In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

You can no longer smoke in NYC

«1

Comments

  • SilverBoxSilverBox Member Posts: 2,347
    edited November -1
    Been like that in California for a few years now. People got used to it. Now most of the better bars have an outdoor area with overhead heaters that are fenced in for the smokers to hang out in.
  • loruslorus Member Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    And how exactly did it improve the quality of life in California? Extra men/power that is required too enforce this law is not free.
  • SilverBoxSilverBox Member Posts: 2,347
    edited November -1
    Its not really enforced. Theres a few bars around where people still smoke indoors. Every once in awhile a cop will stop by those bars and write up the owner and a person or two. Alot of bar owners now have "private clubs" 50 cents of your first drink buys you into the club for life and since its only illegal to smoke in public bars not "private clubs" etc etc.. *wink* *wink*..
  • loruslorus Member Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    SilverBox, I dont remember who said it, but selective enforcement of the laws is the highest degree of lawlessness.
  • woodyd70woodyd70 Member Posts: 266 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    First let me lead in by saying that I have been a smoker for over 15 years. With that said, I don't think smoking should be allowed inside any public place where there may be those choosing to exist that don't smoke or enjoy the smell. We who smoke are very aware of the health hazzards involved, but so are those who choose not to smoke. Why should we push our stinky, unhealthy habit on those who do not wish to participate. I had lunch today at a sub shop and almost gagged at the smell of the ashtray sitting on the table of my booth, I can only imagine how the non smoker feels. I think the smokers, including myself, should respect the clean air of others and go outside to smoke, it's the least we can do.

    woodyd
  • SilverBoxSilverBox Member Posts: 2,347
    edited November -1
    yeup, We'll if every law on the books was enforced we'd all be criminals...

    BTW I'm a libertarian. I think we should have a vastly reduced common sense set of laws. But I don't make the rules or the society I just live here.
  • mark christianmark christian Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 24,511 ******
    edited November -1
    It improved the quality of life for anyone who enjoys eating out, going to a bar, or a gentlemens club and not walking out smelling like smoke! You can't believe how much nicer it is to just relax in a club and not have to breath all that second hand death- the girls like it better too. I have no problem with people smoking outside but once you get into an enclosed area it simply becomes brutal for the rest of us who are just minding our own business and trying to eat. Cigarette smoke has to be one of the foulest smells on earth- man that stuff stinks. Non smoking areas are fine if they are truely seperated...most are not.

    Mark T. Christian
  • whiteclouderwhiteclouder Member Posts: 10,797
    edited November -1
    Mark:

    You are a man who has ovbiously never had your wife host a Mary Kay or Avon party. Talk about stink! My dog avoided me for a week.

    Clouder..
  • shooter4shooter4 Member Posts: 4,457
    edited November -1
    Why is it that nobody cared about second hand smoke until the liberal made a stink about it? We've all been doing it for many years.

    Don't tell me that all of a sudden it bothers you or that it bothered you all of the time. If you really hated it, you would not have gone to a place that had smokers.

    Ban smoking
    Ban shooting
    Ban internet talk boards, like this
    What's next?

    Let's let the gov decide, shall we?
  • loruslorus Member Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    You know Mark, I am not a smoker either, so I went out to eat I

    1) Requested a non-smoking section
    2) If there was non-smoking section I went to a different place

    This being the Big Apple there is always another place. I respect the freedom of choice for the others. Its because other dont I have to pay 330 bucks for a handgun license and wait for six months.

    The NYC assualt weapons ban was clear prelude to all things that followed.
  • FrancFFrancF Member Posts: 35,278 ******
    edited November -1
    My self as a smoker I never did like it while I was eating. It's my own bad habit and I respect others that don't somke. Now when they start talking about doing it in my own home thats differant.



    hsas157x100.gif
    gun1.gif

    God Bless our Troops
  • Big Sky RedneckBig Sky Redneck Member Posts: 19,758 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I smoke but I do not smoke in public places, I won't take my cigs inside when I go to eat, don't go to bars anymore so I can't comment on that but I admit, yes cigs stink and ruin a meal. Even since I am a smoker I go to non smoking areas to eat, nothin is worse than enjoying your meal and having some slob blow smoke in your face, I hate that! And you guys that complain about cigs, have you ever smelled a big stinking cigar or a pipe? I just wish I had the willpower to quit, I have tried and I'm a total failure.


    magnum.gif

    email.gif
  • kingjoeykingjoey Member Posts: 8,636
    edited November -1
    What was that saying? "Having a non-smoking section in a restaurant is like having a no peeing section in a pool"

    I don't like cigarette smoke, but I do enjoy an occasional cigar. I went to the casino awhile back and they don't allow cigars. How is someone supposed to play a decent hand of blackjack without a cigar? It has been scientifically proven that cigar smoking improves one's gambling returns and billiard abilities.[;)]

    Love them Beavers
    orst-title-1.gif

    SUPPORT THE I.N.S. , THE COUNTRY THEY SAVE COULD BE YOUR OWN
  • mark christianmark christian Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 24,511 ******
    edited November -1
    Shooter, I have always hated second hand smoke and I always requested a non smoking section if one was available. The problem is that most places can't do a "King Soloman" and divide a room exactly in half and still provide service to both types of customers. Since no one will die from the effects of not smoking during a meal- you should be able to hold out for an hour without a puff- the results ended in favor of those of us who do not fill a room with smoke. Most places still have a patio area where people can smoke and as I said, I have no problem with smoking outside...it is inside where it becomes a problem.

    Comparing smoking and shooting is interesting. Where I live you are not free to shoot where ever you wish inside city limits. There is an indoor range near me and it is in a light industrial area and this is set a side as a place for shooting. When the outdoor ranges were open these were in areas specially set aside to avoid bothering other people with noise from gunfire and the danger of stray bullets. You are however free to go out into the desert, far away from others and blast away to your hearts content. Seperate areas for shooting and seperate areas for smoking; each is designed to avoid disturbing other people who have choosen not to participate in these activities. I feel each is a good idea.

    Mark T. Christian
  • bambihunterbambihunter Member Posts: 10,627 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Shooter4, all my life I have avoided places with heavy smoke. I love my sister dearly, but I absolutely hate to visit her because I always come home with something, a cough, strep, broncitis (sp), persistent nose-bleeds, etc. She keeps a very clean house so I don't think it is that. She is very respectful and sits across the room, opens a window, etc. I appreciate it very much, but it still doesn't solve the problem, only reduces it.
    I think smokers are kinda like gun owners, a few inconsiderate ones ruin it for all of the rest (the smokers that walk through the non-smoking section lit up, or throw out a butt during the late summer drought and starting fires, etc. I don't have to point out the firearm idiots to this board.)
    A local mom and pop restraunt owner went to the doctor a while back and the doctor said he had lung cancer and that his lungs showed he'd been smoking for most of his life - he had never smoked once, but his restraunt was all-smoking and for a lifetime of breathing it he then looked like he smoked too...
    His place is now non-smoking...
    Fanatic collector of the 10mm auto.
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 9,168
    edited November -1
    quote:SilverBox, I dont remember who said it, but selective enforcement of the laws is the highest degree of lawlessness.

    Cool. That's an excellent argument for enforcing the law every single time. Funny how people NOT in favor of something use these great arguments in support of complete compliance. Thank you for that.

    People at the next table who count on me to be more more polite and civilized than they are willing to be get a BIG surprise.

    As somebody says around here, don't mistake my kindness for weakness. Man oh man, don't.

    Life NRA Member

    T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
  • magnumjimmagnumjim Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I have a constitutional right to smoke. It is recognized by the federal government all fifty states and many cities because they tax it. Your so called collective right to a non smoking environment does not exist because the constitution guarantes individual rights and is supposed to prevent the majority from taking them away just because
    they don't like what I do. I use a legal product that is heavily taxed
    and if you don't like it YOU leave.
  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,730 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    This whole non-smoking debate is funny. If someone sat around farting, or spraying some nasty smelling fumes around, people (including smokers) would be up in arms about it. But if they are ONLY SMOKING.....then gosh, its ok! No, it isn't. A stink is a stink. If you want to stink up the place, go outside. It has nothing to do with "personal freedoms" but has everything to do with RESPECT FOR OTHERS!

    By the way....no one has mentioned it, but the REASON that businesses aren't fighting these "restrictions" is because MOST places have seen their business INCREASE after the "restrictions", for the simple fact that more people do not smoke, and will go out and eat or have a drink if they don't have to be all stink-i-fied after only a few minutes there.

    Only something like 30% of the adult population smokes. To ignore the other 70% is just bad business.

    Merc (who is against smelly stuff, be it cigs, farts or whatever!)

    NO! You may not have my guns! Now go crawl back into your hole!

    ****************************************

    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • Big Sky RedneckBig Sky Redneck Member Posts: 19,758 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I say again, I smoke but not in public places. I can't stand cigarette smoke when I'm trying to eat, I leave mine in the vehicle. I don't force others to put up with my smoke and I wish others would feel the same way. Did anybody ever notice the difference in taste of a good steak when you have cig smoke floating in your face?[:(!]


    magnum.gif

    email.gif
  • magnumjimmagnumjim Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I'll say again. What I do is legal and if you don't like it YOU leave.
  • stanmanstanman Member Posts: 3,052
    edited November -1
    Magnumjim,
    Interesting arguement!

    7mm,
    As a recently reformed smoker who had tried countless times to quit, I have some advice for you,,,, WELBUTRIN!
    I honestly swear to you, if I had known it could be that easy to quit I would have tried this stuff years ago. In my case it almost completely eliminated the physical cravings. The psych cravings were still there to be sure, but I could handle those.
    Talk to your doctor, make up your mind that you're ready to quit, dig in your heels and give it a try.
    You know it's the most important thing you can do for yourself ....... except maybe buying that new gun![;)]

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than to have a French division behind me."
    Gen. Patton
  • Big Sky RedneckBig Sky Redneck Member Posts: 19,758 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Stanman, is that prescription? If it is maybe it's time to pay doc a visit.

    If you insist smoking while I'm trying to eat and tell me to leave so you can smoke, will you mind if I sit in the booth next you you and fart the whole time you are there? Fair trade, your smoke for my * gas?

    He brings up a good question, if it is taxed is it covered byut the constitution? If so next time a cop tells me I will lose my driving priveledge I will use that argument.


    magnum.gif

    email.gif
  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,730 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Magnum,
    Do you know what "respect for others" means? Did your mother teach you any manners?

    Sheesh.

    Merc



    NO! You may not have my guns! Now go crawl back into your hole!

    ****************************************

    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • stanmanstanman Member Posts: 3,052
    edited November -1
    7mm,
    Yes, it is a prescription anti-depressant actually.
    From what I understand, it was just by some fluke that they discovered that it helped IMMENSELY with tobacco cravings.
    It sure won't do it for you, but in my case at least it was a godsend.
    Good Luck!

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than to have a French division behind me."
    Gen. Patton
  • IconoclastIconoclast Member Posts: 10,912
    edited November -1
    The biggest difficulty I faced in stopping smoking was the social / government pressure against smoking. Just my nature, I guess, but when someone tries to tell me not to do something which is a danger to me alone (the secondary smoke BS has been been proven to be exactly that), my instinctive reaction is, to put it mildly, to tell them to drop dead . . . "Iconoclast" was not chosen as a user name at random, folks. Screw these liberal scumbags!!!!! This BS makes me want to start up again, and grind out my butts on the noses of these do-gooder Facists.

    Just leave me the F*** alone, man. G*dd*mn flatlander do-gooder liberal vermin.

    Why is it all these threads tonight are on my "hot button" topics? Not sure my blood pressure will stop climbing . . . .
  • magnumjimmagnumjim Member Posts: 27 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Mercury Do you. It's my right that's being steped on not yours.
    If you want no smoking get the government to ban them. They will never do that because they collect 80 million dollars a day in taxes.
    I'm being gouged for taxes that you don't have to pay and you want
    me to go out behind the barn to use a legal product because it offends you. Don't hold your breath.
  • SlappyDappySlappyDappy Member Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Maybe I should start smoking.

    It sounds like a good deal. I mean, I get to pay my own money to smell bad, have health problems and look like a slob.

    Paying alot of money to die slowly has always been a fantasy of mine.
  • mark christianmark christian Forums Admins, Member, Moderator Posts: 24,511 ******
    edited November -1
    The tax/rights issue is interesting. Magnum, can you site some reference or court case where the paying of a tax entitles you to a right or license? Paying fuel taxes (state or federal) does not allow you to operate a motor vehicle, paying Federal excise tax on firearms or ammunition does not allow you to hunt without a license (even though the Pittman-Robertson Tax was established soley for the purpose of aiding in maintaining and purchasing lands for hunting), paying of a state income tax does not establish you as a resident of that particular state, and paying Federal Income Tax on monies earned in this country does not make you a defacto citizen of the United States or give you any constitutional rights- you simply get to pay the tax and take whats left back home to Japan. I could go on and on here but tell me how paying a cigarette tax is a license and right to smoke where ever you please and in the constitution as well? I am curious as to your legal theroy...you do have one?

    Mark T. Christian
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,846 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Darn, I can not remember the name of that movie, with Sylvester Stalone and Sandra Bullock (sp?) Where she tells him, something like, "It has been decided that everything that is bad for you is now banned. Hence illegal. Smoking, meat, spices, sex? coffee, etc"

    This is what we need, someone to decide for everyone else, what is good and what is bad for you.

    Oh ya.... What were the three shells used for?

    Point of order, I smoke and I think it stinks.


    The gene pool needs chlorine.
  • competentonecompetentone Member Posts: 4,698 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I see the ban not as any issue about "smoking," but as a serious infrinngement on private property rights.

    Businesses that are "open to the public" are still private property--this is a distinction which the government is ignoring with smoking bans; the government is putting restrictions on the use of private property. Whether smoking is allowed or prohibited should be solely the decision of the property/business owners.

    And this is why you see "liberals"--who are normally "champions" of individual/personal behavior liberties--so much infavor of smoking bans; they see the ban as a way to further destroy property rights--the elimination of "private property" has always been a goal of socialists.
  • woodsrunnerwoodsrunner Member Posts: 5,777
    edited November -1
    Well I can't win!! I quit smoking and started farting alot!! I had more friends when I was a smoker.

    Woods
  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,730 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Magnum,
    Did I ever say I was for an out-right ban on smoking? NO! I just don't want people to be smoking when I'm trying to eat. If you want to smoke, go outside, or somewhere where I won't get sick from it, and stink for 3 days.

    I AM for a ban on stupidity, tho, that'd take care of a LOT of people.

    Besides....if you want to talk about "rights" it's MY RIGHT NOT TO SMELL YOUR STINKY BUTT WHEN YOU SMOKE!


    How is your "right" more important than mine?

    Ever heard of "manners"?? How about "respect for others"??

    Merc



    NO! You may not have my guns! Now go crawl back into your hole!

    ****************************************

    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • familyguyfamilyguy Member Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Pick - that would be "Demolition Man"
    Hot dogs, armour hot dogs, all kinds of kids eat armour hot dogs....

    Comp - Funny you should mention the private property issue. A store owner can post a "no firearms allowed" sign because it is private property, but they can't allow smoking in it if there is a ban.

    I quit smoking years ago, and the smell is disgusting and I feel sorry (truly, not in a condescending way) for anyone that still smokes, but I agree that the bans are stupid. Business owners should be allowed to have smoking/non-smoking sections if that's what they want to offer. Should vegetarians get to ban meat in restaurants because it smells bad? Or meat if it is fatty (especially the way places prepare it) and is bad for you? If you feel your own health is in danger (poor separation of the sections, or whatever reason) then simply don't patronize that place! Go somewhere else. Let the customers dictate the market instead of another law.

    And whoever said business gets better after a ban needs to come visit Tempe AZ and see that they don't know what they're talking about.


    Aside from all that, I went to visit my parents when they lived in Argentina for a while.....what a weird experience! Something like 75% of the adult population smokes. You could light up in line at the bank, on the rail cars (their mass transit system), in a movie theater, anywhere! If you asked for the non-smoking section, after looking at you like your from another planet they would sit you in an area where they didn't see someone smoking! Talk about the other end of the spectrum. McDonald's delivering to your home was very cool, though.....


    Got a new gun for my ex-wife.....pretty good trade, huh?
  • SlappyDappySlappyDappy Member Posts: 202 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I saw pics of people in Argentina holding pictures of Saddam Hussein at a protest. Argentina is wierd.
  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,730 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Here are some sources that say that business increased after the ban. It only makes sense....the MAJORITY of people don't smoke, so you should cater to them, instead of the other way around. Unless you are selling cigarettes, of course. :)

    http://www.gaspforair.org/gedc/gedcecca.htm

    http://www.gasp.org/nyrest.html

    http://www.no-smoking.org/may02/05-08-02-5.html

    These ARE links from no-smoking sites, but common sense would tell you to cater to the majority of people. Simple business.

    Also, a lot of the "bans" around the country allow for an exemption for your business, if your business loses something like 5% or more of its sales. Here in Tucson, only something like TWO places applied for the exemption, out of 250 or so (I forget the actual number, but it was very small) restaurants.

    I'm not for outlawing smoking totally, I just think that people should have more respect, and not smoke while others are eating.

    Merc

    Come to think of it.........if people had manners, and respected other's rights to breathe clean air.......we wouldn't NEED these laws....

    PS-Here is a quote of what market forces I'm talking about:

    "Rob LaMaster, of the Arizona Restaurant Association, argues that market forces are already forcing restaurant owners to address the needs of a steadily growing non-smoking customer base. According to LaMaster, the average annual increase in the total number of restaurants is 3 percent, while the average annual increase in the number of non-smoking restaurants is 33 percent."


    NO! You may not have my guns! Now go crawl back into your hole!

    ****************************************

    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt
  • familyguyfamilyguy Member Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Merc, I appreciate the links to back up your point, but that would be like getting crime statistics from the anti-gun lobby. They have a vested interest in presenting statistics in a certain light. Are there any independent studies? I think there's another city in the valley trying to pass a ban (Glendale), and the only 'exemption' would be if a certain percentage of your business is from serving alcohol. So eaters have more rights to protection than drinkers?

    If you're from Tucson, did you hear about Tempe? No exemptions, and some businesses went under. I agree that it is bad manners to light up while someone else is eating, but are you really ready to legislate manners? My point of " go somewhere else " wasn't to dismiss non-smokers, but to suggest a way to make the point without passing more laws.


    Got a new gun for my ex-wife.....pretty good trade, huh?
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,837
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by competentone
    I see the ban not as any issue about "smoking," but as a serious infrinngement on private property rights.

    Businesses that are "open to the public" are still private property--this is a distinction which the government is ignoring with smoking bans; the government is putting restrictions on the use of private property. Whether smoking is allowed or prohibited should be solely the decision of the property/business owners.

    And this is why you see "liberals"--who are normally "champions" of individual/personal behavior liberties--so much infavor of smoking bans; they see the ban as a way to further destroy property rights--the elimination of "private property" has always been a goal of socialists.





    Competentone-BINGO!!

    It always amazes me that when a government steps in and creates a prohibition, the opinions voiced are always "well I dont like it anyway-so it is OK". God forbid the people question whether or not the government should have the authority to enact a restriction on private property is the last thing on peoples minds. The owners of the establishments should decide the smoking issue-the government should not be REQUIRING them to prohibit smoking ON OR IN THEIR PROPERTY-WHICH IS PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT PUBLIC!
    I always love it when I am in the "smoking" section of a restaurant, and some impatient non smoker chooses to take the "first available" seat, which is in the smoking section. They will start to wave their hands in front of their faces, complain to each other about the smoke(loud enough so that I can hear it), and then, after realizing their little hints are having no effect on me, will ask me to put out my cigarette. I always politely tell them "NO". If they wanted to eat in a smokr free environment, then they should wait another fifteen minutes and take a table in the non smoking section.Ifthey choose to take the "first available" in the smoking section, then they have to deal with the inconvenience of smokers. No one forced them to sit in the smoking section, they made the choice, and should not be so rude as to ask smokers to not smoke. I passed up on a "first available" in the non smoking section, cause I wanted to have a couple of cigarettes with my meal- I waited to get what I want. If someone chooses not to wait to get what they want, then THEY GET WHAT THEY DONT WANT!
    But this entire issue should not whether or not we like or dislike smoking in so called public(really private)places-the issue should be whether or not the government should be deciding what owners of private property can and can not do

    "It is important, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments into one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.."
    -George Washington
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,837
    edited November -1
    Iconoclast- I know what you mean. I cant bring myself to put on a seatbelt for the exact same reasons you mentioned. I am always stubborn when it comes to a government requiring me to do something "for my own good"

    "It is important, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments into one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.."
    -George Washington
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,837
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Mercury
    Here are some sources that say that business increased after the ban. It only makes sense....the MAJORITY of people don't smoke, so you should cater to them, instead of the other way around. Unless you are selling cigarettes, of course. :)

    http://www.gaspforair.org/gedc/gedcecca.htm

    http://www.gasp.org/nyrest.html

    http://www.no-smoking.org/may02/05-08-02-5.html

    These ARE links from no-smoking sites, but common sense would tell you to cater to the majority of people. Simple business.

    Also, a lot of the "bans" around the country allow for an exemption for your business, if your business loses something like 5% or more of its sales. Here in Tucson, only something like TWO places applied for the exemption, out of 250 or so (I forget the actual number, but it was very small) restaurants.

    I'm not for outlawing smoking totally, I just think that people should have more respect, and not smoke while others are eating.

    Merc

    Come to think of it.........if people had manners, and respected other's rights to breathe clean air.......we wouldn't NEED these laws....

    PS-Here is a quote of what market forces I'm talking about:

    "Rob LaMaster, of the Arizona Restaurant Association, argues that market forces are already forcing restaurant owners to address the needs of a steadily growing non-smoking customer base. According to LaMaster, the average annual increase in the total number of restaurants is 3 percent, while the average annual increase in the number of non-smoking restaurants is 33 percent."


    NO! You may not have my guns! Now go crawl back into your hole!

    ****************************************

    "Tolerating things you may not necessarily like is part of being free" - Larry Flynt


    Thanks for the links, but so what?. Whether or not the ban will effect business is a non issue-those businesses should be free to decide for themselves whether or not they will allow smoking in their businesses and PRIVATE establishments. They should not be forced to CATER to the majority-they should be allowed to decide what they want in their business. Just because a MAJORITY of the people do not like smoking in restaurants, does not mean that a private establishment should be forced to CATER to the wants of the majority. Do you think that if a majority of the people object to music during dinner, then the government has the right to prohibit restaurant owners from playing music in their establishments? COMMON SENSE may dictate to restaurant owners that it is better BUSINESS for them to be non smoking-but again, that is an issue for them to decide-not the government.
    And people do have a right to breathe clean air while they are eating-they also have a right to not dine in an establishment where people smoke. A restaurant owner should not be forced to give up his rights so that someone can exercise their rights in his business. If someone feels their rights are being violated(the right to breather clean air) then they have the right to not dine in that establishment-no one is forcing them to breathe the dirty air, they are not being forced to dine in the owners establishment, and be subjected to the dirty air. They should exercise their right to breath clean air somewhere else.

    "It is important, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments into one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism.."
    -George Washington
  • AlpineAlpine Member Posts: 14,793 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I am a non-smoker and always have been that way. Personally I think that it is a repugnent habit, that is also a hazard to your health.
    That being said, after being in California where smoking indoors is mostly illegal, I went through Las Vegas a while back. Stepped inside a resturant and almost gagged. Turned around and went back outside as the smell of smoke was overpowering. We went to drive - through as we could not stand the indoor smoke. In the future we will bypass Nevada as a place to go into buildings.

    "If you ain't got pictures, I wasn't there."
    ?The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.?
    Margaret Thatcher

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
    Mark Twain
Sign In or Register to comment.