Sorry I disagree. I believe that the utility of multi-story buildings in major metropolitan areas is far higher than the utility of being able to light up at the dinner table. But that may be just because I’m not addicted to nicotine.
Nice ad hominem. I’ve smoked a total of three cigarettes in my life (didn’t see the appeal), and a few other posters opposed to the ban have also mentioned that they’re non-smokers.
You didn’t mention that the risk of working on a multi-story building is far higher than the risk of working in a smoky restaurant. If you fall off the 20th floor, you will die–period.
That’s not ad hominem:
A. We’re talking about the utility of smoking restaurants. Since you don’t smoke, obviously I wasn’t talking about you. I’m saying that were I addicted to nicotene, I might place a higher value on having smoking restaurants. I didn’t say YOU were addicted to nicotene; you just misinterpreted it that way.
B. I used a winking smilie, which generally indicates that it’s a joke, anyway.
Guess I misunderstood, then. I apologize.
Whats worse is the law in CA that banned smoking from public places was voted it by what many considered a wide margin
And even though people gripe about it its "Why bother " in overturning it when people are asked
Of course This is in a state where a pack of cigs will one day reach 6 dollars apack …
Oh and yes its enforced although many bars ignore the fact people are smoking as theres at least one place here raided once every 2 or 3 weeks and not only does the business get fined each indivisial smoker gets cited also
Most owners/managers have a sign saying "althouhg we provide ashtrays its to protect our property were not responsible if you get cited ect "
Fines run from 150 to 300 bucks per cite