Bavaria's non-smoker protection law now passed

I know for one, that if I see anyone smoking in a restaurant I'm in I will give them a mouthful before making sure they put out their cigarette. I imagine others will likely do the same. They managed it in Italy where no one follows the rules, they can manage it here too.

The UK smoking ban was supposed to kill off all pub culture. Well, (gulp), maybe it did, but the places I've seen in London just bolted some drink rests outside the door and the insides looked as crowded as ever.

One could put up with smoking in a drafty NYC bar and/or British pub, but nothing was worse than a bunch of herman puffing away in hermetically-sealed Velux windows, overheated surroundings and those pokey upholstered cow stalls that pass for booths. The minute the smoking ban hit Hessen, restaurants became infinitely more desireable places to congregate and eat.

People would light up in offices all the time earlier in my career ...now, that's unimaginable. Same will happen in restaurants.

P.S. The latest wrinkle in this story is that Hessen is talking seriously about banning outdoor propane heaters due to the fact that they contribute to greenhouse gasses. How about banning the traditional German diet if they're so worried about that?

Like the pubs that will be in breach of the law if they allow smoking inside or force the smokers outside?

And burgers and fries are any better?

Dangerous route that one. Can you imagine the stink the Heinz lobby would make if they went down the route of banning flatulance inducing foods.

I found something interesting tucked away in the lower left corner of today's Bayern section of the Süddeutsche Zeitung: Seems that the smokers who continue to smoke in non-smoking areas will not immediately be fined but merely cautioned (unless they are blatantly smoking in spite of the ban) to give people "time to get used to the legislation". Canine nuts, a law is a law, and if a fine is involved you pay up.

Could be the end of German culture as we know it. The thin edge of the wedge. Germans only know following the rules and now they are about to introduce a law that doesn't have to be followed. By the end of January they will be crossing when the man is red and leaving their engines on at level crossings. I only hope they also learn that wearing a scarf doesn't stop you getting a cold as well.

Excuse me, but this and Timmeh's lame arguments are preposterous. I was at Birdland recently, a legendary jazz club in Manhattan. No smoke. Absolutely fabulous performance --Ed Riley, Thelonius Monk's old drummer with a band of virtuosi -- and really cool atmosphere. It would have been a foul atmosphere, and very distracting from the music, if I had been sitting next to smokers.

Timmeh's "selfish nonsmoker" argument is ludicrous. It's clearly nicotine addicts who are selfish, blowing acrid smoke in our faces and lungs for decades now so they could satisfy their unnatural craving anytime and anyplace they wanted. Amazing that it took so long for German politicians to come to their senses.

What will happen? Look at the US, particularly California (my current location), where smoking in public places has been banned for years. The bars and restaurants are still full, and everybody can breathe, drink, and eat normally. A few smokers sometimes stand around outside, but I've never observed this to be a problem, and I eat out a lot. More and more are giving up the weed altogether. Good for their health, and ours.

As for enforcement, finally there's a law that allows patrons to point out to smokers that they are breaking a law. In German restaurants I used to politely request that smokers in my vicinity not light up, and they usually complied, sort of embarrassed. I'd do the same now, and could do it with teeth if they refused.

Read the news today ?

http://www.tz-online.de/tzheute/art1061,339439

a pensioner told two guys in the U4 to stop smoking, they followed
him and almost beat him to death. Scary.

Called it!

I've read through all the comments & postings on this thread and the arguements that are turning up have been seen, dealt with and forgotten in most other EU countries which have implemented the ban.
Where should the smokers go? Well most places have set up outside umbrella areas, sometimes with gas heaters. There they happily smoke, meet like minded people and then return to their non-smoking friends.
What about the small bars etc? Well my experience in Sweden was a general revenue increase of 25% across the whole bar/restuarant business in the first quarter.
Here's a prediction of a newspaper story that we'll be reading in the next few monts:"Customers report that they now have to put up with the smell of people with bad hygene problems.'Before the smoking ban we never noticed them.' ". I predict this as I have heard it reported in Sweden, Denmark Ireland and most recently the UK. A little journalistic plagiarism going on there I believe.
Personal opinion, Jan 1st cannot come soon enough!

It's selfish as there is no entertaining of a happy medium as well as the general attitude displayed by the antis, such as yourself. Thanks for backing me up.

Let me make it REAL simple as this is going out to Spätzleland:

1. Most other places don't have the high correlation between very dense enertainment areas and very densely populated areas that inner Munich has.
2. Many other places have an outdoor space, many in inner Munich don't. Even where they do that is only allowed to be used after 2300.
3. Most other places don't have crochety neighbours who call the police at 2305 if those areas are in use and a police force that issue fines for EUR 175 for a few minutes infringement.

Sorry, Timmeh, but he is right. Smoking is an inherently selfish activity. The benefit is given all to the smoker, and the negative consequences are put primarily on multiple other individuals. There really is no other argument.

I don't claim that smoking is not also selfish

I hope I don´t insult any of my smoker friends by saying that I, too, am one of those people who didn´t complain, but will definitely be hanging out in pubs more now that there will be less smoke.

Not a very brilliant or informative post -- my brain is fried after reading all 29 pages of this thread in one sitting.

This is absolutely true. Ask any publican. Those who frequent bars usually have a "hum" off them. It's their nature, you see. You just have to tell the barman that "your man or woman there is a bit off" and I have been reliably informed that publicans and barmen will oblige by asking really "humming" people to quietly leave or freshen up. Most pubs will have dispensers where you can buy aerosol body freshener. These dispensers will replace the fag machines and help increase the turnover of the pubs. Every cloud has a publican's lining, doesn't it?

So Stockholm, Copenhagen, Dublin and errm London don't have that same high correlation? From personal experience I would say that every major city has many Haidhausens where locals go as opposed to the Tourist traps. To the 2300 point, sure London is still closing up early but most bars in Scandnavian cities that provide outside seating have to abide to similar rules and regulations.
Spätzeland? Was that a slight on Augsburg? Actually Datschiland is more accurate and you can spare the insults as my opinion is that the best way to see Augsburg is in the rear-view mirror.

I am very interested to see what O-fest smoke-free will be like. I can wear nicer dirndls there now without fearing cigarette holes in them. And if anyone complains that the customers will stay away, I will just laugh.

Awww lovely... I just walked for a bit up Leopold str... people outside of cafes and business smoking obediently

People were still smoking in our company cafeteria today. I asked a woman working there, and she said that a company cafeteria is private and not open to the "public", and therefore not covered by the non-smoking law. The Betriebsrat is apparently still discussing if smoking in the cafeteria should be prohibited or not.

All cities have their entertainment districts for sure.
But not in correlation with highest population density and a tendency to call the police at 2305 for noise violation will the police enforce with instant fines.

[img]http://media1.break.com/dnet/media/2008/1/21jan2-healthy-at-100.jpg[/img]

Another TTer sent me this SZ link last night, as I'd mentioned to him that we have problems at work with people smoking in the kitchen, and the management seem none to keen to do something about it. Basically smoking in the workplace is covered under existing legistlation to protect employees from passive smoking, and what this articles seems to be saying is that this applies to kitchen, canteens, etc as well as offices.

Yes it does, your company is in the wrong for allowing it.. Either remind them of what their doing is against the law.
If they still don't act, then report them to your works council, if that still doesn't work then contact the Ordnungsamt.

If your worried that they might fire you for doing so, don't. The labor laws are in your favor and you'll get your
job back or a nice big payout.

Well just applied for my first club membership of the <cough> "club" at the end of the street.

Here you go Monk, Just found this on the archives of the New York public library regarding an exhibition of historical smoking habits called Dry Drunk.

In spite of the harsh words of James I a century earlier, the upper classes of 18th-century England indulged themselves heartily in tobacco, reveling in the thick, luscious clouds of smoke. The gentleman's club was the locus par excellence for manly conversation and relaxation, aided by consumption of a good glass of beer or punch and a fine, long, slow-burning pipeful of tobacco. This gentlemanly practice was also on the receiving end of much languid smoky satire, making it that much more memorable.

The 18th-century smoking club epitomizes the arguments both for and against the devilish herb. In this milieu, its narcotic effects are plainly, blatantly sought and achieved. Caricature in 18th-century England, from Hogarth to Gillray, cultivated an extraordinarily keen sense of getting to the bottom of social habits and institutions.

You could probably get some repros of engravings to hang up in your local club.

Nah, I'm not going to hang up pictures glorifying smoking.
I don't like it.

Looks like Turkey is joining in the fun.

Oh my god, stinky bottoms!! bleargh!
I was quite happy for the smoking ban to start (apart from how the jerk-off Government introduced it) but I take it all back. I'll take smoke over micro-poo's any day.
I am going to start a petition for a farting ban in bars & public places. Or at least ask that people try improving their diets before going out socialising.

With a name like marshbot??!!

Sorry, was just watching Shrek with my poorly daughter and the stinky bottoms and marshbot thing just go soooooo well together

Not if I can help it. Stinky bottoms will be BARRED. And if that doesn't work, we should at least press to get alarm systems set up for danger areas. Whether that be warning detectors in public zones or just flashing lights and alarms on peoples pants, I don't mind.
I shall add your name to my petition. Once we get this law passed, I suppose we'll have to start work on armpits.

And people with irritating laughs.

Interesting SZ article that touches on the class aspect of the smoking ban:

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/artikel/475/151097/

An interview with OB Ude which is well worth a read anyway but where he raises similar points to those that Hazza, myself and others have raised in the debate.

http://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/artikel/484/144160/

Dude,
You're in distinguished company now, eh?

And just about this class bit, isn't that like John Reid opposing the ban in the UK on the grounds that it tends to be the paupers who smoke and it's one of the few pleasures they have, what with having to eat mud because they are all so poor. If they quit the fags (with the amount they cost in the uk) they could all be dining on Foie Gras and chips every night (or caviar and ketchup in Hull)

TB, Reid is a bruiser but he has somewhere a little bit of a point.

To paraphrase an aquaitance of mine: New Labour and it's asociated do-gooders long ago gave up any pretence that they wanted to make a fundamental change to the world.
That they had any idea to end, alter or even keep in check, rampant market capitalism. Instead they concentate on the individual.
Thus the horific rates of (say) heart attacks amongst Scottish men is due to them making bad "lifestyle choices" on an individual level as opposed to a broader picture that had to do with de-industrialisation, unemployment, poor housing, alienation etc etc etc.

The UK has very high taxes on smokes. That explains why it is so lucrative to smuggle them in and buy smuggled cigs.
I think about a third of all cigs smoked in the UK now are smuggled.
They are on sale in CIU clubs, factory canteens, back street pubs frequented by dodgy geezers and the rest.
Not on sale at Wimbledon, Ascot or Henley Regatta.

I thought the EU had banned it but it has really caught my eye recently the number of "no name" brands that are flooding onto the market in Germany at € 3.50 or so. I'm guessing not many of those cheap brands will be smoked in the private boxes at the Allianz Arena.

I was at Feldmoching U-Bahn station yesterday and there were 2 teenage girls smoking there. A young guy, although not a teenager, walked up to them and very politely asked them if they would stop smoking as there is now a smoking ban in the stations and they more or less said "Oh yes, sorry", and put out their ciggys.

since we now have a ban firmly in place this is no longer relevant - oder?

why would it stop being relevant? has something dramatic happened to stop smoke from spreading to fill a given volume? change in physics that i may have missed?

The militant anti smoking lobby got what it wanted, Bavaria has one of the strictest laws in Germany.
Becasue the pub trade took their eye off the ball and beleived the politicians, you were able to tighten the screw. Clever.

You can stop whinging now and rush into the pubs that you only didn't visit before becasue they were "too smoky" and make up their lost trade.

A lot of ordinary non-smokers got what they wanted (or more) too. Personally I'd have been happy with seperated rooms where possible, but a bunch of smoking Bavarian MPs tried to force an opt-out clause and lost out big time, resulting in the total ban.

Compromise solutions don't work, which is why no other country in the world has chosen that route. Tony Blair suggested it for England and was laughed out of town. Bavaria may have the strictest regulations in Germany at the moment, but it's only a matter of time before the other states fall into line.

Why wouldn't have compromised solutions have worked?

I think there should have been exceptions as were previously held out for

totally separate rooms
venues under X square metres
temporary structures

The militant anti smokers won the day becasue people took their eye off the ball.
We'll see what the consequences are.

The day was won by the people who didn't like having smoke blown in their faces and stinking of somebody elses dirty habit.
Should they have done nothing about it?

They don't work because the entire premise of the law (i.e. protecting the health of workers and/or other members of the public) is undermined if you have exceptions. This leaves the legislation open to legal challenges.

Any law is capable of being challenged.

People were increasingly getting increasingly anti smoking in pubs etc.
Which is why there was a market driven increase in non smoking nights and non smoking venues.
Sadly not quick enough for the shrill anti-smoking brigade.

I see. I wonder how the smoking ban in NZ, which was introduced successfully many years ago, WITH COMPROMISES works then?
Edit: Let's also not forget the fact that the government buildings in bavaria are exempt, that's also a compromise on a total ban, hypocritical as it is.

I Don't entirely agree with that, as it contradicts the whole argument of implementing the ban in the First place. Also, the Problem here is that if you offer exceptions, then people who don't quite qualify for the exception complain and state they are being victimised. unfair competition etc... As soon as you start making exceptions, then you open up a whole can of worms.

Totally separate rooms would have been a perfect idea. Of course this hit the the small bars hardest... ie, the ones which are basically like someones front room, but for these Bars, having a couple of people outside, is not going to cause a huge rise in noise. What ever direction you take, someone is going to suffer. For me, the smoking room is the best compromise for smokers, non-smokers, bar owners and for reducing large numbers of people gathered on the street outside larger bars

I would argue that this is incompetence rather than a compromise.