In response to the poster who commented on the law only permitting smoking indoors to the detriment of others' health, that's where a law on protecting public health from a smoker's choice gets difficult. For obvious reasons, not making others suffer someone smoking around them indoors but yet allowing the smoker to choose to puff away, there would have to be a way around that.
It's not a perfect solution, but for those without a private outdoor area, for example those living in a block of flats, then a segregated outdoor building would perhaps be the way forward. Preferably one with a door on it to keep the outside area free from the smoke wafting out of the smokers' shed (for lack of a better way of putting it), especially important on days when the wind is strong.
A number of airports have those rather clever smoking rooms where the smell and smoke doesn't waft out but gets extracted. I cannot remember where that was now, I didn't see it at JFK but it might have been Vienna. It's not a perfect solution, as obviously the smoke still goes somewhere but at least it would help to protect the non-smokers.
Of course, I'm still in support of pricing the stuff out of most people's reach along with an increase in the age restriction. It won't stop a lot of people, granted, but it will make some difference and that is what we should be aiming for right now. Decreasing the number of smokers will help no end in improving the public health, and as someone (Bletchleyite?) said it's unpleasant walking into/out of somewhere and the first thing you encounter is a crowd of smokers. Usually literally right next to the door as well.
When possible, I tend to avoid using a shop/cafe/whatever that allows such a thing to happen, and you can all deem that to be silly or whatever if you choose, but I'd rather take my money and support a cleaner and more sensible place. It does save me a fortune on coffee, as I generally don't buy from the places in town now. There's some nice places, with decent coffee, but when you have to walk past all the smokers to get served, no thanks. Worse is the other place next to it, because Coffee #1 may make smokers go outside but on warm days they open the sides of the shop up to cool the inside down. Where do the smokers sit? Next to said open space, no thanks I'll not go there either.
Is there an ideal solution? I don't think there is a sensible way to please all parties. One side will lose regardless of what happens. I do think public opinion is changing though, and in the coming years it'll get to a point where smoking is seen to be really unwise. Perhaps that's what will eventually cause the habit to die out, peer pressure from those who don't smoke, along with ex-smokers visibly demonstrating the benefits and the joys of not smoking. I know one of my team gave up for a few months, but somehow found themselves back on smoking.
Which reminds me of another problem also faced by those wanting to quit, breaking away from the social circle formed with smokers. It's hard to break that link with people you've known for a long time, but it's so worth the effort long-term. I still talk to most of the smokers, just not that much these days as we're all on different shifts now.
Anyway, enough of me vocalising my opinions on this matter. Given the choice, would I put the legal age up? Absolutely so. I would even consider the benefits of incentivising smaller shops to actively put the new rule in place, given the loss of income no doubt generated from the law change, for the first 6 months. The idea there being to help them transition over to being more responsible, and make sure they don't consider ignoring the law to make a few extra pounds.
directorsblog.nih.gov
