weak from the herd is it? Meet in person and say that, tarlung…
Thank you!
Hola!
How bad this is that in the United States that the “Big Brother” government has the right to tell a bar or restaurant owner that they are not allowed to have smokers in their establishments. This is the owners place, not the government’s.
How stupid that one has to stand outside a tavern to have a cigarette. Personally, I “quit” smoking over a year ago. I used to smoke a pack a day. Now, I only feel the urge to smoke when I am drinking. Smoking and drinking go together.
In the immortal words of Richard M. Nixon (the Greatest president in the 20th century) the government needs to “shit or get off the pot” when it comes to tobacco. Tobacco either needs to be illegalized or left alone. America cannot do this because it grows about 80% of the tobacco used worldwide, and America makes a lot of money off of Chinese, Japanese, Korean and European smokers. But America will legislate it to death here.
LAWS, LAWYERS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE KILLING AMERICA.
SENOR
There are also a number of compelling reasons to ban the sale of alcohol in bars - alcoholism, dui, drunken crime, and so on.
I take it though that you respect an inidividuals right to have a drink, even though it can cause harm to others.
So why should people not be able to smoke there too? No-one is depriving non smokers of a place to drink, there are lots of bars which are smoke free. Why is it so dreadful that other bars allow people who smoke to endulge themselves.
Hell, I am at most an irregular smoker - I think I’ve smoked twice this year. But reading the puritanical bullshit of assholes such as virgo witch makes me feel like popping down to the shop, buying a pack of Dunhill, and lighting up.
“The government does not have the right to regulate ANYTHING done by a ‘private’ business”
“Anyone who disagrees with me is an asshole; therefore I am right”
“I don’t smoke much anymore, so that somehow makes my opinion more valid than if I were a ‘smoker’”
“Regulation of one thing necessarily leads to regulation of ALL things” (slippery slope)
“Unhealthy things that I inflict on MYSELF (drinking alcohol) are directly comparable to unhealthy things I inflict on OTHERS”
“Unproven premise: Those who support regulation of smoking are actually merely disguising their desire for total prohibition.
Unproven premise: Smoking and drinking are directly comparable.
Premise: Alcohol prohibition was unsuccessful.
Conclusion: Regulation of smoking will be unsuccessful.”
Do you people think that these fallacious arguments will magically become valid by sheer repetition?
senor…you da man.
Oh fuck off blowero, to give background on your perspective is not to claim greater merit for that perspective you dimwitted chimp. I’d also like some example of someone saying the above, or for you to admit it was a strawman.
And I ask again, why the fuck should premises not have the right to state their own policy on smoking? No-one is forcing you to go to a place that allows smoking, so why should they be dictated to?
Bizarrely if you were actually talking about truly public places - parks or similar - I’d agree that smoking should be banned. But in the confines of a restaurant or bar, why should the management not have the say.
And sailor, as for your example of segrgation, I’m disappointed to see you resort to such silly logic. Are you suggesting that bars are not admitting people? Seen any signs above the door saying “smokers only”? Then where is the comparison?
Gee, Gary - your arguments weren’t logical before, but now that you called me a bunch of nasty names, I’m really starting to see your point.:rolleyes:
That’s great. I’ll keep it up.
>> LAWS, LAWYERS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES ARE KILLING AMERICA.
Senor, since from other threads you are a well known asshole, those you are trying to side with might prefer it if you shut up because you can only do them harm.
Gary, the nastiness is uncalled for. My point is that a bar is not a private place, it is a place open to the public and which renders services to the public and any place like that is already tightly regulated and therefore banning smoking is not inconsistent at all with the regulatory situation.
While you may prepare your food any way you want at home and even invite your friends to eat it, we do not allow food and drug manufacturers to do the same and just let the market decide. Rather there are plenty of regulations stating what they can and cannot do. The airlines are required to abide by certain safety rules. You may have a lot of latitude when flying your own plane but when you are a business carrying paying passengers you are immediately tightly regulated. So, it is quite clear that banning smoking in bars is not inconsistent at all with the customary regulations of all types of businesses. It can be done and there’s nothing new or strange about it.
Now the question is should it be done and that may be more a matter of opinion. My opinion is that yes, the time has come to ban smoking in bars and all places open to the public. I already gave my reasons as to why the state has a compelling interest in the matter:
First of all, the employees should not be subjected to the smoke. A bar is a workplace for those who work there.
Second, just like keeping out minorities results in lost business opportunities for them because much business is done in bars and restaurants, a non-smoker should not have to choose between his health and doing business.
Third, the state has a compelling interest in diminishing the number of smokers for health reasons as it spends loads of money on treating the diseases caused by smoking.
I can think of more but just those three are sufficient for me.
I’m convinced now! A total ban is what we need. Prohibition of tobacco AND alcohol really is best for all of us. It will make us all healthier and cleaner and smell nicer…we will no longer have to fight over these issues. Plus think about all the lives that will be saved. The medical profession might be out a few bucks, but-fuk’em.
It will be cheaper for everyone. The tobacco and alcohol industry can move to South America with the other drug lords. The regular employees at the tobacco and alcohol related businesses can find other work.
So, y’all get it done and I’ll be right there, as soon as I finish this Margarita and stogey!
Wonder how many homicides would occur without a person’s ability to vent their frustration w/ a smoke and/or drink?..
Employees are not ‘subjected’ to smoke. They have the choice to work in a smoking or non-smoking establishment. Many of them smoke anyway. It sounds to me like you are saying that the one or two whiny assed lameo’s that find them sleves working in a smoking bar should have the power to tell the owner, the customers, and the other workers that they can’t smoke? Why don’t they just get another job? And, if the non-smoking bar is such a great idea, then they can get a business loan and start raking it in.
Now you are saying that a non-smoking bar won’t make any money. Well, which is it? Smoke free bars will make money, or will they lose money? Fucking liberals always want it both ways.
Based on that ‘logic’ candybars, gasoline, and alcohol are next on the list. I guess it doesn’t matter what the ‘state’ declares unhealthy and unfit for human consumption as long as it doesn’t affect you. This sounds more and more like a common liberal agenda…the poor innocent consumer doesn’t have a brain and can’t make a choice, so we will legislate ‘good’ behaviour. Screw personal responsibilty! Everyone is a victim… What a load of crap.
Stop, you’re killing me.
Gary,
If you’ve read my earlier posts you’ll know that i’m a non-smoker, and that i wouldn’t complain too much if smoking were banned in bars etc. But, as i also said, it’s not something that worried me enough to lobby for it, or to stop me from going to bars. So, given that info, take the following opinion for whatever you think it’s worth:
I certainly agree with you that alcohol is the cause of a fair number of social problems. After all, when was the last time a man went home and beat his wife after too many cigarettes? Alcohol does indeed contribute to domestic violence, automobile accident rates, various physiological disorders, and the prevalence of really fucking awful beer commercials.
But i believe that there are some key differences between alcohol and smoking that make your comparison rather tenuous. Firstly, although alcohol does contribute to certain illnesses and ailments, the chief victim of those is the consumer of alcohol. As with smoking, i’m not going to tell the drinker what to put into his or her body. I can’t recall anyone on this thread saying that smokers should be forced to quit for their own good. The general argument, even among the more “puritanical” (to use your term) on this thread, has been in relation to the smoke that non-smokers breathe in.
And it is here that the key difference between smoking and booze comes to light. If there are 20 people drinking in a bar, and one decides to start a fight, another decides to drive drunk, while a third decides to go home and abuse his wife, we can address those unsavoury activities individually. There are laws to deal with such actions. The other 17 drinkers are doing no-one any harm by their consumption of alcohol.
But if twenty people in a bar are smoking, then the very fact that they are doing this poses a health risk to everyone else in the bar and makes the atmosphere unpleasant for non-smokers. While a drinker in a bar, with some self-control and consideration, can completely shield others from the effects of his or her habit, a smoker in the same place cannot. With drinking, a key to not hurting others seems to be a certain amount of individual moderation, but with smoking this is less the case.
For example, twenty people having three drinks each is fine, but three people having twenty drinks each is a recipe for problems. But, with smoking, moderation on the part of an individual smoker is really irrelevant if there are quite a few smokers in the bar. So, i’m really not sure that your comparison is completely valid.
Now, having said all this, i’m going to reiterate my earlier position and say that i’m not really advocating banning smoking in bars. While it’s nice to be able to go to a bar with clean air, i think the first thing they should do is enforce ventilation standards that ensure that a bar will not turn into a smoke-filled hellhole. I know plenty of smokers who would support such a move. Most of my smoking friends don’t like waking up the next morning stinking of smoke any more than i do.
Oh, let’s just forget all this legislation. Whenever a smoker light’s up next to you, simply reach over and crush out the cigarette between his eyes. They learn fast that way.
Virgo – you brought back a memory of my late husband. He was a smoker and a drinker, and in one of his driver’s license pictures, he has a little burn spot, a circle, right between his eyes.
Seems he’d been drinking and smoking the night before, had a lit cig in his hand, his hand around the beer glass, he tips the glass up to drink and manages to poke the tip of the cig right between his eyes – and keep it there long enough to leave a mark!
At least that’s what he said happened. For all I know, he could have run into you, off your parole. 
Apparently, as long as you burn other people’s foreheads in a private business, and the owner approves, it’s O.K.
The militancy of the anti-smoking crowd leaves me bewildered. Rather than letting each establishment decide for themselves, these self-appointed protectors of the public good declare that NO shall be the law of the land. What’s next, demanding that the local steakhouse serve vegan only because you demand it?
A former smoker myself, I’ve learned tolerance of what other people do, even if it’s annoying to me. I have the right to leave or not go in the first place if something offends me that much, which is why I don’t go to Country Bars. Should they be forced to play jazz, instead?
If history serves as an example, attempts to legislate personal behaviors by the Government have been a waste of money, an impediment on progress, and a colossal pain the societal sphincter.
Grow up or grab your binky and have a time out. Jeez!
I lived in California when the law went into effect. Friends who didn’t smoke all said they hated going to bars because their clothes stunk at the end of the night. They said they hated going to bars because they could hardly breathe. They said they hated going to bars because it was just a clique of smokers.
The law went into effect.
Guess what. None of those people go to bars now either. The all stay smugly at home, knowing that no one is smoking at a bar they never intend to visit.
Instead, I have seen (and I am not exageratting) 20 people standing in front of a bar smoking, and not a single patron inside.
I agree with previous posts…call the bar “Smokey” and avoid it if you don’t like smoke!
I am gay, and I have NO problem avoiding straight bars!
I hate sushi and I have no problem avoiding sushi bars.
I hate rap music and have no problem avoiding bars that play the music.
And regarding the myth that this will not affect business…bullshit. Talk to any bartender in California and ask about tips pre-no smoking law, and after no-smoking law…they will all tell you business has dropped considerably.
I especially pity the New Yorkers with this new law…it is one thing for Califonians to be forced by the fascists to go outside to smoke in 70 degree weather…it is going to be another thing to get people in NY to go outside and freeze to death in the winter, or sweat their asses off in the summer.
But I guess that is OK…as long as you can smugly sit at home and know that nobody is smoking in a bar you don’t frequent.
I don’t think your friends are representative, because I and my friends go to bars all the time, and there are plenty of people there, all enjoying the clean, smoke-free air. Before the law, whenever I went out for a drink I returned home with a headache, shortness of breath, and clothes that reeked. And that was just from one evening - I can’t imagine having to WORK under those conditions every night. I would have gladly gone to the non-smoking bars. Only problem was, there weren’t any.
Bullroar.
Yes, there were non-smokers who always went out to the bars. And yes, they didn’t like it. The laws have changed and you won. I’m glad you are happy now.
My point was, the vast majority of those who never went to the bars “because of the smoke” and voted for this law still don’t go out to the bars anyway.
So out of curiosity, would you mind if some bars allowed it, and others didn’t? Would you care if Chinese bars in LA allowed smoking? Would it be OK if there were special licences for 10 percent of the bars to allow that filthy habit to exist?
Or do you feel infringed upon by the fact that someone might be smoking in a bar you never heard of, 30 miles from you?