I'm taking a stand!

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

And when there isn't a ban, all bars allow/have smoking. So, I don't have a choice. If you don't like how our country/government works then yes, contact your congressman. That's what non-smokers and service employees have done.

Not true. See my previous post quoted below.

Originally posted by: Xavier434
The problem here is that you are playing on the side of an extreme which is asking for 100% non-smoking establishments because it appears (correct me if I am mistaken) that you believe that the only other alternative would result in every bar and club being a smoke filled choking hazard. The truth is that it doesn't have to be this way. There are ways to meet in the middle. For example, in many parts of Florida (possibly the whole state?) what they do to give everyone their slice of the pie is to only enforce anti-smoking regulations on establishments where a certain percentage of the products being sold is a form of food. What this has resulted in is that there are both a good number of bars that allow smoking and a good number that do not. Both types make pretty much the same amount of money because the law has done a good job of splitting up the customer pool. It's a great solution. Everyone in a single community gets exactly what they want and they get a lot of it.

So you see, there is a way to meet in the middle and everyone can make their own choice and freedom is preserved.

So, there are laws/regulations around smoking in FL. Why aren't you complaining that restaurants should also allow smoking? It's my right as a restaurant owner. Why should government deny freedoms? What's next? Oh, the humanity.

If you lived in CA, MA, NYC before these laws were enacted, all establishments had smoking. FL has laws just not total banning. So, you believe there should be some laws banning smoking?

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

So, there are laws/regulations around smoking. Why aren't you complaining that restaurants should also be allow smoking? It's my right as a restaurant owner. Why should government deny freedoms? What's next? Oh, the humanity.

If you lived in CA, MA, NYC before these laws were enacted, all establishments had smoking. FL has laws just not total banning. So, you believe there should be some laws banning smoking?

What I believe is that freedom should be preserved as fairly as possible for as many people as possible. That doesn't mean 100% total freedom for everyone to do whatever they please because that is impossible. It does mean that everyone gets their fair share of the pie though. I believe that Florida is doing that very well when it comes to the subject of smoking in bars. I very rarely hear of restaurant owners complaining that they are not allowed to permit people to smoke in their establishments in Florida. Even during the time of transition when this law went into effect, the few owners which really had an issue with this just reformed their business into more of a bar style establishment that sold food but it met the requirements of the law. They are now happy as a clam so long as the money keeps pouring in which it does unless they are running the place like a douche. I suppose that there may have been a very small percentage that went as far as to cease being a restaurant owner entirely or moved their business to another location where this law didn't apply, but those people are such a small minority that it really doesn't matter. Again, the idea isn't to hit 100%. The idea is to get as close as possible.

 

[meltdown75]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

why is everyone here so damn confrontational?

all i meant was the province is losing casino money because of their anti-smoking legislation. it's just a statement. is that ok with you? can i fucking post something here without being debated?

 

[oogabooga]

Originally posted by: meltdown75

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

why is everyone here so damn confrontational?

all i meant was the province is losing casino money because of their anti-smoking legislation. it's just a statement. is that ok with you? can i fucking post something here without being debated?

Should we legislate that meltdown's posts can't be debated as part of the smoking ban. He will be the new king of ATOT and end all debate in ATOT. We'll be led by the wisdom of the canucks :beer:

All in favor?
I say Aye.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: oogabooga

Originally posted by: meltdown75

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

why is everyone here so damn confrontational?

all i meant was the province is losing casino money because of their anti-smoking legislation. it's just a statement. is that ok with you? can i fucking post something here without being debated?

Should we legislate that meltdown's posts can't be debated as part of the smoking ban. He will be the new king of ATOT and end all debate in ATOT. We'll be led by the wisdom of the canucks :beer:

All in favor?
I say Aye.

All hail King melty!

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: OdiN
Smokers should have to wear a special suit which keeps all of their smoke just in their little enclosure. That way non-smokers don't have to breathe their crap.

And this goes for smokers in cars too. They should have to keep their windows rolled up.

As long as people that use perfume/cologne have to wear the same suit.

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I would. I am extremely allergic to the knock off perfume and cologne.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: OdiN
Smokers should have to wear a special suit which keeps all of their smoke just in their little enclosure. That way non-smokers don't have to breathe their crap.

And this goes for smokers in cars too. They should have to keep their windows rolled up.

As long as people that use perfume/cologne have to wear the same suit.

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I would. I am extremely allergic to the knock off perfume and cologne.

then you shouldnt have a problem with "that" because that was suggesting people with crapping perfume w/e have to be locked up tight in a suit so nobody has to smell it.. so you should like that....???

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I have never been a smoker, and I am certainly against smoking. However, when I go into a bar, I don't expect it to be the healthiest place for me. A bar's primary function is to serve alcoholic beverages which kill brain cells and cause liver damage, not to mention rob your body of essential vitamins and nutrients, cause dehydration and inebriation with reduced motor skills, which makes operating heavy machinery nigh on impossible (and illegal). Bars are dens of iniquity, and have been since the rise of Speakeasies in the 1920s. As such, I don't think we should be mandating that activities such as smoking be illegal in these establishments.

My two favorite bars are right next door to each other. One, a trendy, upscale establishment, doesn't allow smoking. The other, more of a dive, with free pool and strong drinks, allows smoking (and most patrons take advantage). I know that when I go into the dive, I'm going to emerge reeking of smoke; I'm going to have to bathe, wash my clothes, and lord help me if I'm wearing a nice jacket (I actually have my "smoke jacket" now, just for visiting such bars). I still go in there all the time, because hey, free pool, and everyone is having a great time (and the bartenders rock). If I don't feel like getting smoky, I go next door (where the bartenders also rock, and the food is vastly superior). But it's my choice as a consumer, and I think that's the way it should be. This smoking ban is nonsense (and it goes active come 2009 here in Oregon). I'll probably be happy not to reek of smoke at the end of the night, but a part of the magic will have died (watching the smoke swirling under pool lights is quite mesmerizing).

 

[gorbs]

what the hell is a certified smoking cessation counselor and why would you want to be one. a curious smoker would like to know.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: gorbs
what the hell is a certified smoking cessation counselor and why would you want to be one. a curious smoker would like to know.

That would be so much better as a Certified Cigarette and Cigar Cessation Counselor. "What do you do?" "I'm a CCCCC." "I see."

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: gorbs
what the hell is a certified smoking cessation counselor and why would you want to be one. a curious smoker would like to know.

is it that difficult to comprehend?

i have taken courses and have materials available to provide smoking cessation counseling to any patient requesting help. this counseling i am offering compliments my chosen career as i see patients all the time who are smokers.

why would i want to be one? because most smokers hate that they are addicted to smoking. they tell me that. they also tell others to NOT start smoking. i see what it does to people and i care. if i can help one person break the addiction it's worth every bit of effort.

if you ever want help i can direct you to places where you can get free nicotine gum, lozenges or patches. if you don't want to quit i have nothing more to say about it.

 

[Saint Michael]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: OdiN
Smokers should have to wear a special suit which keeps all of their smoke just in their little enclosure. That way non-smokers don't have to breathe their crap.

And this goes for smokers in cars too. They should have to keep their windows rolled up.

As long as people that use perfume/cologne have to wear the same suit.

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I would. I am extremely allergic to the knock off perfume and cologne.

So you can only handle name-brand perfume? Right...

 

[jonks]

Greatest nanny legislation the govt has ever passed.

 

[sutahz]

:*(
But if a cop walks in and see's someone smoking its the smoker that gets the ticket not the establishment. At least you're taking action into your own hands instead of wanting the government to do things for you.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
I have never been a smoker, and I am certainly against smoking. However, when I go into a bar, I don't expect it to be the healthiest place for me. A bar's primary function is to serve alcoholic beverages which kill brain cells and cause liver damage, not to mention rob your body of essential vitamins and nutrients, cause dehydration and inebriation with reduced motor skills, which makes operating heavy machinery nigh on impossible (and illegal). Bars are dens of iniquity, and have been since the rise of Speakeasies in the 1920s. As such, I don't think we should be mandating that activities such as smoking be illegal in these establishments.

My two favorite bars are right next door to each other. One, a trendy, upscale establishment, doesn't allow smoking. The other, more of a dive, with free pool and strong drinks, allows smoking (and most patrons take advantage). I know that when I go into the dive, I'm going to emerge reeking of smoke; I'm going to have to bathe, wash my clothes, and lord help me if I'm wearing a nice jacket (I actually have my "smoke jacket" now, just for visiting such bars). I still go in there all the time, because hey, free pool, and everyone is having a great time (and the bartenders rock). If I don't feel like getting smoky, I go next door (where the bartenders also rock, and the food is vastly superior). But it's my choice as a consumer, and I think that's the way it should be. This smoking ban is nonsense (and it goes active come 2009 here in Oregon). I'll probably be happy not to reek of smoke at the end of the night, but a part of the magic will have died (watching the smoke swirling under pool lights is quite mesmerizing).

smoke machines ftw.

 

[BudAshes]

They should ban drinking at bars too. Alcohol is bad for you.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't go to bars where smoking is allowed, but it's ridiculous that they made it illegal. If a business owner wants to allow smoking in his place, it should be his choice.

That makes entirely too much sense, thus the reason we must legislate it!

Tell that to the employees.

And OP - you're only taking half a stand. You should report them.

The employees choose to work in a smoking environment.

I also don't buy that they are going to get horrible death causing problems from a little bit of second hand smoke here and there in a bar.

Do a little research on second-hand smoke please.

Yeah..use a dose of salt, some common sense and read the studies thoroughly. There is very little evidence of damage from second-hand smoke, the indicators are flawed, and they don't factor in enough of the slant towards cardiovascular diseases that is present today (and growing with other epidemics such as obesity, and sedentary lifestyles).

I know a lot of people who grew up in the era where people smoked all over, and if they didn't smoke, they didn't develop smoking related issues.

i read your washington post op-ed article.

i have also taken courses on nicotine addiction and am a certified smoking cessation counselor. i'm educated, besides reading articles on the internet, in other words.

second hand smoke is WORSE for the recipient than it is for the smoker. you see the second hand smoke inhaler doesn't have the benefit of a filter like a smoker does.

for every article you can produce that poo poos the dangers of second hand smoke i can find one to counter it. believe what you want, you will anyways.

non-smoker/former smoker who thinks the laws wrong.


fsck articles, go to the studies themselves. SHS is not as bad as it's made out to be.


you don't have the freedom to go to any bar/restuarant and not be exposed to smoke for the same reason you don't have the freedom to go to any home and not be expose to smoke, the same reason you don't have the freedom to go to any xxxx and not be exposed to peanuts/trans-fat/harmfull stress etc.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: meltdown75

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

why is everyone here so damn confrontational?

all i meant was the province is losing casino money because of their anti-smoking legislation. it's just a statement. is that ok with you? can i fucking post something here without being debated?

YOU JUST SHUT YOUR FACE!

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: sirjonk
Greatest nanny legislation the govt has ever passed.

Sure...if you are a non-smoker. You realize that there will be someone else posting that exact same thing if say all unhealthy food were to be banned too right? Next, you will also have another person say that if there is a ban on all forms of birth control. After that, it will be porn on the internet. Need I go on?

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: kranky
I don't go to bars where smoking is allowed, but it's ridiculous that they made it illegal. If a business owner wants to allow smoking in his place, it should be his choice.

beat met to it.

I am not sure if you meant beat me to it, or beat meat to it.

was going to post that.

BTW, Alky. Real men don't drink water passed as Beer. That seems to be your taste. I prefer something above the 4% alcohol level, and that actually tastes like beer is supposed to taste

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: meltdown75
the whole province here is smoke-free. you can only smoke in designated areas and certainly not in bars / restaurants.

i bet the gov't is kicking themselves now though, since their casino revenues are being lost to Americans that refuse to visit casinos that don't allow smoking. they should have made an exception with casinos. no one wants to gamble without a ciggy!

I don't want to gamble next to someone who is smoking. And I have money to gamble. I don't see your logic.

son, $20 is not gambling.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: Flash1969
Smokers suck

"If she smokes, she pokes."

 

[scott916]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
so open a bar in your own home.
i've already stated what i want.

TBH, what you want is for everyone to bend to your will because you choose not to smoke. Guess what, some bars have naked chicks in them. If you don't want to see tits, don't go to a titty bar. If you don't want to have to deal with second hand smoke, go to a bar that doesn't allow smoking. You're simply stating you have more of a right to have things your way because you feel the other perspective is wrong.

The issue here isn't that most people feel that smokers should be able to smoke wherever they want. The issue is that it should be up to the owner of the establishment and its principal patrons rather than the government. I for one smoke occasionally, but I would prefer to have the bar area be smoke free or at least sectioned. However, if there was a bar that I enjoyed that allowed smoking, I would certainly support the decision of the bar's owner and patronize it if I still so chose. If the smoking was such an issue that I couldn't stand it, I'd go somewhere else. It's quite simple, really.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: scott916
TBH, what you want is for everyone to bend to your will because you choose not to smoke.

TBH, what you want is for everyone to bend to your will because you choose to smoke.