The Death of the Irish Pub? "The smoking ban is the work of one man, Michael Martin, the Minister for Health and Children, and one of nature's killjoys... He is generally thought to regard the banning of nicotine from Irish pubs as a personal crusade, explaining that he once tried smoking but didn't enjoy it."

The ban was scheduled to start today, but has been delayed until March. It's one thing to have smoking banned in California and New York, but what's the point of pub that's not dark and smoky? And Scotland might be next...
posted by grabbingsand on Jan 1, 2004 - 122 comments

Last Call to fire up a smoke in NYC has now chimed. As of today, it is now illegal to smoke in any public indoor space, including bars. The New York City Indoor Smoke-Free Air Act of 2002 gives further detail as to what defines a public indoor space. That, not including your residential lease that may prohibit as well. As Andrew Jacobs writes, Walk a Mile for a Camel? Not Far Enough Anymore.
posted by bluedaniel on Mar 30, 2003 - 162 comments

Cigarette filters don't want to go away. A sigh of releaf from the smokers except our lovid earth. Not as harmless as the Everlasting Gobstopper, eh.
The word biodegradable doesn't warrant interest from the companies making cigarettes. The gov should be able to protect us...maybe they sponsor the grassroot with all the money made.
posted by lightweight on Feb 18, 2003 - 15 comments

Smoke Gets In Your...Eyes? According to Geoffrey Gray in The Village Voice, a lot of ex-smokers like to...watch. Whether they're pregnant women, nicotine voyeurs or just regular, filter-tipped voyeurs[comes with a pop-up and probably isn't endearing to employers], it seems that even this intensely physical pastime is becoming virtualized. So be it. But...what does it all mean? Can smoking really be vicarious?
posted by MiguelCardoso on Sep 20, 2002 - 31 comments

"I have been an accomplice to the murders of untold numbers of human beings..." One of Hollywood's most notorious screenwriters claims he and Hollywood are partly responsible for the cancer deaths of smokers. Doesn't Hollywood usually claim they are not responsible for their viewers' actions?
posted by Fabulon7 on Aug 9, 2002 - 30 comments

THE CITY DOES NOT EMPLOY INDIVIDUALS WHO NOW USE OR HAVE USED TOBACCO PRODUCTS WITHIN THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS. - Is this legal? I myself do not smoke, but it seems dangerous that governments or corporations may be able to refuse to hire you based on something you may legally do on your free time. Is this common? More importantly, is this the start of a very slippery slope?
posted by eas98 on May 7, 2002 - 111 comments

As a struggling ex-smoker, I applaud these people for the effort. But part of me still wonders if Unfiltered (a "reality TV" webshow about 5 teenage smokers) is going to have any impact on teens who smoke.
posted by Reggie452 on May 9, 2001 - 3 comments