Is it true there really are no smoking regulations in public places? I am curious about this. I was told that people (Teachers) even smoke in public schools? Do people smoke in restaraunts too? Do alot of the Czech population smoke? Drink alchohol? For me this is a curious thing, because here in Canada there are such strict Laws concerning smoking in public places... which is good thing. Even in bars and pubs, there is no smoking allowed in the buidlings here because we are greatly concerned of the health risks related to smoking. Thank you kindly for this board guys! I am learning lots... and do find the Czech culture fascinating.
Hi Tom, unfortunatelly it is true that there are not many regulations concerning smoking in my country:-( and if there are any they are not being obeyed much...like for example it is forbidden to smoke at bus stops but no one actually takes care about that and it is something I cannot stand...Imagine you are waiting for a bus at 5am and someone next to you smokes...it is true that smoking is forbidden in schools and universities, at least inside Usually you can see plenty of students and professors smoking in front the building....In some pubs smoking is forbidden during lunch time but again I would say it is not obeyed much but it usually depends on a particular restaurant....
I personally prefer the way America deals with smoking. Most all of our restaurants have non-smoking and smoking areas. That way everyone is given a choice. However, I wish it were a little stricter in that the smoking areas are placed in the back of the restaurant that way we non-smokers don't have to walk through the smoke to get to our seat. I must clarify, I'm speaking about Michigan since each state has their own smoking laws. I know out west you can go into a gas station or store while smoking whereas in Michigan you can not smoke in most public buildings unless it is a designated place such as a restaurant or bar. Now, I also must admit that I don't think it is the law. I think it is more just our customs and the preferences of the building owners.
I live in Massachusetts, and smoking is pretty much prohibited, period. You can smoke outside, or in the privacy of your own home, but nowhere else. And for the most part, even at bus stops or on street corners, people give you dirty looks for smoking anyway.
It would not work well in the Czech pubs. If you go to drink some beers with a friend who happen to be a hard smoker, will you be sitting separately?
Actually, more and more of America is just going non-smoking, period. California, New York, Colorado, Washington and Massachusetts ban smoking altogether (except outdoors and the privacy of your own home), and those states are five of the most politically and economically influential in America. Other states are on this growing list, and with any luck, smoking in America will go the way of the Dodo bird.
Yes, same in Canada. Most places are non-smoking, and for the health and happiness of all people I hope this kindof mentality spreads worldwide... all the way into the Czech Republic.
Why would it not work well? It did everywhere else in the US or Canada. Smokers should at least be considerate of their friends and families' lungs? Second hand smoke is so bad for you. If smokers have to wait thru a meal, or have to walk outside to smoke, that may limit the amount that they themselves smoke, making it healthier for them, no? What comes from the end of a burning cigarette? Lets educate ourself here. Second-hand smoke contains many of the same harmful chemicals that a smoker inhales. Some of these cause cancer (carcinogens), like benzene and nickel. Other ingredients are poisons, like carbon monoxide and ammonia. You can't see or even smell many of the harmful ingredients in second-hand smoke. Fans, ventilation systems and air purifiers may get rid of the cigarette smoke smell, but they don't remove the harmful chemicals. Why is second-hand smoke more harmful than what smokers inhale? Second-hand smoke has twice as much nicotine and tar as the smoke that smokers inhale directly from their cigarettes. It also has five times as much carbon monoxide. Sidestream smoke is particularly dangerous. It contains the same carcinogens as mainstream smoke, but in even higher concentrations. A lit cigarette left sitting in an ashtray burns more slowly than when a person actively puffs on it, so it releases more smoke into the air. About two-thirds of the smoke from a burning cigarette is never inhaled by the smoker and goes directly into the environment. What are the effects of second-hand smoke? When you inhale second-hand smoke, harmful chemicals go into your lungs and are absorbed into your blood, organs and other body tissues. Your health can be affected after only eight minutes in a smoke-filled room...even when you're not smoking. In the short term, second-hand smoke can: -irritate your eyes, nose and throat -give you a headache -make you feel dizzy or nauseous -make your asthma worse -increase your risk of respiratory infections like colds, bronchitis or pneumonia, or make them worse if you're already sick. -The longer you're exposed to second-hand smoke, the more it will affect your health. For example, if you work in a smoky bar or restaurant, you could eventually develop serious health problems. Some of the long-term effects of second-hand smoke are: -heart disease -lung cancer -nasal-sinus cancer -non-malignant respiratory disease. Second-hand smoke is also linked to: -stroke -breast cancer -cervical cancer. Here is a list of Chemicals that are in Tobacco smoke! AMMONIA HYDROGEN CYANIDE 1,3-BUTADIENE HYDROQUINONE 1-AMINONAPHTHALENE ISOPRENE 2-AMINONAPHTHALENE LEAD 3-AMINOBIPHENYL METHYL ETHYL KETONE 4-AMINOBIPHENYL NAT ACETALDEHYDE NICKEL ACETONE NICOTINE ACROLEIN NITRIC OXIDE ACRYLONITRILE NNK BENZENE NNN BENZO[a]PYRENE PHENOL BUTYRALDEHYDE PROPIONALDEHYDE CADMIUM PYRIDINE CARBON MONOXIDE QUINOLINE CATECHOL RESORCINOL CHROMIUM STYRENE CRESOL TAR CROTONALDEHYDE TOLUENE FORMALDEHYDE http://www.smoke-free.ca/Health/Healtheffectssmoke.htm
Well Zeisig, I didn't mean to give the message that one has to smoke if he/she is sitting in the smoking area. One could sit in the smoking area with their friend who smokes and he/she does not have to smoke with the friend.
I am not a smoker, however, I would hate to see America go that way. Smoking should be a choice and businesses should have the freedom to choose to allow people to smoke inside their business. If people don't want to go to that restaurant because there is smoking there, then that is their choice and the restaurant owner will be the one loosing customers for it. But at least the government is not dictating our every move. If a business wants to have smoking, let them. That's called Freedom of Choice and that's what makes America so great. I hope states like California and Massachusetts don't influence the rest of American States to give up our God given freedoms.
You can add Florida to the list. Florida is a Clean Air State - smoking is prohibited indoors with the exception of stand-alone bars and tobacco shops. Outdoor smoking areas adjacent to buildings must have a minimum of three sides unenclosed. There is also no smoking allowed in outdoor public arenas (football stadiums and the like) and there is some movement to ban smoking in public parks and other similar outdoor areas. Some health care facilities allow no smoking anywhere on the property. I used to smoke (2-1/2 packs a day). Quit for seven years. Started up again about a year ago (a little less than a pack a day). Dummy me. Will quit again soon.
Please don't post stupid propaganda here. Nobody inhales what "comes off the end of a cigarette." The only way to do that is to have the burning end of the cigarette literally inside your nostril, and yet all of the secondhand smoke studies that you people wave around are based on what comes off the end of a cigarette, not what is diffused in the air. It's junk science. If you want a cause, you should investigate why WTC7 collapsed. (I'm not a smoker, by the way :lol: )
To dzurisovak: I was talking about common Czech pubs. The system of the separated smoking/non-smoking areas is problematic and expensive especially for smaller pubs. It can hardly reflect the statistical distribution of smokers and non-smokers (and mixed groups of them) among guests. Moreover if someone is addicted to drinking, s/he is often addicted to smoking as well. This correlation seems to be high. I am affraid that the non-smoking areas in the common pubs would be either empty (in the better case) or full of drunk smoking guests especially in late evenings. Maybe the best system is to have some pubs for non-smokers only. But such system need no special laws. (I am not a smoker, too )
I'm sorry, I assumed you were asking this question about American pubs. I was explaining what happens in American restaurants. Granted, there are several American bars that are small and filled with smoke and there is no way to go there without dealing with smoke. But once again, at least the people have a choice to go there or not and the owners have a choice to have smoking or not. I just hate it when the government tries to dictate every aspect of our lives.
In my perspective, if there is smoking allowed if football stadiums, that takes away from the freedom of the non-smokers to breathe clean air. It's not like choosing a restaurant, where they can just go to a different one if there is smoking. To see that team, you have to go to the stadium. However, the stadium could have a smoking section where smokers could purchase seats in that section of they want to smoke. Or a place for smokers to go and stand to have a ciggarette before they go back to their seat. Now public parks is another story. Smokers and non-smokers alike pay for the park (tax $$) so who gets the freedom there? The smoker to smoke, or the non-smoker to breathe smoke free air? I suppose if the park is big enough, they could just not be next to eachother. But what do you do when both kids (kid of the non-smoker and kid of the smoker want to ride the same slide?) but if what GoodSirJava is saying is true, than as long as you are outside, the non-smoker has nothing to worry about.
Sorry, but the right to smoke-free air trumps the right to smoke. And California and Massachusetts have a long history for setting the precedence for the rest of the states. The smoking ban is just one issue in a long series of many.
um....if your smelling the smoke, then your inhailing it.... as well as eating it, since its your taste buds in the back of your throat that is doing the smelling. Its not propaganda, its truth. Proven facts. Childern tested from homes that smoke indoors show huge amounts of tar in their lungs even though they themsleves are not smokers. The chemicals burning off of anything, whether it be from a dump, coal burning factory or cigarettes WILL enter your body via all your sensory organs thru your skin and nose. I feel that non-smokers have a right to clean air, and if anyone who chooses to support cigarrette factories and pollute their lungs (as well as the environment) should at least be respectful of their fellow man/woman/child and help support laws that will make this world a cleaner place to live.
Thats true too.... WTC7, Hitler, Napoleaon, Middle East crisis, starvation in Africa etc..... alot of crazy things goin on in the world. Alot darn good reason to become a smoker! hehe, but really, The best place to start cleaning up our act, is right here inside of ourselves with the environment around us I think.
It's politically charged propaganda; it's the corruption, misuse, and distortion of science to achieve a political agenda. It's the same thing as global warming. First of all - that's not relevant to outdoor secondhand smoke. At all. Nobody is raised in a tavern. Second of all - show me these studies, who funded them, what their methods and selection techniques were. Why? You can't just FEEL that someone has a RIGHT to something; you have to prove it. All this talk about a right to this and a right to that is what gets us socialism; suddenly everyone has a right to free health care and primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary education. No law will accomplish that; legislation only makes this world a darker place. Nothing can be solved by legislation. The secondhand smoke issue is just another convenient excuse that politicians keep around to violate people's rights to their own property, and look good doing it. Because that is what this is about; private property. It's up to businesses and landowners as to who can smoke where. This banning-smoking-everywhere-except-in-your-apartment-under-a-blanket-with-all-the-lights-out stuff is completely tyrannical. When there's lots of really bad stuff happening, the proper thing to do is not to start with an issue of no consequence. The water's boiling and the phone's ringing, which problem do you deal with first? None of them - YOUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE So you're an environmentalist? What do you think of the genetically modified foods that kill all the lab animals, create new amino acids, and fry all your organs? (Note: one third of americans have diabetes now, according to a new study, it used to be one in 45 just 50 or 60 years ago; Crohn's disease is way up, cancer is doubling every few years, including weird lung cancers - how many people do you know with breast cancer? how many three year olds with leukemia?) What do you think of the depleted uranium in the atmosphere at over eight times safe levels, with DU being used in over ten proving grounds in the US alone? (lung cancer is way up, and people like - my guess is - you, blame this on second hand smoke, even though smoking in America is at an all-time low, meanwhile it's admitted that you only need to inhale a few thousand DU particles to get lung cancer) What do you think of all kinds of fluoride in the water? What do you think of mercury, live cancer virus, dead bacteria, fungus, DNA fragments, etc, in the vaccine supply?
