Smoking Ordinance--Your Thoughts?

John Russell · From: Austin, Texas

There's been lots of hoopla and heated discussion about this subject--I wonder what the consensus is among country musicians or musicians of any style. I believe it passed at the last city council meeting but could be overturned when the new mayor and councilman take office in a few weeks.

I don't think it's an open and shut case, as with most controversies. Having played bars and restaurants for many, many years, I always enjoy a place with clean air. In fact the Broken Spoke here in Austin, is such a place. It's not due to any ban on smoking, the clientele generally doesn't smoke.

I know it's the law in Calif. and N.Y.C. How has the business responded? I'm not sure if I favor a strict ordinance to ban all smoking but I, for one, would patronize the live music scene more if there were less smoke. --JR

Jim Smith · From: Midlothian, TX, USA

Big Balls of Cowtown in the Fort Worth Stockyards has been smoke free since the first of the year, due to the smoke bothering the owners. Their crowds are way down, some bands now refuse to play there, and the club is now up for sale.

As a smoker, I'm somewhat prejudiced, but smoking and drinking seem to go together, especially with country music.

Orville Johnson · From: Seattle, Washington, USA

i sure appreciate playing in non-smoking venues. i think it is a boon to the music places because a lot of people don't like being bathed in someone's second hand smoke while enjoying the music and they'll stay home instead. one place i played went non-smoking due to the employees complaining about their workplace being smoke filled. i talked to the owner and he was very worried about the effect on his biz. spoke to him two months after he did it and his bizness was better by half. and for those who think they have a "right" to smoke in public places, your claim does not supersede the right of people who have to work in such places to breathe clean air. do it at home, in your car, outside but i'm glad for the movement to restrict it in public places. i used to smoke myself but i had the courtesy to do it in places where it didn't bother others.

Ken Lang · From: Simi Valley, Ca

The smoking laws in California suck, not to mention the price of smokes thanks to the gov. and that Brooks butthead who raised the price by $5 a carton and all the money sits in a bank for want of a reasonable plan of what to do with it.

That said:
I do enjoy a meal in a resturant without someone elses' smoke in my face.

The public buildings seem cleaner.

Even my office is cleaner without ashtrays and butts spilling over the desk. In addition, I do smoke less.

At home I no longer smoke in the house, save rare ocassions, but I do reserve the garage/studio for my domain where it's shut your mouth about smoking. Period.

Don't play in bars anymore. No problem there.

Like all shrinking California smokers, we sneak off somewhere, cover our faces, wear trenchcoats and disguises so we as second class sub-humanoids can enjoy the pleasure of a smoke. All the people who don't like it may go intercourse themselves.

Frank Parish · From: Nashville,Tn. USA

I don't smoke anymore and never will again but that's me not everyone else. I will say that after cleaning a pair of old Session 400's that were in a bar for more than ten years it's pretty bad what smoking can do to them not to mention your lungs. I couldn't bring those amps in the house without a thorough cleaning top to bottom. If I were still a smoker I wouldn't go where smoking was banned.

Gary Walker · From: Morro Bay, CA

I think it's a breath of fresh air more ways than one.

Jesse Pearson · From: San Diego , CA

If you've ever had a girlfriend who worked all night in a bar and you don't smoke, you'd know how bad that second hand smoke is. I have to admit that I only go to bars if someone is paying me to be there anymore, but it sure is nice not getting home and having my clothes smell like a smoking jacket in the morning.

Jeff A. Smith · From: Angola,Ind. U.S.A.

The smoking regulations, along with the blanket media propaganda from anti-smoking groups, are starting to make headway here in Indiana.

I smoked for 15 years, but quit about 16 years ago. That's long enough for me to again be bothered by intense smoking around me, and also the residue it leaves on my clothing and equipment (if I'm playing somewhere).

Having said that, I would never be part of a movement to force owners of privately-owned property to ban smoking. I don't believe the owner of a business owes anyone a smokeless job, or a place to enjoy themselves. It's the owner's initiative and capital behind the business, rather than government doing them a favor by letting them run the place. Small businesses don't grow on trees, and it takes guts to start and run one. Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean has said "small business is our future." The rights of these people should be respected.

Individual rights are usually eroded through giving comfort or security to someone; but not everyone's idea of a quality life is one in which government guarantees their comfort and security. On the contrary, some consider this slavery. Is it right for one group to force their idea of what a quality life is on the other?

Speaking for myself, I'd rather live in a riskier world, keep my freedom, and choose to patronize businesses who are astute enough to voluntarily give non-smoking people what they want. Maybe in each town there will be enough smokers to support their own bars and restaurants; if not, they'll have to learn to do without when they go out to eat or drink.

Government bans on drinking may be just around the corner. After all, irresponsible drinking causes more innocent deaths than smoking ever will. As far as places to eat, aren't they already starting to ban certain junk foods in California, or at least talk about it?

Of course public property is a whole other situation.

Having said all of the above, if it were possible for all of the citizens in a state such as California to approve smoking regulations over their own private property, I would say more power to them. This uniformity, if desired, might be pursued over time in a way respecting of individual freedom, through voluntary group contracts governing smoking in property that is owned or sold. Property owners who didn't want to go along could even be pressured to do so, through the right of contract signees and other sympathetic citizens to not patronize or sell to the non-signing person. (Of course you need to also honor voluntary association for this to work.

)

I'd like to see more diversity among states, in the way citizens decide to regulate private property and behavior. I'm against a one-size-fits-all federal system of regulation, or non-regulation, but that's where we've been headed.

[This message was edited by Jeff A. Smith on 17 June 2003 at 11:02 PM.]

[This message was edited by Jeff A. Smith on 17 June 2003 at 11:12 PM.]

chas smith R.I.P. · From: Encino, CA, USA

quote:
All the people who don't like it may go intercourse themselves.

It probably don't hurt too bad and if you do it enough you'll probably get used to it.

I play in California bars and people still smoke in the ones I play in. I would prefer that they didn't, but I've smelled worse things. I smoked for 20 years and I quit a long time ago, I've also buried three family members who died of smoking related illnesses and that's not how I want to go out. It's an ugly death.

John Lacey · From: Black Diamond, Alberta, Canada

"Do I mind if you smoke? Heck no, just suck it in and blow it out your butt on the way home." Andy Greatrix

Ed Miller Jr · From: Coldwater,Mi USA

The Music store where I work is smoke free and has been for about 15 years. At the time two teachers smoked, now none do. The reason was two fold: First,the brand new guitars got filmy.Second, some guy thought the pick bowl sitting on the counter was an ashtray!

The owner had just locked the front door ( an inside keylock) when the bowl erupted. I heard "HOLY $#!t!"
as the boss steaked by me headed for the back door carrying this fire bowl.

That was the end of an era. The pick bowl is some kind of ceramic, we still use it.

Darwin Schrage, That was I believe; the only time I ever saw Bobby Hankins worried about something. It's funny now, but was scarry at the time.

[This message was edited by Ed Miller Jr on 18 June 2003 at 04:29 AM.]

JB Arnold · From: Longmont,Co,USA (deceased)

They're having this debate in Denver as well. I'm not thrilled about making decrees for owners of businesses, particularly ones where smoking goes hand in hand with drinking, and it's the bar business that keeps the door open. What surprises me is this-you'd think there would be enough support for non-smoking restraunts and bars that a city like Denver could support a few. A city wide ban will hurt everyone. I am bothered by the idea that some folks are saying-"well, I want to come to your place, but I don't like smoke, so you all have to go smoke free." If you don't like smoke, don't go to places that allow it! I agree with bans in other places where everyone has to go. But the local Pub isn't one of those. I quit smoking 15 years ago, but I'm not a Nazi about it. I will say, that the Dallas showroom was a more pleasant place to be without the smoke this year, and we generally avoid clubs for that reason, unless we can get a better fee for playing there. We'll sell out for the right price.

JB

------------------
Fulawka D-10 9&5
Fessenden D-10 8&8
Mullen Royal Precision D-10 8 & 5
"All in all, looking back, I'd have to say the best advice anyone ever gave me was 'Hands Up, Don't Move!"
www.johnbarnold.com/pedalsteel
www.buddycage.net

http://www.nrpsmusic.com/index.html

Arty Passes · From: Austin, TX

The argument about drinking and junk food doesn't relate, because you can drink and eat junk food without forcing others to. Of course, drunk driving affects others, but that's a different argument.
Some of my friends won't come out because of the smoke, but starting gigs past their bedtimes doesn't help either.
I'd like to see a more definitive study of how these laws have affected businesses - so far it's just anecdotal. We can all find an example to fit our side of the argument, but what's the whole story?
This is a tough issue - reasonable arguments can be made for both sides

Arty

JERRY THURMOND · From: sullivan mo u.s.a.

The total answer for this problem is to have a smoking section, with good air filter. Then every body is happy, lots of the Night clubs in this area have it that way, it works fine. Most clubs would go out of buss if such a law was passed. Remember people go in to a bar by choice. I owned a night club for six years, it was always my 1st concern to try an make every one happy, even though 75 per cent of the people who came in smoked.

CrowBear Schmitt · From: Ariege, - PairO'knees, - France

unfortunately, i'm a smoker and i like it.
(and not just the legal stuff either)
i totally respect those who don't wish to breath other peoples smoke.
that's why i smoke outside and away from them
even as a smoker, i prefer smoke free places especially clubs where the nites are long
on the break i step outside and light up.
at home i don't smoke, cause i feel that it would'nt be right for my kids to have to support ambient smoke.
my wife don't dig smoke either !
in my BearCave tho'i'm free to do as i please.
i do find it quite a bit xtreme to ban smoking all together like some states, counties, or towns have done in the US.
last but not least, the red Stone (Catlinite)Calumet which bonds a word, or sends a prayer should be highly respected.
but that's not abuse of smoking now is it ?

------------------
Steel what?

Tony LaCroix · From: Austin, Texas, USA

WHAT JERRY SAID. The ends do not justify the means when it comes to regulation. Club owners and their patrons are not little children that need to be scolded and redirected when they hurt each other's lungs. Yet, smoking IS obviously a public health issue which must be dealt with. I don't understand why the Austin city council can't grasp a "third hand" like what Jerry suggests above. As much as I despise new legislation, a law that would require air filters or smoking sections is something even I could stand behind.

Chris Schlotzhauer · From: Colleyville, Tx. USA

I don't smoke. Smoking, however, is LEGAL. Bars, restaurants are PRIVATE busineses. Private business should have the right to make that choice, not a mayor who personally doesn't like smoke. The mayor only has to convince the city council and not the public to pass such a ordinace. Dallas mayor Laura Miller jammed this down the business owner's throuts recently, but only in restaurants. So a lot of the restaurant business is moving to the suburbs and restaurants are also becoming bars. Such as Big Balls in Cowtown, the OWNER's have every right to ban smoking in their club if it makes them happy. They will probably be out of business soon also. I would rather put up with things I disagree with, than lose my freedoms. Slowly, we are losing those freedoms.

Tony Prior · From: Charlotte NC

I believe if folks want to smoke, they should be permitted to smoke..but not in an area where it may effect folks, like me, who do not smoke.

I don't have a problem with anyone smoking but I do have a problem with someone smoking in my face...

I also believe that a bar, is a smoking place..I'm talking about sitting at the bar and drinking a beer or a whatever..If I go and sit at a bar and have a beer I should expect to have it be a smoky place. This is a given..

A dance floor or a bandstand is not like sitting at the bar..these should be considered non- smoking..

tp

Chris DeBarge · From: Boston, Mass

What Jerry said, how about a compromise? I smoke, but it wouldn't bother me if I had to stand in the smoking section for a few minutes. And with good air filters, everyone would win, because even as a smoker, some clubs around here get disgustingly cloudy!

Boston just banned it, and the entire state will probably go in October. In the meantime, Cambridge and Somerville(the neighboring cities) bars are filling up with "refugees" as the Boston bars are half empty.

I, also, dislike having undemocratic decrees forced upon me, especially by busy-bodies who would never go to a bar anyways! >

Don't get me started on the recent proposed seatbelt regulation (the cops can pull you over for that alone).

Drew Howard · From: 48854

Chris said: "I would rather put up with things I disagree with, than lose my freedoms. Slowly, we are losing those freedoms."

I think they call that "tolerance".

Beer and cigarettes, what else would you expect at a bar? This s**t is getting ree-dickle-dockle. Now, in Euro, they issue you a pack when you hit 13.

All this from a guy who quit.

Drew

------------------
www.newslinkassociates.com
www.drewhoward.com

[This message was edited by Drew Howard on 18 June 2003 at 07:28 AM.]

Erv Niehaus · From: Litchfield, MN, USA

I have the perfect solution! With the advent of cell phones, there isn't much need for pay phone booths anymore. Why don't the places that want to cater to smokers buy up some of these old phone booths and put them in their places of business. If someone wants to smoke he/she can just go in the phone booth, light up, and sit there until they are done. This way they can get the full effect, both first hand and second hand smoke.

Uff-Da!

[This message was edited by Erv Niehaus on 18 June 2003 at 07:35 AM.]

Danny Kuykendall · From: Fullerton, CA, USA

I own a 10,000 sq. ft. billiard room, restaurant & bar here in southern California, and I agree with most of the opinions put forth on smoking; it hurts business (about a year for me), however I don't have to worry about my health (being s non-smoker) and my clothes and hair don't stink of cigarette smoke.
I could understand the law affecting clubs with music and dancing, which we don't have,
I don't agree with the law being forced on private business, and the reasons for enforcing it, but it sure does make for a nicer environment.
After reading Frank Parrish's post on those speakers being filthy with cigarette smoke, it makes me feel even better.
However, if I had to vote on a law allowing bars to permit smoking I would vote for it, and let it be up to the owners to decide. California skirted the issue of choice by owners by (the legislature) passing a law that protects the employees of a bar or restaurant from second-hand smoke. Almost all waitresses and bartenders smoke anyway, and so this was just an excuse for the liberals of this state to pass their non-smoking agenda.
I'm afraid that more and more states will be passing this ban though. Just seems to be a trend in this country.
Danny K

Herb Steiner · From: Briarcliff TX 78669, pop. 2,064

A few random thoughts from a non-smoker who works in a smoky environment and realizes it comes with the territory he's chosen...

Freedom is a function of mathematics. When there are two people and two bathrooms, there's 100% freedom. When there are four people and two bathrooms, these people now have 50% freedom.

We have a country of 260+ million. What we now need is about 130 million more bathrooms.

The most pressing argument I hear for the smoking ban, IMHO, is that employees of bars should not be forced to work in an unhealthy environment. Okay, fair enough; but the operative word is forced. These people are not being forced to work anywhere, but in fact chose to work in a bar, just as the people who attend the bar chose to go there. These bar employees could work retail where there's no smoke, for instance, or any number of smoke-free places.

NO ONE IS BEING FORCED TO BE IN A BAR!!!!!!!!!!!

Many jobs in our society are fraught with danger, like highway maintenance jobs for instance. These workers are in high risk of being hit by traffic, not to mention the high amounts of pollutants being emitted by vehicles, damage to hearing because of highway noise, etc. Many maintenance jobs are scheduled at late night times, when traffic is lower. Of course, these are times when there's a higher percentage of people on the road who have been in bars and have been DRINKING, thereby INCREASING the risk to the highway crews. The logical extension of the argument would be to close down all highways where maintenance needs to be performed, no traffic whatsoever, to remove the workers from the dangerous environment, would it not?

My, wouldn't THAT solution be popular!

Of course, we can't eliminate all risk from society, no matter how many well-intentioned do-gooders want to control our lives. Arguing that "since there's a danger over here that we're gonna control, we should eliminate ALL dangerous behavior, right? That's fair," is simplistic and problematic. Something will always be dangerous to someone somewhere.

There are very, very few absolute laws in the US, just local prejudices reflected by local laws/ordinances. You could get thrown in jail for 20 years in Utah for a crime you couldn't get a policeman to respond to in New York City.

Take the pot v. alcohol argument. No one denies that misuse of alcohol causes death and heartbreak in people's lives. But the prejudice in the USA, amongst people who make these "laws" that control our behavior... for whatever reasons..., is that pot should remain illegal and alcohol remain legal. For now. There are folks working on full accessibility for each, and full prohibition for each. Time will tell.

It's around 10:30AM. I think I'll light up a doobie, do about 1/2 dozen tequila shooters, and see how wide open pedal-to-the-metal I can get the Corvette on my way to lunch, where thank God my safety is assured with a smoke-free environment.

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

[This message was edited by Herb Steiner on 18 June 2003 at 08:35 AM.]

John Cox · From: Texas, USA

Well,

John Cox · From: Texas, USA

Sorry about the double post!
I beliven any time people are told what they
can and can't do is BAD, espicailly in regaurds to freedom. Its bad enough they told us to wear seat belts and infringed on that freedom of choice now cause the group that wants pleasent odors 24/7 we will not have tis freedom.

GOD HELP THE U.S.A. J.C.

Forum Index > Steel Players	Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next	Next oldest topic :: Next newest topic