smoking bans suck

it pisses me off. i'm all for smoke-free establishments. i think most restaraunts and other places should be smoke free. i think that there should be smokeless bars, smokeless bowling alleys, smokeless restaraunts....i completely understand nonsmokers not wanting to be around it. but why the hell should EVERY establishment in a given city or state be 100% smoke free? it's stupid. yeah, nonsmokers have every right to smoke free places, and in my opinion most places SHOULDNT allow their customers to smoke.

but that doesnt mean that smokers should only be allowed to smoke at home or in their cars!

bowling alleys are a good example. if you go to a normal bowling alley where people smoke, the place reeks. when you leave, your clothes smell really bad like smoke. people shouldn't have to avoid bowling alleys just because they dont like being around smoke.

but instead of making it entirely smoke free, wouldn't it be just as easy to simply block off a smokers section with a large plexiglass wall or something like that? a seperate room entirely, with a seperate ventilation system would pretty much solve the situation.

having bars licensed to permit smoking (offering more sophisticated ventilation) and seperate, smoke-free bars makes much more sense than banning smoking in all bars. if people would just get their heads out of their asses, then nonsmokers who own bars would simply prohibit smoking inside their bars! people say smoking bans hurt business....bull....if you dont have a choice then theres no difference where you go. and if you allow smoking in ALL establishments then it doesnt matter where nonsmokers go, they'll leave smelling like smoke (in either situation there is a large population of people unhappy with the situation)

people are stupid if they think theres no possibility of a middle ground. some people claim the bars in areas with smoking bans actually have improved business. if thats the case, then forget the ban and just let the bars ban smoking - in THAT establishment! then both smoking AND nonsmoking bars will benefit - there will be something for everyone.....

i dunno.....it just pisses me off. there are two different smoking ban propositions for my area this year, and things could change drastically. as of now, most of the places in my area are smoke-free do to a city ban. as it is, in certain suburbs you can still go to smoke-friendly bars. this may change it all. there may soon be nowhere you can smoke except in homes and cars and outside, away from buildings.

it simply isn't fair or just.

all sorts of things like this, and america acts like we have so many liberties it's disgusting. get real....seriously, i can't think of many freedoms we have that citizens of most other western countries DONT have, other than lax gun control.

 

there's a ban on all public, indoor smoking in colorado. most places have built on patios for smokers, some even have added heating for them, too. that seems reasonable to me, but in a general sense, i'm thoroughly against banning any behavior in your own property, which includes your own establishment. that's private property, therefore the proprietor should have the right to say what is and is not allowed on the premises.

 

I agree, the owner whould be able to make the call. If there is such a demand for smoke free, it ought to be a place to make a nice business. that being said, i used to think many places were far too smoky, especially most places i went to see music, so sometimes it is nice

i don't mind our smoking ban nesta, helps me meet people on the patios and out front, and it kind of limits my smoking when i go out

what does annoy me is that i cannot smoke in my apartment

 

Well I'm not a smoker yet I feel some of the negative impacts of the ban too. For example, most of my friends smoke therefor when we go out I either have to sit, usually by myself, while they all go and smoke or go outside and freeze my ass off too. Ok ok it's not that bad, I know. Eh, but my lungs probably are thankful soooo.....

 

exactly, kc. i still think its a good idea to encourage smoke-free establishments. i understand not liking the fact that there are a lot of types of places that are hard to find smokefree........i.e. bars.

but seriously, there MUST be a middle ground. just make restrictions on what types of establishments can allow smoking.....regular inspections (at the owners expense) to ensure compliance to certain restrictions on smoke-friendly establishments would be a start....mandatory high-powered air filters, good ventilation systems, and so on, plus perhaps added taxes. it would make the smoking bars and such more costly to operate, and so the prices of drinks would probably be raised. most smokers i know would prefer slightly pricier drinks to be able to have a place to go have a drink and a smoke in peace than to have to go someplace where they couldnt smoke. the added income from more high priced drinks would basically reimburse for the extra costs of running the business, so it wouldnt change life TOO much for the proprietors. on the other hand, the lower costs of drinks and the entirely smokeless atmosphere of bars that choose not to meet these requirements would attract nonsmokers and people who dont mind stepping outside in the cold to smoke. smoking isn't going to magically disappear, so there would be plenty of business for the pricier smoking bars....and nonsmokers rarely enjoy smoky rooms (and what nonsmoker would pay higher prices just to go to a smoke-friendly bar??) so both types of bars could easily stay in business.

it makes sense. why the fuck would we need a ban? there IS a middle ground. the higher priced drinks would basically just be like paying a couple bucks for the luxury of being able to smoke - annoying, but tolerable....

i dont understand why it seems everyone either wants smoking banned everywhere or else think they should be able to smoke anywhere they please.....

 

i dont go out too much. part of it is that i smoke cigars generally these days. i hated going outside just for a few minutes in the cold when i smoked cigarettes....now i'll be damned if i'm standing out there for an hour! i have a rather small apartment, and in cold weather i cant just open up all the windows and doors and smoke in my apartment. the lack of ventilation makes for an uncomfortable smoking experience. i'd rather be able to go to the bar after work and unwind with a beer or two and a nice cigar.

as it is, if i go to a bar its usually cushions. i dont like the bar so much as i like to be able to smoke if i want......

 

there are places that should not allow smoking. there are also places that should be albe to allow smoking if they provide proper ventilation and whatnot.

like the bar by my school, the owner built a separate room with the best ventilation system and then he was told that he couldn't allow any smoking in the building. a good majority of the people go to the bar smoke. it sucks that he went out of his way to pay for this room to be built and then he gets told that the voters voted to ban smoking.

 

thats plain old sad

see, i dont see the problem....sure, with a bob evans or something, where the "smoking section" is seperated by a fucking half wall and its still all one big room....thats fucked up! people going out to dinner with their families or even just nonsmokers wanting someplace to go should be able to have a healthy environment. but if the room is genuinely seperate, with a closing door and a seperate, strong ventilation system.....it should be fine. i dont understand why people have to say EVERYTHING should be smoke free. i honestly think that if this trend of banning smoking in places open to the public (even if they're privately owned) continues, along with the ever increasing taxes on tobacco, it will eventually just end up with one more illegal drug....tobacco....

what ever happened to the idea of letting people essentially doing what they want so long as they dont harm others? you know....liberty? i mean, its true that secondhand smoke is detrimental to ones health....and it should be banned at places like supermarkets and libraries and courtrooms and office buildings and such....but why can't they just seperate smoking and nonsmoking bars and such instead of just flat out banning it in public? this is just stupid!

 

Adding walls and ventilation systems costs money. People don't like to spend money unless it is necessary.

 

enforcing new rediculous laws costs money too, and it costs all the taxpayers.

i already went over how added walls and ventilation systems could be paid for with increased prices, and you know that people WOULD pay more money just for the luxury of smoking. if people didnt love their tobacco passionately....if they werent addicted, in many cases.....then they wouldnt put up with all the outrageous taxes already placed on tobacco. they wouldnt smoke at all, in fact. but the fact is, some people are addicted, and some people just really like it. either way, people will continue to smoke, and smokers love to smoke.

the cost of upgrading the ventilation systems and such is a pittance compared to the money to be made. its not like once that stuff is paid for the prices will go back down. it would probably be more profitable in the long run to spend a little money to get around legislation stating that your establishment isn't fit to allow smoking. which would also benefit the less expensive places that DIDNT allow smoking (because nonsmokers would revel in the fact that they paid lower prices AND didnt have to be around smoke)

if there were a ban on smoking in establishments that didnt meet certain criteria (such as proper ventilation and such) then it would be seen as necessary to spend the money....if they desired to keep attracting smokers for customers. its really quite simple.....there would be seperate types of establishments, and both would likely do quite well

 

is it really that hard to go outside to smoke?

what you are talking about reminds me of the smoking chambers they have at airports
it's just all kinda ridiculous seeming, if you ask me

 

one thing you have to realize is, that it protects the EMPLOYEES. second hand smoke is dangerous, yes, it is proven true. people are getting lung cancer from second hand smoke.... would you like to be the employee of the smoking section that is plexiglassed?? NO. thats what most smoking bans are for.... its the employees that would have to be around the smoke 40 hrs a week.......

 

yeah, its your right to smoke, but when you go around other folks who chose NOT to smoke, you are infringing their right to clean air.... cant you just go outside to smoke?? its not that hard.

 

.

 

they don't have to work in a smoking establishment. there IS work to be found elsewhere.

 

If my two cents matter:

As much as smoking bans suck, I would rather be in a restaurant or bar where I'm not coughing up a lung. And yes, I did used to smoke, but when I was smoking, I at least had the courtesy to leave the room before lighting, so that way I wasn't bothering non-smokers.

Those of us who don't smoke don't want to be around cigarrettes all the time. Those of us who work in the industry (ie in restaurants, bars, etc) likely don't want to end up with cancer or emphazema (Sp?) because of someone else's smoking habit. So, it's a little inconvenient for you to step outside or sit in your car to have a smoke. It's more inconvenient for the rest of us to breath in someone else's gross habit.

 

I think it should be up to the owner or manager of the establishment on whether or not they allow smoking. What's next? Are they going to tell us we're not allowed to smoke in our cars or houses? Places that do allow smoking should have plenty of area between the smoking and non-smoking portions of their restaurants so no one can be offended, then there'd be no reason for complaints. I'm not a smoker, but I'm sick of people trying to take others' rights away. I believe it should be a right for the proprietors of each business to decide how they feel about it.

 

cause you know, there are plenty of ample jobs out there

 

its pretty simple - if you dont' want to be around smoke, don't go to places that is an established smoking business. it should be up to the owner if they will allow smoking or not. if they do, and you dont' want to be around smoke, just dont' go there - you're not forced to go any establishment that allows smoking. same with employees, dont' work at a place where you face smoking risks - theres risks in any job, people work in coal mines, oil fields, hospitals, etc

 

Enforcing smoking laws actually don't cost that much money, most business self-regulate by tossing out people who try to smoke indoors. At least, they have here, and we've had a smoking ban on all public buildings for at least two years.

As for the money thing, most companies simply aren't willing to sink money into an expensive thing like ventilation systems. The club/restaurant/whatever has to shut down for days while they renovate to put in the apporpriate systems, they'll have to meet specific regulations to allow smoking still and most ventilators that have the power to clean smoke-filled air are outrageously expensive.

We've had a smoking ban for two years here and it's not a problem for most. Most people just slip outside - the bars have patios for smokers and those of us who need to cool off, restaurants you can slip out teh door, s'all good. Yeah my mom was a little annoyed when it started but she's used to it now and understands that second hand smoke is harmful, hard to clean appropriately and marks almost all fibres with its scent.