At the moment, we have a blanket law concerning smoking in public places. Bars and pubs are smoke free, which is nice (although now you can smell the wee and sweat), but the streets are punctuated with clusters of smokers, so you are obliged to inhale smoke if you happen to be having a stroll in that vicinity. Now I don't mind a smoke on a night out, or in a beer garden on a sunny day, especially if it's hand-rolled and not the chemical-filled types. When I'm out shopping with my small children, I do mind that the behavior once confined within pubs, now spread into the street . The idea of the Public House originally, was that you took your drinking and your smoking away from the private house and the children. The smoking ban now means that you can smoke at home in front of the children, but not in the pub, which they want to keep nice and fresh for getting drunk in.
Should it be in the hands of the government or the landlords, when it comes to allowing smoking on their premises, leaving it to the discretion of punters whether they want to smoke somewhere or not?
I think landlords need to be able to decide whether the apartment is clean when the renter surrenders possession, and if the apartment isn't clean, then the landlord gets to use as much of the renter's security deposit as he needs to get the apartment clean. If it takes the whole thing to get the smoke nasty out, then it takes the whole thing.
I'm sorry, I haven't been clear here. In England, we call the owner of a pub, or public bar, a landlord. I was trying to ask whether it should be the bar owner (the landlord) or the government who decides whether people can smoke in their place.
No landlords should not be able to decide whether or not smoking is allowed. It is discrimination in a manner of speaking and plays favoritism toward a specific set of people.
As a smoker, I believe that it is wrong for a smoker to smoke in a "Common Area" within an apartment or Condo building. A "Common Area" being the hallways, elevators, laundry room, anyplace where the common public has equal access and might pass or walk by. That Said, My Apartment is not classified as a common Public area, therefore if I decide I wish to smoke in my apartment, the Landlord has no right to stop me.
It may be discrimination but if you smoke inside, the walls, flooring will retain the smell and the apartment will need more money down the road to look clean/fresh for new potential renters. I smoked when I was in my twenties and the inside of my apartment was yellow, the walls, window treatments, carpets smelled awful.
BS. I am constantly cleaning my apartment, because two of us smoke inside the apartment. I wash walls and woodwork, so that the smell and smoke isn't embedded into the walls and floorboards.
Apparently, you didn't clean them. That's all.
Cagsil you are a rare find in the world of renters. My ex's family dealt in rental houses and finding good renters was not an easy task. For every good renter we went through ten or fifteen bad ones (that's just a rough estimate on average by the way.)
Given the experience we have had I do believe that landlords should have the right to declare their property smoke free if that is what they choose. Yes, you are paying them for the priviledge of living in their house and yes, the deposit is there to cover the cost of repair for any damages but the bottom line is that it is not your property. Staying there is a priviledge and if you do not agree with the landlord's terms you have the choice of finding a landlord that is more accomodating to what you desire.
My present landlords required us to sign a lease, when they took over from our previous owner. The apartment complex I live in has 6 families(six apartments) and it's stipulated on our lease that we're not allowed to smoke in our apartment.
If I had a choice on where I would be able to live, then that would be fine, but I do not.
Edit: Not everyone has the money to move.
That is true about the cost of moving and it is even more difficult than in previous years which is why it is so important to not only respect the wishes of the landlord to avoid eviction but also to do as you do and take the initiative to be proactive about the effect you have on your environment.
As a former landlord (in-law) I can tell you that you are a dream and as soon as your character was uncovered we would have made exceptions for you.
I agree. My father smoked when I was growing up and it got into EVERYTHING. It was in the carpet, the walls, the drapes, the clock even had a yellowish grime to it. I'm for the landlord..they should be able to dictate whatever they want to safeguard their own property.
Well, as a former landlord to several houses that my husband and I owned, we looked into this issue, and discovered, at least in my state, that it was perfectly acceptable to specify in an ad advertising the house for rent that we preferred non-smokers as tenants.
If we did have prospects apply that were smokers, they always verbally agreed that they would confine their smoking to the outside. All of them honored the commitment except two tenants, who eventually skipped out and disappeared anyway. In our lease, we had language that they were responsible for any damages or stains caused by cigarette smoke, whether from themselves or their guests.
Well, to clean the walls I would have to paint them every six months or so but honestly I didn't want to and had to. I washed the window coverings every month and it still produced brown/black water in the first wash, brown in second, yellow in third and fourth and so on. Cigarette smoking is your choice and it is not making you healthy nor anyone around. It stains your clothes, stays in the rugs, carpet and wood. Good cleaning might be nice but still I wouldn't move into an apartment if I knew it belonged to a smoker.
Oh, and of course, when I was a smoker, I didn't really have a sense how strong was the smell.
I think it should be up to the Bar owners (the landlord). In my opinion, when you think of bars you usually are thinking of people drinking and smoking. If you don't want that, go to a restaurant and sit in their bar section. Also if this is a new law, the places already are going to smell like smoke, so might as well let the landlord make the ruling. I always thought the banning of smoking in bars silly since that's part of the atmosphere.
In Austin, Texas, USA, they passed a law that allowed restaurants to make smoking sections that were walled off from the rest of the people and had separate vents and such from the other part of the restaurant. It made everyone happy with doing it that way. Though the one problem they had was the downtown bars wouldn't be able to do this since they were small and couldn't separate the areas for non and smoke, so people had to stand outside to smoke and had to be about 10 feet away from the door... if they did that, they would be in the street. I don't what they did about that since I moved shortly after the law passed.
All these years people have been doing what they want now the landlord can ban smoking,glad I live in my own apartment,No it,s not fair their are responsible smoker's.
Why should they.
They have your secutrity deposit, and repainting from smoking is a reasonable excuse to keep your cash. Not to mention you start the fire that burns his building down, he gets insurance and to sue you for everything you have.
I agree that a landlord of a residential property should be able to say whether you can smoke or not. But what about the landlord of a pub? At the moment he/she has no sayover whether people can smoke on his/her premises. The government decides. Is that right?
It is my bussiness, I make the rules... not the Govt.
Our Govt seems to think they can and should micro-manage ever last aspect of our lives these day... and that has got to end.
I totally agree. We have the same thing here. Cigarettes aren't illegal, so landlords should be the people deciding whether people can smoke in their bar or not. I shouldn't have to walk around people who have to stand in the street smoking because the government says they can't smoke inside. It's like prohibition.
As I don't smoke, I used to hate going into pubs, because I always left smelling of smoke, but now I enjoy the experience of going to a pub much better. The only problem is, that if I go to a pub with a smoker, I can be left inside talking to myself, whilst the smoker is outside sucking on a fag. I do think that is should be up to the landlord though, rather than the government.
Whilst I do think it should be up to the landlord, who, should provide a room within the pub, where smokers can go, it has to be remembered that people who do not smoke have rights too. For years, pubs were out of bounds for me, because I didn't want my eyes stinging and my hair and clothes smelling from the smoke. Smokers don't seem to as aware of the smell, but for a non-smoker it is all too obvious and horrible. So, I think I should be entitled to enjoy an evening in a pub, as much as any smoker. And the statistics show that in the US, 3,000 non-smokers die every year, as a result of inhaling secondhand smoke.
by Prince Maak 14 years ago
Is SMOKING really injurious to health? If Yes, why do people smoke, And why there is no World Wide Ban on smoking.I think, by banning smoking we may control the increasing pollution level a bit.
by Cassie Smith 10 years ago
More and more companies aren't hiring smokers because they are not a protected class and they increase a company's group health insurance premiums. Should it be allowed?
by ramkkasturi 12 years ago
What process do you use to decide whether to read an article or not?Search engines are ok but beyond that do you just see the title or go beyond? After reading what makes you want to write a comment?
by mandybeau 13 years ago
Would you let one of the pesky little critters blow smoke all around your Lounge-room, or would you boot them outside.
by The Tea Lady 11 years ago
do you have a definitive dictionary to decide whether to allow words or not e.g. Oxford English...Dictionary
by Laurel Rogers 8 years ago
How do you decide whether a poster is a sock puppet or a troll?I am interested in folks who identify such things. Is it something obvious, or do you use deductive reasoning by reading their posts?
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|