Dubstepforum.com

Badga Tek wrote:I can't see it being enforced there. Enough dodgy shit goes on down there that its almost (touch wood and all that) immune from the law. Maybe its just wishful thinking. I can't bear to think of a Subdub without being able to have a spliff inside...

I went to see The Bug & Aphex Twin at the Barrowlands in Glasgow shortly after the smoking ban in Scotland, and there was blatant drug taking of every kind right in front of the bouncers and they didn't give a shit. But the second someone lit a cheeky cigarette on the dancefloor the bouncers went mental and they were thrown out straight away. They had guys up on the barrier at the front just looking for people smoking. Bizarre state of affairs.

So I'm not sure the fact that there's bare other illegal shit going on is going to help.

[b]racket wrote:

colm wrote:you can see it happening already, warehouse parties are sprining up all over east london every single weekend.

squat/free/warehouse raves have been going down all over London for a long long time.

sure, of course, but they've got way more frequent and/or public in the last few months i think.

4linehaiku wrote:

Badga Tek wrote:I can't see it being enforced there. Enough dodgy shit goes on down there that its almost (touch wood and all that) immune from the law. Maybe its just wishful thinking. I can't bear to think of a Subdub without being able to have a spliff inside...

I went to see The Bug & Aphex Twin at the Barrowlands in Glasgow shortly after the smoking ban in Scotland, and there was blatant drug taking of every kind right in front of the bouncers and they didn't give a shit. But the second someone lit a cheeky cigarette on the dancefloor the bouncers went mental and they were thrown out straight away. They had guys up on the barrier at the front just looking for people smoking. Bizarre state of affairs.

So I'm not sure the fact that there's bare other illegal shit going on is going to help.

it's not that bizarre - the fines are enormous for licensees if anyone is found smoking on their premises.

to those who complain about nanny states or the taking away of the rights of an individual, it has nothing to do with that - it's all about protecting the rights of employees to work in a safe environment.

and to those that think that there's no link between passive smoking and health problems - there has alredy been a link posted to conclusive research conducted by the British Medical Association establishing suck a link.


I smoke cigarettes, but I will be quitting (again!) shortly, and I would much rather listen to music than stand outside a club smoking a cigarette.

ThinKing wrote:it's not that bizarre - the fines are enormous for licensees if anyone is found smoking on their premises.

Oh no, I don't mean bizarre like that. The fines were sort of my point.
I just think that the fact the law now makes smoking cigarettes a far more serious matter than taking class A drugs a bit wierd. It actually makes perfect sense in that smoke can harm others and getting pilled to the gills almost certainly won't, but it's just so out of step with the rest of drugs policy.
I suppose drug laws are never exactly logical though are they?

luke.envoy wrote:

Care to enlighten us as to what that little gizmo is son? Looks nifty

Oh, and about protecting staff or whatever, if that is the real reason for this ban then its a shit tonne more ball bag that i previously thought. If you choose to go into a profession you accept the risks involved in it, you cant become a lumberjack then complain of splinters...

The Wiggle Baron wrote:

luke.envoy wrote:

Care to enlighten us as to what that little gizmo is son? Looks nifty

it's a pipe card. does exactly what it says on the tin. big up envoy

I had a feeling it was something along those lines.

And yeah, thats my plan anyway!

(Just a thought though, the metal beepy things as you go in...problem?)

I'm a non-smoker but have always accepted smoke, especially green, as part of the package. Its think its totally going to fuck with the vibe at clubs. Its hard enough to get audiences to come to underground stuff and dance in London these days as it is, and suddenly now your dancefloor is going to keep emptying every 15 minutes.

All I'm saying is clubs better wake up and start buring incense asap...

metalboxproducts wrote:
You still haven't answered my question. Do you drive a car?

oh yeah forgot about that - no i dont. but i do catch a bus twice a day and i see your point..

The Wiggle Baron wrote:And yeah, thats my plan anyway!

(Just a thought though, the metal beepy things as you go in...problem?)

you guys have metal detectors at clubs??

lol, not all of em mate, but as you go into dmz these days you get the standard pat down, and now a quick scan with ole jonny metal bleeper. Feels a bit extreme, but I think im right in saying there were a couple of club shootings in the vicinity(ish) in the not too distant past?

fuck tobacco & passively smoking it (imho!) ---

herbin it at DMZ tho... I wouldn't say essential, but I've reached
some serious levels doin that

I think luke had it to the right direction there, but I think even
stealthier & better hits --

The Wiggle Baron wrote:
Oh, and about protecting staff or whatever, if that is the real reason for this ban then its a shit tonne more ball bag that i previously thought. If you choose to go into a profession you accept the risks involved in it, you cant become a lumberjack then complain of splinters...

Yeah, hold tight all the people die-ing of asbestosis - Wiggle has your backs!

zap pow wrote:
I don't drive a car and I am glad that there are laws against people letting off toxic fumes where I work, whether they be exhaust fumes, smoke or asbestos.

I am also glad that it isn't up to my boss, or people who visit my office but don't work here.

I think everyone has a right to work in an environment that doesn't destroy their health.

I like a toke, btw.

it dont sound like it

rekorder wrote:
it dont sound like it

yeah cos having a toke and caring about social justice and workers' rights are completely incompatible, innit.

4linehaiku wrote:it's just so out of step with the rest of drugs policy.
I suppose drug laws are never exactly logical though are they?

you're missing the point - it's nothing to do with drug laws since tobacco isn't suddenly becoming a controlled substance (aside from existing age restrictions regarding its sale of course). It's essentially Health & Safety law protecting the health concerns of employees working in pubs & clubs etc.

I don't agree with the smoking ban myself but i can certainly see that it will make pubs smell nicer and clothes etc

But what i think is sad is that the days of going to see a gig or club night in some stinking, smoky, rat infested shithole that you have struggled to find and is pretty scary looking will be long gone

And why should smokers pay twice- once through taxes and once through prohibition?

zap pow wrote:

rekorder wrote:
it dont sound like it

yeah cos having a toke and caring about social justice and workers' rights are completely incompatible, innit.

feck i was only razzin ya, i suggest u put more in those zoots m8

rekorder wrote:
feck i was only razzin ya, i suggest u put more in those zoots m8

now there's a plan...

Those pipe card things.... surely you can smell them a mile off just like you can a real cigarette, and wont having to use a lighter mean you'll stand out in a dark room?

The whole 'firemen cant complain about being exposed to flames so it's the same for bar workers and cigarettes' just doesnt cut it and has to be one of the most shortsighted and cruel excuses in this debate. If you were given the choice of having a job which exposed you to cancerous smoke or unemployment you'd always pick the first. Even barworkers who smoke are hard done by in the old regime as they are forced to inhale that much more than they do from just having a few of their own ciggies round the house

owengriffiths wrote:Those pipe card things.... surely you can smell them a mile off just like you can a real cigarette, and wont having to use a lighter mean you'll stand out in a dark room?

The whole 'firemen cant complain about being exposed to flames so it's the same for bar workers and cigarettes' just doesnt cut it and has to be one of the most shortsighted and cruel excuses in this debate. If you were given the choice of having a job which exposed you to cancerous smoke or unemployment you'd always pick the first. Even barworkers who smoke are hard done by in the old regime as they are forced to inhale that much more than they do from just having a few of their own ciggies round the house

That would be true if it was ever a choice between barman and unemployment. Being a barman is a fairly good job in my opinion, and if you didnt want to do that because of smokiness, then there are PLENTY of other jobs you could be doing. May sound like a bad thing to say, but bin men are PROPER fit...