Ban smoking, ban smoking, ban smoking

Oh fuck off already.

Now, banning smoking has become a hot topic here in Southern Colorado.

I am a former smoker and while I spent many years subjecting my body to harmful chemicals and other shit I sure as fuck don’t think that a town/city has any right taking away the right of a business owner to allow smoking in their private establishments. I think a bar, especially the local “dive” caters to smokers who like to drink.

One guy even had the balls to say that his pregnant wife and two year old son should not be subjected to smoke.

FINE, I agree!!! Then go to those places that don’t allow smoking I even linked to a site that gave over 60 restaurants in Pueblo, CO that don’t allow smoking. Tell the managment/owners that they are happy they don’t allow smoking. Vote with your wallet but don’t let the city counsel tell the rest of us where people can or can’t smoke. ALSO, if your wife happens to be in a bar with his 2 year old son, WTF kind of life is that for your kids? Dumbass, get a clue.

Luckily the owners of the bars got enough signatures to take this to the vote of the people rather than handing it over to the city counsel of Pueblo to make the decisions that they need to stay out of.

But it pisses me off.

If you look at the potential economic impact, it’s looks pretty grim. You ban smoking in bars, local “dive” employs 10 people. Local “dive” ends up getting shut down because people stay at home to drink and to smoke. Lets say there are 100 “dives” that means 1,000 are potentially without employment.

FUCK, if you don’t like smoke, go to places that don’t allow it. If you don’t like smoke, don’t be employed in places that allow it. But sure as fuck don’t trample on the rights of smokers and the rights of business owners because you don’t like smoke. If you take your kids to the local “dive” I would call human services on you anyway.

Fuck off already. Shit.

Now it’s becoming an issue up here in C Springs…God Damned Militant Anti-Smokers, there are about 140 places in town that don’t allow smoking fer fucks sakes, very family friendly really. They are bringing to the vote of the people, granted they get enough sigs, in November.

I think you know how I am going to vote.


eee…yep. glad to see people as spirited as you excercising your rights as a citizen of the United States of America. Go Democracy!

Actually, San Francisco has banned smoking pretty much everywhere except private homes.

The dives, however, are still with us :smiley:

Um, Techie, smoking’s been banned from all restaurants in California for many years (I remember smoking sections when I was a little kid, maybe back in the late '80s), and it’s been banned from bars for, oh, four or five years now, and I doubt any establishments have closed because of it. People who want to smoke go outside, just like they do at work. There was a lot of complaining at firt (re: the ban on smoking in bars), but I think everyone’s pretty used to it now, and no one really cares.

I WISH there was a ban on smoking in restaurants here in Michigan. God, nothing’s quite as appetizing as the scent of cigarettes wafting over from the smoking section.

The problem with banning smoking in bars: You’ll always have a sizable group of barflies hanging outside smoking.

I know that, but does it make it right or correct?

In my view, NO.

If I owned a restaurant, I probably would not allow smoking, mainly so people can taste the food correctly. However, that doesn’t mean it’s right to ban smoking in what the city counsel perceives as being “public” establishments.

Yes, the bars will survive but I still think it’s stupid as shit.

There are places that don’t allow it. Most “families” aren’t going to go to a bar anyway and you can find restaurants to take your family on line here in Colorado.

I still stand that if you don’t like smoke, don’t go to those places that allow it. Heck once I am over my complete dependence upon smoking, I wouldn’t mind joining my fellow smokers in the occasional smoke while drinking a beer.

If you are a business minded person, then open up a non-smoking bar that serves alchohol and caters to non-smokers but don’t set the law against the owners of those that choose to allow smoking in their establishments. Vote with your wallet, do not allow a gubbermint to say that smoking, which is perfectly legal the last time I bought a pack of cigs, is off limits in private business.

It’s ludicrious, now matter how you turn it for me. It’s just plain stupid.

I can “almost” understand why you wouldn’t want to light up a fatty in the middle of dinner seeing as it’s apparently illegal but a cigarette is not illgeal.

Next on the plate? Bubble gum chewing because people throw gum on the ground…might mess up the imported Italian shoes that of those sitting on the city counsel…

I don’t much care for a militant anything (a militant military I suppose is nice, but other than that…).

My only stance on this is that I would like to be able to walk into a restaurant of my choice and have a place designated for a non smoker. If that’s the case, what do I care. As far as clubs and bars are concerned, I’m smart enough to realise that smoking occurs there so I just don’t go.

I’m an ex-smoker. Part of me thinks that banning smoking in as many places as possible is a good thing – the other part wants the government to butt out. (Ooh, a pun.)

If smoking were still as accepted as it was 30 years ago, I’d probably still be smoking, and I’d spend my retirement years hooked up to an oxygen tank, like my mom did.

Anyway, as for the OP, I don’t have any facts to back this up, but it wouldn’t surprise me to hear that business owners are glad to have this decision taken out of their hands.

A non-smoking place is going to be cleaner, it’ll smell better, your fire insurance might be cheaper, and your employees won’t be subjected to secondhand smoke. (Whether or not it’s a proven health hazard, what non-smoking person wants to spend 8 hours a day around smokers?)

So yeah, you could decide on your own that your place is going smoke-free, but then you risk losing your smoking customers to the guy down the street. But if smoking isn’t allowed anywhere, all you have to worry about is providing better service, lower prices, whatever.

Or did I miss the point of the OP entirely?


You kind of lost the point.

The point is, the gubbermint needs to stay out of the business owners decisions as much as possible.

A restaurant owner, who followed the ban for the couple of weeks it was “enforced,” in Pueblo, stayed with the non-smoking after the law was repealed when the signatures came in.

This is not to say to anyone that YOU MUST HAVE SMOKING IN YOUR ESTABLISHMENT but to give each and every business owner the ability to decide without having the goverment as a fall back. They need to get a back bone if they own a restaurant or bar.

Look, if you own a business and you don’t like smoking, don’t allow it. If you need the “balls” of a government entity to state that there is no smoking in your restaurant or bar, what the hell are you doing in business anyway? You’re doomed to fail if you can’t do it on your own as is your desire. It is your business and your rules, if people don’t like it they will go elsewhere. There is nothing in the Constitution stating that a business owner can’t turn away those they don’t want in their privately owned business. If you don’t want smokers in your place, ban smoking, it’s that easy. But for that to be a good reason, the goverment doesn’t allow it, doesn’t sit well with me.

When I was a smoker I would go out with non-smokers to restaurants, quite often. When it came to non versus smoking, I would pointedly state non before anyone else had a chance to say anything. I didn’t want to position myself to force my non-smoking friends or family into a place they felt uncomfortable.

When I was out with my smoker friends, we’d go sit in the smoking section.

But, BIG BUT, if a business doesn’t mind it then whats the problem. You go to their business and you pay them money for drinks or food and if you don’t like smoking, then just don’t go. Don’t force a business to put rules down that should not be a part of the government’s business. I say, as I have before, vote with your wallet. If you don’t want to be in the same place where people are allowed to smoke, don’t go. If you don’t like it and you love the place then write a letter to the owner, in a calm way that you like the place BUT for the smoking.

Why anyone would accept banning this as normal is beyond me.

I also do not think it is really the business of Government to decide that adults cannot use legal and frrely available products in adult areas.

Here the unions pushed for it (and got it) as a health and safety issue for hospitality workers. Having worked in a pub I understand that smoker or not you inhale a lot of the stuff working behind a bar where people smoke. However, if I did not like that I was free to leave and find a different job.

I want more choices, not less.

Then you would be the one to ask. Because New York has recently passed a bill that would ban smoking in bars in NYC.

(I feel betrayed, as if by a lover, despite the fact that I don’t smoke.)
What I want to know is how are the dives dealing with it? Is it really being enforced?

Should I expect, say, Mars Bar (voted Best Dive by New York Press and called “dangerous” by Zagets) to really end up smoke free?

Because I feel that a smoke free Mars, or Sophie’s, or Max Fish would be a violation of everything I wasted my youth over.

AH! Perhaps proof that wasted youth is in itself a contradiction.

The anti-smoking thing is out of control. I don’t smoke, none of my friends smoke, and I prefer a smoke free enviornment given the choice. However, I prefer more to live in a country that still lets people make some fucking decisions on their own. I can see banning smoking in public places, court houses etc. but a bar? Come the fuck on people! Let the anti-smokers open up their own oxegen bars or whatever if their clean air is so fucking important to them. They can all sit around and breathe some fresh stale air, and sip on their wheat grass shakes. In the meantime, I would like to go to a bar where the owner still has a little bit to say about what goes on there.

Well, phooey. The fact is that, in this case, your “rights” end where the legislation begins-- not the other way around. For god sakes! People tend to think that anything not expressly illegal is their “right”. That’s not the definition of a right!

Look, argue that it’s economically better for smoking to be allowed in businesses. Argue that your community prefers certain private businesses to allow smoking. But bringing some artificial argument about non-existant rights into the equation just makes you sound like some spoiled teenager.

“But mooooooooooom, I’m 16 years old! I have a RIGHT to do what I WANT!”


Yeah! You tell 'em!

Fuck the MAN! Come to my bar! I’ve got asbestos floating everywhere and lead pipes! We also spray Agent Orange around the patio to keep the weeds away. Who the fuck does the government think they are telling me what I can and can’t do! If my workers don’t like it, they can get a job somewhere else (even though all the other bars are like mine!)

Follow da money.

If the gummint really valued ‘our health’ they’d ban the eternal combustion engine.
It’s mostly anal-retentives that want anything banned, the old ‘If I can’t have it or don’t want it, you can’t either, and I’ll find any asshole excuse to get my way’ syndrome.

I don’t have a problem with people that want nicotine, I do have a problem with the delivery system. Chew your nicotene gum, wear your patch, but I don’t want to smell your smoke. Smokers, have some consideration for people that don’t want to smell your smoke. Wouldn’t you be annoyed if you went to a bar or eating establishment and a couple of the patrons, brought a boom box and was playing music and you couldn’t control whether you could hear it or not?

I don’t smoke, but I don’t think it should be banned in public places like bars. I think this site gives good reasons why.

Who told you that you have a right to smoke in public? Get this, people: IT’S NOT A RIGHT. What page of the constitution grants us the right to smoke cigarettes in public? And guess what - if you cater to the public, then you are a public place. Nobody’s telling you that you can’t smoke at home. But if your restaurant or bar is open to the public, then you don’t have any more “right” to smoke than I have a “right” to clean air. So all you smokers (and ex-smokers) who think you are on some kind of moral high-ground can just get over yourselves.

I sure hope it passes, cuz I’ll be laughing.

That’s the same B.S. argument they made in California. But guess what? We still have bars, and they didn’t go out of business. Kinda blows that theory, huh?

Excellent arguments, there.

IANAS and I don’t hang out in bars.

California is really getting ready to fuck over the smokers now! It’s like those ass-hole democrats want it both ways. No smoking anywhere inside a public building, you can’t even light up in a “breeze way” outside. You have to go to a ‘designated’ spot and smoke.

Okay, so when the budget is all fucked up, 27 billion or 37 billion in the hole, they don’t know exactly, where can they make up the revenue? More taxes on smokes! The price of a pack is going from 3.50 to 4.50, and that’s the cheap stuff.

Are smokers a great source of tax revenue, paying more taxes than non-smokers, or are they ill, addicted to a substance and they need our help?

Let’s help them out by making the price of smokes so high that they can’t afford to keep smoking. But wait, if we make it to high then everyone will stop smoking and we won’t get any tax revenue.

I would love to see what would happen if everyone in California stopped buying smokes for a month.

On the other hand, maybe I could capitalize on all this by opening up a liquor-smoke-lotto-coffee shop. Whatever you’re jonsing for we got it!