt and the Social services just because he can't sleep in the morning and my kids cry a bit when they're teething.

Still.

The beer's cheap.

Cars are fitted with devices to reduce the pollution. The pollution limits are constantly being changed, to restrict the amount of pollution they cause. Do smokers wear anti-pollution equipment? Cars in Germany are allowed to go as fast as they want in certain circumstances. Speed doesn't kill, next week I will be travelling at over 500kph, yet that speed will do me no harm.

I've said it before, and even though I think Hazza's points make sense, I reckon it'll just work. It's pretty ridiculous though that the decision is passed today and the ban comes into place in 20 days. That's not a lot of time. Although I guess in the end, all they have to do is put up some no smoking signs and stop people from smoking in their buildings. Maybe it will work all smoothly like I said, and all this fuss will have been for nothing.

But they have had the no smoking signs up in S-bahn stations for ages and people just ignore them.

As for banning cars and trucks.. Its coming.. Haven't you read about the new Red/yellow/green Eco stickers and how cars with red/yellow
stickers are going to be banned from certain city zones..

For a start, lots of non-smokers will also go outside with their mates. So that brings the number up again. If you must use the UK or Ireland or the US as a comparison, then you will see that this is the case there too. Those mates don't go outside just to stand there quietly in the corner either.

You know it's going to be a problem...why pretend otherwise??

no we are all speculating.
we all have valid speculations and can make comparisons to other countries and from previous experience as bar-owners or bar-visitors etc but no one knows for sure what problems will arise from the ban.

Of course it will be a problem. But there will also be a solution. They're not just going to start the ban, bitch about the noise for a couple of months and then throw in the towel.. "ugh, you know what? Hazza was right. Let's just let everyone smoke again."

C'mon.

No, I'm not sure this is a problem. I'm sure it will happen outside somewhere like Kilians where there's a busy bar in an otherwise silent area, maybe there'll be a comment in the papers about it but in general I doubt if the fabric of society will be materially affected by it.

And what is the solution then? Why don't they think of that first, before introducing this law?

And why is everyone saying "Hooray" without even wondering about it themselves???

Even if half the bars closed because of noise violations, I'd still be happy, because now I pretty much don't go to bars at all, and the other half will now be acceptable to me. Even if 90% of the bars closed. That still leaves 10% I'd be willing to go to, which is more than I have now.

And gee if "everyone" is saying hooray -- then doesn't hat indicate that society wants this change? Not just "selfish anti-smokers"?

well that's real considerate of ya, gen

As I've said twice, bouncers! You say 50 € a night? That's not very much money, especially considering the amount of damage control the bouncer can do. Until the situation pipes down, that would be my solution for the pub owner.

Why, exactly, do you care so much about the fate of pub owners and their neighbors? I know you come from that industry, as do I, but shouldn't you be more angry about being the one forced to go outside for a smoke?

Well, I don't know about other non-smokers, but it definitely did cause me to "hermit it up". I will be able to go out to eat a lot more now - I avoided all restaurants in winter because I hate the smoke.

You have the choice to stay at home.

I am just concerned its going to stuff up my chances of getting Sky ... my wife hates the smoke so I was using it as an excuse... so now add loss of revenue for Germansky and Bavaria satellite.

I am all for the ban but the points Hazza and others have are valid

I'm stunned and I find that appalling. This is people's livelihoods you're talking about...

But this is the point of extremists Hazza. As long as they get their own way they don't give a shit about anyone/anything else.

I'm just not in favor of supporting failing business models.

You're quite right, I do, but then, seeing as I don't smoke and haven't for years why would I? I just think that you saying that you don't go to pubs and therefore don't care if 90% of them close is really special of ya.

@Lawsey: I don't quite follow your logic, why would a smoking ban prevent you from having Sky installed?

€50 a night is a lot of money. It's €1500 a month or €18000 a year. Would you be happy to lose that.


Because I don't always just think of myself...

@Uncle Nick: Because now she will say I can go to the pub to watch the football/rugby/cricket etc etc instead of getting it installed...whilst I am at it I will also have to take her out to dinner more and heaven forbid...socialize more!!

But it's not a failing business model. It's only failing due to heavy handed government intervention.

And that is patently unfair...

that's assuming the bars are busy enough every night to warrant bouncer employment.
busy bars will be able to afford that wouldn't they...smaller quieter ones wouldn't need to.

Hazza, I'm appalled that you think democracy isn't working here. Did you ever write to your political representatives on the matter? Did you go to the demonstration you posted about Monday evening? I've worked for this law to pass, even though I can't vote in this country. Created a website and programmed a database for a non-smoking organization (http://belair-muenchen.de/datenbank.html - the list of non-smoking restaurants we've collected), maintained many entries in TT's guide to nonsmoking restaurants in Munich, wrote to politicians, have been to several demonstrations, and tomorrow night I'll be on TV. All totally selfish uses of my time. What have you done besides bitch here? Whatever it was, I guess it wasn't convincing enough.

Hazza, you have my sympathies.


Err If I remember correctly that still means the bar owner being out of pocket.. or will the governement make extra-non-smoking-security tax deductable?

Hazza is right, the massive, oh so massive problem will be the noise. Unless of course someone can come up wth a statistic that says noise-complainers are by their very nature radical non-smokers and after January the first are now all to be found in smoke free bars so won't hear a thing. No, smoking a ciggie when pissed with mates has never been a quiet affair. I expect the police are going to get damm mighty sick of this soon.

The other factor that hasnt been weighed in is the climate. Sure it works in London, Dublin blah di blah du blah. It never gets colder than 6 degrees in winter and that is considered deep winter artic penguin time. Here months can go on before the damm quicksilber rises above 0, and in the evenings it can easily be minus ten by 9 p.m. Not the best circumastances.

As a ex-smoker, and I used to smoke more than most of you pussies here who claim to be smokers I tell ya, I don't realy give a monkies nipple whether someone smokes near me or not. If it's too smokey for me I leave.

This is yet another knee jerk reaction political bollocks for a few whingers who to be honest are not the people who power the turnover at bars - ie lieghtweight drinkers, probbly drinking two wine schorlers and then not more because they dont like to lose control and get drunk.

It would have been more important in the big picture of thnigs to bring in a speedlimit, this is just a side show, I'm sure if you searched hard you'd fingd that more people probably die of speed caused car accidents than second hand smoke. And if they really wont to think big picture then start banning fat people, who are becoming an increasing burden to the health system, which means we all pay extra taxes so they are hurting us all with their selfish fatness. I'm sure we could find many examples.

Lawsey, bud, I feel your pain, but on the bright side, you can now take the good lady with you down the pub and while you watch the sport of your choice, you've always got someone to pop off and get you a fresh one! Result

And so how will smaller bars keep their smokers quiet when they go outside?

Afford it yes but I would certainly expect the cost to be passed on to the consumers. 50 cents a beer would seem reasonable if a pub has to have bouncers to control the noise outside the pub.

I hope you live near a pub, Gen and that your bedroom window faces out onto the street.

@ Hazza

isn't it possible the bar-staff can manage that on quiet nights? only takes one of them to nip outside and ask the smokers to keep the noise down, that's if they're even making loud noise in the first place.

This isn't democracy this is loudest minortity politics. Smokers, have been forced to sit in the guilt corner and are deep down so ashamed that they are addicted to the damm things that they are afraid to actual voice their rights.

@triumph bob: you haven't met the wife have you... but I like your thinking mate

Surely non-smokers are a majority though?

If a pub has to close up shop because it can't handle the loss of business associated with the smoking ban (and street noise situation), then it's probably not that profitable anyways. I can't see this ban really affecting the small pubs that much. Are the smokers of Germany going to say, "I'm not going out tonight, I can't smoke in that bar" if it's a bar they enjoyed going to before the ban? I can't really see that happening. What I do see happening is the smokers of Germany saying "fck, I used to be able to smoke in that bar, can't anymore, that sucks" but they still go the bar anyways. And as a result, they end up smoking fewer cigarettes that night. Why do I think that? Because that's exactly how this played out in the U.S. when they first introduced the ban!

Hazza, I do live above a very popular bar! Now I might even go INTO the pub, as I can tell from outside that people are having fun in there watching sports, talking, listening to music... and their bar staff manage their noisy people quite well when they tell them to please be quiet when leaving as the person who lives directly above does complain if they're too loud. And the patrons -- comply.

If you don't like the laws your politicians were discussing, why didn't you do anything about it? Well then it obviously wasn't very important to you now was it.

I would be VERY happy to lose that. And I'll tell you why. When I was working at a bar there were three nights during the week where no security was in place. A few of those times there were also no men on the premise. Now, I'm pretty feisty but if a fight had broken out, there would've been nothing we could've done but wait for police to come. But that's just my personal opinion about having security around.

Now, if I were a business owner and had a busy pub, where, as you put it, my 40 smoking customers were constantly causing complaints that potentially would ruin my business, then yes, I would fork out the 50 € to security to shut them the up or fuck them off elsewhere.


If the bar owner doesn't put his staff on the books, then yes, you're right, it's out of his pocket. Do you not think that businesses subtract their personnel costs before turning in their taxes?

So you're saying it wont affect his cash flow? IIRC Most small bar owners do not pay themselves a salary, they take the float, so the loss of 1500 Euros is a direct hit on their money in the pocket, and the difference between their families eating the next month or not.

True, but surely it would put more food on the table than if their pub was put out of business due to all the complaints? Hazza has asked repeatedly for a solution, I've provided one, for 50 € a night. Bargain, I tell you.

So Gen,
You actively campaigned for a law to stop people smoking in pubs when you rarely use them? Doesn't that seem a bit odd? If you don't go in them, then why would it bother you?

Australia no longer has smoking rooms - as of July 2007, all pubs and clubs in Australia are completely smoke-free.

The best thing would have been to leave it as it is. It wasn't that much of a problem, I believe some people - natural born whingers - tend to be oversensitive to living in the modern world, If it's not smokers, it's children breathing to loudly or waking up before 11 am on a Sunday and moving at a child like speed, or it's people with less busy and important jobs than themselves actualy having the cheek to use something or other when they want to, car fumes, parking spaces, loud mp3 players, fat people in general and irish folk singing. Live and let live.

triumph_bob, the idea was that I could go in them if they weren't so stinky and smoky. The smell bothered me so much that I didn't go -- I was one of those "hermits" mentioned further up. Now I can go.

And it was a problem gid, enough so that there were lots of anti-smoking organizations campaigning for years against it. Society changes -- things aren't always good just as they are.