You bring up great points.
No he doesn't. What's the point in saying again "Go to places that don't allow smoke" when I've just said there aren't any?Also this:
If there are NO places with non-smoking in your town, it means that the vast majority of people smoke
is deeply flawed. I live in a small British town which has always allowed smoking and is behind the times. It's not because everyone smokes! For example there are hardly any black people here and old people stare at them if they see one. Get it yet? This town is old-fashioned and it shouldn't stay that way just because it's quaint or something. If the pubs/restaurants banned smoking, they might get more and more of the wealthy second-home types that live round here visiting and spending money, instead of the buy one pint and smoke fags all night cos I'm on the dole type clientelle.DampeS8N: By linking your argument to Rex's, you should really say "don't go out of your house and drive your car or walk near roads because there might be a drunk driver there, just use the Internet to order everything. In fact don't use the Internet because your credit card details will get stolen and your PC turned into a Zombie"
Remember the other point about banning in pubs/restaurants is that it's a "workplace" and that workers are affected. So you say "get a different job". Ok small town 10% people unemployed, job comes up at pub, you turn it down because you believe it may endanger your health and remain on dole, but you get hassled by the government who make you fill out forms, send you on special courses, and generally try to stop your dole at every move.
Actually what I'd be happy with is if 50% of pubs banned smoking. Then at least I'd have some choice. But with 0% banning here, I have NO choice. If every pub in town had naked ladies dancing and you didn't want to see that, you couldn't go to a pub, but guess what, it's pretty rare for that kind of pub/club yes? So people do have a choice. Non-smoking pubs are just tooo rare.