Who has to deal with a smoking ban in their city? What are everyone's thoughts? I'm ENRAGED!!!!!

[ChrisL 2]

Quote

People have different wants and opinions.
We should respect them all.

That sounds great on the surface but its completely impractical.

When peoples needs are in direct opposition, someone will get the short end of the stick.

__

My mighty steed

[livendive 8]

You've made my point for me. While I do agree that the anti-smoking movement has a point with the whole not being exposed to a known carcinogen thing, I also think a bar/restaurant ought to be able to legally have a scotch & cigar night if they so wish. If you don't like cigars, you'd be a fool to go there that night.

Basically, it all boils down to fact that everybody wants everybody else to kowtow to their own position. Personally, I think everyone should be free to do as they wish. The best avenue for the anti-smokers to exploit is the OSHA angle. The law requires that employers put protections in place to prevent employees from being exposed to known carcinogens. I know of no exemption for tobacco smoke. Obviously, it would be unreasonable to expect waitresses/bartenders/dancers to wear HEPA filter respirators, but I think the potential exists for engineering controls, e.g. highly ventilated rooms with pass-through trays through which waitresses can deliver drinks.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[hungarianchick 0]

Smoking is banned in bars/restaurants/clubs in the entire state of Massachusetts. I don't see the difference in the number of people frequenting these establishments. But then again, they always have a choice to drive to another state for a drink...

"I love cooking with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food."

[rwieder 0]

it's really kind of simple, smoking kills. it's not good for you at all. you can eat to your health, drink to your health but you cannot smoke to your health. even animals have sense enough not to smoke. c'mon now, lighten up.

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[lawrocket 3]

Okay, now in all seriousness...

What you have described is the way things SHOULD be. I don't like cigarette smoke, and therefore I did not go to places with cigarette smoke. I found them to be pleasant places. Smokers had their joints, too. I'd go in those every now and then with some friends. My choice, you know.

Now the choice of whether to own, operate, work at or patronize a business that allowed smoking is gone. I find this to be a shame.

On the other hand - I've got an issue with the "deaths from second hand smoke" statistics. I've seen a few death certificates and I don't ever seem to recall seeing "second-hand smoke" listed as a cause. I even hear a commercial that talsk about the thousands of children exposed to second hand smoke who die every year. Well, yeah, they are exposed to it, but it doesn't mean that the second hand smoke killed them, does it? It comes out that way...

I'm thinking of taking up smoking. Second hand smoke is way worse than first-hand smoke, or so I'm told. I'll lower my risks and take that smoke straight from the filter!

edited to add: I physically appreciate the smoke-free environment. Ideologically, I am opposed to it, and shall stay opposed to it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

We lost by 2% or the vote. I think it was rigged. What right does the city have to even bring it to vote?????? THEY DON'T! I am going to fight this. It is smoking first, what is next alcohol??? This is prohibition all over again!

It won't happen with alcohol because more than 25% of the population drinks. On the upside, people like me are far more likely to go out, not having to worry about how to launder the smoke out when I get home.

The big negative I see with the Austin situation is that they jerked around the owners with this filtration middle ground they had no intention of honoring.

[jlmiracle 7]

Quote

animals have sense enough not to smoke.

Actually I think there is a monkey that smokes at some zoo. Not 100% sure where it is, heard it on the news a while back.


Judy

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[ChrisL 2]

Quote

\Personally, I think everyone should be free to do as they wish.

Sounds great except for one thing, In this scenario, people smoke wherever they feel like it with no regard to the health of others, and the people who choose to not smoke must remain in their homes to protect themselves from
having to breath poison.

This seems like a fair and equitable solution to you, eh?

It seems to me that since the smokers are making a concious choice to
partake of a known health hazard, they should also accept the responsibility that goes along with that choice. Namely being considerate of people that dont feel like getting cancer or heart disease.

The ONLY workable solution is that smokers do so in private. This is the only way that smokers can fairly exercise their right to poison themselves for no tangible purpose and non smokers dont have to share the disease against their will.

Even as a smoker I was in firm support of this position.

__

My mighty steed

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Quote

People have different wants and opinions.
We should respect them all.

That sounds great on the surface but its completely impractical.

When peoples needs are in direct opposition, someone will get the short end of the stick.

Well in this case demand should have just fix the problem.
If there were a bunch of people who do not smoke and bunch that do. We can have smoking and non-smoking clubs/bars.

The number of smoking and non-smoking Bars would be determined by the demand.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[GARYC24 3]

Also, shutting down all tobacco companies play apart, in the making it a law thing. Kinda hard to do, and I could really care less if they all closed tomorrow! (sorry all those people who work there would have to get new jobs, go back to school, get new career, etc.
I do not believe for 1 one minute all this is has to do with health, I believe it has to due fire insurance reasons, too.
However, bars are alot less smoky, and at concert venues the visibility has increased! haha

[Shotgun 1]

Wow, I can't believe that went through in Austin. It should be up to the bar owners whether they want to allow smoking in their bar or not. (Oh, and I am not even a smoker.) I wonder how long that will last....

[livendive 8]

Who cares whether it's good for the smoker's health? Skydiving isn't good for our health either! But I'll concede the point that we shouldn't force others to smoke just like we shouldn't force anyone to skydive. I think a happy medium exists and that those who want to participate in any number of risky behaviors should be free to do so, provided they don't compound the risk for others.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[ChrisL 2]

Quote

Well in this case demand should have just fix the problem.
If there were a bunch of people who do not smoke and bunch that do. We can have smoking and non-smoking clubs/bars.

The number of smoking and non-smoking Bars would be determined by the demand.

This would be a reasonable compromise.

__

My mighty steed

[skymama 37]

Quote

In short, i'm FOR the ban. . . everywhere. Smoke at home or in designated areas. Me, my family, my friends, other people and their children do not deserve to be forced to breathe that crap in while walking in the park, down the street, etc, either. Not to mention cigarette butts that are thrown everywhere, I think people should be fined.

I totally agree.

Fireflytx, I'm sure you could find another job or a second job if you think it's going to impact you that much.

She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

[jlmiracle 7]

Well, said Dave.

Who ever owns the facility should decide if they want smoking in there or not.

I wish they would ban cell phone use in public places since no one seems to be able to use a quiet voice and I have to listen to some stupid annoying conversation.

Judy

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[mcneill79 0]

Nice color

[livendive 8]

Quote

The ONLY workable solution is that smokers do so in private. This is the only way that smokers can fairly exercise their right to poison themselves for no tangible purpose and non smokers dont have to share the disease against their will.

Define "private". Also, why can't non-smokers exercise their right to boycott those establishments that allow cigarette/cigar smoke to enter their airspace and let market forces bring about the desired changes? Do you know what percentage of Americans smoke these days? Non-smokers enjoy a substantial majority and should be able to force change fairly rapidly through such steps.

Instead, we're still caught up in this mob mentality of "there should be a law!"

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[fireflytx 0]

Quote

Quote

\Personally, I think everyone should be free to do as they wish.

Sounds great except for one thing, In this scenario, people smoke wherever they feel like it with no regard to the health of others, and the people who choose to not smoke must remain in their homes to protect themselves from
having to breath poison.

This seems like a fair and equitable solution to you, eh?

So what was wrong with our prior law that bars had to have ionized filtration in order to get a permit which did create smoking and nonsmoking establishments? We did have a choice! Nonsmokers did not have to go into that third of bars and restaurants in Austin where there was smoking.

"Well behaved women rarely make history"

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

at concert venues the visibility has increased!

Hmmm. Seems to me that whenever I go to concerts at large venues I spent most of the show pissed off at the large amounts of another type of smoke wafting through the air and oscuring visibility (God help me - I was in the nosebleeds at a CSN&Y concert)

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[banjobill 0]

Quote

Who cares whether it's good for the smoker's health? Skydiving isn't good for our health either! But I'll concede the point that we shouldn't force others to smoke just like we shouldn't force anyone to skydive. I think a happy medium exists and that those who want to participate in any number of risky behaviors should be free to do so, provided they don't compound the risk for others.

Blues,
Dave

Who cares about smoking? I think they ought to ban farting in public.

....with a capital P and that rhymes with T and that spells TROUBLE!!!

[fireflytx 0]

Quote

Fireflytx, I'm sure you could find another job or a second job if you think it's going to impact you that much.

I have done all the other jobs corporate (which I will never ever do again), waiting tables, regular sales. I make much better money now. I chose to dance to get my self out the hole the other jobs created.

Why should I have to change jobs because someone is taking away our rights? People had a choice here in Austin to go to nonsmoking or smoking establishments.

"Well behaved women rarely make history"

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

People had a choice here in Austin to go to nonsmoking or smoking establishments.

I think that's the point in a nutshell. Choices are no longer available...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[skymedic 0]

Thank god more towns are doing this....cancer sucks....i've seen it from all sides...as a family member who has lost close loved ones from it....as a health care worker who see's smoking's debilitating effects on a daily basis...and most importantly...I am a cancer survivor of almost ten years since my first diagnosis....

give em up...there just not worth it...or if ya like em..so be it...not my job to tell you what you can and can not do...but don't do it around my family or around me. and that includes the bar's and restraunts we frequent.


I am hoping ST.Louis county will pass the ban..they've been talking about it...i hope it is sooner rather than later.

Marc
otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman....

[skycat 0]

Here in Colorado a number of cities and counties have banned smoking and more do so every year, when the issue goes up on the ballot it passes every time. Actually right now going through legislature is a state wide ban on smoking in restaurants, and from the track record of every other smoking ban law that has passed I see this one passing also. Which of course will open it up for a state wide ban on smoking in bars; which if you live in Boulder, and several other Front Range communities you can’t do anyway. (not to mention all the establishments that have voluntarily banned smoking)

Where I’m going with this is people still flock to Boulder to hang out, eat, and drink. Having spent quite a bit of time in Austin when I lived in TX and now living 30 minutes from Boulder I’d say the culture in the two communities is very similar. Both are College towns with rich roots in dining and entertainment where people from all over the state come to visit and enjoy the atmosphere. You can’t go into a restaurant or bar in Boulder that isn’t packed on weekends and many week night. Around here people do go “Well hey I can’t smoke in Boulder bars so I don’t want to go there”, nope they go there anyway and smoke outside (although I heard Boulder was trying to ban that also).

So while there will be some growing pains with this changes and people figure out how they are going to deal with the ban.

FYI Smoking is banned statewide in New York, California, Connecticut, Utah, Vermont, Delaware, Florida, and Maine in some shape or form.

Fly it like you stole it!

[unformed 0]

I can understand banning smoking in very public places (ie: malls). Actually, I would expect the owners of the mall to ban it themselves since smoking would not help their profits.

Resetaurants and bars are a completely different story. Especially bars. For the record, I don't smoke (anymore), and yes, there are some bars I don't like going to because they are extremely smoky. Well, then it's in the best interest of the owner to create a filtration system, or ban smoking if he so deems it necessary.

Forcing PRIVATE business owners to do something that can greatly and directly affect their income because a few CUSTOMERS (that are free to do their business elsewhere) are inconvenienced is absolutely reatrded and goes against capitalism. If you don't think a smoking ban can affect a restaurant, read my previous post. Matt's Tropical Grill and Cigar Club in Indian Harbor Beach was greatly hurt by the smoking ban in Florida.

That was a business where having a cigar at the end of a good meal was customary, and a big reason people would go there and not elsewhere.

I could even (somewhat) understand requiring restaurants to have a non-smoking area (which they used to do) but not banning it altogether.

This ad space for sale.