![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
Welcome to City-Data.com forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with 400,000 other registered members. User profiles and some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your free account you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 14,000 posts/day about local topics and you will see fewer ads. Within the last few months our forum was cited in an article in 15 newspaper and in a story on AOL's homepage.| Search our forums (advanced): |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
If that many non-smokers stay home because of smoke then it would behoove business owners to create non-smoking establishments, which is exactly what they do. Telling them what they can and can't do on their property is just inherently wrong- a concept I should think many Americans feel strongly about. But I guess personal liberties mean squat these days to people.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Here's what gets me: if we're supposedly going to take away choice for the benefit of public health, it would seem to me the obvious thing to do would be to take away the choice to smoke at all. That would have a far, far greater impact on public health than banning smoking in places of public accommodation (the impact of which will be negligible), to say nothing of banning it in private clubs that are not even open to the public. I wish the Smoke Nazis would be honest enough to say that they just don't like smoke and they're too lazy to seek out the non-smoking establishments instead of hiding behind the cover of "public health."
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thank you!!!
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
That's true that you can CHOOSE to go to a non-smoking bar if you want to go out but NOT inhale smoke, but really, how many people would go to a non-smoking bar if smoking bars were around? Even the non-smokers would have to elect to go to the smoking bars because all of their friends who smoke would not go to the non-smoking bar.
Saying that it should be amended so that there are smoking and non smoking bars is a fine idea, but it wouldn't work because the non-smoking bar would lose a TON of business to the smoking bars. So, none of the smoking bars would go no-smoking. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Can't resist. Have to tell my short story. This changed my personal outlook on the public smoking topic.
Work maternity floor, taking new mom and baby to car that dad has brought to the circle drive. This is a smoke free facility in IL. Very big and clear signs that smokers are not to smoke at the entrance. This day, as most days, smokers were smoking there. Security cannot patrol this area exclusively (and shouldn't have to). We must exit through them, the other entrance at the ER is in same situation. Mom of baby says, and I quote her here, "How sad that my baby's first breath of the outside air had to be through second hand smoke". End of story. ![]() |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't understand what this has to do with anything. I don't think anyone has an issue with hospitals and areas outside of them being non-smoking. And while there are obviously some bad apples I think the majority of smokers are respectful and understanding of those kind of policies.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|