13 best beer countries

Reads 8434 • Replies 95 • Started Monday, March 16, 2015 2:14:20 PM CT

The forums you're viewing are the static, archived version. You won't be able to post or reply here.
Our new, modern forums are here:
RateBeer Forums

Thread Frozen

Message HaStuMiteZen99 beers 1111 º places 27 º 14:56 Mon 3/30/2015 I hope as many places resist this crap as long as possible. It’s surprising how many otherwise sensible, liberal people go in for this kind of legislation just because it aligns with their pub atmosphere preferences. Maybe if the majority of people end up teetotal and dislike seeing lots of alcohol consumption, we should ban that in public places too. I can just imagine the arguments "I’m not trying to unfairly inflict my preferences on the rest of the populace using the law - THIS IS A HEALTH ISSUE. Given the connection between alcohol and violent crime, these drinkers are increasing my chances of injury or death in alcohol-related violence. Of course, I could just go somewhere where there’s no drinking, but why should I have to change my behaviour? I’m a sensible teetotaller!" Ye gods!
Message Ernest P beers 9325 º places 229 º 16:52 Mon 3/30/2015 Originally posted by GarethYoung I hope as many places resist this crap as long as possible. It’s surprising how many otherwise sensible, liberal people go in for this kind of legislation just because it aligns with their pub atmosphere preferences. Well, as should be obvious, smoking directly affects everyone else in the venue; they inhale the smoke without a choice (other than leaving). It’s almost like parking a motorcycle inside the place and letting the engine run. It’s fine that you choose to partake in that, but it’s not fine to force everyone else in the room to as well. It’s beyond just a known health issue, it prevents me from being able to smell my food and drink, and makes me stink like an ashtray afterwards (which is irritating when you’re on a trip traveling light and want to wear the same clothes as many days as possible). If someone else eats or drinks something, simply being in the same room doesn’t cause me to implicitly ingest that same food or beverage, so your alcohol analogy is comparing apples and oranges. Vaporizers are a viable option for those who can’t wait (or go outside) to get their nicotine or THC fix.
Message ContemplateBeer beers 2089 º places 153 º 17:16 Mon 3/30/2015 I’ve been drinking in bars and breweries for over a decade, and I’ve never been exposed to a violent incident while trying to enjoy my beer and/or meal. However, the effects of second-hand smoke are decidedly more difficult to avoid. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke

Message HaStuMiteZen99 beers 1111 º places 27 º 01:54 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by Ernest Originally posted by GarethYoung I hope as many places resist this crap as long as possible. It’s surprising how many otherwise sensible, liberal people go in for this kind of legislation just because it aligns with their pub atmosphere preferences. Well, as should be obvious, smoking directly affects everyone else in the venue; they inhale the smoke without a choice (other than leaving). It’s almost like parking a motorcycle inside the place and letting the engine run. It’s fine that you choose to partake in that, but it’s not fine to force everyone else in the room to as well. It’s beyond just a known health issue, it prevents me from being able to smell my food and drink, and makes me stink like an ashtray afterwards (which is irritating when you’re on a trip traveling light and want to wear the same clothes as many days as possible). If someone else eats or drinks something, simply being in the same room doesn’t cause me to implicitly ingest that same food or beverage, so your alcohol analogy is comparing apples and oranges. Vaporizers are a viable option for those who can’t wait (or go outside) to get their nicotine or THC fix. Importantly, smokers are not forcing anyone else in the room to inhale their smoke. Anyone who doesn’t like smoking in a bar is perfectly at liberty to leave and go somewhere else catering to their tastes, just like any other aspect of a bar’s atmosphere or policies. The point is not that you should like this, you can hate smoking in bars as much as you want. The issue is that legislating against it is unjust and illiberal. If I don’t like dogs or children or smelly people or dirty carpets or football fans or Scampi Fries, I dont legislate against those things being allowed in bars, I simply recognise that the bar in question in isn’t catering to my tastes and go somewhere else. The reason I tailord my analogy to the health issue is that it’s the only one that even deserves to be addressed in this context, to be honest. You can’t seriously think that the fact that it makes you enjoy your food less and makes your clothes smell is reason to make it illegal. If so, you’re just admitting that you have some pub atmosphere preferences and, rather than recognising that other people have different preferences and exercising your ability to go somewhere else, you’d prefer your preferences were forced on everyone else as a matter of law.
Message HaStuMiteZen99 beers 1111 º places 27 º 01:56 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by ContemplateBeer I’ve been drinking in bars and breweries for over a decade, and I’ve never been exposed to a violent incident while trying to enjoy my beer and/or meal. However, the effects of second-hand smoke are decidedly more difficult to avoid. http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke They are not difficult to avoid at all. You just leave. Easy.
Message 3fourths P beers 9493 º places 1576 º 02:04 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by GarethYoung If I don’t like dogs or children or smelly people or dirty carpets or football fans or Scampi Fries, I dont legislate against those things being allowed in bars. This is actually exactly what happens. Shirt and shoes required, no pets, employees must wash hands, no chicken sitting out at room temperature becoming contaminated... there are countless laws in place to keep public business spaces healthy for the entire public, and exposure to cigarette smoke is demonstrably unhealthy whether you are a regular smoker or exposed to it second hand. Clean, healthy, breathable air is as much a right as uncontaminated water.
Message SarkyNorthener beers 5200 º places 142 º 02:38 Tue 3/31/2015 Has someone who spent many years working in smoke filled betting shops and pubs I know what it is like going home everyday stinking of smoke, getting coughs and chest infections etc. After the ban it was great the chest infections and coughs stopped. I didnt smell of the stuff. Has a non smoker and someone who worked in those environments it was the best thing to happen. However has a business in both betting and pubs it closed a lot of places down due to loss of income.

Message 3fourths P beers 9493 º places 1576 º 02:42 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by SarkyNorthener However has a business in both betting and pubs it closed a lot of places down due to loss of income. And life goes on, literally for everyone involved. Employees find new work, owners find new opportunities, smokers find that popping outside isn’t so bad, and everyone is better off.
Message HaStuMiteZen99 beers 1111 º places 27 º 02:47 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by 3fourths Originally posted by GarethYoung If I don’t like dogs or children or smelly people or dirty carpets or football fans or Scampi Fries, I dont legislate against those things being allowed in bars. This is actually exactly what happens. Shirt and shoes required, no pets, employees must wash hands, no chicken sitting out at room temperature becoming contaminated... there are countless laws in place to keep public business spaces healthy for the entire public, and exposure to cigarette smoke is demonstrably unhealthy whether you are a regular smoker or exposed to it second hand. Clean, healthy, breathable air is as much a right as uncontaminated water. Well, not quite, at least not where I’m from. There is no law here requiring shirts and shoes, or banning dogs here; in any case, the fact that a law exists doesn’t mean it should exist. Food laws are a little different, but if there were some people who preferred their food prepared by dirty hands, or left sitting at room temperature for a long time, then I don’t think they should be prevented from indulging themselves, just because other surrounding people don’t like it. Of course, it should be made clear what’s going on, so people can make an informed choice. Some people want to make it illegal to have rare burgers (this might actually be illegal in the area I’m from, though no one actually abides by the law): those people are illiberal. Lots of things that are enjoyable come with health (and other) risks. Part of what it means to be a responsible, sentient person is to weight up the risks and make a decision for yourself about whether you want to smoke/eat rare steak/drink excessively/visit bars which allow smoking. I don’t think many people think clean, healthy, breathable air is a right, or at least not a terribly strong one. People who live in large cities have very little opportunity to breath clean, healthy air. Should we ban cars? Businesses that produce fumes? In any case, even granting that clean, healthy air is a right, that just means everyone should have access to clean healthy air. It doesn’t mean that all air has to be clean and healthy all the time, especially if some people have an interest in doing things which make some parts of the air not clean and healthy. So, as long as there are places you can go for your clean air, it’s illegitimate to force all pubs/bars to ban smoking by law. Compare with the water case: everyone has as right to uncontaminated water (let’s suppose). But it doesn’t follow that every single water source ought legally to be required to be completely pure. Lots of people might want access to water polluted by alcohol, for example. So long as everyone still has access to pure water somewhere, that’s completely fine.
Message HaStuMiteZen99 beers 1111 º places 27 º 03:05 Tue 3/31/2015 Originally posted by 3fourths Originally posted by SarkyNorthener However has a business in both betting and pubs it closed a lot of places down due to loss of income. And life goes on, literally for everyone involved. Employees find new work, owners find new opportunities, smokers find that popping outside isn’t so bad, and everyone is better off. Apart from the people who like to smoke and drink at the same time in pubs and other places, of course. Popping outside is bad, especially if you live in Scotland and spend about 80% of your outside time being blasted by horizontal rain. I used to find drinking a pint of bitter and smoking a cigarette one of life’s great pleasures, as did lots of smokers. Though that’s not comparable with losing your job. Losing your job or having your business close isn’t a trivial matter. It’s not like "Whoops, haha, better get another equally good one after lunch". Some people, especially when they economy is shitty, can’t get another job, or open another business, and if they do, it might well be one they hate.