Three pound pint

What's wrong with having to smoke outside a pub - surely smokers must be getting used to the idea that smoking inside a public area is not on?

I've just paid over £3.00 for a bottle of beer - but it was 10.4%!

Why would I want to go there with all the smokers?

My point is that under the current rules, the 'no smoking' areas are not just free from smoke, but tend to be a haven free from the sort of people in the pub who do smoke, who in my experience tend to be noiser, more aggressive and disruptive.

As a non-smoker, I'm dreading the loss of this segregation, tbh.

BTN

Agreed.

The worst offenders IMO are younger people in groups who chain smoke and have a total disregard for anybody else around.

Exactly.

And currently the penchant for B&H and silk cut among some of their number means that the entire groups are - thankfully - kept discrete from the no smoking section, which is less crowded, and where civilised people can sit at a table and hear themselves talking quietly.

Maybe the pubs I go to - many of them JDWs - are not typical, but I can only see the smoking ban having a negative affect.

BTN

I'm quite massive, yes.

BTN

Then go to pubs that aren't noisy and aggressive!

Smokers are noisy, aggressive and disruptive.

By extension then, non-smokers must all be quiet, timid and constructive?

IMO you are a git.

The phrase used was "tend to be..." if you want to extend the accusation to all smokers you need to provide evidence.

Again with the ALL assumption, no possibility of shades of grey in your world?

Possibly, but could you give us more reasoning for your statement?

There could be an element of truth in the above statement, as IMO the majority of smokers in pubs tend to be young.

I see plenty young people near to where I live, drinking in the street, pissing up shop doorways, shouting, intimidating passing motorists, parking in bus stops (or anywhere) and leaving their broken glass/rubbish on the pavement.

I don't see too many older people doing that.

I am an old git:-))

that sounds a very subjective judgement. There are plenty of older smokers.

What's that got to do with smoking? Parking in bus stops is not an age thing either. You seem very ageist.

what are we talking about - young people or smokers? Which?

pay attention - I was highlighting the absurdity of the previous poasters generalisation that ''Smokers are noisy, aggressive and disruptive.''.

Actually no. What you did was *misquote* Ben and then work from your misquote toward a total non-sequitur.

Since (as I pointed out) Ben said that smokers *tend* to be noisier etc it leaves the possibility that some (but a minority) are not noisier.

I've left in the original text and removed non-relevant material above. Study what I've left.

It's attention to detail you are having a problem with. I've noticed a lack of concentration in a fair number of smokers when the pangs start to kick in, are you perhaps a smoker?

bollox _ i quoted nothing. I pointed out prejudice. end of story.

ffs, stop squirming. his anti-smoking generalisation is insulting.

idiot.

troll.

Tosh. The simple act of leaving the original text in as part of the reply is the act of quoting. You don't need to put quote marks round the text to signify exact reproduction of the original - although when you did do that style you actually altered the text from the original in order to pretend Ben said something more extreme than he actually did. In normal parlance this is known as a lie, although politicians prefer different wording and tend to go with "misrepresentation"

1. You gain nothing by use of bad language (even if you are using the short form)
2. It was not the generalization you imply.

Yes, yes it is becoming clear you are. Put it in bigger letters to remind yourself.

Ah, the final retreat - or are you planning to come back with a deep and cutting insult?

Nice to see that the art of rational debate is alive and well, xifer.

What do I want with a debate? - Why should I be interested in what anyone other than the poster I replied to had to say? If you concur with the above statement what would be the point?