Keef Wrote: > If the owner is correct and this is down to the > smoking ban, then surely it's a great > demonstration of how a venue should be able to > chose whether it allows smoking or not. It's all > well and good to say people have a right to go to > a smoke free place, fine. However, if they are > chosing not to go to a certain place, and that > place is losing business because it's usual > smoking punters are not coming in, surely that's > just wrong! Well as an anti-smoker I completely agree. I didn't go to Inside 72 because it was so smoky and never tried it after the ban. If it remained a smoking bar so what - why can't this government treat us as adults who can make a measured decision of where we want to drink! and if that means inhaling smoke so be it.