Bavaria's non-smoker protection law now passed

Imdgman, I'm glad you used your power as a consumer to let establishments know that you wouldn't dine there if there wasn't a no smoking section, if more people actually used this power, the market would have found a happy medium, but no. Again, I don't smoke ciggies.

@Hazza, you talk about "smokers" outside, but then a solitary smoker in the corner, because surely just one smoker wouldn't disturb anyone, right? Smokers are going to be put out by the smoking ban, and they're going to have to adapt. If your solution is "well, we'll just let them keep on smoking in the pub", then you've achieved nothing.

@Marcsignal, do you realise that putting "FACT" at the end of each sentence doesn't actually turn your statements into fact? Several, if not all, of your FACTs are actually OPINIONs.

The laws on noise from pubs and the presence of patrons outside pubs after the expiry of their outside license times are not new.
They are as old as the hills.
People who have a drink are NOT quiet outside which is why pubs get hassles.
When pubs try and enforce quiet outside their premises, they get slagged off. ie the bounces at Kilians.

Why on EARTH is it likely that human behaviour that hasn't been effected by the law until now will suddenly change becasue of a new law that encourages / forces people to break the other law?

@Mat T

All quoted examples are findings from a 3 year study, and 2007 thesis written by a DCU (Dublin City University) hons BA student 'Aisling Daly' in Dublin, and, as it happens, she is a non smoker. So they are not my 'Opinions' at all im afraid.

unfortunately, it is not available online for your perusal...

Hence the use of the "FACT." after every paragraph, presumably? You realise that writing it lends no extra weight to the statement?

I wrote a BA dissertation and the results were so unreliable that you couldn't even start to call them "facts". A single 20-year old student doesn't have the resources to research accurately, and isn't expected to either.

The fact is though that at the same time as the smoking bans there has been a massive drop in the sales of beer pubs.
This year the UK pub trade will sell least ammount of beer in pubs since 1920.
Soming bans are a nail in the coughing (sic) for pubs. Not the only one, but a significant one.

Well avoided...

You know that a bar owner isn't going to be coming to any sort of complex socialogical conclusions. It's not like my scenario is so unlikely.

So if you were to be faced with this scenario, then how do you react?

@Monkstown: The pub trade has been selling the least amount of beer since 1920 almost every year. Only the occasional World Cup and/or particularly hot summer provides a temporary boost. There are other social reasons for the decline in alcohol consumption, as is the case here in Germany as well.

Really? Including this one?


If so, she's just created a paradox.


I didn't say that they will be quiet. I said that they will have to adapt. Smokers will have a number of options (going to a place with an outdoor area, smoking outdoors quietly, going to and leaving the pub earlier, smoking less, or even NOT smoking for a few hours, just to name the first few that occur to me), but all of these are going to require some effort on the smoker's part. If the smoker is not willing to go to any effort, then he/she's not deserving of any sympathy.

@ small town boy

Her family are/were in the pub trade, and the study was done over 3 years. I'd argue that that is more than adequate time to carry out a reasonably good analysis, at relatively little inconvenience. As well as having good insight into the pub business herself, and the fact that students spend a lot of time in pubs. I'd argue was possible to do valuable research quite easily, by studying the patterns of change on/at student social events. I'd also argue that the research was not biast towards smokers, since the student involved was a non smoker.

If I'm honest, there were plenty of positive findings in the thesis too, regarding time taken to clean pubs at the end of the night, etc. and the fact pubs didn't need to be redecorated so often. Like I say, the ban didn't bother me, but it did confirm for me, many of the obvious things i've observed about the facts of the ban in Ireland.

So you realise then that pubs in inner Munich will be in a no win situation:
Smoking banned inside, noise / mere presence banned outside.

Noise / mere presence outside means a € 175 or so fine


Not all pubs have them and they all close in Munich at 2300 latest.
Using them after 2300 incurs fines.


Doesn't happen.


They tend to NOT go to the pub and they tend to close as a result.


ONE smoker having ONE cig outside a pub can be a €175 fine for the pub.


Here's some news: Smoking in itself is addictive. Combined with drink and a pub, socially addictive too.
If the government was SO opposed to smoking hy not ban it totally?
They don't as it's a nice little earner.

If I'm eating and there is a smoking ban and they are allowing smoking, then I'll leave and point out that the guy smoking in the corner as the reason. If I'm only having a few beers, then I wouldnt care. But I'd also point out to the owner that allowing the guy to smoke is jeopordising their license more by allowing smoking to carry on. That smoker doesnt give a damn about the owners business, if the bar closed because of it, he'll just find somewhere else to go.

Not avoided, I just pointed out the underlying assumptions of your post… namely that this smoker simply has to be at the bar. They don’t… disallow them from the premise like anyone else who’s repeated unlawful behavior threatens the business.

The solution: do not allow smoking in the bar, do not allow loitering outside the entrance.

This can work, because

1) Smokers somehow manage to still take airplane flights without smoking, they can go for extended periods without smoking. So they can go out for an evening without smoking.

2) Many other businesses successfully deal with public nuisances attracted to their premise. I’m specifically thinking of teenagers hanging out at local gas stations. These business manage to deal with this problem, I fail to see how smokers are somehow different and uncontrollable.

Personally, I think this law should be enforced through a combination of pressure on the business owners to enforce their patrons to remain quiet… and if the problem persists, ‘strings’ by plain cloths cops targeting individuals for being loud.

I do, however, fail to believe this is some intractable problem

???


Ahhh ??? Typo nazi

Having said that, there's little point in speculating now, what effect it will have in Germany, everybody will know the social effects in a month or two, and the overall effect on businesses within 2 or 3 years. That is really the point where people can say 'I told you so' not now.

So come on? I thought you'd all be dying to tell me how you'd cause a scene and then call the cops and being all self-righteous about it.

You can't tell me that this is not something that could realistically happen - particularly with the police already saying that they won't be conducting random checks...

The Bavarian Police have said they won't be doing special anti smoking patrols.
Munich City Council has said they won't be detailing any staff to enfroce a Bavarian state law.

If people are still smoking in pubs after 1st January, who is going to cal 110?

The issue of loitering teens at a petrol station isn't the same.
Becasue smokers outsid a pub are customers of that pub and will alternate their time outside and time inside conducting new business ie buying drinks.
The publican does NOT want them to go away; that's the point.


Can we epect the law to be revsersed or amended if the predicted reults take effect?

Nice reply.

You make bunch of statements and claim they are facts. You claim that they are all extracts from somebody's research. I would like to see a source for your "NO Government anywhere, will never [sic] publish survey information about anything, that they don't want you to hear, or that undermines their plans. FACT." quote.

Nevermind, you guys are right. This is the single greatest threat humanity has ever faced. Civilization has marched on, up until now, but we have finally met our match with this issue. I fully expect all commerce to grind to a halt on January 1.

People returning back from winter vacations will periodically be seen on their knees weeping outside the hollow out husk of their former favorite pubs screaming: “We Finally did it, You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!�

[img]http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Film/Pix/pictures/2000/02/03/Planet.jpg[/img]

If you complain to the bar and they tell you that they can't send smokers outside due to the noise and you decide to call the cops, then if the cops show, the barman will put 2 and 2 together and you'll get thrown out and banned...

ok I'll be a little clearer... "meaning what exactly ??"


It falls into the catogory of 'The Bleeding Obvious' if that will do ??

FYI Matt taking advantage of a 'typo' to use as ammunition, is not conducive to reasonable debate, it's immature, and shows a lack of confidence.

So let me just get this straight: It is entirely possible to ban someone who is pointing out a bars violation of the law, but not possible to ban someone causing the violation.

I like that:

“excuse me barkeep, but it appears all of your fire detectors are broken and your wiring is faulty�
“So, what’s your point?�
“That’s really unsafe, you can’t continue this way�
“So, are you going to rat me out?�
“No, but perhaps you should tell that guy cutting the wires to stop�
“Sorry, there’s nothing I can do, we want his business�
“Can’t you ask him to stop, I’m a customer too?�
“That’s it pal, you’re trouble, get out of here and don’t come back!�

I think you've gotten plenty of feedback. I do think that option 1 is definitely incorrect, but had refrained from answering the question directly because I feel your hypothetical situation is a little too contrived and untypical. It certainly doesn't cover the majority of gastronomical outlets in Bavaria. And it includes statements like "sending smokers outside", which is just plain wrong - you don't send smokers anywhere.

If a pub can't survive unless it allows smoking indoors, then it's also time for that pub to adapt. If it doesn't, and goes out of business, then that's partly the fault of the smokers, and partly the fault of the pub for not adapting. And yes, it'd also be partly the fault of the non-smokers, but that's like blaming the Internet for the decline of record shops. It's called progress, and keeping up is part of surviving. I get the impression that you are actually hoping that the pubs and smokers won't adapt, just so you can say "I told you so". I hope that's not actually the case.

The problem is that the bars are breaking the law either way.
Which is why small pubs should have an exemption and large pubs with two rooms should be made to have one no smoking.
The so called Spanish solution.

Sone snotty nosed blow in who grasses a pub to the police but is NOT going to be a regular should find themselves out on their arse quicker than they know it.

No, ban the smokers from the pub, problem solved.

Smoking's been legal in bars for 500 years. So do they do the sensible thing and decide that there needs to be some consultation with the bar owners and the KVR and the police and draft a law to be implemented after everyone has a reasonable understanding of how this will be enforced and the things that they will all need to look out for? And give everyone a good amount of time to prepare?

No, the dickheads who were elected to represent the people decide in their infinite wisdom that for some unknown reason, this needs to be rushed in really quickly. So they announce that the law will be one thing around 6 months prior to implementation. Then around 2 months before they change their minds and then pass the actual law a mere 20 days before it is to be implenented in a way that has those in the business, those in charge of making policy and those in charge of policing the law clueless to the effects.

And there's a bunch of people on here applauding this process...

just to play devil's advocate: how is a tiny one room pub which caters exclusively to smokers supposed to adapt?

Maybe if smokers weren't the best customers, then that would work.

Kinda like the management at Disneyland saying: "Kids cry too much - let's ban them"

No, I’m simply pointing out it isn’t an intractable problem. The process might very well have been screwed up, but you are presenting it as a problem with no solution what so ever. This is what I am specifically taking issue with.

I ignored your typo, and did not attack that. My reference to a "paradox" was based on the idea of a university study (therefore government-funded) apparently making the statement that government studies will never say anything to the detriment of the government.

However, despite you having stated that all your facts were lifted from a certain study, this one apparently isn't. It's getting a little off-topic, which I why I didn't follow up on this in my last post, but you do realise that I only have to find one government study, anywhere in the world, which says something detrimental to absolutely any policy of that government, to disprove your fact? I'm just saying that your throwing the word FACT around so casually is bad form, and I picked the easiest target in your post to illustrate that point.

Become a tea-room.

tea-rooms are exempt from the smoking ban?

All of your posts have the same underlying assumption: that smokers are somehow people that emit smoke. That their smoking is uncontrollable.

Since it’s a total ban, the smokers will have to adapt. Some might get banned from a pub, and the rest will realize they can no longer continue as usual, and not smoke at the bar.

Again, I’m not saying there won’t be issues initially, as there is in every industry when ever a new law is passed. Then society will adjust, and all other this useless hand wringing will be looked back upon as just that.

Under present laws, there is no solution. As someone with experience owning a bar in Munich, I truly believe that. The solutions given here have all been unworkable or downright laughable.

And the applause is absolute...no criticism of the way the law was written. So one can only come to the conclusion that you approve.

You said in an earlier post that it is possible to ban people from a bar, there is your solution.

Jebus, are you guys still here?

Besides which a first degree (not even a science degree FFS) dissertation is hardly cutting edge research. More a case of asking the local barman what he thinks

Yeah, I'm a little curious how this thread will continue after Jan 1 and into the future.

It will be interesting to look back on certainly

Interesting that someone who claims to do what they want on their profile is so vehemently behind a decision to enforce restriction of personal choice.

I suppose Timmeh hit upon a valid point - if gasthauses had done more to create non-smoking areas in their establishments it might never have needed to come to this. Personally though, I am very, very happy that this law is coming in. I have always gotten headaches and sneezing fits due to smoke, and would have to leave parties and get togethers very early due to this.

...And have a business remain financially viable, obviously. You can't just ban your best customers and expect to survive

Hey, just had slightly off topic thought, but what if they bring this law in in Amsterdam / the Netherlands?

Hazza, surely if they are your best customers, they should have a bit more respect and understanding than some schmo who's just walked in off the street?

someone keeps feeding the troll...

Are you calling me a troll? If you are, you can Fuck right off. I'm giving my opinions on a topic - not to bait people, but because that is what I believe.

You don't even know what a troll is...

Wanker.

Correct, things I also think businesses should be required to do:

- maintain fire safety systems
- cater to the handicapped
- allow seeing eye dogs
- prevent hazardous work environments for employees
- prevent pollution of the local environment.

We are not islands, ‘personal choice’ is fine, except it often impacts others adversely, and can therefore be regulated.

I don’t accept bars wanting to allow smoking anymore than I would any other business needlessly allowing a hazardous work environment.

So they should shut early to prevent health problems associated with working night shifts too?

As for smokers being the best customers... fine. But having a policy of 'smoking outside our bar will lead to your being banned' does not mean you suddenly loose all business from smokers.

It means there is individual punishment for those that disregard the law. 99% of all smokers will choose to follow this, and not smoke in the bar or outside it if they know the punishment… unless their plan is to systematically go from bar to bar being banned.

I address this each time you bring it up, can you please stop?

Getting nowhere with this.

We'll see how well this doesn't work on 1 January...

@ Matt T

Ok point taken, no worries

Generally, in my observation of this thread, I've noticed there is a lot of arguement, about whether or not there will be problems with 'Noise Levels' outside pubs, among other things, etc. and I can only say that there WILL be changes in people's social, drinking habits, as a result of the ban, that is inevitable.
You wont have to wait too long to see them either, 2 or 3 months at most.

If non smokers are under any illusion, that the whole place is suddenly going to turn into some kind of 'non smokers utopia', forget it, the ban will affect you in other ways. If bar owners have to build, and heat, smoking areas, they will start charging more for their beer, and that will cost you too, as well as the smokers.

I'll be bold enough to make a few other predictions.

IMO
The law will not see smokers quitting on mass, Smokers will, by and large, continue to smoke, they will just do it elsewhere, where they are allowed to.
Bouncers will have new problems seperating smokers standing outside, from random drunk people wanting to come in to a pub/club
Pubs without a smoking area, especially in rural areas will suffer, and some may close.
There will be an increase in private partys in peoples houses/apartments.
Off Licence sales will go up.
In some cases, peoples social groups will fragment, with smokers and non smokers drifting in their separate ways.
Pubs/Clubs in the city centre, with a good heated smoking area, will fare better than those that don't.
By Spring and Summer, you will find as many non smokers, as smokers, in the smoking area.

I could be proved wrong with 'some' or indeed 'all' of the above, but you will all know, by about March or April, however, the Winters are, by and large, the Acid Test.