Dutch Ban Smoking In Amsterdam Cannabis Cafes
I WAS heard an American toursits go up to a copper at Amsterdam airport and ask where the weed shop was becsue he wanted a smoke. Soon he’ll need a cake shop:
AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A Dutch smoking ban will come into force in July next year for all restaurants and cafes — including coffee shops where cannabis is the top attraction, the government decided on Friday.
“Coffee shops will be treated in the same manner as other catering businesses. They will be smoke-free,” Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende told NOS television.
“It would have been wrong to move towards a smoke-free catering industry and then make an exception for coffee shops. People would not have understood that.”
Still, the Rijksmuseum is worth a visit…
Posted: 9th, June 2007 | In: Twitterings Comments (39) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on British Law Elevates Climate Change Belief To Same Status As Relgion
- Clive on Judge Rules Transexual Burglar Has Rotten Life And Must Remain Free
- June on British Law Elevates Climate Change Belief To Same Status As Relgion
- yampster on British Law Elevates Climate Change Belief To Same Status As Relgion
- dairy on Katie Price And Peter Andre Burnt At The Stake, In Pictures
November 19th, 2008 at 11:50 am
WHO WANT THE AMERICANS VISITING YOUR COUNTRY ANY WAY ! STAY IN AMERICANT
October 23rd, 2008 at 3:53 pm
As an expat living in Netherlands I can confirm a few things.
The smoking ban really hasn’t changed anything- any coffee-shop worth their salt has simply put up a “rook zone” (smoking zone) where staff “don’t enter” (altho it’s very rare to see a coffeeshop employee without a spliff in his mouth in my experience!)
The Dutch agreed to the EU enforced smoking ban but as usual, showed pragmatism in the face of adversity.
It’s worthwhile to note that pure cannabis joints (i.e. containing no tobbaco) are not restricted by this law and you can still puff these standing at the bar of your favourite coffeeshop.
Hooray!
October 9th, 2008 at 8:52 am
the smoking ban in pubs is ludicrous you are more likely to suffer harm from a drinker than a smoker.
How many marriages have broken up due to drink loads
How many fights at closing time have been cos of fags none but loads after a skinful.
How many kids have lost a parent cos of some drunken yob??
Its time we looked at the drinking culture not the smokers
I am not anti drink but more laws should be in effect to stop out of control drinkers.
October 8th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
i think this proposal is outrageous and for anybody that has said that this is to protect the workers in coffee shops then you need to get your heads sorted, people who work in coffee shops most likely smoke weed and dont mind it been smoked infront of them so why would they need to be protected from something they smoke anyway?
but i think that this article may be wrong anyway, i have heard that the law is that you are not allowed to smoke anywhere that serves food or drink, in which case coffee shops just stop selling food or drink and they will be exempt from this. the only bad thing about that is that you will need to go somwhere else to get your munch food and a cure for dry-mouth.
also im not sure how many people are aware of this but a lot of coffee shops in holland have been told that they have to close down, the government has said that (i think) any shop within either a 1 or 2 mile radius (not sure which) of a school must cloase because they do not want to encourage youngsters to smoke cannabis.
October 8th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
matt you need to get urself a g.f if u go there 3/4 times a year
September 19th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
call yourself xxx amsterdam ( what a joke )
——
M&A
Artemis
Can you please choose another username to avoid confusion with another poster.
July 16th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
just looked again at the conditions and it seems your only allowed to smoke pure weed…………………..RESULT!!!
July 16th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
there is designated smoking areas in every shop, cafe etc however you may not be served in these areas (coffee food or whatever). the smoking areas would be completely shut off from the non-smoking areas so no worries. peace
July 15th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Fuck all of yall who dont smoke the green king. I tell you now that you better let me smoke my bleezy or ill blow you up bitch ass hoe
March 6th, 2008 at 5:53 am
that is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard that is the only reason any1 from america would ever visit that country
March 5th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
why why why ,the goverments f***** let us smokers smoke toke , get high till we die ….dont like it dont go ther.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
this is dreadfull, all my dreams of running a chilled out coffeeshop in the midst of hectic amsterdam have been crushed!
i totally agree with james webb -swindon fair enough ban smoking in every public place other than coffeeshops, after all there meant for getting baked oh well lifes a beach!
February 19th, 2008 at 6:54 am
Here in Canada restaurants and pubs put up areas where there was a enclosed smoking area. When our smoking bans came into effect many thought they would lose alot of business but found the opposite to be true. In Amsterdam a enclosed room seems to be the best solution.
I personally find tobacco smoke both offensive and harmful and resent the fact that I cant say no in public places. I have just as many rights to a clean air space as the smoker who wishes to toxify mine. To stay home or not frequent a business at times just isnt an option or viable.
Perhaps a new strategy such as my suggestion needs to be discussed amoung the MPs there eh!
Carla
February 5th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
i could not be happier that the smoking ban has come into place in areas such as restaurants and bars cos i hate it when i am enjoying a lovely meal with my friends until someone sparks up a ciggy at the table next to me, but to ban smoking in a place which is purely designed for smoking is just ludcrous. if you do not smoke, then don’t go in there. i have been to Amsterdam a few times now and it is the most amazing place in the world, not just the cannabis but also the culture. i fear that once the smoking ban comes into place then it will not be just the coffeeshops that are loosing out but also the tourists. i also do not think it is fair that because a group of MPs that think it is a good idea to discriminate against us smokers, people lives will be dramatically affected. have they even thought about those people who run a coffee shop as a living, how are they going to cope when their business goes under? i mean lets face it, once the smoking ban is in effect people aren’t going to want to go to Amsterdam just to get some weed and smoke it out on the street and why should we have to! we havent done anything wrong, it’s not as if we are blowing smoke into people’s faces! you have to be 18 to enter a coffee shop and if you are 18 then you are an adult and old enough to make up your own mind as to whether you smoke or not. every coffee shop has a door and if you do not smoke weed then don’t enter. it’s not as if you could accidentally stumble into a coffee shop thinking it is a cafe. even the staff are smokers for christ sake! i am so gutted by this smoking ban and i think it is the worst thing that could happen. what’s next, are they going to ban the women working in the red light district aswell.
February 4th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
wounded were going b4 then hahahahahahaaaaaa : )
December 4th, 2007 at 4:34 am
CANT BELIEVE IT…JUS CANT nooooooooo
: (
November 5th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
i cant believe what i am reading here, surely coffe shops are the biggest tourist attraction in the dam??? i for one have been there over10 times and if i didnt want a smokey enviroment i would not go so surely that is the case…
IF YOU DONT SMOKE DRUGS, THEN DONT GO TO A AMSTERDAM COFFEE SHOP AS THEY ARE MEANT FOR DRUGS!!!!
I UNDERSTAND AT A REASTARUANT BUT YOU CANT SMOKE WEED IN THEM ANYWAY SO JUST DONT GET IT
October 31st, 2007 at 4:45 pm
I’ve never had a problem with there being smoke-free establishmetns for those who want them. But when it was proposed to let bars decide smoking policy for themselves, the Antis screamed there had to be a “level playing field.” Translation: If people have the choice, more people will choose smoker-friendly bars and that would destroy the propaganda which says the vast majority of the public supports smoking bans everywhere.
October 30th, 2007 at 2:33 am
i find those with completely polarised views either way to be most scary in this debate…hiow on earth can a smoker not consider that their smoke may be harmful to others…even just smoke in the eyes is a real annoyance to most people…me for one am happy that now i cna go to my favourite restaurant and eat wihtout some philistine lighting up ans making me and my baby daughters cough…..on the other hand, i feel that people do have a right to choose and so a blanket ban and criminalising people just further isolates and marginalises…i am a weed smoker and would not be happy were the coffeshops in Dam to be affected….personally i think tobacco is nasty… but i and others should be able to make a choice and yet still protect the health of others…a blanace is required rather than a roughshod approach.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Yesterday there was a demonstration against the smoking ban in Amsterdam. There’s also a petition with about 100,000 signatures. Similar protests are also happening in Germany and England.
October 15th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Here’s a quote that may provide some insight:
“…it would be essential to foster an atmosphere where it was percieved that active smokers would injure those around them, especially their family and any infants or young children showwould be exposed involuntaily to ETS.”
Those are the words of Sir George Godber, at the 3rd UN Wotrld Conference on Smoking and Health.
The year is 1975, a good decade before there was any “scientific evidence” on secondhand smoke. It’s pretty clear that the antismoking crusade is not in response to research, but that the research is done at the behest of, and tailored to fit the goals of, the antismoking crusade.
Sir Richard Doll, the first researcher to establish a link between lung cancer and active smoking ridiculed the idea of beign harmed from other people smokng in his presence.
October 15th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Hey, Roger, “everybody” doesn’t agree on these laws. What evidence there is of “secondhand smoke” being dangerous is spurious at best. Can you name anyone who’s died of it? It’s all conjecture. Read the stuff about places like Japan that others have posted.
As far as being selfish, it used to be that you could smoke virtually everywhere and hardly anyone complained. Then they started designating “No Smoking” areas and smokers for the most part unselfishly stepped aside, thinking that if we respected nonsmokers’ preferences they’d respect ours. That largely worked, but some fanatical, well-funded antismokers weren’t satisfied and eventually we found ourselves outside like lepers. I think smokers should have been more selfish earlier and fought back. Now the moonbats are complaining about smoking out-of-doors.
How about letting us have some designated smoking bars. Staffing won’t be a problem because most bar workers smoke. And there will still be “smoke-free” bars for those who need a sterile environment to socialize.
October 10th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
Here in NY, unions just helped defeat a campus wide smoking ban at Stony brook University. It seems that peopel who shomke have rights, too!! this ban would’ve forbidden smoking anywhere ona huge amcpus, including outdoors or even in your own car!!!! These antismokers are fanatics and they won’t stop till it’s illegal.
Speaking of labor, Ireland has a barman’s union and the twit in charge praised the ban when it came in. I wonder if he’s still in office now that some 600 pubs have closed in Ireland and lots of bar staff are suffering accordingly.
What working people really care about is being abel to make a living and job security. Where are people like Joseph when these things are on the table??? Nowhere to be found!!
One last thing: if enough people wanted smoke-free bars, they would already exist without government interference.
October 10th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
You think that working class non-smokers don’t deserve to be protected? Everybody agrees with these laws, that’s why they get passed. They’ll also save thousands of lives.
There are over 100 studies that show second-hand smoke causes death and disease in non-smokers; Would you really see people die before you’d go outside to smoke? don’t be so selfish and think of others.
October 9th, 2007 at 6:47 pm
Funny, it seems that nowadays smoking is mainly the province of the working class; bougie folks eschew it. Yet the bans are put forward as protection for the workers. I’ll bet Joesph above and the rest of the antismokers are middle-class types who don’t like the plebes having a puff with their pints.
Here in NY, we have ultarich people like Mike Bloomberg pouring their money into passing these laws–that’s the only reason they ever get passed. I guess the proles need their “betters” to save them from themselves once again.
October 9th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
If second hand smoke were so deadly, the Japanese would be dropping like flies. On the contrary, they have the world’s longest life expectancy. Many other countries without smoking bans also have longer life spans than those that do. I personally think the whole thing is a huge fraud.
How many bartenders, etc have complained abotu working in a smoky environment? Here in the US, it was hardly any. I like to sit at the bar and chat with the barkeep, who usually is also smoking. Sittng in some glass booth may not be quite the same. At least they should have both smoking and nonsmoking sections, or smoking and nonsmoking bars. That would be fair. Banning it everywhere isn’t.
October 9th, 2007 at 12:43 am
Have you no compassion for people with asthma, allergies, or for the health of people who work jobs that would expose them to second-hand smoke?
Smoking bans are not about ‘personal choice’ of customers. They are about protecting people who work in bars, restaurants, cafés, etc.
Good job to the Netherlands for standing up for working folk! and for everyone out there who cares about their health. And obviously, they’ve done it in a way that will still makes it possible to smoke weed in Amsterdam, just not right next to the person who is selling it to you.
June 26th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Didn’t I read that the British Parliament, which voted for the smoking ban, also voted to exempt their own bar?!?!?!? What total hypocrisy! And didn’t they strike down a measure that would exempt historic buildings from having to be covered with those stupid little “No Smoking” signs?? (Those thngs are so prevalent here in the US, I think we should change the flag and intead of stars have 50 red circles with lines through them. “Welcome to America–land of petty rules and regulations!” But seriously, British people must not care much about their country if they allow this sort of thing to happen.
June 23rd, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Make Mine Mexico!!!
I definitely do not willingly travel to, or spend money in, places with smoking bans. I used to love to visit Ireland, but no more. Besides boycotting countries, though, we should really be boycotting the corporations whose money helps push these bans through. The worst offender has to be Johnson & Johnson. Also Miracle Gro, for firing employess who smoke and Mariott and Westin hotels for not allowing smoking in their rooms. Don’t forget the American Cancer Society and the American Lung Association, either. Hit’em in the wallet, I say!!!
June 23rd, 2007 at 12:38 am
Had my first trip to the Netherlands in May. Loved how civilized, tolerant and smoker-friendly it was. Sad that that may end. Or not. The Dutch are famous for their pragmatism in the face of idiotic prohibitions. For example, cannabis is technically illegal in the Netherlands, the authorities just turn a blind eye to the coffee shops because they know the alternative is repressive, counterproductive and downright unfair. Hopefully they’ll follow the example of countries more respectful of the enjoyment of life, like Italy and Spain and ignore the smokign ban.
Otherwise, I echo Donnie, but it’ll be Japan for me (where, by the way, they smoke everywhere but have the world’s longest life expectancy. Go figure!!)
June 22nd, 2007 at 9:23 pm
What a disapointment, I always thought that the Dutch were even more tolerant than the British and having been invaded during the 2nd World War I would have thought that they would have jealously guarded the freedom of all their people. Everybody knows SHS is a scam you only have to read the reports and grossly inflated made up figures. I carnt believe the Dutch fell for this one. Greece for holidays then.