Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE actually
sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can on the tube
since it started.
This is in complete contrast to the Smoking ban which is openly flouted and
has been in around 20 odd years.

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:08:52 +0100, "Frank Incense"
wrote:

Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE actually
sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can on the tube
since it started.
This is in complete contrast to the Smoking ban which is openly flouted and
has been in around 20 odd years.


I don't remember seeing any cans even before the ban, but then I don't
travel late at night.

Dave

In message , at 13:21:21 on Sun,
27 Jul 2008, Dave remarked:
I don't remember seeing any cans even before the ban, but then I don't
travel late at night.

I have to agree. Plenty of really drunk people (especially on the Circle
Line and inside) but very rarely anyone actually drinking.
--
Roland Perry

Frank Incense wrote:
Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE
actually sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can
on the tube since it started.

I've seen four empties and one person drinking in the past week alone,
and I only go on the tube off peak.

I've seen no active enforcement of the law, but I'm unsure where it
would be enforced given that it is rare to pass a member of staff
between gate lines.
--
alex @ http://nuttyxander.com/
* we taught ourselves to play the pots and pans so
that we would have something honest to dance to *

On 27 Jul, 12:08, "Frank Incense" wrote:
Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE actually
sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can on the tube
since it started.
This is in complete contrast to the Smoking ban which is openly flouted and
has been in around 20 odd years.

I've seen a few drinkers - maybe slightly fewer than pre-ban, but not
by a significant number.

Not sure I'm with you on the smoking ban point though - I haven't seen
anyone smoking on underground bits of the Underground *ever*, and I
can't even remember the last time I saw someone smoking on a surface
platform...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In message , Frank Incense
writes
Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE
actually sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can
on the tube since it started.
This is in complete contrast to the Smoking ban which is openly
flouted and has been in around 20 odd years.

If the rubbish left on my trains when I put them into the depot at
nights is anything to go by, it's being totally ignored!
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:08:52 +0100, "Frank Incense"
wrote:

Not even two months in and from my eyes it seems that people ARE actually
sticking to it. Or am I wrong? Probably only seen 1 empty can on the tube
since it started.
This is in complete contrast to the Smoking ban which is openly flouted and
has been in around 20 odd years.

Not that the drinking "issue" was a problem (IME) in the first place I
have seen one instance of someone obviously consuming alcohol and that
was on the North London Line on a weekday in the early afternoon. No
one said anything, myself included, as the person in question didn't
look as if he would respond favourably to adverse comment.

I've heard one announcement (I think) about the ban and I think that was
on LU but otherwise the change is so low profile as to be invisible so
far as enforcement goes.

I don't understand your comment about the smoking ban - I've seen it
flouted less than 10 times since it was introduced and on several
occasions I asked, having identified myself as staff, the offender to
put the cigarette out and they complied immediately. Given the wider
smoking ban that is now in place smokers even move out of bus shelters
to smoke so those sitting there are not subject to their smoke.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

In message of Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:57:43
in uk.transport.london, Roland Perry writes
In message , at 13:21:21 on
Sun, 27 Jul 2008, Dave remarked:
I don't remember seeing any cans even before the ban, but then I don't
travel late at night.

I have to agree. Plenty of really drunk people (especially on the
Circle Line and inside) but very rarely anyone actually drinking.

I think I see more 500ml alcohol cans than before the ban.

I was at Canning Town Bus Station on Saturday at 07.50.
A customer was both smoking and imbibing inside the enclosed area.

The station is only staffed 0830-1600 at the weekend.
I left the criminal to it.

Incidentally, there seems to be a discrepancy on smoking rules in bus
stations. Signage and practice permit it outside enclosed areas.
Conditions of Carriage say: "4.5. For safety reasons, on our buses, in
our bus stations and on Underground stations and trains you must not:
• smoke ...". Can anyone explain the usage of "in" and "on" in that?
--
Walter Briscoe

On Jul 27, 2:57*pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:21:21 on Sun,
27 Jul 2008, Dave remarked:

I don't remember seeing any cans even before the ban, but then I don't
travel late at night.

I have to agree. Plenty of really drunk people (especially on the Circle
Line and inside) but very rarely anyone actually drinking.

Since I wrote my letter to the Standard complaining that elephants
ought to be banned from escalators, I haven't once been stuck behind
an elephant on an escalator.

(My letter didn't get printed, but it was obviously passed on to
TPTB. It just goes to show how one person can make a difference.)

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 19:47:43 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

Not that the drinking "issue" was a problem (IME) in the first place

It was only an issue on buses, IMO, when it was common for a dropped
can to end up rolling on the floor, spilling beer around the place and
making it stink.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.