I'm taking a stand!

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 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.

what kind of danger do tits present to me? maybe if i get hit hard enough with them in the face i'll get a couple of shiners?
topless women and smoking... not a fair comparison.

i don't want everyone to bend to my will. i just don't want to be exposed to their smoke.
i've already said i am selfish about this, and that smokers are just as selfish. what more can i say?

And as has been said many a time, you don't have to go to smoking establishments. If they cater to smokers, it's who they prefer to cater to.

Obviously they are not catering to you then. =)

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 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.

what kind of danger do tits present to me? maybe if i get hit hard enough with them in the face i'll get a couple of shiners?
topless women and smoking... not a fair comparison.

i don't want everyone to bend to my will. i just don't want to be exposed to their smoke.
i've already said i am selfish about this, and that smokers are just as selfish. what more can i say?

And as has been said many a time, you don't have to go to smoking establishments. If they cater to smokers, it's who they prefer to cater to.

Obviously they are not catering to you then. =)

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

And if the property owner decided only to cater to whites? Once you allow regulation of PUBLICLY accessable property, the line simply becomes what regulation is ok. Owner's get choices about somethings, no choice about other things.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 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.

what kind of danger do tits present to me? maybe if i get hit hard enough with them in the face i'll get a couple of shiners?
topless women and smoking... not a fair comparison.

i don't want everyone to bend to my will. i just don't want to be exposed to their smoke.
i've already said i am selfish about this, and that smokers are just as selfish. what more can i say?

And as has been said many a time, you don't have to go to smoking establishments. If they cater to smokers, it's who they prefer to cater to.

Obviously they are not catering to you then. =)

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

this has been addressed. i have answered it already. i used a "roomful of hookers" as good for business too. find that post.

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 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.

what kind of danger do tits present to me? maybe if i get hit hard enough with them in the face i'll get a couple of shiners?
topless women and smoking... not a fair comparison.

i don't want everyone to bend to my will. i just don't want to be exposed to their smoke.
i've already said i am selfish about this, and that smokers are just as selfish. what more can i say?

And as has been said many a time, you don't have to go to smoking establishments. If they cater to smokers, it's who they prefer to cater to.

Obviously they are not catering to you then. =)

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

And if the property owner decided only to cater to whites?

You don't think there are places like this?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: TruePaige
No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

And if the property owner decided only to cater to whites?

You don't think there are places like this?

De facto maybe, by law, no.

 

[Xavier434]

How about this one? Don't live in an area which makes you so unhappy because there is no public bar to go to which allows/disallows smoking depending on your preference. There is a very good reason why I choose to live in a city. I like variety.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 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.

what kind of danger do tits present to me? maybe if i get hit hard enough with them in the face i'll get a couple of shiners?
topless women and smoking... not a fair comparison.

i don't want everyone to bend to my will. i just don't want to be exposed to their smoke.
i've already said i am selfish about this, and that smokers are just as selfish. what more can i say?

And as has been said many a time, you don't have to go to smoking establishments. If they cater to smokers, it's who they prefer to cater to.

Obviously they are not catering to you then. =)

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

And if the property owner decided only to cater to whites?

..wow..

That's unchangeable coloration of the skin vs Actions that may or may not bug others.


Non smokers can come into a smoking bar if they want, and vice versa, they just will have to deal with the action or inaction of the other party.


I should of known someone would try and bring racism into this.

 

[gorbs]

i am sure that when i have had enough of smoking i will make the decision to quit. no disrespect intended to you just wondering why. you must be in a healthcare related field so i can understand you being passionate about this subject.

oh and stop using the silicon loaded breasts and you won't get any more black eyes lol. jk.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

How about this one? Don't live in an area which makes you so unhappy because there is no public bar to go to which allows/disallows smoking depending on your preference. There is a very good reason why I choose to live in a city. I like variety.

:thumbsup:

Be happy = Win.

Government running your life = Bad.

UK = Bad. It's just science. =p

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

How about this one? Don't live in an area which makes you so unhappy because there is no public bar to go to which allows/disallows smoking depending on your preference. There is a very good reason why I choose to live in a city. I like variety.

i'm not unhappy.

so now i have to *move* so i can find a non-smoking bar/restaurant. i can't live where i want to b/c i like the non-existent crime rate, the country air, the slower pace of life...
i have to move to a big city to get clean indoor air.

hmmm.... i see exactly what you are saying, and it's not a solution.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: gorbs
i am sure that when i have had enough of smoking i will make the decision to quit. no disrespect intended to you just wondering why. you must be in a healthcare related field so i can understand you being passionate about this subject.

oh and stop using the silicon loaded breasts and you won't get any more black eyes lol. jk.

lol, i like you.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: BudAshes
They should ban drinking at bars too. Alcohol is bad for you.

That's not the point. I could see banning alcohol if everyone who drank it in turn immediately peed all over everyone else..

People still drink and drive, or drink and fight, or drink do any other of dumb things which present just as great of a threat as second hand smoke.

NakedFrog, you're one of the brighter posters on here.. but that just me me lol, isn't that shit illegal too?

I don't think smokers, who are desensitized to the smells and irritants of sh smoke, realize that non smokers want to sucker punch them the shit smells so bad when the blow smoke in their direction. It makes my eyes water, my nose itch, my clothes stink, my hair stink, and it makes breathing more difficult. Just bout the only other thing that could do that would taking a dump on my head. I'd break somebody's kneecaps for that.

Whenever I go out to a bar, and someone is smoking and their ss smoke comes in my direction, my first thought is "fucking asshole insensitive prick!"

I'm just pointing out that alcohol negatively effects others who haven't imbibed as well
Hell, even the tortures of drunken karaoke nearly justify banning alcohol.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i'm not unhappy.

so now i have to *move* so i can find a non-smoking bar/restaurant. i can't live where i want to b/c i like the non-existent crime rate, the country air, the slower pace of life...
i have to move to a big city to get clean indoor air.

hmmm.... i see exactly what you are saying, and it's not a solution.

You can't have your cake and eat it too without invoking a law which is walking the same path as the UK walked which is what this is all about in terms of those arguing against you. If you choose to live in a small town like that then you are also choosing to give up on a variety of opportunities and choices because that is how it works in places like that.

To be honest, that really isn't my preferred solution either although it makes a lot more sense than the one you are proposing. I prefer the one Florida uses.

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: OdiN
Compromise = both sides lose

No...that's called a bad compromise. Read my posts about how Florida handles this problem. They are using a great compromise. Both the smokers and non-smokers are very content here. Most of them believe that both sides win.

I don't know where that post is....this thread is a mess.

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: BudAshes
They should ban drinking at bars too. Alcohol is bad for you.

That's not the point. I could see banning alcohol if everyone who drank it in turn immediately peed all over everyone else..

People still drink and drive, or drink and fight, or drink do any other of dumb things which present just as great of a threat as second hand smoke.

NakedFrog, you're one of the brighter posters on here.. but that just me me lol, isn't that shit illegal too?

I don't think smokers, who are desensitized to the smells and irritants of sh smoke, realize that non smokers want to sucker punch them the shit smells so bad when the blow smoke in their direction. It makes my eyes water, my nose itch, my clothes stink, my hair stink, and it makes breathing more difficult. Just bout the only other thing that could do that would taking a dump on my head. I'd break somebody's kneecaps for that.

Whenever I go out to a bar, and someone is smoking and their ss smoke comes in my direction, my first thought is "fucking asshole insensitive prick!"

I'm just pointing out that alcohol negatively effects others who haven't imbibed as well
Hell, even the tortures of drunken karaoke nearly justify banning alcohol.

I personally think alcohol should be illegal. Society, imho, just can't handle it.

 

[nakedfrog]

At best, this should be decided on a city/county level and voted on by the people that live there.

 

[Baked]

Saw some hot ladies smoking outside the building yesterday. I love smoking hot ladies.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: OdiN
Compromise = both sides lose

No...that's called a bad compromise. Read my posts about how Florida handles this problem. They are using a great compromise. Both the smokers and non-smokers are very content here. Most of them believe that both sides win.

I don't know where that post is....this thread is a mess.

Here you go. There were basically two.

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.

Originally posted by: Xavier434
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.

 

[scott916]

Originally posted by: 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.

You're misinterpreting my post. I said I hardly smoke, and if given the choice, I would prefer to patronize a bar that people didn't smoke at. My point is that the choice is mine whether I choose to drink at a bar that allows smoking that I otherwise enjoy. I feel that if the OWNER chooses to allow smoking, thats their choice, I don't feel that the simple fact that I am a paying customer allows me to dictate what he/she can or cannot allow at their establishment.

Speak with your dollars, people, not by stomping your feet and forcing upon others your idea of the way things should be.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: TechBoyJK

Originally posted by: BudAshes
They should ban drinking at bars too. Alcohol is bad for you.

That's not the point. I could see banning alcohol if everyone who drank it in turn immediately peed all over everyone else..

People still drink and drive, or drink and fight, or drink do any other of dumb things which present just as great of a threat as second hand smoke.

NakedFrog, you're one of the brighter posters on here.. but that just me me lol, isn't that shit illegal too?

I don't think smokers, who are desensitized to the smells and irritants of sh smoke, realize that non smokers want to sucker punch them the shit smells so bad when the blow smoke in their direction. It makes my eyes water, my nose itch, my clothes stink, my hair stink, and it makes breathing more difficult. Just bout the only other thing that could do that would taking a dump on my head. I'd break somebody's kneecaps for that.

Whenever I go out to a bar, and someone is smoking and their ss smoke comes in my direction, my first thought is "fucking asshole insensitive prick!"

I'm just pointing out that alcohol negatively effects others who haven't imbibed as well
Hell, even the tortures of drunken karaoke nearly justify banning alcohol.

I personally think alcohol should be illegal. Society, imho, just can't handle it.

Society can't handle it NOT being legal either, so we're kinda boned

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: OdiN
The thing is - it's a rights thing.

I have a right to breath smoke-free air.

Smokers have a right to smoke.

The two rights are contradictory to each other. So who's is more important? I see things as since smoking is a health risk, I shouldn't be subjected to it. If you want to ruin your own health and do something which is bad for your body, that's fine. I dont' care. But your actions shouldn't be allowed to also subject me to that same substance which is bad for my health. People have said well people eat bad food which is bad for them, ban that too! Well....you eating horribly doesn't affect my body, so it's not at all the same.

The two rights are indeed contradictory. But you're missing a vital piece of the equation: location. If you were trying to get smoking banned in public places, you'd have a legitimate claim that since smoking poses a health risk, it should not be allowed in places where non-smokers are likely to congregate. That all changes when you move into private property. If a bar keeps its doors and windows shut so that virtually no smoke escapes (as they should), the smoke is not entering the public air, and is only affecting people who choose to be patrons of that particular establishment. If you don't want to be subjected to that smoke, you are not required to enter said establishment and breathe the air. If enough people decide the smoke it too offensive, the bar will lose money, and reevaluate its policy on allowing smoking.

Originally posted by: OdiN
You say it's about the rights of property owners. I doubt there would be a single bar which, if allowed, would decide to not allow smoking over allowing smoking. Not that I care much personally, because I rarely go to bars.

I can think of several bars in my neighborhood which, voluntarily, do not allow smoking (one does after 10pm, but virtually no one ever smokes in there; perhaps because the bartenders don't leave the ashtrays out, so no one thinks it's allowed). There are plenty of establishments where you can go and enjoy a drink without dealing with the foul stench of cigarettes (I'm not a smoker).

Originally posted by: OdiN
I think smoking should be banned in public - even outdoors, except for perhaps designated areas.

Why? Becuase walking around San Fran or something and trying to enjoy the nice bay air only to have that ruined by smokers is not something I found enjoyable. Smoke is very offensive to me, it causes me to cough badly.

Imagine a horribly offensive odor and airborne substance which causes you to cough and be extremely uncomfortable. Now imagine that many people all around you secrete this and cause you discomfort. Would you like that? Smokers don't care because....well they smoke and it doesn't bother them. But they don't stop to think (most at least) about what it does to others, and they don't care. But if the situations were reversed I think you wouldn't mind a ban.

I am more in line with banning smoking in public places. The public has a right to be secure in their health, and smoking has been proven to be detrimental to health. What people choose to do in private settings is completely different. If people want to subject themselves to a known carcinogen, a product which is killing them as they use it, if they are doing it in a private place, then let them be. Bars are not public property. You have every right to not frequent an establishment because it allows a behavior that you detest.

The other night I was talking to someone in a bar, and she told me about a place in my town which is essentially an orgy club. The club is divided into several different areas; a voyeur room, where you can simply watch others "play," a room in which you are expected to join in, and private rooms for those who desire specific company. There are fetish events in bars around town on a rotating basis which feature acts that I find personally repulsive (suspensions and BDSM play). I know not to frequent those locations when such events are happening; I don't demand the government stop these people from having their fun so that I may feel more comfortable in someone else's establishment. What right do I have to tell other people that what they choose to do for enjoyment in a private establishment is wrong (I draw the line at obvious criminal acts, such as rape, murder, child pornography, etc., but as smoking is still legal, I don't really think it qualifies)?

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

How about this one? Don't live in an area which makes you so unhappy because there is no public bar to go to which allows/disallows smoking depending on your preference. There is a very good reason why I choose to live in a city. I like variety.

i'm not unhappy.

so now i have to *move* so i can find a non-smoking bar/restaurant. i can't live where i want to b/c i like the non-existent crime rate, the country air, the slower pace of life...
i have to move to a big city to get clean indoor air.

hmmm.... i see exactly what you are saying, and it's not a solution.

WTF is this. So you want them to ban smoking and force everyone else to move away from those same things if they want to find a bar that will allow smoking?

Coming from a non-smoker here and I don't like the smell of smoke at all. Your rights end when they start infringing on other's rights.

I hate this kind of thought even on subjects I don't agree with (like smoking). Its the same kind of thinking that started all this nanny legislature that creates people who rely on the government on everything and then wonder why they have no rights left.

What if the tables were turned and there were more smokers and they were creating laws banning establishments from having non-smoking zones?

 

[OdiN]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: OdiN

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: OdiN
Compromise = both sides lose

No...that's called a bad compromise. Read my posts about how Florida handles this problem. They are using a great compromise. Both the smokers and non-smokers are very content here. Most of them believe that both sides win.

I don't know where that post is....this thread is a mess.

Here you go. There were basically two.

Okay...well that doesn't make sense. So restaurant = no smoking because of the food. Bar = smoking.

So what if I wanted to go to a bar (not a bar & grill type of thing) and not have to deal with smoking? Oh...can't. Don't see how that is a great compromise.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: moshquerade

what if you live in a one horse town and there are only a couple of bars/restaurants in the area? none of them are non-smoking b/c there is no ban. so i should just stay home?
see.... you think this is all easily solved. it's not.

Actually, if no one in your town wants to have anywhere for non-smokers to drink, that is their prerogative, and you should find something else to do or drink elsewhere.

you are making the same damn argument i have (insert "smokers" where you put "non-smokers" and yet you don't think i should have an argument.

No, I also believe if no bar in a town wants to cater to smokers, that is their choice.

I think the bar owner has the right to choose.

It's not about what the people pick. It's what the PROPERTY OWNER wants.

Don't you see that? It's not confusing. It's up to the owner to make the choice that is in his best interest.

How about this one? Don't live in an area which makes you so unhappy because there is no public bar to go to which allows/disallows smoking depending on your preference. There is a very good reason why I choose to live in a city. I like variety.

i'm not unhappy.

so now i have to *move* so i can find a non-smoking bar/restaurant. i can't live where i want to b/c i like the non-existent crime rate, the country air, the slower pace of life...
i have to move to a big city to get clean indoor air.

hmmm.... i see exactly what you are saying, and it's not a solution.

What if the tables were turned and there were more smokers and they were creating laws banning establishments from having non-smoking zones?

lol, that pretty much has been going on for years minus it being a law.

 

[hellfreeze]

Originally posted by: elmer92413
/violin

:thumbsup: