Would you support a smoking ban in bars?

[WI_DEM]

This is a controversial subject right now here in Madison, which has had a smoking ban in bars for the last couple of months. Many bars say that business has decreased dramatically and they have had to lay off employees. They also say, "what do you expect when you go to a bar? people like to drink and smoke, even people who don't usually smoke." Supporters say the bars have had plenty of preparation time to offer unique specials to keep patrons coming and that people who used to avoid bars because of all the smoke are people they could target.

What say you?

[NoBushSpokenHere]

1. No - instead - install more ventilation. n/t

[ashling]

33. Designating a smoking section in a bar or restraunt

is like designating a peeing section in a swimming pool

[SammyBlue]

143. Let them smoke. . .bars and restaurants are for the public

Make a smoking section and let it go.

Also, don't say, what say you! That's Bill O'Falafel's phrase.

[Greyskye]

181. You're right...

...and this member of the public appreciates being able to actually breathe while eating. And my son who has asthma likes getting out once in a while as well - he certainly can't go to a 'smoking' restaurant! Isn't he a member of the 'public' as well?

[SammyBlue]

189. I have asthma too. . .you know something.

I can't breathe around cologne and perfume. Ban them

Next, I don't like the shirt you'r wearing. It's disrupting my meal. Ban that!

Next, I don't like the music you're listening to because my son will say the bad words in that music. Ban that!

I don't like that movie because my son will become violent. Ban that.

If the restaurant has a smoking section, find that out. As far as bars. . .what is your son with asthma doing in a bar?

People like this make me sick. Because I am personally inconvenienced, I believe it should be banned.

The right wing does this! For crying out loud, listen to yourself! Look at yourself! You're acting like a wingnut.

Take it upon yourself to politely ask the person smoking not to smoke around your kid if you like. I'd probably tell you to go to hell (but I don't smoke), but protect your kid by not intruding on others.

You non-smokers have the airplanes, 99% of the airports, buses, public building, theaters, malls. . .basically, smokers can't smoke unless they are alone with no one coming near from for 50 miles standing in the middle of the road.

This is an aspect of life I am a strong libertarian on. It's personal choice. Deal with it. Life isn't fair. You son, or you don't like it. . .there are hard facts to deal with.

But having the government tell business to order me not to smoke because someone, somewhere doesn't like it smacks in the face of personal choice. I have the personal choice to smoke. You have the personal choice to ask me not to or more your seat.

[progressivebydesign]

280. It's a health issue...

By the way... SMOKING IS NOT A PERSONAL CHOICE because it affects everyone around you! It's not a fucking inconvenience, it's a health risk. You have asthma? really? Your post was so unbelievably rude and insulting. Maybe you can find something called Libertarian Underground someday...

[Greyskye]

357. Yes I do.

I have asthma too. . .you know something. I can't breathe around cologne and perfume. Ban them

If you have asthma, can't breath around perfume and cologne, yet chose (as a professed non-smoker) to go to the smoking sections in sports bars; you are either self-destructive or not being completely truthful. Please let me know which it is.

Next, I don't like the shirt you'r wearing. It's disrupting my meal. Ban that!

Next, I don't like the music you're listening to because my son will say the bad words in that music. Ban that!

I don't like that movie because my son will become violent. Ban that.

Straw man, straw man, and straw man. Weak, dude.

If the restaurant has a smoking section, find that out. As far as bars. . .what is your son with asthma doing in a bar?

Oh yes, smoking sections in restaurants are so effective. That cloud of carcinogenic stink just magically stays in that half of the restaurant! I couldn't even come close to counting the number of times I or my family had to request to move farther away from the toxic cloud that was invading the 'non-smoking' section of the restaurant. Where is my libertarian ability to breath clean, non-noxious air now?

And I only commented on my son being in restaurants, not bars. You really like those straw men I see!

People like this make me sick. Because I am personally inconvenienced, I believe it should be banned.

The right wing does this! For crying out loud, listen to yourself! Look at yourself! You're acting like a wingnut.

Pot. Kettle. Black. Let's see; a person smoking during their meal causes someone to have a potentially life-threatening asthma attack. That hospital trip to get a nebulizer treatment is what you call being "personally inconvenienced". Gee, I think that having to step outside onto the smoking patio is more in line with being "personally inconvenienced", but then I'm evidently a wing-nut. Silly me. :silly:

Take it upon yourself to politely ask the person smoking not to smoke around your kid if you like. I'd probably tell you to go to hell (but I don't smoke), but protect your kid by not intruding on others.

Gee, it's so comforting to know that if I ask you to stop smoking in order to protect the health of my child, you'll "probably tell (me) to go to hell". And who is acting like a wing-nut? :eyes:

You non-smokers have the airplanes, 99% of the airports, buses, public building, theaters, malls. . .basically, smokers can't smoke unless they are alone with no one coming near from for 50 miles standing in the middle of the road.

"You non-smokers"? But wait, you said above that you didn't smoke! Hmmmm..... Gee, 50 miles worth of isolation before you can smoke? In CA it's only inside buildings. You're adding some rhetoric to your straw men now I'm seeing!

This is an aspect of life I am a strong libertarian on. It's personal choice. Deal with it. Life isn't fair. You son, or you don't like it. . .there are hard facts to deal with.

You are correct, it is a personal choice that you need to deal with. If you choose to smoke in CA, then you deal with lighting up outside. So sorry, life isn't fair. Deal with it.

But having the government tell business to order me not to smoke because someone, somewhere doesn't like it smacks in the face of personal choice. I have the personal choice to smoke. You have the personal choice to ask me not to or more your seat.

How about, you have the personal choice of either not smoking indoors, or going outside to feed your addiction. Restaurants and bars no longer have spittoons scattered about for you to spit your tobacco juice in; why aren't you arguing in favor of that while you're at it?

[SammyBlue]

192. That system works well at the sports bar I frequent.

The smokers are in the smoking section, the non smokers aren't.

I go to the smoking section. The people in there are more fun to watch football with.

The non smokers tend to be uppity little yuppie scum who, as George Carlin puts it, "turned their children into cult object, they have child fetishs and it's not healthy."

I also agree with him when he says: "I'm tired of all this mindless yammering about children. . .help the children, save the children, what about the children. You know what I say: F-ck the children."

And I'm a teacher.

I'm tired of my choices being limited because some dumbass parents doesn't want their insulated child to experience life. No violent movies, no violent video games, no dangerous toys (like marbles and legos), no swearing or drug references on the radio. . .Jesus Christ!

GC: "No wonder kids smoke. You'd smoke too if you had to deal with this striving, anal yuppie boomer parents who enroll you in college before you know what side of the playpen smells the worst. You want to help you kids. . .leave them the fuck alone."

I'll add to it. . .you want to help you kid. TEACH THEM!!! Don't force me as a teacher to teach the crap you should be. Teach them at sometimes, people in a restauarant like to smoke, drink beer and eat red meat. If you don't like it, don't do it. . .but don't prevent that person's enjoyment of those activities.

[noonwitch]

360. I agree with you and I work in children's services

I have a coworker who thinks she should be able to petition to terminate people's parental rights because they smoke. She complains when the smokers are smoking outside.

On the other hand, she as a parent is not exactly mom of the year. She spends most of her time trying to manipulate the child's father, or the courts into making him suffer. She is promiscuous, and has slept with court officials, and has made sexual harrassment accusations against pretty much any male supervisor she has ever had.

She also voted for Bush in 2004, and thinks he's doing a good job.

[progressivebydesign]

275. Too true! I LOVE when they have a piece of freakin' TAPE on the floor..

... to designate the different areas. It's insulting.

[tk2kewl]

2. No smoking in any bars in NY State

I think it is overboard myself.

[kysrsoze]

105. They're considering it in Chicago. I'm a smoker and I hope they do

Everyone else I know who smokes is sick of it and knows it's going to eventually kill them if they don't stop. The damned things are burning poison. We're all wanting to quit, but we freak out at the thought of going into a bar full of smoke and being able to resist buying a pack from the bar.

I think deep down most smokers probably feel the same way about their habit (though I'm sure many still see smoking in bars as their right). I used to be for banning in restaurants and keeping it in bars. I've seen some bars in san fran where there is a dedicated smoking room with glass walls. I'm really tired of it all and in the past year I've changed my mind about the proposed smoking ban. Do it now. The bars won't lose business if it's across the board.

[johnfunk]

140. I love Love LOVE the smoking ban in New York

I don't want some addicted bozo using his or her toxic, deadly addictive drug anywhere near me.

I also think it's high time we nationalized the tobacco industry and that the FDA regulate its sale.

[kysrsoze]

168. Please get off your high horse.

Those of us who smoke aren't a bunch of bozos. People who act like that deserve a nice puff in their face.

[johnfunk]

267. You sound like an addict in denial

[progressivebydesign]

283. Naw they're just a proud liberal doing service to their corporate master.

Don't you just LOVE the liberals here that have zero problem enriching corporations that make a product SO VILE that they have to make commercials telling you how to stop using their product and how to keep your kids from using it?

[SammyBlue]

204. So, let's go back to prohibition with that stupid logic

Alcohol addicted bozo could be sitting next to you getting drunk. What flawed logic.

[johnfunk]

268. False equivalency: alcohol and tobacco are FAR different substances

By BMA measures, tobacco is more addictive than heroin or cocaine. Tobacco affects different regions of the brain than alcohol. And there are far more laws on the book that regulate alcohol, its consumption and misuse than tobacco.

And for the record, I rarely drink.

[Warren DeMontague]

As far as I'm concerned, the problem isn't the substance-it's the delivery

method.

And the fact that everyone else in the place has to breathe that shit in, too.

Look, consenting adults should have the right to fuck up their own bodies. The "Drug war" is an utter waste of time.

But asking cigarette smokers to go outside to puff is not the same thing as criminalizing it.

[SammyBlue]

203. It is. . .I was back in Utica visiting my grandmother March 2004

Keep in mind, I live in Arizona now. It was cold, windy and snowing.

The bar owner was forcing smokers into that condition to smoke. It was inhumane.

Going outside to smoke in Southern Arizona in March isn't bad (at night, it's about 55 degrees). In late winter in Western New York, it's almost 20. WTF!!!

[Maru Kitteh]

259. So What? They don't *HAVE* to smoke - do they? No they don't

And nobody forced them to go to the bar either. They knew the rules when they went there. Too bad. So sad. Freeze. But keep your stupid toxic result of poor decision making out of my face.

[Dulcinea]

224. Smoking bans are a sign of creeping fascism.

Smoking is a terrible habit & definitely should not be encouraged, but demonizing smokers & treating them like social lepers is not the way to go. I seldom smoke myself, but few things piss me off more that self-righteous anti-smokers whining about their air being polluted by a cigarette when there are many worse pollutants in the air.

Eventually we're all going to die from something. Get over it.

Alcohol without cigarettes? Perish the thought!

[Warren DeMontague]

281. Oh baloney. Having to go outside to smoke is not "fascism"

Used to be, I would go into a bar for five minutes, come home, throw my clothes in the hamper and not only would the clothes I was wearing in the bar have that nasty wet dog cigarette smoke smell, all the other clothes and the whole hamper would get it.

"Many worse pollutants" my ass. Only a smoker would be so oblivious to how vile that shit smells. Try quitting for a month, and see how it smells to you then. (good luck!)

Hey- the minute they invent a bubble that goes over your head so no one else has to breathe it, I wouldn't give a fuck if you wanted to smoke in hospital ERs surrounded by oxygen tanks and people on iron lungs. But when you smoke indoors, you force other people to breathe it- so it's other people's problem, not just yours.

They banned smoking -indoor smoking- in bars in California, and it's wonderful. The smokers pissed and moaned and bitched, and now they go outside and miraculously their entire existence in our fascist state hasn't been destroyed.

No, "fascism" is the fact that people can be smoking a different plant in the privacy of their own homes, and be thrown in jail for some ridiculous mandatory minimum sentence. Smokers have to go outside to smoke. Big deal.

[progressivebydesign]

286. Gawd. My mom just rented the apt that used to house a smoker..

Let me tell ya. We looked at it when the windows were open.. and smelled some smoke, but it didn't seem bad. So she rented it.

OMG! Do you smokers have ANY clue how bad your smoke is?

Let's see.. The apartment, we found out know, has been painted twice with Kilz paint. Totally washed down with TSP on all surfaces. The flooring has been replaced.. and guess what? When it gets moist there, BROWN OOZE DRIPS DOWN THE WALLS!! And, I tried to help my Mom by cleaning the bathroom door (that had already been cleaned) I was left with a bag full of TAR colored paper towels. They are now thinking of replacing all the doors in the apt., light fixtures (even the lightbulbs were coated), and painting the brick walls inside.

Oh and the guy who lived there before? Moved to a rest home.. he has emphysema. Shocking.... I tell ya.

[Warren DeMontague]

294. "OMG! Do you smokers have ANY clue how bad your smoke is?"

Nope, they don't. No clue. Actually, judging by some of the responses, they clearly think we're exaggerating... or bitching just because we're jealous of how sexy those things look sticking out of their mouths.

Course, I grew up in the midwest with parents who both smoked like chimneys, and on cold days wouldn't roll the windows down in the car: "Stop whining about it!"

Mom quit and lived, Dad didn't in time, and died.

[SammyBlue]

319. Yeah, my grandmother died of lung cancer too

You know. . .it's their decision, and we shouldn't impose government will on a private choice.

Hmmmm. . .I wonder where I heard that argument before. Oh yeah. . .abortion.

Hmmm. . .sorry, if the government should stay out of a woman's uterus, the government needs to stay out of a smokers life too.

[Warren DeMontague]

321. I agree- and if the thread were about criminalizing nicotine use

like pot smoking is criminalized, or like people want to do with abortion, I would be right there with you.

(You can't get an abortion in a bar, can you?)

It isn't. It's about asking smokers to go outside instead of smoking in enclosed, public spaces, and as far as California goes, it works.

[dubyaD40web]

3. No, No, No, No, No!

That opens the doors for other things. If feel sorry for the people of NY.

[iconoclastNYC]

121. Don't feel sorry for me.

I went to San Frank and was so jealous of California for having bars where you can breath and where the end of your night you and your clothes don't smell like an ashtray.....then NYC and NYS passed the ban.

Nobodies suffering here. You go out side to get your nicotine fix or you QUIT. Nobody should suffer for YOUR ADDICTION. Do it outside or stay home.

[PunkPop]

4. They are a proven health hazard.

What other proven health hazards are openly allowed in public places?

[SeattleGirl]

7. Drinking.

No, it's not a danger in the same way second-hand smoke is, but it IS a danger when a drunk person gets behind the wheel of a car and drives.

[iconoclastNYC]

122. Name a state where Drunk Driving is legal? N/T

[SeattleGirl]

230. I'm not necessarily talking about drunk driving

though that of course IS hazardous to one's life -- not to mention to the lives of people the drunk driver may plow into. I'm also talking about families, friends, and associates of alcoholics. Their drinking can be extremely harmful, not only to themselves, but to those around them. Again, it is not exactly the same as standing next to a smoker, where the smoke is going directly at you, but a drinking addiction can have horrendous effects on those around the drinker. I know -- my father was an alcoholic.

[Selatius]

264. There is a big difference you are ignoring

Alcohol only becomes an issue when it is abused. Cigarettes, when used properly, still result in sickness and death. That's not true with alcohol.

[SeattleGirl]

277. I'm not ignoring it.

As I said, the two are not exactly the same, and your point is well-taken. I was just trying to make the point that drinking can cause problems for drinkers and those around them. :-)

[progressivebydesign]

295. Someone elses drinking does not affect my health negatively.

In fact.. someone could shoot heroin near me and it has no effect on me ('cept grossing me out royally!). That's the point. No other addiction negatively impacts everyone around it immediately the way smoke does.

I just want to enjoy going out again... (the only thing I miss about where I used to live was the smoking ban).. I just want to be able to see my husband play music (he's out tonight to a smokey bar), and also not worry that he's destroying his heart or lungs after all the years of having to play in those places.

Actually, we both tire of his having to put all of his clothes, his shoes, his leather jacket, in the laundry room at 3am when he gets home, because it will totally destroy our closet with the smell... and everything ends up smelling like ciggies.

[SeattleGirl]

307. Again, I'm not trying to totally equate the two, because

you are right, smoking or being around smoke does usually have a more immediate effect. But I have seen statistics that show that family members of alcoholics have more health problems (often stress related) that those family members who don't have an active alcoholic in the family. Believe me, I saw and experienced the effects first hand.

So, I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying, just again trying to make my point that drinking can also have adverse effects on others too.

[NashVegas]

371. But Drinking Doesn't Have an Averse Effect on MEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Are you getting the picture?

(My dad was an alcoholic, too.)

[Warren DeMontague]

284. Consenting adults should have the right to fuck up their own bodies

Period. Even if they're doing something stupid. Enough with the fucking nanny statism of trying to protect people from themselves.

No, the problem with people smoking indoors is that OTHER people have to breathe that shit in. Ergo, having people step outside to smoke is a reasonable compromise.

[Selatius]

298. I agree but with some issues

I think an individual should have a choice on the matter, but as you said, they should step outside instead of being allowed to be inside with others who may not want the smoke. The thing is if these guys get lung cancer or cancer of the throat as a result of cigarette smoking, should the rest of us foot the medical bill for their foolish choices?

[Warren DeMontague]

305. Here's the rub on that: People make all kinds of foolish choices.

Either you think that everyone should have universal coverage, and you accept that some people are going to smoke, drink, eat fatty foods, engage in risky behaviors, etc. and others may have to foot the bill, or you say everyone pays for themselves, period. Trying to draw distinctions about 'some kinds' of bad behaviors and whether we should pay is a slippery slope.

My answer? Cigarettes are taxed fairly well already. Plow some of that money into a SPHC system. Same with alcohol. Legalize drugs, or at least pot, and tax it too- with money, again, going towards a SPHC system. Actually, the health consequences from pot use would be dwarfed by the tax revenues, I suspect- resulting in a huge net gain for health coverage regarding more unhealthy behaviors, like eating trans fats. Shit, while we're at it, tax those, too. But you can't start saying "oh, well, these things are unhealthy and we shouldn't pay"- everyone's got stuff they do that's unhealthy. Jim Fixx died from jogging. At some point you have to accept that people do self-destructive things, best thing you can do is educate them -honestly- on the front end and make sure everyone is covered, because we all end up paying in one way or another... whether we want to or not.

[slybacon9]

345. as long as it doesn't fuck up anyone else.

right.

[karlrschneider]

8. Have you ever sat in a traffic jam?

:eyes:

[PunkPop]

61. Yes. Can't stand it.

Sitting there thinking how much of that crap I'm breathing in. Same thing I feel when I'm in a bar or at a club and people are smoking all around me.

However, cars are a necessary part of our lives and serve an important purpose. I also believe there is a movement to curb emissions as a way to improve our environment.

Cigarettes on the other hand serve no useful purpose.

[Touchdown]

365. Drinking in bars serves no useful purpose.

I'm sorry, but I don't have a lot of sympathy for people who complain about someone else's pollution of their lungs while they are CHOOSING to destory their liver and brain cells.

[eggman67]

9. Auto emissions n/t

[karlrschneider]

GMTA

:D

How many thousands of cigarettes would it take to equal the CO spewing from a car's exhaust?

[MindPilot]

46. I actually did that experiment once

I fed cigarette smoke to an automotive exhaust emissions test machine.
It went into overload mode and shut down.

I've actually been in situations in the shop when the ambient air is dirtier than the exhaust of the car I'm testing.

[iconoclastNYC]

124. Drive your car into a bar lately? Any other enclosed space?

[flyarm]

10. drinking!!!!!!!!!!!!! n/t

[PunkPop]

30. I've never been to a bar where patrons spew their drinks

on other patrons.

Interesting. I'll definitely avoid those though.

[NYC Liberal]

36. What about when they get drunk?

[PunkPop]

42. They're no hazard to me.

Now if they get in their car....but I believe there are laws against that.

[Touchdown]

62. Actually, you should worry more about them getting in your

face. Drunkards nicely sloshed are generally looking for a fight. If he also smokes, try and bring up this issue in the bar with him. I'm sure there are laws on that one too, but a law can't prevent a black eye.

[sinkingfeeling]

15. Alcohol consumption...

[progressivebydesign]

289. Pointless argument. No one gets heart disease from second hand booze. n/t

[Touchdown]

364. Neither do they from smoke.

See my post below. Number 200-something.

[parasim]

18. Uh, let's see...

Gasoline-powered vehicles. Factory smokestacks. Drive-through liquor stores?

[Greyhound]

22. Cars, busses, factories, chemicals, etc.

This is just the health police restricting your actions "for your own good". I was in LA when they forced this on us. Can't find any good stats (every one I've found is done by one side or the other) but the owner of Barney's told me that his business was off 40% after the restrictions went in. He had to lay off 6 waitresses, later hired 3 back. BTW there is now an "underground" of bars and restaurants that do not enforce the ban and their business is booming.

[iconoclastNYC]

127. Anecdotal evidence is "faith based" and

the scientific studeis done in NYC 1 year out after the ban have shown no decrease in business. This is more FUD spread by the selfish smokers who want to endanger everyones health to smoke and Big Tabacoo.

[Greyhound]

152. I'm sure those waitresses would be reassured to learn that their jobs

were not really eliminated. Y'know the owners income didn't suffer too much, just the poor people he employed.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

176. It just cracks me up the people who think Walmart is the devil,

but they still smoke...UM HELLO! Big Tobacco is more evil than Walmart. If you use walmart as it's intended it won't kill you.
Duckie

[BeTheChange]

288. It strikes me odd..

the number of smokers I see at protest rallies. When we were in Crawford, it was hard to get a breath of fresh air outside. I stopped smoking after making that connection at a local protest. It was just absurd to me that I was out protesting corporatization, greed and arrogance, while supporting the first two and embodying the last quality so much that I thought inhaling masked poison was a good idea.


I think that it is fascinating that the second most prevalent ingredient in a cigarette is sugar, often in the form of high fructose corn syrup.

Then, all the things they put on them to fool your body. These are just the ones that pop out at me on first glance at marlboro's site:
http://www.philipmorrisusa.com/en/product_facts/ingredients/tobacco_ingredients.asp

LIME OIL
LICORICE EXTRACT
ANGELICA ROOT OIL
BERGAMOT OIL
CARDAMOM SEED OIL
CAROB BEAN AND EXTRACT
CELERY SEED OIL
CHAMOMILE FLOWER, HUNGARIAN, OIL
CHAMOMILE FLOWER, ROMAN, OIL
COCOA AND COCOA PRODUCTS
COFFEE EXTRACT
COGNAC, GREEN, OIL
CORIANDER OIL
DILL OIL
FENUGREEK EXTRACT AND OLEORESIN
GERANIUM ROSE OIL
MOUNTAIN MAPLE EXTRACT SOLID
ORANGE OIL, SWEET
PEPPERMINT OIL
ROSE OIL, BULGARIAN, TRUE OTTO
RUM
RUM FLAVOR, NON-ALCOHOLIC
SANDALWOOD OIL, YELLOW
SUGAR: HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP 42%
SUGAR: INVERT SUGAR
SUGAR: SUCROSE
TANGERINE OIL
VALERIAN ROOT EXTRACT
VANILLA BEAN EXTRACT (EXTRACTIVES)
VANILLIN

It was insane for me to fight against the man while I gave him almost 4 bucks a day.

I was for the smoking ban before I stopped smoking, and am still against it. I hate that for years Ive caused the people that loved me to breathe in poison to be around me when I got my nic fix every 30 minutes to an hour. Im so glad to be a nonsmoker.

[Touchdown]

363. Now is your turn.

Since when does science do studies on economic effects of small businesses? Shoudln't economists do those studies?

You need to link to at least 2 studies, and they should be scientific studies. If you can't then you are guilty of spreading hysterical propaganda.

You have no facts.

[Touchdown]

58. They are a proven irritant.

Second hand smoke has NEVER been proven to be a health hazard. Irritant, yes.

[PunkPop]

66. Yeah, it'll irritate you

Right into a nice case of cancer or heart disease.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/invoke.cfm?id=CC00023

edit: corrected my spelling.

[Touchdown]

75. Not second hand. Try arguing apples to apples

IF that were the case, then EVERYBODY would have heart disease, emphazema and lung cancer, since in the 50s half of the country smoked, and the only places it was banned was operating rooms and elevators. up 'til the 90s most places allowed you to smoke in most public places, like malls and airports. It defies logic, and the EPA propaganda about SHS has been debunked.

[LincolnMcGrath]

83. Where has this science been debunked?

The Camel laboratories?

The Phillip Morris Institute for higher profit?

[Touchdown]

110. Not the science, the propaganda that alters and omits.

The original study said second hand smoke is an "IRRITANT". Nothing more. The chances for cancer from SHS are 4 in 800,000, which is the same as "4 times as likely", just worded much more orwellian. Like mushroom clouds over American cities.

[iconoclastNYC]

130. Philip Morris thanks you.

You are so right....if there was a risk factor for second hand smoke everyone would be dead. Thats not unlike a braindead smoker saying: My Grandfather smoked til 85 so i should be ok.

[Touchdown]

229. Actually it's Brown and Williamson, but thanks for the sentiment.

How very liberal of you.:eyes:

Just giving the facts. If it doesn't fit your frame, then go back and re-read Lakoff.

[iconoclastNYC]

355. What facts?

FACTS? Facts are the countless SCIENTIFIC studies that prove that second hand smoke (especially occupational expsosure) causes medical problems. You dispute these based on your laughable conclusion that if second hand smoke was a hazard we'd all all have cancer.

You have no facts.

[Touchdown]

362. You want facts hysteria-monger?

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/326/7398/1057

Results For participants followed from 1960 until 1998 the age adjusted relative risk (95% confidence interval) for never smokers married to ever smokers compared with never smokers married to never smokers was 0.94 (0.85 to 1.05) for coronary heart disease, 0.75 (0.42 to 1.35) for lung cancer, and 1.27 (0.78 to 2.08) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease among 9619 men, and 1.01 (0.94 to 1.08), 0.99 (0.72 to 1.37), and 1.13 (0.80 to 1.58), respectively, among 25 942 women. No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.

Conclusions The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed.

----
http://reason.com/ogmyt.shtml

5. Secondhand smoke poses a grave threat to bystanders. The evidence concerning the health effects of secondhand smoke is not nearly as conclusive as the evidence concerning the health effects of smoking. The research suggests that people who live with smokers for decades may face a slightly higher risk of lung cancer. According to one estimate, a nonsmoking woman who lives with a smoker faces an additional lung cancer risk of 6.5 in 10,000, which would raise her lifetime risk from about 0.34 percent to about 0.41 percent. Studies of secondhand smoke and heart disease, including the results from the Harvard Nurses Study published in 1997, report more-dramatic increases in disease rates—so dramatic, in fact, that they are biologically implausible, suggesting risks comparable to those faced by smokers, despite the much lower doses involved. In any case, there is no evidence that casual exposure to secondhand smoke has any impact on your life expectancy. (See Chapter 5.)

Brits and an author not good enough? How about the WHO, whose findings have been supressed because they came up with nothing?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9776409&dopt=Abstract

CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose-response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation of exposure.

NY Daily News on the faultiness of the EPA's METASTUDY. The EPA never conducted a ETS study of their own. They merely cherrypicked the studies they liked and ignored the ones that contradicted their pre-determined findings...

http://www.junkscience.com/news2/zion.htm

In a devastating 94-page opinion, Judge William Osteen put the cat to the Environmental Protection Agency. These ideological hustlers are responsible for all the madness we've experienced since 1993, when, without a scintilla of evidence, they declared that secondhand smoke causes cancer.

This "finding" created civil war in America. Suddenly, it wasn't just the smoker who was endangered it was the person at the next table, even the tenant in the next apartment and the guy sitting next to you at Yankee Stadium.

Common sense should have put this into the garbage pail. If secondhand smoke killed, we'd all be dead, especially everybody who worked in newspapers a veritable smoke screen in the old days.




TD's note: I could find more. but you don't seem to be worth it, as I know your'll ignore what I gave you here.

[iconoclastNYC]

370. I'm convinced! Repeal the ban.

Nobody should have to breathe polluted air because people can't overcome thier addiction to cigarettes. It comes down to that. You can quote all the industry funded junk research you want and it doesn't change the fact i'm healthier for not having to breathe in second hand smoke.

If face that you think this POV is hysteria then you really demonstrates the lengths you'll go to defend your point of view.

I guess you probably think that Global Warming is junk science too as is Evolution. There is a bit of controversy over these topics too with plenty of paid scientists writing papers to cloud the issue.

[Touchdown]

374. Nice non-sequiturs, and thanks for proving my point.

You are an extremist zealot when it comes to this subject. No amount of contradicting FACTS will shake you from your crusade in eliminating smokers from the face of the Earth, or your self-satisfied worldview, no matter what it takes. I guess there's a little fascist in us all. All it takes is the right issue to pull you over the edge.

WHO is industry funded? The British institute of medicine? Whatever.:eyes:

The POV isn't hysteria, it's you attitude, and absolutist hate-mongering verbiage. This isn't about smoking for you. It's obvious it's about smokers, which is next to witch hunting. You wouldnt' use this kind of language with people who rarely bathe, gays, African Americans, jews, and so on, so you only have a few left to choose from to hate.

You guessed wrong. Global Warning has nothing to do with this issue.

[tyedyeto]

235. Alchohol

It can be deadly when driving! Much deadlier than second hand smole

[GrumpyGreg]

5. No---if a place is too smoky I won't go there but why is a law

needed? There are lots of non-smoking bars.

Something for everyone.

[Greyhound]

25. When this started in SoCal the bars that didn't allow smoking went under

so they had to get a law to force everyone.

[radwriter0555]

255. West Hollywood. Nightclub Mecca of SoCal. Not ONE single bar closed

due to the smoking laws.

Straight and gay clubs are all doing JUST FINE.

Step outside and have your ciggie please.

Thanks!

[Lexingtonian]

327. total bullshit

I was there when Santa Monica went through all that propaganda crapola. Customer levels actually went higher once the ban was imposed. All the arguing amounted to 'But, but, male Japanese tourists don't like this....'

Same in Toronto, which was a far more drinking-and-smoking blue collar city then. (You could tell when a Maple Leaf crowd went by, and not just by all the Canadian Tire-based attire :-) ). Unbelievable whining by restauranteurs and bar owners, who refused to believe what was seen in other cities- and when the partial ban passed, there was a dip that recovered in six weeks and customer numbers went up over the prior level after another six weeks. Word got around that you could actually go to places and breath clean air

[PunkPop]

55. The problem arises when there is a reason to be at a specific

bar/restaurant or club.

I want to attend a concert. Why can't I go without worrying about standing around breathing other people's smoke all night?

I want to attend a function at a specific restaraunt. Same thing.

Etc, etc.

[High Plains]

115. Well, I guess you have to make a decision, then.

[PunkPop]

190. Right

I've decided to totally 100% support smoking bans in public places.

In the meantime, if necessary, I'll put up with breathing the nasty crap that nicotine addicts are polluting my air with.

[iconoclastNYC]

138. There are not lots of non-smoking bars

And the reason is that a non-smoking bar would have a decrease in business. Thats why in NYC 60% of bar owners suppoerted an across the board ban even tho something under that 10% of bars were smoke-free. If it's across the board nobody suffers by acting unilaterally.

[drhilarius]

6. It's a fucking bar...

beer goes with cigarettes like peanut butter goes with jelly. If you don't want smoke, then meet your friends at a friggin' juice bar.

[timber84]

17. AMEN

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PunkPop]

77. Right on!!

n/t

[mikefromwichita]

228. Not hardly

Fascism in action

[Beaverhausen]

80. Here here

I go to a bar to drink, not to breathe in other people's cigarette smoke. I should have the right to choose what I do or don't breathe in.

[High Plains]

120. You have the right not to go to a smoky bar.

Go to a non-smoking bar. Don't make a goddamned law forcing other people to not allow smoking in their businesses.

[Beaverhausen]

128. I live in California...they are all non-smoking

it is the law. And it works fine. so get over it already.

I think it's sad that a law has to be passed to make people have the courtesy to step outside if they need to smoke instead of making everyone around them have to breath it in.

[radwriter0555]

258. Exactly.

That's my only gripe about living in France now, is that occasionally there are moments with smokers in restaurants that get very uncomfortable physically for me. If there is a breeze and it's blowing the other way, well, whatever.

I can't stand having cigarette smoke wafting over my dinner plate.

[Mr_Spock]

252. Hear hear!!!

These morons arguing for this murdering of fellow citizens are not likely people who go to bars at all OR are smokers. Selfish bastards every last one of them!

[SeattleGirl]

94. And sometimes I get sick of attitudes like yours

Yes, I'm a smoker, but guess what? I don't smoke around people who don't, like my husband, daughter, mother, friends. I so rarely sit in the smoking section of a restaurant because I am with a non-smoker. I'm fine with going outside if that's what's necessary. I was just in Las Vegas, and if I sat down at a machine with people on either side of me who weren't smoking, I didn't light up. Yes, others in the casinos were smoking, but I didn't add mine to it.

Anymore, there are more places than not where smoking is not allowed, so I'm sure you could find many places to go and have a drink without being around smokers.

And, if you knew anything about smoking, you would know that it is not an easy thing to quit. I started smoking when it was still "cool" and socially acceptable, and when the tobacco companies were hiding the truth about their product. I am not smoking to personally cause you grief.

[High Plains]

118. If you don't want to breathe smoky air...

stay out of smoky places. Choose to go to a non-smoking bar. Don't make a law saying there can't be bars where smoking is allowed.

If you can't deal with that, go to New York City. Never mind the auto exhaust, industrial pollution, horse shit and human shit, at least you won't have a smoky bar.

It's a free country, ain't it? Oh, pardon me, that's so last century.

[Ferret Annica]

123. Smokey air is a hazard to employees

They should be able to work without their lives being put in jeopardy by inconsiderate nicotine addicts.

If people need a fix, go outside and stop causing workplace injuries.

It's amazing how self righteous addicts get.

[SeattleGirl]

161. It is equally amazing how self-righteous non-addicts can get.

I am tired of being the punching girl for people who think they are better than me because they don't smoke. If you don't, good for you! If you don't want to be around smokers, there really are a lot of places where smoking is not allowed, including bars. As I stated in my post just above, I don't go around smoking where it isn't allowed, and I don't smoke in places where it is if I'm with a non-smoker. I've been in casinos which allow smoking, and have had people next to me ask that I not smoke, and I comply. I can always move to another machine if I really want a cigarette.

I just don't think smoking should be banned all over the place. I agree with it being banned in office buildings, etc. And I also like the idea espoused here about it being up to the owners of bars and restaurants as to whether they will allow smoking in their establishments. And it is also an individual's responsibility to choose where to go. If you want a drink, why would you deliberately go into a place you know is smoke-filled? There are such animals as non-smoking bars, which I think is great. Some folks in this thread are yelping about not wanting smokers to push their "rights" onto non-smokers. Well, smokers don't want non-smokers pushing their "rights" on us. Again, there should be both kinds of establishments, and then there would be places for both groups to go. And no, I don't mind going into a non-smoking place; I do it quite often because my husband doesn't smoke and it is more important for me to enjoy his company than a cigarette. For that, I can go outside.

Please climb down off your high-horse, and realize that smokers are human beings. If someone is being inconsiderate of you, there's nothing wrong with asking them to move or not smoke at that moment. People have asked that of me, and I'm happy to honor their request. I'm not so happy to do it, though, if the person is mean, nasty, and and "in your face" kind of person.

[Ferret Annica]

175. Employees have a right to a safe working environment

Nobody wants to be placed in the position to draw a line, but smokers and their addiction care only about their drug of choice and not the health of the workers in bars or those patrons who do not want to get cancer and heart disease from second hand smoke from people who care more for their drug then the health of those around them.

No compromise, smoking in bars and taverns should be completely banned. If only for the health of workers in these establishment.
Call it arrogance right back at an addict's one track mind for their convenience in doing a drug of choice, but frankly I am in no way sympathetic nor moved.

I recommend you take care of your medical problem and get help for your addiction instead of standing up for it. You would be very glad you did once you got that monkey off of your back.

[SeattleGirl]

179. But if a person doesn't want to work in a smoke-filled environment

why would they apply for a job in one. I am not disputing the health effects of smoking, but I am starting to resent what seems to be a presumption on your part that smokers are totally self-centered, don't give a crap about anybody else, only care about themselves, etc. If you had really read my other posts, you would see that is not the case with me. Nor is it the case with most other smokers. Yes, there are some out these who are self-centered, who would just as soon tell a person to go to hell as to put out their smoke or move, so as not to bother another person. But why can't there be both kinds of places -- smoking and non-smoking alike. If you like to go into non-smoking places, why should you care if the place down the road allows smoking? You are in a clean environment, and those folks down the street aren't doing anything to you.

And let me ask you something: Do you drink? Do you think drinking is harmless to others? I'm not being sarcastic here; I really want to know.

[Ferret Annica]

183. I don't drink and have never smoked

I was born with pneumonia and was in an incubator for three weeks with a blue tinge to me and got the last rites because my mother chain smoked while pregnant with me in 1953-4.

I also grew up as the oldest of six kids and was point man dealing with an abusive alcoholic.

I know that when you peel away all the socially mitigating words to sugar coat the behavior, smoking in bars occurs because of primary concern for that most important to anyone addicted to any powerful chemical; their drug of choice.

I in no way am attacking you in an ad hominem manner, I merely and quite dispassionately state my opinion on this topic and why.

I also don't think people should pay with their lives for being financially desperate enough to take a job in a bar where carcinogens fill the air.

We do not have any smoking in bars and taverns in Eugene, Oregon and it works even though unenabled addicts don't like it. There are clubs and places I cannot go to in Portland because the smoke drives me nuts, I hate it.

Please do not take this personal, I've posted enough years online and do enough political activism in real time to know that when I take a no compromise stand on something, it can be quite annoying and frustrating to whomever does not concur with me to listen to what I have to say.

But smoking is a realm where I pull zero punches. My Mom died at 67 in 2003 of cancer after smoking heavily her entire life, and my only sibling who smoked died last year four days before her 49th birthday of cancer.

Nice to debate this with you and all I say it think about how your addiction colors your opinion. And I am serious that anyone with the medical problem of nicotine addiction should do something about it.

[SeattleGirl]

185. I do not object to your strong stand

It's just that some of the things you said seemed inappropriate and personal toward me and other smokers, such as your statement about being self-centered. I am actually working on not smoking (and please, don't say "just quit" -- I've tried that and it doesn't work for me. With what I'm doing now, I've already cut down to less than half of what I was smoking).

I can understand why you are so adamant about not being around smoking, and truly am sorry that you lost your mom and your sibling. I lost my dad many years ago to cancer (he was 43), from a combination of smoking and working around extremely toxic dry cleaning chemicals. (You'd think that you make me not want to smoke, right?)

We do have something in common -- I was the point person in my family of 5 siblings in dealing with my dad's alcoholism. The reason I had asked if you drank is that I have encountered rabid anti-smokers who could drink a lot of people under the table, and yet are just as rabid in claiming that drinking does not cause harm to other people. Sure, it doesn't in the same way as second-hand smoke does, but as you doubtless know, it definitely does have an effect on others as well as on the drinker, especially if the drinker is alcoholic. Even if one is not alcoholic, they could still maim or kill another person by driving drunk.

Well, keep fighting your fight, and I'll keep fighting to quit smoking!

:-)

[Ferret Annica]

196. Re: your first comments last post

I am new to posting here, but I am used to posting on spin off forums (from FR by exiles and JimRob haters) full of conservatives and Neo Cons such as Freedonundergroud.com, Libertypost.org, Freedom4UM.com and was even on the Free Republic itself with my views fully known some years as 'ferret'.

You really have to scrap and battle in those places and are always outnumbered if you have my political views and efficacy.

I am used to posturing strong usually arguing with the sort of people that any retreat of position engenders a counter attack rhetorically as Neo Cons take any softening of POV as weakness.

Even this sort of reality check would be viewed as a "whine" by the sort of conserva-nutzie I am used to dealing with. I love good political battles and have done enough locally I am instantly recognized and have to deal with the trappings of being a forest activist in Eugene, Oregon.

Good luck with your battle with the cigs, and I enjoyed this exchange. Thanks and good to meet you. Hope this additional reality check helps in understanding why how I framed some things might have come across as inappropriate and personal.

[SeattleGirl]

214. Well, I DO see more why your posts were so strong!

Battling the freepers and neocons, one must be strong! Thank you for the additional info, though, on why you frame your posts as you do. It's certainly understandable.

I enjoyed the exchange too, and by the way, I graduated from Springfield High School, and my family still lives in Eugene and Springfield! I always enjoy going back, as I lived there for many years.

[Ferret Annica]

220. I graduated from Churchill HS in Eugene

And next time you chat with your family, tell them you met the guy named Mike McCarthy who nearly died falling three stories from the incense cedar to the pavement in front of the Nike Store site at Fifith Street Public Market when a security guard pulled his rope. I was merely hanging a banner and going to sit until the demonstration next day protesting Nike generally and the large trees they cut down for that store specifically. If they were here in July 1998, they'll know who I am. ;-)

[SeattleGirl]

227. Yikes! Glad you're still around!

I'll definitely ask them. I'm sure they'll remember.

[rman]

343. it's not just about employees, what about customers who smoke?

One would think, if there's a market for non-smoking bars, why are there none - or if there are, why don't non-smokers go there instead of to smoking bars?

[Broken_Hero]

338. Ditto,

good post, love it. If you dont' like the smelll of smoke, don't go into a smoky bar, there are tons of drinking establishments in bigger cities, and god knows how many in smaller cities/towns. I was a smoker, for about 8 yrs, i'm currently about to be 5 months smoke free, and I know what it feels like to be a smoker, and i know what it feels like to hate smoke. True, when i smell cig smoke, i'm not offended, i actually love the smell, but i am a man, and i resist the temptation to smoke. And again, i have a friend who smokes 3 packs a day, and he understands that when he stays with my wife and I that he is suppose to smoke a majority of his cigs outside, i do let him have a few during the night.

its a touchy subject it seems, if you don't like to smoke, go to an appropriate place, and the same with smokers...show respect to one another, there is no way, that any of us can stop supporting big business, i don't care what you say. If you don't buy cigarettes than you are buying nike, or frito lay, or fruit of the loom or whatever...I lived out in california for about three years, and i didn't mind the smoking ban inside the bars/restaurants, i prefered to be outside in the breeze anyways...it seems this subject has touched a lot of nerves here, but its a debate...thats a few of my thoughts...:)

[Mr_Spock]

254. That's an entirely selfish attitude.

These morons arguing for this murdering of fellow citizens are not likely people who go to bars at all OR are smokers. Selfish bastards every last one of them!

[friesianrider]

145. Oh wow...

Whoever you are...:toast: :thumbsup:

[hogwyld]

165. Yeah!!

Go to a non-smoking bar if it bothers you that much. We have become a nation of overlitigious ninnies!

[Mr_Spock]

251. Maybe I'll start getting shitfaced and kicking smokers faces in

Then we'll see who's a ninny. :P

[Mr_Spock]

249. I like drinking a beer but smoke makes my lungs act up and ruins my night

I bet most of the people saying "it's a fucking bar" probably aren't non-smokers who enjoy going to a bar. It's all fine and dandy if you're not the one being killed by ignorant morons just because you enjoy having a beer and socializing. Incredible.

[in_cog_ni_to]

256. AFUCKINGMEN. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

285. Or, if you're such a delicate flower that you can't go outside to smoke

stay the fuck out of California bars.

[trackfan]

11. They banned years ago here (CA)

but I wouldn't be in favor of banning it if it were up to me, even though I'm not a smoker.

[Beaverhausen]

29. And the world didn't come to an end, did it?

Even though I occasionally smoke I'm glad, because I'm also a singer and to be able to sing and take a good breath in a non-smoky atmosphere is pure heaven.

[trackfan]

79. No. But it did impart a nice scent to my clothes.

I sort of miss that. ;-)

[SeattleGirl]

12. They're trying to do that here in Washington too.

Pisses me off, even though I don't go to bars. Plus, there are some bars, at least in the Seattle/Tacoma area, that are smoke-free, which I think is fine. Gives people who don't want to be around it a place to go, and for those who do smoke, there are also places they can go.

[AntiCoup2K4]

74. I can't wait!

I'll very much enjoy being able to go out for a drink at someplace other than Dead Robin :beer:

[SeattleGirl]

84. You should check the internet for other places

I know I've seen them -- bars, that is, not just restaurants.

[sinkingfeeling]

13. I don't support smoking bans period. Hundreds of restaurants declared

themselves 'no smoking' and that left a few for us smokers. But it wasn't good enough, so the city passed (by a very narrow margin) a total no smoking ban for all restaurants, cafes, diners, etc. So I go to the next town over to eat out.

[AngryOldDem]

99. And therein lies the problem

My city also did this recently and it has forced many places to close and/or relocate. At established businesses, their numbers have been way off, so they might close up as well. Who knows how many other places that were thinking of opening a place here didn't because of that stupid ban.

So, these places go to the next town over and take their customers with them, which has a slow erosion effect on our local economy. A lot of empty buildings and storefronts, but, what the hell...

I don't smoke, and I don't appreciate being around cigarette smoke, but I usually find no smoking sections adequate and if I know a place is smoke-filled, I just don't go there. It should be up to the individual proprietor to determine what he or she will allow or not allow in his or her place of business.

[iconoclastNYC]

139. That's why you do it at the STATE level.

NYS passed the ban about two weeks after NYS. And if you have to cross state lines to get your fix maybe that will be enough to make you quit.

And as I said in NYC there has been no long term effect on business because of the smoking ban.

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[meegbear]

14. IT BLOWS!!!

have you ever tied to enjoy a good cigar and a cognac with the drink in one place and the smoke in the other?

IT BLOWS!!!

[Maine-ah]

16. NOPE.

I have talked to some owners up here, and they have lost business. Now during happy hour, you see people in the bars with kids.

[sinkingfeeling]

19. I thought most states didn't allow children in bars.

[Maine-ah]

45. dunno.

but it might have something to so with that this particular bar is also a restaurant, but mostly a bar. I have seen women holding babies, sitting at the bar and not at a table.

I have no idea as to what the laws are, I just know what I've seen.

[converted_democrat]

20. Nope, I wouldn't. n/t

[LincolnMcGrath]

21. Workers have a right to a safe healthy workplace.

[Greyhound]

27. Since when? OSHA hasn't enforced the regs in decades, unless

someone has a political ax to grind.

[LincolnMcGrath]

39. They have always been very helpful when I asked.

I am, however, all for giving them more teeth for enforcement.

[Greyhound]

100. Don't know where you live but in the "right to starve" states you can't

even get soft mats put down so people that stand all day on the job don't develop back problems.

[LincolnMcGrath]

104. I live and work in a "Right to Work for Less" State.

Talk to * about slashing the ERGO standards, putting Elaine Chao at Labor Dept, Locking Out Longshoremen, etc.

[Greyhound]

112. I think we're on the same side. I was only pointing out that the

supposed 'right' to a safe workplace doesn't exist in this country.:shrug:

[parasim]

34. Do workers have a right to a safe and healthy commute?

Where's the ban on gasoline engines?

[GrumpyGreg]

35. Why on earth would they work in a bar if they were so concerned

about health or a healthy workplace?

It's all about choices,not laws.

[LincolnMcGrath]

44. Why would a steelworker work in a mill?

[iconoclastNYC]

135. Maybe becasue they don't have many job opportunities?

It is not fair to the workers that just because nicotine addicts need to get thier fix thier job decidsion comes down to making a good living in a bar or getting cancer. It's the addicts problem. Don't put it on the worker.

I suppose you oppose smoking bans on Airlines too right? I mean those Flight Attendants have a choice to work on a plane right?

[Touchdown]

71. Try cutting off a lush and kicking him out of your bar.

Talk to me about "safety" in an establishment that serves inebriating substances. Tobacco smoke is nothing compared to a pissed off drunk...who's a Denver Bronco.

[LincolnMcGrath]

78. Well heck, lets just throw ground up asbestos on the floor instead of

sawdust!

[Touchdown]

88. What bars do you go to?

Sawdust? ;)

[demily]

85. Don't people still work in coal mines? n/t

[LincolnMcGrath]

93. Yes. And it is allot easier on the lungs and other body parts

due to 'big gub'mint laws' regulating the WORKPLACE.

[Coexist]

23. Same arguments came up when it happened in Florida

bar traffic didn't change.

On a good note - within a WEEK (I kid you not) they stopped smelling like stale ashtrays. So they were more pleasant to hang out in. Just like office buildings, there are just small crowds around the exits as the "smoking lounges".

[Beaverhausen]

76. Having to step outside to smoke creates a cool dynamic

You aren't stuck talking to someone you don't want to, you can go outside and gossip with your friends, you can meet cool strangers out there- people you might not have met otherwise.

I really fail to see the big deal. This been the law in California for years and it's great!

[flyarm]

101. sure in warm weather places!!

try standing outside in 10 degree weather in nyc!!!!!!!!

all the bars traffic is down..the workers now all go to jersey city by bus after work to the bars!!!!!!!!!
the bars in jersey are triving.,.in nyc..dying!

[Beaverhausen]

113. I'm from the east coast...when I smoked more I did have to step outside...

...on occasion. You know what? I put a coat on. Big deal.

[Walt Starr]

24. I voted yes, but only because I actually have a better solution

Make the law clear. Allow the market to drive factors. Any eating or drinking establishment cannot have it both ways. Either all smoking or all non-smoking.

[eggman67]

26. Oh, stop being reasonable. :)

[UncleSepp]

31. That's creative - I think I like it

The nonsmoking section isn't so smoke-free, anyway. It's more honest.

I wouldn't mind also if a bar had to be licensed for indoor smoking, checking adequate ventilation exists and so forth, and along with the license got the right to sell cigarettes so that they can recoup the cost of the license. A business could also get a license as a nonsmoking facility, which would make them subject to periodic inspections that there's not any smoking going on where there shouldn't be. Either way, a business gets a sign to put on the door and the rights to use the smoking or nonsmoking certification logo on their advertisements. Patrons can choose which place they want to go to, and employees can choose which place they're going to work.

[NYC Liberal]

41. Bingo, that's what I've always said.

We should definitely allow smoking in restaurants/bars, but like you said: smoking OR non-smoking.

[rasputin1952]

43. I'm w/you...Many establishments let you know right at the door whether

is smoke free or not. I have avoided many places that are smoke free, just as those who do not smoke, can Avis places where smoking is permitted...it is a simple solution to a nagging problem.

As an aside, I have NEVER seen smokers DEMAND that a place be "Smoking Permitted". It has always been the anti-tobacco people that have pushed this. I would never suggest they take up smoking, however, even outside, in a stiff breeze I was told by a rude woman that I was 'polluting her air'...I told her that if she would quit breaking wind upwind from me, I would consider putting out my cigarette.

I was amazed that this person would even accost me about this, outside no less!

[iconoclastNYC]

141. Separate Equal n/t

[Oeditpus Rex]

28. I don't support government bans on anything

that should be left to business owners.

[LeftyMom]

32. That's been the law in California for years

It seems really wierd to me when I travel and people smoke in restraunts, the airport, etc. That said, I neither smoke nor drink, so I'm probably the wrong person to ask.

[maveric]

40. Hell, you cant even smoke in jail in San Diego county!

And recently,pubs in Ireland have banned smoking.
The world has gone mad!

[LeftyMom]

59. Of course you can't smoke in jail!

Who wants to give inmates the ability to burn shit, or let them smoke during incarceration while society is responsible for thier medical costs?

[Warren DeMontague]

312. Man, they're trying to take ALL THE FUN out of going to jail...

mad, I tell you, mad! :crazy:

[flyarm]

102. its why i refuse to go to calif for vacation!!!!!!!!! n/t

[LeftyMom]

108. I'm sorry.

California's lovely. If smoking inside is such a big deal to you that you have to plan your travels around it, that's a bit sad. :(

[flyarm]

167. actually i lived there for 13 years and i put up with it as long as

i am willing to...see when i moved east from there it took 3 months for my head to clear of all the gunk from the pollution!! not smokers!!
now when i am forced to go through calif i get sever headaches from the stinking pollution!!

my feeling is..clean that up first!
and yes i lived in L.A. for 13 years and suffered migraines from the pollution and now i rarely have one since getting out of there!

son went to college there as well and i could hardly stand to go out there from the headaches from pollution!

[LeftyMom]

170. Yeah the pollution sucks

I've got athsma so I totally sympathize on that one. We've got some nice brown crusty air here in Sacramento. :( Pity, it's a nice town in most respects.

[flyarm]

207. ahhhhhhhhh sacto.........

thats where hubby grew up and son went to college..

but we lived in L.A......pollution will kill ya!!

i remember a study done in LA..kids who were never exposed to smoking had lungs that looked like they smoked for years...from the air!!

i think if anyone wants to start with bars..they ought to look at the air first!!
priorities are screwed up out there!!

now..fly.. breathing clean air..no headaches!! in the east!!

hi sacto!!..all the hubbies family is out there...i make them come here!!..i refuse to go out there!!

hi sacto lefty mom!!:hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi:

i will take a bar here with smoke in it for an evening...over air that is unbreathable out there day in and day out. and bars with no smoke!.....as long as i get to breathe the clean air here..i am happy!!

and headache free!

fly

[AlCzervik]

37. there are places outside of Vegas that you can still smoke in?

[drhilarius]

38. Could we also ban drinking in bars?

See, my friend and I don't drink, but our other friends do and they always hang out in bars. We don't much like the smell of booze, and alcohol is dangerous, if you drink it and if some drunk decides to start something. If we got rid of drinking at bars, then everyone could have a could time (since most people go to bars just to sing songs and do push ups rather than put poisons that make them feel good into their bodies). Also, I'd really like to bring my kids to happy hour, and I don't need all that smoke and booze around. Yep, let's just play in sandboxes, drink snapple, and blow bubbles till closing time. :sarcasm:

[Behind the Aegis]

48. LOL!

:rofl:

[WI_DEM]

51. Let's just bring back prohibition?

There could be moonshine wars again.

[AntiCoup2K4]

72. Hey, while you're making ridiculous comparisons, let's try this one....

"I'm a heroin junkie, and I demand my right to shoot up in the middle of this bar. And if I leave some dirty needles sitting around on the floor, and you ram one through your foot, oh well, what the fuck, right?

Because MY ADDICTION takes precedence over the rights of others!!!"

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Touchdown]

86. Wow. I hope you win the oscar.

This isn't about "everybody else". I've read no less than 3 of your diatribes, you selfish drama queen. It's all about you.

If you are allergic to tobacco, then that's not my problem.

[Beaverhausen]

97. When you smoke you aren't the only person who has to breathe the smoke

Is that concept so hard to understand?

You choose to smoke, fine, but those around you having to inhale the smoke have no choice.

Who is the selfish one?

[Touchdown]

107. Maybe I'm stereotyping, but your avatar gives you away.

Please tell me that you listen to him for the political commentary rather than the other reason 99.9999% of Marley fans listen to his very good, but rather repetetive music. The last I heard, brownies are the only other method of ingesting that substance, and even then, it get's baked...pun intended.;)

OOPS! Sorry, Anastasia. I thought I was still talking to Anticoup.:O

[AntiCoup2K4]

117. I appreciated Bob Marley's music before I ever got high...

...and just as much now, 5 years after the last time I smoked dope. And while I was high, too for that matter. Not that I have anything against the brownies either of course.

But then recent studies say ganja doesn't cause cancer. As for Bob himself, he swore it was a CIA hit (the cancer entered his body through his big toe some time after he felt something stabbing him in the foot through his shoe)

[nashbridges]

166. Ganga will cause cancer

If you're rolling it in paper. For all of the toxins in processed tobacco, some of the most dangerous are in the rolling paper. Tar, especially. If you hit the weed, stick to the bongs.

And if someone will a college level or higher understanding of biology and chemistry could explain to me how you "inject" someone with cancer, I'd greatly appreciate it. A shot of weapons grade plutonium through a needle into your big toe will eventually cause cancer, but probably not in your big toe. Cancer is a collection of cells gone haywire within a particular person's body. It's not a contagen. If it was, we'd all be fucked.

Plausible explanations are appreciated!

[AntiCoup2K4]

218. Well, not to drag the thread off topic, but.....

...lots of people whom the CIA have found "inconvenient" have suddenly developed cancers which soon insured they were no longer a "problem". Bill Casey, Lee Atwater, just to name a couple. Marley thought he was a target because he openly opposed the CIA's chosen candidate in the Jamaican election.

[nashbridges]

336. And my mother,

and my little sister. Neither of whom were inconvenient to the CIA.

I asked for someone to explain your "theory". You've provided nothing but people who died from cancer.

Go you.

[eggman67]

92. First

Get heroin legalized. Then shoot away, and I'll avoid going to the bar.

[SteppingRazor]

95. Completely agree.

They should have heroin bars. Give'em all clean needles. Cut down on AIDS. Why the hell not?

[eggman67]

96. Yes End TWOSD! n/t

[flyarm]

103. no heroin is illegal!..smoking is still legal and lots of taxes are paid

by smokers!

[AntiCoup2K4]

Along with a lot of contributions to the Republican party

Pickles & Chimpy say thanks!

[High Plains]

125. Then go home.

[ieoeja]

81. They already have in rural areas.

When you live on a farm eight miles from town you cannot reasonably expect someone to give you a ride home every time you want to go into town for a drink. So now my folks do most of their drinking at home. Killed their previously active social life. But this is a good thing since it means they will stay where they belong.

Can't have them farmers going into town. They might start learning more than they need to know about the world.

[Breeze54]

171. LMAO!!

EXACTLY!!

:rant:
I live up here in the cold north east and the greedy
a-holes here, up the taxes on cigarettes (What a JOKE!)
but never use the extra $$ as intended!
I just drive up to New Hampshire and get my cigarettes!
Fuck them and their self-rightous taxes!
Supposedly they sued the tobacco companies to recoup
medical costs for the state as in Medicaid patients
with lung cancer etc.
BUT they are throwing poor people OFF of Medicaid
SO? Where's all the $$$?? Hmmmmm??
It is a SCAM!!
Just like the Lottery $$ was going to education!!(Another SCAM!)
MA ranks 47th in education now!! 47th!!! omg!
Where's all THAT $$ gone ??
What a crock!
I used to go to different bars after work.
Most everyone smoked.
The regulars only go now to meetup with their friends
and then they all leave after one beer and the place is EMPTY!
A lot do not go there anymore. I don't!
I joined a private club! :toast:
Smoking IS ALLOWED IN PRIVATE CLUBS in MA though!
How come??
KICK BACKS!!
Isn't that where all the lawmakers hang out?
At the private clubs??

There are things called air conditioners and fans and WALLS!
Many restaurants built walls-
one side for smokers/one side for non-smokers
Worked great!
Then they passed the fucked up law.
The restaurant/bar owners took a hit!! More $$$
And business IS down!
Lots of closings and empty parking lots now!


I think we should outlaw farting and belching in the bars too!
:P
Cripes!
You are so right!
Just serve coffee and donuts and ice cream!
No more deep fried food either!
Just veggies for YOU!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Self-rightous fucktards! :grr:
:toast:

[ewagner]

47. What I support

is a law that would require Bars and Restaurants to post on the door and in advertising that they are either a smoking or non-smoking establishment. That way, anybody entering the establishment will do so with INFORMED CONSENT . That's what democracy is all about.

[LincolnMcGrath]

50. What about the workers?

S.C.B.A. or Forced Air Purifiers to wear all day?

[Ladyhawk]

49. How about non-smoking bars?

:shrug:

I never go into establishments that allow smoking. In this county that would be the bars and the Mi-Wuk-run casino.

I'm not a gambler of any kind, so it doesn't matter all that much to me. :D

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

52. Ban childbearing. Kids are known health hazards.

They pollute the environment with noise, carry all sorts of diseases, cost billions in a usually vain attempt to educate and civilize them, and are generally a pain in the ass.

[kansasblue]

53. build it and they will come.......

in DC they have no smoking bars (and no law) and the people choose. The bar is doing great!

If it's such a good idea, and it is!, then open a non-smoking bar/club/resturant and the people will come.

[calico1]

54. CT passed the law recently.

I now enjoy having a drink at a bar whereas before I would avoid it. I guess it can go both ways. Smokers may not go anymore but people who avoided the bar because of smokers will go. A drinker doesn't affect me just from sitting next to me drinking. And I don't have to drink. I do have to breathe though. I am glad for the law. BTW restaurants in general smell much cleaner now.

[MindPilot]

56. What's next? You can't be naked in the shower?

It's been the law here for sometime. Undercover cops cruise around looking for violations; can you think of a better way to use police resources? I knew you could.

Another downside is the area outside of the bar or restaurant is now a public smoking area that can offend anyone; not just those who choose to go into the bar.

There has been a lot of comments today about personal responsibility. How about taking the personal responsibility to stay out of the fucking place if the smoke bothers you? I can't stand the smell of hot dogs so I very rarely go to sporting events, but I don't expect hot dogs to be banned. Maybe I should sue Oscar-Mayer.

As for the workplace safety argument, I spent 20 years fixing cars. Nobody gave a flying rat's ass about the amount of exhaust, gas fumes,
freon, brake dust, paint overspray, solvent vapors or anything thing else that floated through my work area and into my lungs. It comes with the job.

On edit: I'm not a smoker.

[LincolnMcGrath]

69. When did you work on cars?

Who licenses Refrigerant Recovery Machines? EPA

A few OSHA standards particular to Auto repair

1910.106, Flammable and combustible liquids.
1910.107, Spray finishing using flammable and combustible materials.
1910.132, Personal Protective Equipment, General Requirements.
1910.134, Respiratory Protection.
1910.147, Control of hazardous energy (lockout/tagout).
1910.157, Portable fire extinguishers.
1910.215, Abrasive wheel machinery.
1910.303, Electrical systems design, general requirements.
1910.305, Electrical, wiring methods, components and equipment.
1910.1200, Hazard Communication.


"It comes with the job" is Unacceptable.

[MindPilot]

87. early 70's to early 90's, Ford dealers, Colorado & California

Refrigerant recovery machines were new just as I was retiring, but they weren't to protect the workers, that was only a nice side-effect.

Most of those other regs apply to the shop itself, not to the worker. And in the car-fixing biz, safety gear is like any other tool, if you want it, you buy it yourself.

[Sgent]

57. I see it very differently

Its a first ammendment thing. If a bar owner (or especially a club) wants to provide a place for people to smoke, they should be allowed to. No one has to patronize the place if they don't want to -- or work there. Considering the tenuous relationship between secondhand smoke and long-term health issues -- especially if its only occassional -- the drive out of the parking lot with all the slightly inebriated people is likely to be more dangerous to your health.

Freedom of association is a big one, and if a private club with a bar wants to allow smoking, I see no problem with that.

FYI... I bring up the club thing because in many states bars cannot exist per se. So everyone pays their dues when they enter (cover charge) and they become a member for a year.

[Dora]

60. Open your own freakin' non-smoking bar if you want a smoke-free bar.

Don't make it law, for pete's sake.

I live in Austin, and the city is now beginning to realize that the smoking ban they passed was really stupid. Why? Because the non-smokers who all said the only thing keeping them out of the bars was the cigarette smoke are still staying home.

"Oh, we would love to go out and support local live music, but the smoke - cough, cough - it's just so annoying - cough. If there were a smoking ban, we would go out every weekend."

Bullshit. Those fucking liars. Bars here are mostly empty now, and the people who do go to bars are drinking less because they're spending all their barstool time outside smoking cigarettes.

If there was a market for a non-smoking bar, then somebody would have opened one by now.

Oh, I don't smoke.

[eggman67]

82. In addition

Nonsmokers tend to drink less than smokers and therefore even a one to one replacement in patronage would likely result in a loss of revenue.

Also many bars sell cigarettes, and while I have no idea what the profit percentage is on that, it would still need to be made up.

[demily]

106. I live in austin too

And I totally agree with your post. People smoke cigarettes when they drink; it's just a fact of life. Healthnut nonsmokers don't go to places like Lovejoy's, Casino El Camino, and the Horseshoe Lounge anyway so why punish the people who go to those places all the time and adore them, and have no problem with the smoky atmosphere? Also contrary to what people are saying, the bars do NOT smell better now, they just smell like sticky barmats and body odor and 20 year old booths that have never been cleaned. Oh yes, that's much better. Until smoking is made illegal, businesses should get to choose whether they allow a legal act to be committed on their premises. This smoking ban was an insult to the people who make Austin's beloved live music scene happen.

[Beaverhausen]

119. Is this a proven statistic. "People smoke when they drink" ?

cause I know plenty of non-smokers who drink.

And as a musician...how can it be an "insult to the beloved live music scene" when a singer doesn't have to try to sing while breathing in a room full of smoke?

[Dora]

350. It's an insult when musicians can't get work because of the ban.

Which would the singer rather have? A smoke-free bar with 2-5 patrons, or a smoking bar with an audience of 25-30 people? It's simple math.

It's insulting because the city claims to be "the live music capital of the world," yet they passed the smoking ban with little research into efficacy or potential economic consequences. The result of their actions is that our bars -- which were already not paying musicians very well and many have stopped booking bands, period -- have lost revenue and thus have even less incentive to bring in a band.

I went to Antone's on a Monday night two weeks ago. Monday nights are historically slow, but generally by 9:00, you could find a fair to middlin' crowd there drinking, listening to the band, smoking, and talking. This Monday was pathetic. The few people that were there were going outside to smoke, nobody was watching the band, and people weren't drinking.

This effects me personally, as well. My husband is a musican who's been playing with bands and in bars for 30+ years. The threat this ban poses to our income is real, and we're seeing it already. While it's nice that I no longer wake up smelling bar smoke when he slides into bed at 3:00 a.m., it's not so nice to review the month and realize that his musical income is $300 less now than it was a year ago.

I grew up in Tempe, Arizona, and lived there for 27 years. Once upon a time, Tempe had a small, quirky, but thriving music scene (does anybody remember the Gin Blossoms?). 2-3 years ago, Tempe passed a smoking ban. When we last visited Tempe a year ago, two of the best clubs in town (hell, in the Phoenix metro area) for live original music, Long Wong's and Nita's Hideaway, had both closed as a direct result of revenue lost due to the smoking ban.

Pro-ban nonsmokers say they would go out more if only bars weren't so filled with smoke. Well, our bars in Austin are smoke-free, but there aren't any non-smokers there. The bars here are empty, with smokers lurking outside, dragging on their cigs in the parking lot. And the nonsmokers are still breathing their clean smoke-free air at home, at home, at home.

[Beaverhausen]

353. There is a ban in Los Angeles and it didn't effect business at all

Lots of live music here and the smoking ban hasn't caused one club to close. It probably got more people to go out who otherwise can't stand to be in a smoky club.

[Dora]

354. Los Angeles (and NYC) are not Austin, Texas.

LA is a monstrous metroplex with a thriving tourist industry 24/7. The two cities are incomparable by any stretch of the imagination, as the demographics are apples and oranges.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

64. Overturn all smoking bans in bars.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

67. There is no smoking

in bars in FL if they serve food, and most of them do. We eat out more than we used to because of it.

So yes, I support no smoking in bars because of the second hand smoke issue. Around here they have smoking patios, which of course, isn't quite as possible in the north. It seems to work, though.

I feel sorry for the crews that work in smokey rooms..it will ruin their lungs.

[devilgrrl]

68. I couldn't care less...

do what you have to do.

[Jamastiene]

70. Eddie Izzard, the British comedian said it best.

He was talking about no smoking in California bars. They are supposed to be the freaky state, yet they ban smoking in bars. He said, "Next thing you know, there will be no drinking and no talking."

This is what I would like to add. A smoking and nonsmoking section is plenty enough of that sort of lifestyle nazism. Leave me and my hacking, wheezing cigs alone in a whirlwind of smoke and other smokers. You nonsmoking types can sit there and complain about us out of earshot. And we'll complain about you complaining. We must face each other and do this for the full humor effect.

[emdee]

73. There should be either non-smoking areas or

non-smoking bars could open as a different choice. Then, over time, if the non-smoking bars were chosen more often than not, it might evolve as the norm, but I don't think it should be legislated.
emdee

[IN-dem]

89. You can thank smokers for your roads

and extra little tidbits..Because we have to pay outrageous taxes when we buy are cigs. So actually the non smokers are reaping the benefits to.

[giant_robot]

114. You can also thank smokers for outrageous health care costs.

COPD affects an estimated 20% of the population and accounts for approximately 14 million physician visits annually. I'll be sure to thank you each time I pay my health insurance.

[High Plains]

131. Yean, and non-smokers never get sick or die n/t

[IN-dem]

169. My mom has COPD and Asthma

And she has never touched a cig in her life. She got it from working in a factory for 34 yrs. Not from other workers smoking..Because it was a non smoking factory she got it from the factory fumes. I do not smoke around my mom. If you ask a smoker "kindly" to put out a cig 9 times out of 10 the smoker will be happy to put it out or take it somewhere else. Also I have to pay the insurances premiums too probably more since I am a smoker.

[giant_robot]

211. I'm very sorry to hear about your mother's illness...

It is true that factors other than cigarette smoking can cause COPD. COPD is common among people in Nepal and the Andes who rely on wood or dung fires as their main source of fuel for cooking and heating. However, the main cause, by far, is cigarette smoking. The burden we bear on public health due to the morbidity, mortality, and health care costs associated with cigarette smoking far outweighs any benefit we gain from smokers paying tax on tobacco to ruin their health.

[SteppingRazor]

90. I think smoking bans are horrid ideas...

But then, I also think you should be able to blaze a joint in a bar, as well as consume myriad other dangerous substances. So maybe I'm not the best one to ask :evilgrin:

[AntiCoup2K4]

109. But then the latest research shows that smoking pot does NOT cause cancer!

So blazing up a joint wouldn't negatively affect anyone's health :)

[johnnie]

91. No one ever mentions the carcinogens floating around the bar

That shit is nasty for your health and if the bar is cooking a lot of food the air is already filled with toxic air. All those steaks and burgers on the grill are probably just as bad as the second hand smoke.

[Snotcicles]

98. Whats next, banning Radioactive Jewelry?

[bluedawg12]

111. Sun is a proven health hazard, so is being obese,

so are many things.

Keep the government out of personal behavior.

[LincolnMcGrath]

137. So if I am Fat, (which I am Not)

Will that give you cancer, if you work in my bar. Will the steam rising off my fat ass seep into your lungs and cause emphysema?

[bluedawg12]

323. Possibly- although the visiuals would first make me go blind and then

I would have to quite before the toxic butt fumes could kill my lungs.

sounds plausible.

no?

[LeahD]

328. And, you're not supposed to consume food or beverages that

have been stored in toxic plastics, or be around new carpet, or wear synthetic fibers, or shower in water that's chlorinated, or eat tuna more than once a month...... or, or, or.......

[spacelady]

116. If the bar is privately owned & operated the OWNER should have the

say-so about smoking, same with restaurants.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AngryAmish]

129. Bans exists because non-smokers like to boss people around.

All other reasons claimed are lies.

[iconoclastNYC]

144. Wow what a genius thing to say.

You should research that and right a book. Maybe Philip Morris will sponsor you. Maybe they can pay for some remedial education too.

[Skinner]

148. LOL

Nice broad-brush there, AngryAmish. You can't think of any other reason why non-smokers might want to ban smoking in public places?

[AngryAmish]

157. nope

[Fox Mulder]

133. Yes, I do support it.

I'm allergic to cigarette smoke.

Besides, secondhand smoke is much worse than the smoking itself.

[Skinner]

153. You got a source for that "fact"?

"secondhand smoke is much worse than the smoking itself."

Seems kinda counter-intuitive.

[Beaverhausen]

156. It isn't filtered

It comes right off the cigarette.

[Skinner]

158. I still would be interested in seeing some evidence.

Even with a filter, it seems like sucking directly into the lungs would be worse than standing in the general vicinity and having the smoke diluted in the air. That's just a guess, though. I would be interested in finding out the truth.

[SammyBlue]

210. Skinner. . .thank you

I absolutely love what you just said. Your attitude of the "Nanny government" and banning things like smoking (and the illegal drugs) and legalizing drugs if something I've been screaming about for YEARS!!!

We are making our government pass laws to protect us from ourselves, making self-destructive action illegal.

When we petition the government to pass laws to make self-destructive action illegal, we end up with what we have now: Imprisoning drug offenders, making smoking illegal, prohibition, etc. Nothing that benefits society.

Only two other countries imprison more people than we do. . .Russia and China.

In Arizona, according to DOC stats, over half the inmates are drug offenders. 75% of them were addicted and committed the crime of possession. At the University of Arizona, students will get evicted from their dorms for lighting up a doob or caught with alcohol (I am against the 21 and over drinking age even though I am 27).

Minor consumption in Arizona means in your body too, since the courts have ruled that a human body is a container. So, that's more Americans with criminal records.

Next, we'll imprison people for smoking, or give them criminal records? When will it stop?

[Mr_Spock]

270. Even when I smoked I used to gag on other people's smoke

There is something very irritating about the burning smoke that comes off of the end of a burning cigarette. It can be very irritating and get's into the eyes also. I would never go so far as to say it is worse than actually smoking the cigarette, but it was always more irritating to me when I smoked. It's funny how the smoker will put the cigarette away from themselves so they don't have to deal with the smoking butt wafting up and watering their own eyes, but they have no consideration (or rarely) of that same irritating smoke blowing in anothers face. It's such an ironic situation - I would never as a former smoker complain to a smoker in a bar, but when I saw this post here, it reminded me of how inconsiderate smokers really are and how much I WISH there was a ban on smoking in the bars where I live. Many places that ban smoking find that there are a lot of new people who always wanted to go to a bar but who didn't due to the smoking - several towns claim the bars end up with more business as often as not. :shrug:

[Cleita]

134. Neither. As a former bartender, I support the right

of the owner to decide whether or not s/he will permit smoking. The patrons should decide whether or not they will patronize the establishments. I lived in a small town that had two bars. One bar was no smoking. It worked out quite well. The smokers had their place and the non-smokers like myself had a place to go to as well.

Since I'm asthmatic, I find I can no longer tolerate cigarette smoke or pollution. This is one of the reasons I live in the country. In spite of the pollen it doesn't affect me like smoke and pollution. So, for people like myself a no smoking restaurant or bar is welcome.

Another solution is to have a outdoor area for smokers, which is fine in good weather.

[Greyhound]

136. 2 to 1 against. Just like in CA before the pols were threatened and bribed

[Warren DeMontague]

316. Ah, yes, and the world has ended here. Bars closed, people destitute

smokers oppressed...

oh, the humanity~! :nopity:

edit: hey, got a link for that "threatenin' and bribin'"?

[Greyhound]

366. You seem quite pleased that you were able to impose your will

on everybody else. Remember it when the health police come after your bacon-cheese burger. :P

[Beaverhausen]

367. Smokers can still smoke, they just have to go outside to do it.

Why is this concept so hard for people to get?

Smoking isn't banned...smoking inside a public place is banned.

[Greyhound]

369. The camels nose and all. There is a city in SoCal that has banned

smoking period, even in your car. If you drive though and a cop sees you smoking he will pull you over and you get to pay a stiff fine.
I'll try to find a link, it's been a few years.

[Warren DeMontague]

372. And if someone wants to start a thread on that

I will gladly call it what it is- bullshit.

But as someone who used to go out and would come home smelling like a wet dog took a dump on my clothes, I can attest to two things: The CA smoking ban on smoking in enclosed, indoor, public places has considerably improved the bar/club experience in this state, and the smokers have managed just fine with stepping outside to light up.

And you know what? If I take a bacon cheeseburger (jesus, yuk. no thanks.) and light it on fire next to you in a bar, with the burning fat, gristle, and smoke getting in your lungs, I promise not to complain when the health police tell me to put it out. :P

[LincolnMcGrath]

373. You find that link yet?

[WI_DEM]

142. Interestingly it is the more progressive elements in Madison who

support this ban. For instance the biggest supporters on the City Council are "Progressive Dane" members. Their rationale is for health reasons. Of course they are also the folks who are fighting hardest for a "living wage" and low-rent housing in Madison, too.

[Skinner]

146. I'm actually kinda surprised by the results of the poll.

I thought that liberals were supposed to be the "Nanny-government" people who won't let people smoke or eat what they want. (On edit: That's sarcasm.) And yet, at this point the results of this poll are almost two-to-one against.

Poll result (182 votes)
Yes, I support a smoking ban in bars (61 votes, 34%)
No, I don't support a smoking ban in bars (119 votes, 65%)

I gotta admit some ambivalence here. I am absolutely 100% opposed to prohibition of cigarettes and alcohol, and I'm sympathetic to the idea of legalizing all other drugs. I also agree with the principle that a bar owner should have the right to decide whether to permit smoking.

But I gotta admit that I personally don't like the smoke when I go out to a bar. Sure would be nice to not have to deal with it.

I guess I'm one of those people that is content to sit on the sidelines while smokers and non-smokers fight it out.

But if they try to make your cigarettes illegal, I got your back.

[Beaverhausen]

155. Skinner, come visit California. Visit the bars and restaurants

you will be amazed at how nice it is to NOT have to breathe in smoke. Nice to go home without your clothes smelling like an ashtray.

As I said in a post above, I think it's sad that laws have to be passed to make people have the courtesy to step outside to smoke. But apparantly they do need them.

[johnnie]

163. I am not that surprised at the results

A lot of people don't mind the government forcing people to do something if it is something that makes them happier. A of of the people for smoking bans here are happy because THEY don't have to put up with the smoke and the smell. Yeah, a few mention the workers and second hand smoke, but typically it is because they themselves don't smoke and want it to be the way they like it.

Luckily I live in a place where they let the owners decide if they want to have smoking or not. The place where my sister works stopped having a smoking section and they still do fine. When I go there I just don't smoke. Of course they stopped selling draft beer so I don't go there as much...lol.

Letting the owners choose is the only logical and progressive thing to do. No one is forcing people to go to bars that have smoking and it is wrong to force them to do so.

[LincolnMcGrath]

178. I'm not all that surprised by the results

Nicotine users are very passionate about the subject. Non users (On DU), IMHO are probably less inclined to support bans on personal freedoms, so they may tend to click no. A different poll, with different questions could in fact give an opposite result.

I have seen the Marlboro Militia at its very worst in the workplace, where state laws clearly banned smoking. Management was indifferent, and getting the company to follow the law was difficult. There was little incentive for a front-line super to anger 90% of his workforce, to placate the 10% who wanted clean air to breathe. Personal property was destroyed, (tools, lockers, cars keyed,) and death threats were made.

The sad part was, most of the smokers opposed this criminal activity and quickly went outdoors when they were told it was bothering their coworkers. (Why they had to be told that is another discussion! lol) The militant 'I got a God Given Proud to Be an American Right' to blow smoke right in your face smokers ended up causing the company to ban smoking plant-wide.

[johnnie]

188. Wow

Did you work in a prison? I have never seen anything even close to that nor do I know anyone who is that passionate about their "God given right" to blow smoke in other people's faces. I smoke and I know a lot of smokers and I respect other people's wishes concerning their homes and establishments and the other people I know are the same way.

You actually saw people destroy tools, cars and other property just because they wanted to smoke at work? You must have worked with some real winners.

[spacelady]

226. In the small town I where I live, the city council passed an ordinance

that all restaurant & bars must decide whether to be totally "non-smoking" or "all-smoking" that is, no divided areas. I personally find this ordinance to be too binding on the owners of these establishments. Also, I have never heard of such an ordinance, is this common?

[Warren DeMontague]

287. I was in California bars before and after the ban

it was like night and day. And you know what? The smokers- even my friends who acted like the apocalypse was upon them- have adapted and everyone still has a good time. With the upshot that you can go out and not have your clothes smell like a dog's ass when you come home.

No one- NO ONE- is less for "nanny statism" than me, but I do think that when you're talking about a public, enclosed space, asking people to go outside to smoke isn't such a hardship.

Of course, we do live in California, so it's fairly nice outside most of the time.

[friesianrider]

147. I can't believe this is still an issue.

These people act like it's their fucking birthrite to suck on smoke for fun...and *I* am the one who is supposed to accomidate it?

I just don't fucking care about this issue - I'd ban nicotine altogether. Smokers can be the most universally whiniest bunch of people I've ever seen.

[Skinner]

151. In the interests of fairness

I just chastized someone else for their broad-brush comment about non-smokers. So, I should probably point out that calling smokers "the most universally whiniest bunch of people I've ever seen" is also a broad-bush.

And for the record, I think banning nicotine is a terrible idea.

[friesianrider]

160. Well that's true.

Just as I don't like when people continually broad-brush PeTA members, I suppose I should practice what I preach.

[Warren DeMontague]

320. i agree about banning nicotine.

But lets be fair about it. Stop throwing millions of non-violent addicts of other drugs in jail. Don't let them do 'em in bars, but don't spend $40 billion a year on a useless 'drug war', either.

The problem with smoking in this case isn't that it's addictive and kills you (although it is, and it does- I watched it happen to my dad) ... the problem is that other people are forced to breathe in the smoke when you're indoors. That said, a reasonable compromise between the rights of people to inhale their own smoke and the rights of others not to is to ask the smokers to go outside when they light up.

That's a far cry from 'banning nicotine'.

[BeTheChange]

313. What about vegetarians?

Lotsa meat eaters would say the same about them... and it's an issue you seem to feel particularly "passionate" about.

[friesianrider]

349. And lots of meat eaters do say the same.

But that seems to be a perfectly acceptable thing to do, so hey...

:shrug:

[goodhue]

149. you bet

They have it in CA and NYC, and now too in Minneapolis where I live. It's amazing for live music--the visibility and clean air are brilliant. I now have a hard time going to St. Paul bars because of smoke, much as I would like to frequent the Turf Club for rock show.

[bigwillq]

150. We have one in CT.

I still don't support it, I feel that's too far in taking our rights away, but I have to say, a year into the ban, I like it.

You don't smell, you can breathe at the end of the night, bars are not as crowded sometimes because people go outside or on back patios for those bars that have them.

I like it.

[pinto]

154. I smoke, don't go out much anymore, but I'm fine with it. Outside's OK.

(I live in CA, no smoking inside, anywhere, except private residence.)

[journalist3072]

159. I say Yes....

Due to issues of second-hand smoke, and some people being allergic to cigarrette smoke.

[Greyskye]

162. Band I was in years ago had to stop taking bar gigs

as a couple of us in the group would be sick for weeks after spending 3 hours in a smokey bar. I finally started going to bars once in a while again after they banned smoking in them here in CA.

If you want to toke on your coffin nail, do it outside!

[MrSlayer]

164. Bars? No way. Bar/Restaurants? Yes.

If there is a certain amount of food being served I'd go along with it but telling local shot and a beer bar owners their customers can't smoke is a joke. Besides I'd just love to see them try to enforce it. The local tappys here would just laugh in the face of a ban and anyone who bitched about it.

[kath]

172. Loved, loved, loved the smoking ban when we were in Boston on vacation.

It was wonderful to go out to listen to music and drink and be able to stay more than an hour or so without our eyes burning and watering from all the smoke. And the bar did PLENTY of business, even during the week.

Think about the poor people having to work in a smoky environment for hours at a time. NO ONE should be subjected to such workplace conditions.

[OnionPatch]

173. No, I think it sucks

and I don't even smoke. But I used to and I remember how important it was to have a cigarette with that beer at the bar. They could at least allow the bars to have smoking rooms or something. Not being able to smoke at the bar has got to just really suck. I can agree with bans on smoking at eating establishments, but bars? Sorry, just can't get with that one.

[Guaranteed]

174. Yes. And farting, too. nt

[jonnyblitz]

177. i am an ex-smoker whose every friend smokes (damn near)

and my housemate smokes in the house. every person who i have befriended in the last few years and enjoy being around is a cigarette smoker so i just deal with it, but, PLEASE, if i am in your car and you have to light up, crack the window! I don't frequent bars so much anymore so I don't care one way or the other but, on behalf of my friends who smoke, I say let them smoke in a bar. On the other hand, I never realized how nasty and intrusive cigarette smoke was until I quit.

[Warren DeMontague]

326. All my friends were bar-hoppin' smokers when the CA ban went into effect

they complained, swore, bitched, moaned, swore they would boycott, complained some more, and when the time came, they went outside to smoke and it didn't affect their habits or nightlife at ALL.

[Deja Q]

180. Hell no. I like second hand smoke.

It's smoke screens I dislike. Particularly political ones to make us feel better while we are being metaphorically raped and stabbed.

[ermoore]

182. I don't own a bar, but if I did . . .

It's fascist. You wanna go somewhere and drink where no one smokes then don't come to my bar. I own it. It's mine.

[Darranar]

184. Bar workers should have the right to ban it by vote if they wish to.

So should bar customers.

But the government making the decision for them seems rather unfair to me.

[SeattleGirl]

186. Exactly!

Leave it up to the owners and employees (or the customers, as you also suggested).

[johnnie]

193. The customers?

I don't let people coming to my house vote on what I do at my own home do you?

[Darranar]

197. Do you live in a bar?

The people who go to them should have the right to breathe freely if they so choose.

[johnnie]

198. Bars are privately owned

Shouldn't the owners have the right to choose if people smoke in their place or not? If they feel that they want their place to be smoke free then they can, if they want to allow people to smoke in their bar then they can.

I see it as no different than the government telling me that people aren't allowed to smoke in my house including me.

[Darranar]

199. So are factories, and the goods they produce.

Yet there are nevertheless regulations on them to protect workers and consumers.

One's business is not equivalent to one's home, even though both are privately owned.

[johnnie]

202. There is a difference

There are regulations on products because people expect to be buying something that is safe for them. If a person frequents a bar that allows smoking than they know upfront that they are going to be around smoke. If the cook is pissing on the burgers without the customers knowing than that is wrong and against the regulations that they are supposed to follow.

As for workers, once again, no one is twisting anyone's arm to work at places they feel are harmful to them. If you are a non-smoker and want to work at a bar, apply at the ones that are non-smoking.

[Darranar]

212. So should we abolish minimum wage laws, too?

After all, workers can just leave and get a higher-paying job, right?

And, by the same logic, couldn't smokers go to bars whose workers and customers had not democratically decided to ban smoking?

[distantearlywarning]

187. I used to be a smoker.

I quit 5 years ago. Now I don't care to be in smoky places on a regular basis. It smells bad to me, it irritates my sinuses, and furthermore, it makes me want to smoke again, which is not good for my willpower.

Nevertheless, I do not and will never support a smoking ban in bars. Restaurants, yes. Other public places, yes. But not bars. Bars are a place where people go to conduct adult activities, including smoking. Yes, cigarette smoke is harmful to one's health. So is excessive drinking and taking strangers home to have sex. That's why bars admit those over the age of 21 - because there is an assumption that once you get to that age, you are old enough to make these kinds of choices for yourself. And yes, that includes cocktail waitresses and people who's parents died from lung cancer and also people who are allergic or who just plain hate cigarette smoke. You have choices too, despite what some of you in this thread seem to want to believe.

You know what you're getting in a bar. It's not a mystery. Choose to do it or not. Or choose to go to a non-smoking bar. Nobody NEEDS to go to a bar. And a bar is not the kind of place where the average person could be reasonably expected to go on a daily basis. It's a specialized place, kind of like a porn shop. And like porn shops, children aren't let in, and adult people who take responsibility for their own behavior like adults make the choice whether to go there or not. And presumably responsible, grown-up people who don't like to see smut and naked people and sex toys don't annoy themselves by entering adult shops, nor do they hold the other porn shop patrons responsible for their own unhappy feelings.

I don't want to live in a society where we legislate adult behavior to soothe the sensibilities of others, and I will never ever support this kind of legislation. If you don't like smoky bars, don't visit them or work in them. It's very simple. (And honestly, all this talk reminds me of the right-wing nutjobs trying to tell everyone else what to read and watch on TV because they themselves think sex is dangerous. Don't be those people - please!)

[johnnie]

195. Very well said

It's strange to me that so many people would want their decisions to be made for them by the government. I think there is enough of that already.

[IN-dem]

213. Great post I agree with you. nt

[Catchawave]

191. I voted Undecided, and I'm a smoker....

I really find smokey indoor areas disgusting. So I've always stepped outside for a "healthier" puff :) I know, I'm an oxymorAN !

[SammyBlue]

194. There is nothing more obnoxious than a reformed anything

reformed smokers, reformed drinker (I'm a recovering alcoholic), reformed eater, born-again fundamentalist.

These people are the most obnoxious people on Earth because if they can reform, you can and look how happy I am!!!

I love the tests these people give me:

Asshole: Have you ever found yourself looking forward to a drink?

Me: What the hell is that? I look forward to food, that make me a food addict. I look forward to sex, that make me a sex addict. Sometimes, I look forward to taking a big shit. That make me a shit-a-holic?

[GoneOffShore]

208. Oh, thank you!

Do you do stand up?
Shit a holic!
Effing brilliant!!!

[spacelady]

233. I love my addictive personality, but oh those coffee drinkers GRRRR!

Wonderful post, and yeah, I'm looking forward to all of it.

[AntiCoup2K4]

340. Nah, the shitaholics would be easy enough to figure out.

They would be the ones demanding toilets out in the middle of the bar at every table, so you could drink and shit at the same time.

[GoneOffShore]

200. I don't like smokers in restaurants BUT

I go to Paris all the time and really don't have a problem with it. Most Parisians are pretty understanding about not smoking until the people next to them have finished dining. And there is seldom a problem in high end restaurants.
That being said, this is the United States, land of the sweeping, draconian law. If one person objects, then we must all OBEY. My brother is a rabid anti smoker and hence, I don't go to restaurants with him (well, there are other issues, but hey, might as well kick this one in as well) because he has caused problems every time we've gone out together (and he quibbles on the bill).
Time to get over it people. We're humans and so we have indulge in amazingly self destructive behaviour (like voting for idiots and worshiping non existent cloud beings and sacrificing virgins on their behalf). Ain't gonna get any of that to change.
Inhale that second hand smoke, cough, inhale, enjoy.

[SammyBlue]

201. Bravo! I agree 100%

Thank you. I thought I was alone!!!

[Liberal In Texas]

205. In a perfect world, there would be smoking bars, and nonsmoking bars.

But obviously, you rabid-anti-smoking-in-bars-people DON'T SUPPORT such a situation, because we haven't had that all along. If you did, there would be lots of non-smoking bars. The marketplace would be the driving force.

If enough of you patronized non-smoking bars, we would have them. Instead you want to make it illegal for everyone so you can have your way.

There a LOT of people who only smoke on nights they go out to have a few drinks. They stop at the 7-11 on the way to the bar for a pack of fags. Otherwise, at home or at work, they consider themselves non-smokers.

And don't say that the non-smoking bar concept hasn't been tried. Every time it has, the place either goes out of business, or changes to smoking so they can stay in business.

[porphyrian]

241. It's the phenomenon of the Behavior Control Technicians.

Some people just can't stand that other people behave in certain ways, even if it doesn't personally affect them. They just can't stand the "idea" of the behavior, or something. I like to think of them as Behavior Control Technicians (after a Fishbone song of the same name in the singular). My theory is that these people are suffering from some sort of psychological disorder stemming from their own feelings of being out of control, either of their own lives, their environment, or perhaps their children. At any rate, since they can't control whatever it is that is warping their mind, they seek to impose their order on everyone around them, hoping to find some sort of balance in the power trip. However, understanding this does not make me sympathetic of their behavior, rather it pisses me off. Just as stabbing people in the eye with a raw hot dog is unacceptable, so is forcing others to behave in an arbitrary manner to indulge some idiot's neurosis.

[mandyky]

206. I hate smoking bans altogether

Many cities have banned smoking from all bars and restaurants, and I think that sucks. As a smoker, I pay the high taxes on the damn things, I should be able to smoke wherever I want, within reason.

I think the whole danger of second hand smoke stuff is crap, unless one is asthmatic or something..

[undeterred]

209. Madison resident here who loves the smoking ban

from a personal point of view. I can see why people are upset, but some of us like going out more than we did before. It should offset the loss of business.

[porphyrian]

215. No, but I'm not opposed to people opening non-smoking bars.

I just don't think it's the goverment's place to dictate who smokes and who doesn't in private establishments. If someone wants to open a smoke-free bar, that's up to them. However, as a former smoker, I remember that smoking and drinking go hand-in-hand for many, and I don't think they should be forced out. We're not talking about restaurants with kids here, we're talking about bars. Consenting adults should be allowed to choose in private establishments.

[Liberal In Texas]

221. Agreed, see my #205. n/t

[B Calm]

216. I still want a roller skating rink (with a bar) for adults only

I don't smoke, but I think the smoking ban in bars is stupid.

[SeattleGirl]

217. Roller rink with a bar!

Now THAT I'd like to see! :rofl:

[B Calm]

219. Well, what do you know, I already have one customer.. Hell I might

be able to make millions on this idea. I could open a chain of roller rinks all over the country.

[SeattleGirl]

231. I think I should wear a helmet though.....

:rofl:

[B Calm]

232. Drunks on Skates Roller Rink.. Be more fun than watching drunks

singing in a karokoe bar..

[SeattleGirl]

237. And definitely not as hard on the ears!!! n/t

[EnfantTerrible]

222. They thought the ban here in NYC would kill the bar business

They were wrong. I'm a smoker who, at the time of the ban, thought it was totally fascist. Now? It's just a fact of life... no smoking in bars or restaraunts. You get used to it.

[spacelady]

236. Just "getting used to" things is a dangerous philosophy,

especially in this day and age.

[EnfantTerrible]

240. Agreed

In the main I agree with you. However, it's important to be discerning... There is a larger public health issue at play here. I find it difficult to argue for subjecting non-smokers to secondhand smoke. I would whole heartedly support designating smoker friendly establishments. (Most of the bars I frequent let you smoke anyway after a certain hour... there is a speakeasy feel to it.) Why they can't allow establishments to declare themselves smoke-friendly or smoke-free and leave it at that is an on going argument. From what I can surmise, it's less about the patrons and mostly about those that work in the establishments. Should non-smoking workers be forced to breathe secondhand smoke to earn a paycheck?

"Getting used to it" is a slippery slope... and as I wrote that I figured I'd catch some heat for it. An argument could be made for freedoms being infringed upon, but that argument cuts both ways. I am a smoker who supports a workers right to earn a living in an environment that isn't detrimental to their health. Smoking is a personal choice. Where one can earn money to survive isn't always a choice, but rather a matter of necessity. This is just one smokers opinion. One who has lived with this law for a number of years now. I was angry about it. Now, as I said, I'm used to it. I feel there are more important issues for me to be rigid about. We each choose our battles. No one is telling me I can't smoke. They're just saying that I can't smoke in a bar or restaraunt. There was a time when one could smoke in hospitals. No one is complaining about the fact that we no longer can.

[in_cog_ni_to]

244. If someone wants a job in a bar, they should be told that

it is a smoking bar and if they wish to work there they need to accept that fact and sign a contract. Otherwise, find a job elsewhere. Damn. It's a BAR!

[in_cog_ni_to]

242. I never "just get use to it" because

I would never go to a bar or restaurant that doesn't allow smoking. I would have moved out of NY if I lived there. That's nothing but a fascist state. Smoking is still legal. If they give non-smokers a place to go, then SMOKERS should be given a place to go. SMOKING IS STILL LEGAL.

[EnfantTerrible]

245. Please see my response to Spacelady. eom

[EnfantTerrible]

278. Smoking in a bar is important enough an issue to you

that you would move? Sorry, it's not that important to me. Like I said above, we each choose our own battles. My priorities are just different than yours. But let me ask you a question: Do you believe the warnings on the side of a package of cigarettes? If you smoke you don't heed them (neither do I), but there are many folks who do heed that warning and choose not to smoke. Now, if someone can only get a job in a bar (and I know plenty of people who can only make enough money to survive by bartending) should they be subjected to your smoke just because it's a bar? Choosing where one can make a living isn't as cut and dried as choosing whether or not to smoke. Let me put it another way, can you not survive without a cigarette at the bar (as opposed to stepping outside)? My guess is that you could, but that you CHOOSE not to. Fine. I understand that sentiment because I had it myself... however one can not always choose where they can find employment. Especially employment that covers the costs of living in NY city. And to head off a potential rebuttal of "then they should move out of NY city", I would say that argument is similar to saying that the unfortunate souls in Louisinia should just have evacuated... the reality is that we each have our own situation and sometimes moving isn't an option.

[BiggJawn]

223. I don't go to bars any more.

So what right have I to set policy for those who do?

They can jump on the bar and smell each other's farts for all I care.

[mikefromwichita]

225. I detest

tobacco smoke intensely, but if the bar owner finds smokers to be good customers there is no Law requiring me to spend my time there.

[Spock_is_Skeptical]

234. No way... if you can't stand it, find a nonsmoking bar or restaurant

I think the smoking ban in Minneapolis has really hurt business, judging from what I've heard from a couple of bar owners anyway. An example: Someone very close to me had a relatively successful DJ night at a popular downtown club, and after the ban went into effect he saw attendence drop tremendously. No amount of promotions helped; the club owner had to cancel his night.

I agree with the sentiment, "What do you expect when you go to a bar?"
Smokers have perhaps been too meek to really say anything; the anti-smoking advocates' voice seems to be the only thing heard. All of the whining, guilt-tripping and self-righteous ranting from the anti-smoking brigade effectively silences any opposition.

Makes me want to say "Shut the F--- up and stick your self-annointed halos up your ass."

Seriously.

I think bar owners/business owners are trying to reverse the ban here. (Recall hearing something about it, no link or anything to give.)

[Warren DeMontague]

314. So if you want a restaurant where people can't shit on the table

next to you, I highly suggest you find one!

What an obnoxious notion. Like there's no "right" more important than being able to lord it over your plate of scrambled eggs at IHOP with a marlboro dripping ashes. Really, you know, if you can't separate the act of eating from the act of smoking by the whopping 30 seconds it takes to step outside and light one, maybe you do have a problem.

Anyway, somehow, miraculously, businesses here in California -even bars- have survived the smoking bans.

I visit the midwest and people still smoke in restaurants - disgusting. It's like a time warp.

[tyedyeto]

238. I want a BAN on perfumes!

That includes both women and men. I'd rather sit next to someone smoking than a person who has smothered themselves in aftershave or perfume.

[SeattleGirl]

260. Did you know some government offices and healthcare places

do ban perfume? I had a meeting at the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation regarding a client of mine, and there was a sign posted very prominently at the door, asking people to not were perfume or cologne because of how it adversely affects some people. I also don't wear perfume (or smoke) around my mother, who has a lung condition and is extremely sensitive to both things.

[tyedyeto]

265. That may be the case in some places but if people want to ban

smoking in every public place in every state, I want the same ...to ban all scents from all those places.

[SeattleGirl]

272. I don't want to ban smoking from every place

because I smoke, but do think that people who don't smoke should have places to go for food and entertainment where it is smoke-free. As to perfume, I don't mind it unless someone has drenched themselves in it. Then - ack! Especially women who drench themselve in patchouli oil! Ugh!

[in_cog_ni_to]

239. No. As soon as we have SMOKERS ONLY Bars then I will support

no smoking bars. Why don't we have SMOKERS ONLY, non-smokers NOT ALLOWED Bars and restaurants? Smoking IS STILL LEGAL, is it not?

I visited NY for the first time ever a few years ago, not knowing they don't allow smoking ANYWHERE. Not even in OUTDOOR RESTAURANTS for crying out loud. :eyes: Unfreakin' real. We'll never go back, needless to say. It was THE WORSE vacation ever! I couldn't wait to leave.

[Name removed]

246. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[in_cog_ni_to]

250. Go to a dance club that doesn't allow smoking. Stinking pig?

Stinking pig???? Stay home if you don't like it! It's still LEGAL!

[Mr_Spock]

257. Fucking smokers spewing their smelly smoke all over my clothes sucks

I wish there were places I could go to nearby that were non-smoking. Mass is non-smoking and it is fabulous - NH isn't and I cough, I can't see because my eyes are watering so bad and my nice leather smells like smokey shit the next day. Thanks you selfish bastards.

[Fountain79]

261. Bill Hicks on non-smokers...

"The worst kind of non-smokers are the ones that come up to you and cough. That's pretty fucking cruel isn't it? Do you go up to cripples and dance too?"

"Obnoxious , self-righteous, whining little #@#$@. My biggest fear is that if I quit smoking, I'll become on of you...Don't take that wrong. I have something to tell you non-smokers that I know for a fact that you don't know, and I feel it's my duty to pass on information at all times. Ready?.......Non-smokers die every day...Enjoy your evening. See, I know that you entertain this eternal life fantasy because you've chosen not to smoke, but let me be the 1st to POP that bubble and bring you hurtling back to reality....You're dead too."


I'm a non-smoker and I think it's funny.

[in_cog_ni_to]

271. Those ARE funny! The first one reminds me of my sister.

OMG! She's horrid. She's the non-smoker who coughs when she just SEES a cigarette...not even lit. She coughs the minute you pull it out. That's my sister. Good thing she lives in Virginia. We'd never see each other anyway. I can't stand her non-smoking attitude and she can't stand my smoking.

[SeattleGirl]

274. Reminds me of a person in a coffee shop

who came all the way across the room (she was in non-smoking) to me in the smoking section, and started giving me crap about smoking. Then she started coughing. I gave her sugar-laced hell and she did a quick retreat. Uppity bitch.

[Fountain79]

276. I was kinda like that until I lived in Mexico.

In Mexico it seems like most young people smoke. I remember riding in cars being the only non-smoker. No Smoking signs were hardly followed. In fact on the buses it would say "No Smoking" and the bus driver would be lighting up. I'll say it again, if you don't want to smell smoke, don't go there. If it is profitable by all means start up a non smoking bar or convince a bar owner to start one.

[in_cog_ni_to]

303. We had a bad experience at a restaurant in Acapulco, Mexico

at our hotel restaurant. We had made reservations for the "smoking" section and went down to dinner, took our seats in the "smoking" section and a group of people in the same area complained that we were smoking. They were Americans, OF COURSE, and our waiter told us we couldn't smoke because those people were complaining. OMG. WRONG thing to say to my husband! LOL...The waiter got an earful, we canceled our dinner order and my husband proceeded to the front desk to get the Hotel Manager and gave him an earful. The Manager was falling all over himself to placate my hubby and ended up giving us a free dinner the following evening in the SMOKING SECTION. We never would have eaten at that restaurant if there was no smoking. We were told we could smoke. We always ask BEFORE we make reservations.

Many people in Mexico smoke and you can even smoke in STORES! We were in a jewelry store and I told my husband I was going outside for a smoke and the store owner said, "no, no, no! Here, take this ashtray! You can smoke in here." I had to pick my jaw up off the floor. :) They also offered us wine. :7

[Fountain79]

306. Go to Monterrey...

The non-smoker is the minority there. I would love some of the more puritanical non-smokers to check it out and ask themselves really how bad do they have it here?

[SeattleGirl]

266. Why do you seem to think you have a right to be so rude?

I understand that if you hate the smell of cigarette smoke, you would prefer to not be around it, but calling smokers nasty names is really quite unnecessary. As many others have said, don't go into places that allow smoking if you don't like it. Or better yet, party at home where you have complete control and can tell people not to smoke in your home or yard, or not invite smokers. But your nastiness really is uncalled for. Do you go up to obese people and call them fat fucking pigs?

[Mr_Spock]

301. Well, drinking home alone isn't such a healthy idea - know what I mean?

Smokers have control over their smoking habits - fat people can't stop being fat at a moments notice. Smokers can keep their smoke from blowing in their own faces where it is entirely irritating, but could give a flying fuck if it is blowing in someone elses face. I hated smoke blowing in my own face when I smoked - it made my eyes water and was generally irritating. No, I'm not gonna sit home by myself and drink and be generally what's considered an alcoholic. I LIKE going to the bar once in a while and commiserating with the enemy (most guys up here are Republicans). I sit as far away from the known chainsmokers as I can - which can be a problem at times. I never ever complain about smoking except occasionally to the bartender who suffers along with me at times when it becomes a smokefest in there - though we never say it in front of anyone. No, there is nothing I hate more than a former smoker who whines like a baby while they are around smokers - doesn't mean I don't have an opinion about people who are commiting suicide around me and making my eyes water and my throat occasionally gag because they don't have the slightest consideration for the people around them. Imagine if I never held the door for people or I "accidentally" kicked people in the shins all the time?? Yeah, see what I mean by "rude"?

[SeattleGirl]

322. Yes, I know what you mean.

I am a "considerate" smoker to a large degree (though I dare say you might disagree with my use of that word) in that I do go outside a lot, I don't smoke next to non-smokers even in places where smoking is allowed, etc. I don't think I should always have to go outside, though, which is why I think having places where smoking is allowed is great, AND I also think having non-smoking places, including bars, is also great. I really do want non-smokers to have places they can go to to enjoy themselves without being exposed to cigarette smoke.

:toast:

[Mr_Spock]

243. The people smoke at my bar - it's awful awful awful. Fucking scumbags.

They fucking leave their smoke to blow in MY face - someone who can enjoy a drink once in a while WITHOUT smoking a butt. Too bad every other ignorant scumbag who crawls out of their cave in NH smokes like a fucking chimney. I end up suffering because of these ignorant ass holes. I smoked and quit because it was killing me - I hope it kills these fools - actually it does - they are dying off at an alarming rate. Less ignorant Republicans is fine with me...

[in_cog_ni_to]

248. YOUR bar? You own that bar?

I bet there's a non-smoking bar somewhere in NH?

[Mr_Spock]

262. Nope, it's a state full of ignorant redneck chainsmoking assholes.

Every bar is full of ignorant idiots who chainsmoke (mostly Repuke also). There is NO choice here in NH for someone who likes to see bands, dance and just go to the local bar for a drink. My life is being shortened every time I go to enjoy the social scene around here. I have a constant upper respiratory irritation - thanks smokers for making sure it never gets better. x(

[SeattleGirl]

269. Chill out, would you???

Perhaps you should try "Rude-a-holics Anonymous" or something. As I said in my post just above, I totally understand why you wouldn't want your clothes smelling like cigarettes, and now, knowing that you have a respiratory problem, it's even mor understandable that you would not want to be around smokers, but can you tell me there are absolutely NO non-smoking places in NH? If there aren't, why don't you and your non-smoking friends petition your favorite establishments to become non-smoking? Have some smoking and some non-smoking places. Just please quit being so damned nasty. It's totally uncalled for. I am not smoking around you, and don't appreciate being lumped with with the names you are calling smokers.

[Mr_Spock]

282. There are NO non-smoking bars here in ignoramusville NH.

At least not within 20 miles of where I live. And no, I'm not going to drive that far to go drink if you know what I mean. I like being local anyway - I get a pulse for what's going on in the minds of the local Republcan rednecks in town. And there are three Democrats of the hundred or so who frequent the bar - we wink at each other from time to time. It's where I study the enemy. I also don't complain to anybody about smoking - even the ones who have thier smoke blowing in my face when I've decided to grab a bite to eat while hanging out. Only once in the 10 years I've been going there has someone asked if the smoke was bothering me - ONLY ONCE. Selfish bastards.

[SeattleGirl]

302. I understand why you wouldn't want to drive far if you were

going to be drinking -- good for you. I drink, I drive, but i never mix the two. And while I do understand that you would not want to be around cigarette smoke, can you acknowledge that you are also making a choice -- to go to places where you know there will be smoking.

As to people asking if the smoke was bothering you, if the place is considered acceptable for smoking by the owners and many of the patrons, it's not necessarily true that the smoker next to you is being deliberately rude, but rather did not think about it. And perhaps they did not think about it because the person it was bothering (you) did not say anything.

In several of my posts earlier in this thread, I mentioned that I had just come back from Las Vegas. If I sat down at a ban of machines and the people directly around me were not smoking, I did not light up. People were smoking all over the casino, but I felt I did not need to add my smoke to the immediate area. On another visit, I sat down at a machine next to a woman, and when I started to light up, she asked me not to. I said sure, no problem, and it really wasn't. There were other machines some ways away from her that I could go to if I wanted to smoke badly enough, but I respected her request. Have you asked people in your immediate area not to smoke next to you, or to move? You don't have to be rude about it, just ask them, or request that they move. You might be surprised at the response. And if the person IS rude to you, or refuses, then they are an ass for not respecting you; you are not an ass for asking them.

The other thing is, as I said before, think about requesting from one of places you really like to go to that they consider becoming non-smoking. Get some of your other non-smoking friends to joint your request. It's worked around here, not only with restaurants, but with some bars, and it was because of customer requests.

[Mr_Spock]

315. I'm glad you react well to requests not to smoke - here's a story...

I was sitting next to a guy who's a regular. I got some food and he got there after I was already sitting there. He was smoking a PIPE of all things and I was actually having an issue breathing without gagging after he lit up. He could see that I was in obvious distress and he actually asked me if the smoke was bothering me. I said "uhm, yeah, actually". He moved to the other side of the bar. Then I heard him make some remarks that he had to move because the guy down there was bothered by his smoke. It was nice of him to point me out and generally make a spectacle out of me - NOT! And I didn't even bring up the smoking issue - I was simply asphixiating and he noticed. And this is one of the mildest people who is a regular at this place. No, even asking these people not to smoke is insulting to THEM. It's like that everywhere around here. Heck, it even annoyed me when I was smoking - there is some sort of auto-defense mechanism that happens when one smokes. And I tried so hard to be super considerate of non-smokers (heck, even other smokers don't like your smoke blowing in their faces). I quit because after 17 years I knew I wasn't going to like my life in 10 years if I didn't quit - so I did. It surprises me that more woman that I know smoke than men now. I hope more people realize they are killing themselves and limiting their friendship circle (I'd never ever date a smoker now). :shrug:

[SeattleGirl]

324. I'm glad the guy moved, but too bad he thought he had to

point you out. But on the other hand, maybe that kept some of the folks around him from coming over by you! Not to diminish how "on the spot" you probably felt....wouldn't much like it myself.

You know, I really appreciate that you were willing to provide more info about yourself as to why you don't like being around smokers. It provides a fuller picture of things, and helps me to understand why you take the stand that you do. :-)

[Mr_Spock]

330. Thanks for hearing me out...

It takes many posts sometimes to flush out one's point of view (well, I speak for myself :D ). The initial ones many times will contain the first emotional reaction like "well, if you really want know my opinion" :evilgrin: I usually don't say anything and I know most folks could really care less anyway. This post was the first time I've really had a chance to have a discussion on this issue in an open forum like this.


Carry on... :D

[SeattleGirl]

331. You are most welcome!

I agree, sometimes it takes awhile for the bigger story to come out. And I myself sometimes react with more emotion than logic when I initially respond to someone's post. I know some people just brush that off, and ignore or attack, but I like continuing a dialogue with someone to see where it goes, and to try and learn more about a person to see what might have brought them to where they are.

So, a toast to you! :toast:

[Mr_Spock]

332. Cheers!

I do like a beer now and again :D

:toast: :9

[SeattleGirl]

335. Well, I'll toast you with a Velvet and Coke!

:toast:

[in_cog_ni_to]

279. You have a constant upper respiratory irritation? and you KNOWINGLY

go to smoke filled bars? Whose fault is it that it never gets better? You're being ridiculous and irrational. STAY HOME. You can't tell me there isn't ONE non-smoking bar or restaurant in NH. I don't buy it. We don't have banned smoking here and we have a TON of restaurants that don't allow smoking. We just don't eat there. YOU could do the same. If I can be discriminated against and eat elsewhere, so can you.

[Mr_Spock]

290. I will not give up my lifestyle because of the selfish bastards.

The whole idea of a bar is to go smoke and drink in NH - that's just the way it is. And smokers are selfish ignorant ass holes who never even consider if their smoke is blowing in your face even though they hate it when it blows in THEIR OWN faces. I was so careful when I smoked not to have the trail leading to someones face - not these ignoramuses. It doesn't bother me as much as the selfish pricks here on DU telling me I should stay home. I don't care if you smoke - just keep the damned smoke out of my face. I hated my own cigarette smoke blowing in my face when I smoked, can't the smokers here imagine that it might be irritating to hand that smoke to the person sitting next to you?

[progressivebydesign]

297. Smoking is a "lifestyle"? Umm.. it's actually a DEATHstyle. n/t

[Mr_Spock]

310. True - that's why I had to quit - it was killing me.

17 years of that was enough for me.

[IN-dem]

333. Drinking will kill ya too. nt

[Mr_Spock]

334. Yep

'Course the little I drink may actually be good for me.

[Fountain79]

247. Here's a novel idea...

Rather than forcing bars to go non-smoking let the bar decide themselves. If a person wants to go or work at non-smoking bar then they will let their feelings known. As much as I hate having the smell of cigarettes on me it bothers me more when Government puts this kind of restriction on a business.

[Maru Kitteh]

253. OH HELL YES I'd support it! And I would go out a helluva lot more often

if I didn't have to come home smelling like a nasty ass ashtray. It's disgusting.

If you want to kill yourself with your stupid addiction that's your business but why should I have to damage my lungs and body when all I really want to do is listen to a good band just because or your poor decision making and/or lack of will?

BTW, I am talking about smokers in bars here, not you personally WI-DEM.

[progressivebydesign]

292. My husband is a musician.. I rarely can go out to see him play. :(

I have a wicked sensitivity to cigarette smoke (no doubt because my father smoked in the house and car when I was little), so I cannot be around it for any length of time. First.. I get a screaming headache that is unbearable.. the next day? VERTIGO!

I'd love to be able to see my husband doing his job. And I'd love to know that his livelihood was not going to give him lung or heart disease.

Drunks I can handle.. my health doesnt' suffer from their addiction, but the smoke does not stay in a smoker's lungs.. and it burns unfiltered out of the cig.

[Fountain79]

263. DU'ers from outside the US...

Is there such a puritanical drive to eliminate public smoking outside our country too?

[progressivebydesign]

273. Yes, and here's why....

1) When Mopaul posted his experiences in trying to have access to nightclubs in his city, while in his wheelchair, everyone here rallied (as they should) for his cause. It was not fair that people who are not physically able to manage stairs, etc., should be kept from visiting clubs. So.. why would it be okay for people to accept that those with lung ailments, asthma, allergies, heart conditions, to not have that same right? Because second hand smoke IS a health hazard and DOES keep disabled people out of public places. This is something that should have been addressed in the ADA, but was not because of the CORPORATE tobacco lobby.

2) My husband has been a working musician for 30 years. He is a non-smoker. Wonder what his lungs look like after the years he had to earn his living in smoke filled bars?

3) I'm tired of watching good liberals defend the marketing of death and destruction by CORPORATE masters. In the states and cities that have banned smoking in public places, rates of existing smokers and new smokers has decreased. AND business has actually improved.

4) I lived in the first city to ban smoking. It was a gutsy move and was YEARS ago. The Chamber of Commerce came out with a very concerned stance on it, they were fearing for the restaurants and bars in the town (it was a college town with lots of bars). Well.. guess what happened? The businesses IMPROVED, more people came from other towns to actually eat and party in smoke-free environments. So much so, that neighboring towns enacted their own bans to win back customers to their restaurants and bars. The Chamber of Commerce actually wrote a letter to support smoking bans, essentially saying that they were skeptical.. and they were wrong. The doom and gloom and predictions of financial failure were wrong.

5) The majority (by a LARGE margin) of people do not smoke. Why should we be subjected to someone else's cancer-causing smoke? There is no god-given right to smoke in bars. They are open to sell alcohol, maybe food, and perhaps some entertainment. If I am not allowed to bring in my dog, for health reasons, then smoking should also be banned. Smoking does not just affect ONE person, it affects everyone around them. It's the one habit or vice that actually negatively affects those immediately around you when you partake in it.

[EnfantTerrible]

300. I'm a smoker who agrees with you.

It's difficult to talk rationally about this subject because beyond the "Rights" arguments there is an addiction element that brings out the irrational in my fellow smokers. In essence, folks are arguing for the "Right" to endanger those around them. Now that is just :crazy:.

[Warren DeMontague]

318. Or the "suck it up, stop whining, I can't smell a thing" argument.

Usually accompanied by "why are you so self righteous--- and out to get me?

Real rational.

[Warren DeMontague]

291. YES. It made all the difference in the world in California.

And asking people to go outside to smoke is hardly some kind of hardship.

[buddysmellgood]

293. I'll go along with smoking if I can bring car exhaust to match

[Warren DeMontague]

296. Okay, no running your car inside bars or restaurants, either.

And no taking a shit on the table!

[LittleClarkie]

299. No. You don't like smoke in bars? Ya don't go to bars then.

It just seems like the two go together.

And I don't even smoke. I had two parents that did though. Winter was hell when I was a kid. Couldn't roll down the windows in the car, and there both parents were, smoking up a storm. Couldn't frickin' breath. It was always good to get to our destination.

Got accused of smoking at school a couple of times, because I smelled like I did.

[Fox Mulder]

337. How about if you want to smoke, then stay home?

[DanCa]

304. I get physically ill from smoking .. but no . I simply can't tell another

person what to do. That's not me. I can't tell another human what shirt he or she wears I certainly am not going to tell them when they can or can't smoke.

[Warren DeMontague]

308. Can't we fight about PETA, or porn, instead?

*sigh*

[DanCa]

311. The day we fight about porn is a day i thought would never come

Please don't take my nudie mags away :)

[Warren DeMontague]

317. Just don't smoke them in a bar

or use them to torture chickens.

[sierrajim]

309. Not only no but HELL NO

What I would support is if the owner of the business wants to let people smoke in their own business thats their right and then on the other side if an owner does not want people to smoke they can enforce that also. I guess what I'm saying is let the owner decide what they want for their own business.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

325. No way.

I'm a non-smoker with severe asthma and I still think banning smoking in bars would be fascist.

[Withywindle]

329. Lawd no.

Restaurants, yes. People don't want to smell smoke while they eat, perfectly understandable.

But bars...?? Especially bars that don't have live entertainment or dancing, where there's nothing but drinking going on? (I like the quiet, very untrendy grungy old-man taverns where you can actually have a conversation.) Makes no sense to me at all.

[Raine]

339. YES nt

:thumbsup:

[Peter Frank]

341. Hitler Was a Vegan N/T

[RebelOne]

351. Hitler was a vegetarian, not a vegan.

There is quite a difference between the two.

[Liberal In Texas]

352. ...and Hiltler hated smokers. n/t

[Broken_Hero]

342. I don't know..

About you guys, but in my experience as an ex smoker, and currently as a non smoker, i see no problem with letting bar owners decide for themselves to ban smoking. I'm all about giving people choices, no one is forcing, or putting guns to non smokers heads, and telling them to go out to smoky filled bars...it reminds me of a lot of talking points religion takes on porn, gays, etc etc...

I would NOT EVER IN MY LIFE support a smoking ban. Do i think its good that some cities/states have smoking bans? Hey its up to them, if they voted on it, and the ban passed, good luck to them. I thik smoking is a harmful threat to your health, but again, non smokers die and get sick also, and plus the talk about taking care of air pollution, to me, seems to trump the issue of second hand smoke or smoking bans.

I have been to California, lived in Sacramento for three years, out in North Highlands, and when i found out about the ban i was taken a back, greatly, it was like...banning cigarrettes at a Nascar event, it just made me go huh? But people went and smoked outside, what bothered me the most, was that there was no bar outside to cater to the smokers, you always had to climb, crawl back into the bar to get more drinks (unless you wanted to wait a decade for the waitress to come to you). If they catered a little more to the smokers outside, i see that as an improvement. At the Glass Turtle in Rosevill, CA, the out door patio is so damn small, 70% of the patrons are on this patio, which is about half the size as the bar inside...people/owners just have to do more work to accomadate the smoker. In my experience, my friends, myself included...when we drank, we smoked...we tended to smoke a bit more when we were drinking.

A lot of touchy angles/perspectives here, i do agree smoking is bad for you, but again, all people die, all people get sick, its just a tug of war, there is middle ground of compromise, we just have to find that footing.

[slybacon9]

344. As a smoker i would support the ban.

i smoked a pack a day for 10 years. The ban here in california was awesome. I smoked when it happened. From the first day we all loved it. It's just better. And it help me quit in the end.

[emmajane67]

346. Absolutely, (I smoke) and here is why...

I come from New Zealand. Yes, I know you're all jealous now. I'm not living there right now though.
Anyway, smoking in bars got banned there about 6 months to a year ago and it is fantastic. All my friends who smoke totally agree with the ban too. Not to say we liked the idea to start with, and in a more violent society having a bunch of drunks on the street smoking could lead to a lot more problems, but after the first couple of weeks we all loved the plan.
Being able to go out for the night and come home without ciggie smoke in you clothes, hair, pores...everywhere was great. And after a big night out the sore lungs and throat from smoking is reduced because your only smoking your own ciggies, not the whole bars.
Bit lonely for the non smokers when all the smokers go outside of a ciggie but the smoke a lot less.
Leaving there and traveling through South America and now living in England I really notice how intrusive and gross it is to sit in a smokey pub.

[fleabert]

347. what I think is funny, here in CA at least, is the outdoor patios at

restaurants...they have thigh high little fences on the sidewalk to delineate the eating area, and that is 'no smoking', but the other side of this playpen fence, 'smoking area'...as if there is a magic wall.

I can understand not allowing smoking indoors, I don't smoke in my own home, but outside? come on!

that said, I think bars should get to decide for themselves if they want to be all non-smoking, or smoking, then the consumer could choose and eventually, the public's desires would be shown in which ones were profitable.

I think ventilation is the answer. someone invent an economical, bad ass strong ventilator that is easy to install in a bar, and you will be very wealthy!

[in_cog_ni_to]

348. At least CA allows smoking at the outdoor restaurants. NY DOESN'T!

It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. With all the damn pollution and car exhaust RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE RESTAURANT and they won't let you smoke a damn cigarette?? STUPID.

[sweetheart]

356. smoking is not healthy, inhaling all that dust

Rather than smoking in public, they should serve cannabis cookies and
so there does not have to be all the public cannabis smoking that this
poll is voting on.

I agree with the legallization of cannabis, and with it, i presume that
the preferred methods of consumption will turn towards food and vaporizers.

But smoking is not healthy for the bar staff. The second hand smoke
makes bar staff put their lives at risk, and it is wrong.

[walldude]

358. What right does anyone have to tell a private business

owner whether or not people can smoke in their establishment?

[wrathofkahn]

359. Damn straight

I have yet to see anyone shoved into a bar with a gun to their back.

[BlueStateGirl]

361. As an ex smoker and current bartender.... No. I think it is a chickenshit

response.

I don't see how a legal subtance can be banned on privately owned property.

If an owner wants to ban smoking in his/her establishment, I see no problem with it. If an owner wants to continue to allow smoking in
his/her establishment I see no problem with that either. The market will decide. And everyone will have choice.

I think a smoking ban in bars is chickenshit because tobacco is a legal substance. And the idea of the goverment banning the use of it on privately owned property bothers me.

If they are that interested in safe guarding the health of the citizenry, then ban it out right. Make it illegal. Everywhere.

[Bridget Burke]

368. What are the real statistics for economic damage because of smoking bans?

"Many bars say" isn't valid.

At this stage of my life, I'm not one for long sessions of serious drinking; a couple of drinks & a bit to eat suit me better. Some neighborhood places serve my needs quite well. Houston just banned smoking in restaurants & I haven't noticed any loss of customers. They can always smoke on the patio.

It's not just the smoke--it's the sour residue of years of smoking that can be disgusting. The results of surgery for head & neck cancer are not that pleasant, either. At least those malignancies are more treatable than lung cancer. (I've already lost a couple of friends to that.)

I don't much care what happens in dive bars. Toothless geeks reeking of smoke (& other things) tend to bore me. If a bar has a decent ventilation system I might consider a brief visit.

[all.of.me]

375. i'd be more inclined to go out for a drink if it was smoke free

i NEVER go to bars, for that very reason. i go out to eat, but there is no smoking in restaurants here. even when they had smoking sections, i didn't like it. i am allergic to tobacco, so i pay a dear price to be exposed to it.

[LWolf]

376. Yes.

Having worked a 2nd job waiting tables before smoking indoors was banned in CA, I know first-hand what it feels like to go home after wading through everyone else's smoke for several hours. It's fine to say "don't go there, then." I wasn't going to eat or drink; it was my job. You can say "don't work there, then," and I'll tell you that a single mom who has to work 2 jobs to keep the rent paid and her kids fed doesn't give up the job. It's not like there are multiple evening 2nd jobs out there. I guess I could have turned tricks instead, but I preferred waiting on tables, and that's the job I was offered when I needed it.

I don't think a person's right to smoke extends beyond the end of their nose; they don't have a right to fill a room, or a building, with 2nd hand smoke unless it is their own house. And even then, they shouldn't have the right to do so if there are kids living there.

[WI_DEM]

377. I've met quite a few wait staff who feel this way