Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The majority does not congregate near doorways.. Did you run a study and collect stats? I do not... Why do you not ask them... Or it's too easy to just make generalizations and complain...
How many times do I have tell you that I support indoor bans on smoking subject to business decisions? That the majority of places should not allow smoking... But other businesses that decide that smoking is a part of their service should be allowed. Do you not read?
When thr ban went into effect, certain business owners actually lost business because it was core to their business model. Even the local smoke shop doesn't allow smoking inside... A smoke shop!
The majority does not congregate near doorways.. Did you run a study and collect stats?
How many times do I have tell you that I support indoor bans on smoking subject to business decisions? That the majority of places should not allow smoking... Do you not read?
Those who do persist in smoking where they know it will annoy others are the demographic you need to address, however many of them there are. There are smokers who have posted in other smoking threads here on CD who have admitted they do it intentionally.
We are at the point with indoor smoking bans where deliberately opening a bar that allows smoking, even if it were to be legal, would be a poor business decision. What you want is wishful thinking.
Those who do persist in smoking where they know it will annoy others are the demographic you need to address, however many of them there are. There are smokers who have posted in other smoking threads here on CD who have admitted they do it intentionally.
We are at the point with indoor smoking bans where deliberately opening a bar that allows smoking, even if it were to be legal, would be a poor business decision. What you want is wishful thinking.
So stop. Saying the majority when you have no idea.
It is un-American because the basic tenant is freedom of choice. If a few choose the violate regulations then argue how to enforce those regulations rather than further take away choices from those that do follow the law.
Health nuts should not decide how I live. Paranoid people should also not have influence over how others live
Do you have a study that opening a bar to smoking is a poor decision? Because I know a couple that closed due to it. The vast majority of their customers where smokers... They sold tobacco in bar. It was their business model. You do not... So stop making up stuff.
You have no idea if the majority are smoking inconsiderately.
You have no idea if businesses that cater to smoking are a poor business decision
So stop. Saying the majority when you have no idea.
It is un-American because the basic tenant is freedom of choice. If a few choose the violate regulations then argue how to enforce those regulations rather than further take away choices from those that do follow the law.
Health nuts should not decide how I live. Paranoid people should also not have influence over how others live
Do you have a study that opening a bar to smoking is a poor decision? Because I know a couple that closed due to it. The vast majority of their customers where smokers... They sold tobacco in bar. It was their business model. You do not... So stop making up stuff.
You have no idea if the majority are smoking inconsiderately.
You have no idea if businesses that cater to smoking are a poor business decision
You making stuff up....
Where have I said "majority"? Link to the post, please?
What I said was, "Those who do persist in smoking where they know it will annoy others are the demographic you need to address, however many of them there are. There are smokers who have posted in other smoking threads here on CD who have admitted they do it intentionally."
You actually quoted me saying that.
If a bar closes because of a smoking ban the probability is that many bad business decisions were made. Those that stayed open after bans were instituted also had smoking customers. Why were they not forced to close? The answer is that they adapted, many seeing food sales increase and a return of non-smokers who had avoided going to bars because of the smoke. For every potential smoking customer there are four potential non-smoking customers. Why would someone opening a bar want to deliberately restrict his customer base?
If a bar closes because of a smoking ban the probability is that many bad business decisions were made.
You do not know that.. Again weak stance based on conjecture
They set themselves apart by serving an environment for smokers and drink. There are bars that serve alcohol only. There were smoke shops that only served smokes.
They did both which set them apart from the competition.
Of course businesses whose core service was not centered around smoking where not impacted.. That is irrelevant to the stance that thee are businesses that where in the business of smoking... And they were impacted. Another Deflection.... From the real issue that choices where denied
How about enforce the laws that exist? Instead of denying the whole of freedom of choice. Again you have done nothing but whine and complain but offer no alternative..
How many weak arguments are you going to throw... Prostitution again? Life is unfair suck it up attitude? Conjecture against smoking permitted bars business decisions? Argument that we should just stay home? It is an addiction and you know best? All weak... Very weak.
By your own words.. You admit that the majority are abiding by smoking in areas outside and away the door... Yet your judgment is to persecute the whole... How wrong is that? Why dont you get courage to say something about it...? Or are you ok with letting someone else deal with it because lack of assertiveness?
There exist no solid stance against smoking outdoors which is why I think the current laws are a sufficient compromise. I think they over reach by infringement of business owners rights... People simply need to enforce current regulations. If you do not like it.. Well life is unfair... Wink wink... Talk to your rep and good luck.
My point went right over your head. Given the option, more venues are going non-smoking.
That is my point... You said it yourself. GIVEN A OPTION. The business owners were denied the choice. Good lord man.. I am using your own post to prove the point.
You do not know whether or not the business I succeeds or not.. It is irrelevant. They should have the freedom to try anyways. ... You did the business research or making it up again?
PS. The smoke shops/bar near me that closed were in business for decades and closed shortly after the ban. So you cannot claim that no viable market exists.
That is my point... You said it yourself. GIVEN A OPTION. The business owners were denied the choice. Good lord man.. I am using your own post to prove the point.
You do not know whether or not the business I succeeds or not.. It is irrelevant. They should have the freedom to try anyways. ... You did the business research or making it up again?
PS. The smoke shops/bar near me that closed were in business for decades and closed shortly after the ban. So you cannot claim that no viable market exists.
"The parameter estimate for the smoke-free variable did not even approach statistical significance (P = .723; Table 2), indicating that the presence of a smoke-free law had no detectable effect on the sale price of a bar."
An established, well-known bar in Atlanta went smoke free:
"The parameter estimate for the smoke-free variable did not even approach statistical significance (P = .723; Table 2), indicating that the presence of a smoke-free law had no detectable effect on the sale price of a bar."
An established, well-known bar in Atlanta went smoke free:
"Most of the tavern’s 7,485 Facebook fans were also in favor of the new policy."
The pool of smokers is shrinking. Even bars that could serve smokers - like Manuel's - are deciding not to do so.
It doesn't matter. We've been through this over and over. This is all irrevelant. You do also realize that we operate in a society in which mob rule is kept in check. Rarely do supreme court decisions regarding civil rights for example are left to public opinion. You only need to show that even a small minority's freedoms have been violated in order to call to attention a wrong.
A business proprieter does not have to prove viability in order to start a business. They should have the right to start a business on their own decision. They shouldn't have government dictate what services they decide to offer to their customers. It is a very simply concept that you seem to have a difficult time grasping. A business who wants to operate smoke free because it has little related to their services should be allowed to operate smoke free. A business who wants to operate with a smoking environment because it is a part of the services they wish to offer shoudl be allowed to operate allowing smoking on their premises.
Good/bad business decision nor the popularity of a decision has little to do with the topic at hand. Business owners should have the right to decide not the public.
Did you read the study? It is a study that doesn't focus on businesses that rely on smoking as a core service offered... smoking bar, cigar bars, etc... That is the discussion I am having here... not just some business.. but businesses who choose to offer tobacco and smoking as a service.
I've said this a million times already, I support ban on smoking in most public areas such as restuarants but for businesses that decide that tobacco products are core to their offerings were adversly impacted (see the link of businesses already listed). I believe there should be some sort of exception for them... as a person who is anti-smoker should have no business in them to begin with.
I've already shown a list of owners who have been impacted? No sympathy for those who have lost business and even closed?
I've also asked this serveral times.. but you refuse to answer. I support indoor smoking ban in its current form... except that it over reaches by not allowing excemptions for businesses that are specifc to the sale of tobacco. What exactly do you want? a flat out ban indoors and outdoors? Unless you answer, you are just whining.
Have you ever owned/operated a business?
Last edited by usayit; 06-27-2017 at 07:22 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
