Who to report to

[PattayaMale]

Slackerman, If I understand what you wrote, your objection is someone filing a claim with police for relief because you feel the police will come back and ask that person to be an informant at some later date. I see that we agree on having the owners/managers ask customers to step outside if they need to smoke.

 

So if instead of going to the police about a specific bar, how would you feel about a group of people putting some pressure on the police to enforce the non smoking law through letters to the editor or a petition to the Mayor?

 

How do you feel about owners chaining exits so if a fire occurs people may not be able to get out? Do business's have that right to make those rules?

 

If you agree that a harm will occur in 20 years as you suggest, is it because the harm is not immediate, you feel the owner has a right. The workers do not really have the leeway to just walk.

 

In my view, the non smoking law was passed to protect people including the workers. It is not just because it is annoying in many ways.

 

I wonder if slackerman will answer the few questions I posed to him above.

 

I agree with GB too. But it does not change the questions posted above.

[Guest slackersam]

Rather than go to the police, why not have the group of people write letters to the bar owner explaining why you will not be patronizing his establishment?

 

As to fire doors, again if I saw that I would simply leave and not come back. And I'd tell people not to go to that bar because it's dangerous.

 

Nobody is forcing you to go to any specific bar and people should be allowed to do what they want with their own business.

[Bob]

Rather silly debating this issue.

 

As an alternative, why not stand outside the establishment, douse yourself with gasoline (or gasahol if you're "green"), and threaten to immolate yourself unless the smoking stops? You'll probably help lower the smoke level in the establishment for at least a few minutes because I'd suspect at least a few lit stoggies will come flying your way (if not, I could test my Bic?).

[Guest lvdkeyes]

I am an adamant non smoker. It is a disgusting habit and hazardous for the smoker and anyone else around the smoker. I was very pleased when the non smoking laws came to Thailand. BUT---I would not get all bent out of shape and report to the police about places that flout the law. I firmly believe the less contact you have with the police, for whatever reason, the better off you are. I would merely not frequent the place after telling the owner/manager that I would not be back and why. If enough people do the same, the owners would get the message and follow the law or risk loss of business.

[Guest slackersam]

Exactly.

[Guest laurence]

Keep up your crusade Pattaya Male. Not only is second hand smoke dangerous so also is third hand smoke. Smoking in bars ruins the experience for everyone in some way or the other.

[Guest]

Keep up your crusade Pattaya Male. Not only is second hand smoke dangerous so also is third hand smoke. Smoking in bars ruins the experience for everyone in some way or the other.

 

Yes, keep up the crusade.

Also have some sympathy for the bar staff who have to put up with the illegal smoke every day & cannot leave as they have to earn an income.

 

 

[Guest Astrrro]

Yes, keep up the crusade.

Also have some sympathy for the bar staff who have to put up with the illegal smoke every day & cannot leave as they have to earn an income.

 

Let's get real here, as far as occupational hazards in the sex industry second hand smoke is pretty low on the totem pole. I'm not a smoker but I'd rather put up with smoke than get rogered by a smelly farangs 40 years older than me that might give me an STD.

[Guest slackersam]

Exactly, Asstro.

 

It's amazing to me how people will argue for the right to unhealthy habits that they like but will argue for laws against unhealthy habits they don't like.

 

At the end of the day the average go-go or rent boy has a lot more immediate health risks than second hand smoke (which by the way is less harmful than car exhaust which we all have to deal with every day.)

 

 

[Guest laurence]

 

Some of you guys seem to put up a "smoke screen" to obscure the health effects of smoking. We could go on and on about dangers of riding motor bikes, crossing a soi, eating fruit, sexual practices but that has nothing to do with smoking.. Ban on smoking in civilized countries has cut the rate of lung cancer. Places like Thailand where laws are not enforced and ignored show their indifference to the health of their citizens. Smoking to the non smoker, in a bar or restaurant or public place, is an obnoxious and unacceptable practice. It is the smoker who should go elsewhere to smoke and not expose others to the effects.

[Guest Steve1903]

Yeah, no petitions, no protests, vote with your feet and if enough others are like minded then the owner will have a choice to make. It also has to be said that the bars which allow smoking are likely to also attract customers who want to smoke in the bar and dont like being forced outside.

[Guest laurence]

From my observations, when a bar is crowded the percentage of smokers is small but their presence affects everyone. But sometimes, with only a few customers, the number of smokers may out number the non-smokers. In which case the door is the only option for us.

[Guest slackersam]

I agree with Steve.

 

Here is an idea for the people who are terrified of smoke - don't go to the bars where they allow smokers.

 

If all of them seem to allow smokers you could find one that has the least amount of smokers and then a bunch of you could go together and say to the owner "Hey, we will give you all our business and tell all our non smoking friends about your place that you don't allow smoking and you'll then get a lot more business."

 

If you were convincing enough you'd then have yourself a non-smoking bar and wouldn't have to go running to the police.

[Guest fountainhall]

Places like Thailand where laws are not enforced and ignored show their indifference to the health of their citizens.

 

This is not exactly true. Have you been in any office recently where people smoke? I haven't. They all have to go outside to smoke, and seem to respect the law. Same in restaurants.

 

The problem seems confined mostly to enterainment bars. Here, as we know, cash is king. Solid bar is pretty good at enforcing the regulation, but there's one customer who comes in fairly regularly, never offs a boy but always buys several rounds of drinks for 5 or 6 guys. He smokes like a fish and so the boys light up. I spoke to the mama-san - who just shrugged his shoulders. This guy must hand over Bt. 3,000 eery time he enters the door. That's a pretty powerful argument for turning a blind eye - alas!

 

"Hey, we will give you all our business and tell all our non smoking friends about your place that you don't allow smoking and you'll then get a lot more business."

 

A noble sentiment, slackersam. It just hasn't the slightest chance of working. No bar owner is going to trust a bunch of farangs to provide his future profits.

[Guest slackersam]

Well then, that goes back to my earlier argument - it's their country, not ours. We are guests. If that's what they want to do, I think that's their right. We do have the right to vote with our wallets by not giving them their business but if the local native bar owner thinks that the local native customers want smoking, we as outsiders should respect that.

[Gaybutton]

You are arguing an issue that isn't going anywhere. The fact is a regulation exists that prohibits smoking in bars. The fact is that several bars are ignoring the regulation. The fact is that those who tried to get the authorities to do something about it have gotten nowhere. Ideas such as petitions, letters-to-the-editor, etc. have no practical value because it simply doesn't work.

 

I see only one solution. Patronize venues that do not permit smoking and refuse to patronize venues that do.

[Guest slackersam]

Gaybutton,

 

I think that's what I've been saying all day.

[Guest GaySacGuy]

Rather than go to the police, why not have the group of people write letters to the bar owner explaining why you will not be patronizing his establishment?

 

As to fire doors, again if I saw that I would simply leave and not come back. And I'd tell people not to go to that bar because it's dangerous.

 

Nobody is forcing you to go to any specific bar and people should be allowed to do what they want with their own business.

 

 

So let me ask...if you see fire doors locked, leave and only tell your friends not to go there....and then there is a fire and several customers and employees are killed by being stacked up against these same fire doors....How responsible are you for these deaths that you could have prevented??? Being a rat is one thing, but turning a blind eye to hazards is another.

 

 

 

Gaybutton,

 

I think that's what I've been saying all day.

 

That isn't what you have been saying. You have been tagging anyone who ask for police assistance a rat and various other things. There is a difference between being a rat (who generally give information to get something in return) and a responsible citizen who takes action needed to protect his fellow citizens.

 

I agree with GB that you can vote with your feet and your wallet on the smoking issue. But I don't agree that this is the course of action to take with all issues, especially health and safety concerns!.

[Guest slackersam]

I said before that if you see a mugging, a rape, a murder or really any violent action or theft that it's reasonable to go to the police.

 

In other cases I think it's best to vote with your feet. I agree that locked fire doors are a very bad idea. But, even if you go to the police they'll just get a fine and will probably relock the doors the next day. I don't see the advantage to going to the cops over it.

 

Far, far better to simply let everyone you can know that the place is dangerous and not to go there.

[Guest lvdkeyes]

I think everything has been said about this subject. It's time to stop beating the dead horse.

[Guest slackersam]

Word.

[Guest shebavon]

the only thing I believe you can really do about it is to patronize the bars that comply with the regulations to the exclusion of the ones that don't.

 

 

That, or to politely ask the offending smoker to stop, and if that does not work either cough on or pour your drink over him.

[Guest laurence]

That, or to politely ask the offending smoker to stop, and if that does not work either cough on or pour your drink over him.

 

Better yet, fart in his face and see how he enjoys a puff of that.

 

[Guest MonkeySee]

I am not a smoker and I do not like smoke in my face. There are a lot of things I do not like, for example smog, pedos, police corruption and the list goes on. But the smoking issue seems to be so important to some. I do not understand the extremes some anti-smoking people go to. I tend to think a person somewhat unbalanced when going overboard on any one issue.

[Guest shebavon]

I am not a smoker and I do not like smoke in my face. There are a lot of things I do not like, for example smog, pedos, police corruption and the list goes on. But the smoking issue seems to be so important to some. I do not understand the extremes some anti-smoking people go to. I tend to think a person somewhat unbalanced when going overboard on any one issue.

 

 

People feel strongly about this issue, because the stench is extraordinarily offensive to many non-smokers.

 

While it used to be socially acceptable to smoke in public, at your workplace, in automobiles with your children and closed windows; we now know better.

 

Only by making the offenders aware of how unacceptable their behavior is, will they be encouraged to stop.

 

As to the issue of involving police and authorities, that would be going overboard in my estimation.

 

Better to let the offender and bar owner aware of your distaste, and move with your feet if necessary.