| Author |
Topic: Non Smoking Bars |
Patrick Thirsk
From:
Lancashire U.K.
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 5:55 am |
|
| Thats right Archie, I'm in Wales....but only about 300 yards from the English border!!. Today's papers say we should be following the ban in due course, Quicker the better..............Pat |
|
|
|
Cliff Kane
From:
the late great golden state
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 7:18 am
|
|
| Now, if they would only do something about the crap me and my family have to breath every day living in southern California. More kids are getting asthema each year here, it's totally gross. It would be nice to see a real response applied to the air that everyone has to breath down here. I know that there are regulations, but it is very bad, and it doesn't seem to be getting better. Compared to air polution in southern California, the achievement of a healthier environment due to smoking bans seems like a red herring. |
|
|
|
Jon Jaffe
From:
Austin, Texas
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 7:38 am
|
|
| Cliff, do not blame the asthma entirely on the environmental air. Well done prospective studies on children in Switzerland, measured animal E coli levels. The children with the highest levels lived with animals. Their incidence and severity of asthma was significantly less regardless of an urban or rural environment. So move to avocado country, and get some goats and dogs for your kids to play with. You will have more time to teach them pedal steel guitar. |
|
|
|
Cliff Kane
From:
the late great golden state
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 8:21 am
|
|
Hi Jon,
that's pretty interesting...so having e coli reduces asthma? Hmmm, choices, choices.  |
|
|
|
John Cox
From:
Texas, USA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 9:34 am
|
|
| The way I see it, we've got other problems and are porblably going to go due to other things that have yet to be factored in. We've got Dow Chemical poisoning our water, Archer Daniel Millions puting god knows what in our food. J.C. |
|
|
|
Chris Schlotzhauer
From:
Colleyville, Tx. USA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 9:59 am
|
|
| The problem I have with this whole issue is they are usually driven by one councilperson or mayor that have issues with smoking. They get an ordinance past the council without a vote from the public. It's not right that one person with an agenda to force a private business to ban a legal activity. Period! |
|
|
|
Lawrence Sullivan
From:
Granite City, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 10:45 am
|
|
To me this whole issue comes down to the idea if I cant' convince you of my of my point of view then I will force you to conform with it.
As a smoker I have no objection to not smoking around someone who objects to it, on the other hand I see no reason that a person should not be allowed to open a business that allows smoking as long as he provides clear notice to the public that smoking does occur in this establishment and if you seek employment here smoking is allowed here, then no one is forced to work at or patronize
the place except by choice
Too much this country is bending to organizations that want to enforce their beliefs on everyone What is next, will PETA and ELF be allowed to control what you eat, wear and build your house out of??
Respectfully,
Larry |
|
|
|
Webb Kline
From:
Orangeville, PA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 12:06 pm
|
|
Good points, Larry. I understand where you're coming from. But, on this topic, smokers are the ones who force themselves on nonsmokers. Nonsmokers aren't doing anything, but breathing noxious fumes that they shouldn't have to breathe in public.
That is a whole world of difference from whether or not someone eats an animal in front of us or not.
Still, I know of some fine restaurants locally who don't allow smoking and they are among the busiest around. They have great food, great service and give nonsmokers a place to enjoy a night out without coming home smelling like a disgusting ashtray. That would be the good old American way before the days of politcal correctness, environmentalist whackos, welfare, and affirmative action.
Things are getting too complicated for this old goat. I have a well-preserved 87 Bronco II, and I love having to unlock it with a key. It never blows its horn and flashes its lights at me as I am walking away from it,and people wonder what I'm doing when it snows and I get out and turn the centers of my hubs. Ahh for the good ole' days....
|
|
|
|
Bill McCloskey
From:
Nanuet, NY
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 12:07 pm
|
|
| With all due respect that idea that a person can open a business and do what they want is preposterous. Do you really want to go back to the days of child labor, unsafe working conditions, 18 hour work days. Business are always subject to public health concerns. That is why we have building codes: so people don't get trapped in burning buildings. That is why we have work place codes so that workers do not have to put up with dangers to their health. Seat belts save lives. The idea that you can say: go work someplace else is just wrong. Some people don't have an option. |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 12:20 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| on the other hand I see no reason that a person should not be allowed to open a business that allows smoking as long as he provides clear notice to the public that smoking does occur in this establishment and if you seek employment here smoking is allowed here, then no one is forced to work at or patronize the place except by choice. |
This gets to the heart of the differences in view here. The problem with this reasoning, IMO, is that work is not an "optional" thing. That is why we have workplace standards, and clean air is just one component. If one really believes the above reasoning, then one should argue that chemical factories, mines, and other workplaces should have no safety or air quality standards either. Respectfully, that dog just will not hunt. Witness the outrage at recent mining disasters. IMO, employee litigation against bar owners who don't maintain reasonable air quality standards is an easy wedge to force this issue.
There is another issue. In most places (certainly here in PA), liquor licenses are tightly controlled, and assigned temporarily, "in the public interest". The same goes pretty much for restauranteur licenses, although that is usually much less tightly controlled. I think it's fine if a privately run (no employees), private club wants to permit smoking. Many places, they don't even need a liquor license for that. But the idea that liquor license holders, the only public establishments where liquor can be served, can exclude people who can't, for whatever reason, deal with high smoke levels, is just wrong and, IMO, illegal. 20-30 years of changing attitudes and laws about accessibility of public places to everybody has rendered the old "I'll just do whatever I bloody well please with my public place" concept obsolete.
I would be the first to argue that if it's possible to enforce air quality standards, and permit bar/restaurant owners to install serious ventilation equipment and subject themselves to reasonable air quality testing, then that would be preferable to an outright ban. But I think this is very difficult to instrument and administer, and probably impractical. [This message was edited by Dave Mudgett on 15 February 2006 at 12:22 PM.] |
|
|
|
Travis Bernhardt
From:
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 12:37 pm
|
|
RE the impracticality of ventilation systems, in Vancouver some places have a special designated room for smokers that I don't think employees have to go into if they don't want. It makes a sort of sense, but in reality it doesn't really work, as the smoke invariably defeats the poorly sealed room and makes its way out into the main area.
A perfectly sealed room with a great ventilation system that workers didn't have to go into would be a satisfactory solution in theory. But of course workers probably do end up in there anyways, and the chances of the room being properly sealed are iffy at best, and I doubt most club owners will want to spring for a proper ventilation system...
Assuming good enforcement I could live with the seperate room scenario. Of course, here in Vancouver enforcement is... perhaps not entirely what one would hope for (but that's true no matter what the law--when there was a total smoking ban some places still allowed smoking and there was never anything done about it).
My preference is for a total smoking ban. I could never go to bars or clubs--now I can, and occasionally I even do (which is how I know about the smoking rooms thing).
-Travis |
|
|
|
Ian Finlay
From:
Kenton, UK
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 3:03 pm
|
|
The good news (for me) is that the UK Government just banned smoking in public bars and clubs AND private members clubs. I've had enough of coming home with my clothes stinking of smoke. And I remember clearly being woken up in the mornings by my Dad's hacking smokers cough. Ugh.
Ian |
|
|
|
Lawrence Sullivan
From:
Granite City, Illinois, USA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 3:10 pm
|
|
With due respect for everyones opinions on the subject of smoking in public and private places in no way was I advocating changing mining safety laws or work place safety regulations or being forced to work above and beyond a normal workday,or taking seat belts out of automobiles, and yes most of us do have to work somewhere but we do have some choice as to where we do work, where we eat and where we go for entertainment
By allowing a businessman to open a business that accomodates the smokers is not going to infringe on anyones rights, there are enough smokers to fill any jobs available and there can be enough non smoking establishments to accomodate all the non smokers too It can be done.
If the country as a whole wants to go completely to non smoking I can go to strictly drive throughs or carry outs eateries and get my entertainment from CDs and tapes but by banning folks like me don't complain if I limit the dollars I spend
Respectfully
Larry |
|
|
|
Bill McCloskey
From:
Nanuet, NY
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 3:15 pm
|
|
"If the country as a whole wants to go completely to non smoking I can go to strictly drive throughs or carry outs eateries and get my entertainment from CDs and tapes"
If you are seriously resticting the places you go, eat in, or go to for entertainment in based on whether you can smoke, perhaps you ought to think about that and the addiction that is causing it. That is a tremendously sad comment and I thank god I quit smoking 25 years ago.
"no way was I advocating changing mining safety laws or work place safety regulations "
With all due respect, that is exactly what you are advocating. This is a work safty issue. If you can ignore forcing workers to breath carbon monoxide in the workspace, the rest follows.
Get on the patch dude and save your life.[This message was edited by Bill McCloskey on 15 February 2006 at 03:18 PM.] [This message was edited by Bill McCloskey on 15 February 2006 at 03:22 PM.] |
|
|
|
Kevin Hatton
From:
Buffalo, N.Y.
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 3:20 pm
|
|
| Bill, I agree with you. This is a public safety issue. Smoking has been proven dangerous to public health. |
|
|
|
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 3:58 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| if you seek employment here smoking is allowed here, then no one is forced to work at ...the place |
Except musicians.
I suppose we have the choice if being unemployed, or finding another profession. But if we want to earn a living at our chosen craft, we have to play in bars, and if those bars allow smoking, we have no choice but to expose ourselves to the poison gas known as second hand smoke. |
|
|
|
Damir Besic
From:
Nashville,TN.
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 6:17 pm
|
|
the "second hand smoke" is a bigest krack of bull I have ever heard.My father in law is 95 and he still smokes.If I go to the bar I want to have a cigarette and a beer,.If I ever open a bar it will be free to smoke free to drink and free to carry your gun in if you like (as long as you don`t drink).I was born in communnist country and I had my share of socialists and communists.This is a free country,if you like to smoke,my God ,then you go ahead and smoke.California....that is a separate story all together.
Db
------------------
"Promat"
~when tone matters~
http://hometown.aol.com/damirzanne2/PROMAT.html
|
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 6:19 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| yes most of us do have to work somewhere but we do have some choice as to where we do work, ... |
Why should some workplaces be required to have regulations on safety and clean air and others not? What makes restaurants and bars so special that we should subject their workers to cigarette smoke, when we don't make that requirement in any other area?
| Quote: |
| ... there are enough smokers to fill any jobs available and there can be enough non smoking establishments to accomodate all the non smokers too It can be done. |
First, let me understand this - do you really advocate that being a smoker should be a condition of employment in bars?
Second, I believe that you are mistaken that there are necessarily plenty of music venues with liquor licenses that don't allow smoking. Here, and in many places, there are absolutely none. I mean zero. One restaurant with a bar opens up the restaurant section every once in a while for a touring blues or jazz act and makes smokers go back to the bar, which actually, I consider quite reasonable. But realistically, the only way anybody can work or play music in a liquor-serving establishment here is to deal with smoke, period. I know, I've played almost every place there is around here in the last 20 years.
I agree that there are ways to accomodate both smokers and non-smokers. But without laws, to date, the only solution offered to non-smokers is to simply "stay outta the bars". Respectfully, that just doesn't cut it anymore and never really did. IMHO. |
|
|
|
Bill McCloskey
From:
Nanuet, NY
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 6:48 pm
|
|
"the "second hand smoke" is a bigest krack of bull I have ever heard."
Damir, when your heads that far down in the freaking sand, it helps filter out some of that second hand smoke.
|
|
|
|
Jim Sliff
From:
Lawndale California, USA
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 6:49 pm
|
|
"there are enough smokers to fill any jobs available"
Impossible to do. There would be immediate lawsuits regarding discrimination against non-smokers who want to work there, but couldn't do so safely.
Give it up, folks. It's a health issue that WILL continue to be pressed until it's gone. Every argument to the contrary gets blown apart.
You may not like it - but that's the way it is. |
|
|
|
Travis Bernhardt
From:
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
|
Posted 15 Feb 2006 11:02 pm
|
|
Damir said: "the "second hand smoke" is a bigest krack of bull I have ever heard."
On what basis do you make that claim?
-Travis |
|
|
|
Mike Perlowin
From:
Los Angeles CA
|
Posted 16 Feb 2006 3:46 am
|
|
| Quote: |
| I had my share of socialists and communists. This is a free country,if you like to smoke,my God ,then you go ahead and smoke. |
How do you feel about traffic laws that us to obey speed limits or stop at red lights? Is that also communism?
Every time a law is passed that somebody doesn't like they yell "SOCIALIST" and "COMMUNIST" and "THEY'RE TAKING AWAY OUR FREEDOM.
Well guess what. Freedom doesn't give anybody the right to harm others, and public safety laws are not examples of a totalitarian government. And this IS a public safety issue.
Even the most ardant NRA supporter does not support the "freedom" to fire a shotgun into a crowd.
|
|
|
|
Bill McCloskey
From:
Nanuet, NY
|
Posted 16 Feb 2006 4:03 am
|
|
hmm...
Maybe he's trying to spring a communist plot on us: give us all lung cancer so his comrades can take over. |
|
|
|
John McGann
From:
Boston, Massachusetts, USA * R.I.P.
|
Posted 16 Feb 2006 6:27 am
|
|
Congratulations to those who beat the reaper (so far). I have a 75 year old pal who smokes. I also had a 42 year old smoker pal who died of lung cancer.
Some get lucky and beat the odds. MOST DON'T.
Statistics don't mean ß?ˆ† if it happens to you or a loved one.
Politically correct? How about common sense? You wanna smoke? Go for it! Just don't do it in my face, or my family's face![This message was edited by John McGann on 16 February 2006 at 06:30 AM.] |
|
|
|
John Ummel
From:
Arlington, WA.
|
Posted 16 Feb 2006 7:07 am
|
|
| In 1991 I sat in the doctor's office. She walked in with my chest X-ray & told me I had pneumonia. The oxygen in my blood was dangerously low. I looked like I was already dead. (I was playing 6 nights a week in the local smokey bar, had been for going on 20 years)I asked how long I would be out from work. She asked what I did for a living. I told her...she just looked at my eyes and said "John, you gotta get outa there, its gonna kill you." I got out. I've only just started playing in clubs again as Washington state has made them smoke free. Kid yourself if you want, 2nd hand smoke is a killer. |
|
|
|
