How do you feel about the proposed patio smoking ban? (Austin: restaurant, law)

[austinrebel]

Originally Posted by Idlewile

Again, no one spits their liquor on me on restaurant patios. Until they do, your argument is categorically null and void.

How come alcohol is banned in Austin Parks if it is so benign?

[Idlewile]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Good point. Perhaps the parties at the adjoining tables were just as miffed at your children's presence as you were at their tobacco's.

??? Why? Would they have a reason to be?

Seems as though no one wants to touch how this is different from banning smoking inside restaurants 30 years ago and how monumentally over-stepping that was thought to be at the time. Interesting.

You have your point of view as I have mine, which apparently many here and elsewhere support (thanks, all), as many align with yours....

Great debate topic, OP.

[Gorfml]

Originally Posted by austinrebel

It's based on second hand smoke seeping through the walls and killing the people in the next apartment

Rofl I busted out laffing when I read that!...

[Gorfml]

Second hand smoke is not a health risk. Studies suggesting otherwise are either based on junk science or politically motivated.

So if smoke bothers u so much, grow a pair or gtfo...

[G Grasshopper]

Just a thought - I remember when Texas made wearing seat belts mandatory. I was a student, and it was about 1972. Lots of people thought it was an outrageous breech of their rights. Personally, I was aware of all the people without insurance who would cost the public a great deal if they got into an accident and needed to have the public pay, through Medicaid. Then when I lived in CA, I remember a similar uproar about mandatory helmets when on a motorcycle. The argument for that was similar to seat belts, in that it would cost the public if there was an accident. In both cases, people got used to it. There is compliance, and lives have been saved, as well as public money.

I do remember how relieved and grateful I was when CA banned smoking in restaurants. It never seemed to hurt the restaurant business. A few years later, they banned smoking in bars. I had no opinion on that, since I never go into a bar, but it sounded to me like it would be a hard sell. Then the people who work in those bars started speaking up about the threats to their health and second hand smoke, people saw the reasoning, and it was passed. There was grumbling, but people got used to it. I don't know if that hurt business at bars, but if it did, I imagine business rebounded as people got used to it. Over the years, the rate of smoking in CA decreased, and that is good for everyone, as we all pay for the healthcare costs of the seriously ill.

I understand the reasoning about banning smoking on restaurant patio. I would find it pleasant not to have to deal with second hand smoke, but I don't eat on restaurant patios all that often, so I could accept it either way. I realize that if I smoked, I might have more of an emotional reaction to the proposal. My brother in law smokes, but he never does this around others. If we are all eating on a patio, he will quietly go out to smoke someplace where no one has to receive his second hand smoke. He is a considerate smoker.

[CptnRn]

I'm all in favor of it. The Health Department says that second hand smoke on patios is harmful.

Austin might ban smoking on bar and restaurant patios | www.statesman.com

The Early Childhood Council, which advises the City Council on childhood development issues, recommended a patio and deck smoking ban in December on an 8-0 vote after seeing a presentation from the health department.
“It showed that secondhand smoke on patios is not much different than the damage done from secondhand smoke indoors,” Chairman Kyle Holder said. “It’s a no-brainer if it’s not good for kids.”

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by Idlewile

Oh no, I am reminded every day that this is Texas and in no way resembles anywhere else.

To play devil's advocate, how is this different than Smoking and Non-Smoking sections of a restaurant? Everyone used to think the concept of a completely Smoke-Free restaurant was ludicrous.

I guess I have to wonder about situations like this. My family (my spouse, my two small children and myself) go to Opal Dinvine's -- a place that advertises that they are family friendly and kids eat free on Saturdays. There are no tables left inside because of two big groups so we are forced to sit outside. Great, it's not too hot. We sit, order. Two other partites are seated at the table next to us and behind us. The table next to us pulls out cigars and lights up. The table behind us with lights up cigarettes. We are downwind of both and the smoke is swirling into my kids' faces. We ask if we can move but our server tells us there are not any tables left that do not have smokers nearby.

We could wait for 25+ minutes in hopes of a table inside opening up she apologetically tells us.

We did not order smoke in our food, or milk, or mouths yet if we choose to stay, eat and pay for our food, we are forced to deal with the harmful smoke directly.

Opal Divines has an opportunity to make their restaurant more suitable for you and your family. Expand the interior or make a change to the patio. If they don't make a change - maybe they lose you as a customer. Or you change your behavior to avoid times when you can't sit inside.

But there is no reason the law needs to force a decision on them just to please you.

[hoffdano]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

I'm all in favor of it. The Health Department says that second hand smoke on patios is harmful.

Austin might ban smoking on bar and restaurant patios | www.statesman.com

Not one piece of fact in that article. The Health Department says..... Based on what science?

That a person or child who whiffed some second hand smoke will die sooner? Contract lung cancer? What?!?! What bad thing will truly happen if someone encounters a cigarette a few times in their life?

[ImOnFiya]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

I'm all in favor of it. The Health Department says that second hand smoke on patios is harmful.

Austin might ban smoking on bar and restaurant patios | www.statesman.com

Drinking alcohol is far more immediately harmful in terms of liver, intestianal, and even pancreatic diseases.

CptnRn, following your logic (and those of this ordinance supporters), where is the reasoning for the smoking ban (with long-term) health risks, and not an alcohol ban with both (long-term and short-term) health risks?

In addition, how can a Texas municipal (city) ordinance surpass Texas state law?

[austinrebel]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

I'm all in favor of it. The Health Department says that second hand smoke on patios is harmful.

Austin might ban smoking on bar and restaurant patios | www.statesman.com

By your reasoning, we should also ban outdoor fireplaces, fire pits, and fire rings on outdoor decks. And also, outdoor BBQ's in parks. These emit second hand smoke that is even more dense than cigarette smoke.

You agree, right?