|

09-30-2007, 04:31 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
143 posts, read 131,678 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
|
I haven't read all of the responses so, this might be a repeat of some but, I just hadda add my thoughts.
In my opinion, this isn't or shouldn't be about smoker's rights vs non-smokers rights.
This is about the state's interference with a business owners right to conduct a legal business as he chooses and as the business climate in his area dictates.
Frankly, I'm tired of Government at all levels trying to legislate morality and intruding on my life with the 'we know what's best for you' attitude.
Our founding fathers abhorred this kind of Government intrusion into people's lives and now, we just blindly accept that the Government is doing what's in our best interests.
Ask yourselves one question...if someone comes to your door and says "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help you", do you believe him?
People are in business to make money. Let the market dictate how they do that. If a person owns a bar or restaurant and the majority of his clients are non-smokers, he'll figure out it's in his best interest to ban smoking.
If on the other hand, 95% of his patrons and employees are smokers, why should the government be able to dictate that he cannot meet their needs/desires when the 5% of his patrons that do not smoke have the choice of going to a non-smoking establishment?
Restaurants and bars are places people go to by choice, not necessity.
The same applies to the people that work there. As it stands, people are still free to work where they chose.
I have no problem with making public buildings and places that people have to enter with no choice into non smoking areas.
But for the government to step in and tell the same people that are paying the taxes that pay their wages what they can and cannot do with their privately owned property is just wrong.
Granted, the government makes all kinds of laws related to how one can conduct business (no sale of alcohol to minors, etc) but, we are talking about legislating a perfectly legal activity here.
Let the marketplace dictate which businesses are smoke free and which ones allow smoking and get 'big brother' government out of the mix.
BTW, do you realize how silly it is to argue that smoking shouldn't be permitted in a bar because it's unhealthy? Exactly what activities that take place in a bar ARE healthy?
|
|

10-01-2007, 07:40 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
16 posts, read 13,341 times
Reputation: 12
|
|
Well said...
Auntie bob, you make some good points. I imagine that the problem with the workplace is that sooner or later, someone is going to sue over health related issues. It is a sad commentary on our justice system that you can get sued over darn near anything! I suspect this is the reason why the states that are passing laws regarding public places do not make allow for seperate areas.
|
|

10-01-2007, 08:11 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
143 posts, read 131,678 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Togareth
Auntie bob, you make some good points. I imagine that the problem with the workplace is that sooner or later, someone is going to sue over health related issues. It is a sad commentary on our justice system that you can get sued over darn near anything! I suspect this is the reason why the states that are passing laws regarding public places do not make allow for seperate areas.
|
Well, I think it's possible to put safeguards in place. People willing to work in smoking environments could sign a waiver of liability or something. My guess is, a good number of people that have been working in the bars that still allow smoking are probably smokers themselves.
I think what makes me the angriest is that the money the state got in the tobacco settlements is actually being used to lobby both city and state governments for the no-smoking laws.
So in effect, the huge sums of money the tobacco industry paid the state is being used to put Minnesota businesses out of business. There's something definitely wrong with that picture.
And you are right, this idea of everyone looking for someone to sue is just ridiculous.
I fully understand the non-smokers wanting to be able to go places and not be exposed to smoke but, does that have to be EVERY place? Seems to me there could be a happy medium in there somewhere.
My guess is, most non-smokers aren't going to suddenly start going to every bar there is in their town on a regular basis. Sorry...I'm ranting again. 
|
|

10-01-2007, 10:49 PM
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Reputation: 10
|
|
|
[SIZE=3]Sen. Kathy Sheran will not get my vote next time she runs for office along with the rest of the people that voted for this smoking ban.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]What ever happen to the peoples vote, when we vote them into office they should pay more attention to what the public that voted them in to office want.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=3][/SIZE]
[SIZE=3]I guess I could always move to a smoking state. Anybody have a list?[/SIZE]
|
|

10-01-2007, 11:06 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
16 posts, read 13,341 times
Reputation: 12
|
|
Non-Smoking State
You may have to look hard, they are going fast. I hear Kentucky went non-smoking. I must say that was a suprise. I also very strongly support the comment that you need to watch who you vote for and make sure that you follow their voting patterns. That is the best way to know if they are supporting the ideals you want them to.
|
|

11-21-2007, 09:36 PM
|
|
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
2 posts, read 3,082 times
Reputation: 10
|
|
Perfect example of the Narcissist mentality
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfgal
I am all for a smoking ban. It gets so tiresome going out to a restaurant and coming home smelling like cigarette smoke. My kids have asthma and it really isn't good for them to be around smoke. The problem with the having smoking sections in a restaurant is that the smoke still disburses throughout the restaurant and there really is no smoke-free area. Why should non-smokers have to put up with other people's cigarette smoke??
As for separate facilities for smokers/non-smokers, what do you do if you go out with a group of people or heck, even your spouse, that doesn't smoke, split up for the night and meet back home later?
I think Minneapolis has handled things well, providing a smoking area outside for those that choose to smoke. I see no problem with this what so ever.
|
It is amazing that people are so arrogant as to think that it is okay to force someone out into the cold for their comfort and preference. If the smoking bothers you or you don't want your child to be exposed to the smoke THEN DON'T GO OUT. Further, Minnesota isn't exactly Florida; yeah just go outside in February, oh when it is negative 20 out... THANKS YOU ARE A REAL SWEETHEART!!!! AMAZING!!! The most ridiculous part is that last I heard that restaurants were private establishments and if the owner wanted to they could prohibit smoking if they WANTED TO!!!!
|
|

11-23-2007, 03:54 AM
|
|
Professional Bit Twiddler
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mableton, GA USA (NW Atlanta suburb)
3,918 posts, read 3,001,983 times
Reputation: 553
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pads
[color=black]It is amazing that people are so arrogant as to think that it is okay to force someone out into the cold for their comfort and preference.
|
I didn't choose for you to smoke, and neither did the business owner, and yet you blame the inconvience on THEM? WTF?
It is amazing that people are so arrogant as to think that it is okay to force the foul stench which results from a nonessential habit like smoking on everyone else in a given location for their own comfort and preference.
Want to smoke in my house. Sorry -- take it to the front porch, or leave. There is no middle ground.
Want to smoke in a restaurant? Fair enough -- visit one that allows smoking.
Can't find one? Try not smoking for an hour or so for a change. Your smoking is a choice, right? Prove it.
|
|

11-23-2007, 03:56 AM
|
|
Professional Bit Twiddler
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mableton, GA USA (NW Atlanta suburb)
3,918 posts, read 3,001,983 times
Reputation: 553
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auntie Bob
BTW, do you realize how silly it is to argue that smoking shouldn't be permitted in a bar because it's unhealthy? Exactly what activities that take place in a bar ARE healthy?
|
Small amounts of alcohol (e.g., wine) might actually be healthy. FWIW.
|
|

11-23-2007, 01:24 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
143 posts, read 131,678 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcsteiner
Want to smoke in my house. Sorry -- take it to the front porch, or leave. There is no middle ground..
Want to smoke in a restaurant? Fair enough -- visit one that allows smoking.
|
What you choose to allow on your property that you own and pay taxes on is your business and under your control.
Shouldn't business owners have the same right to determine what they'll allow on their property?
Obviously, no one is going to be frequenting a restaurant that allows smoking. The state, in it's infinate wisdom, has decided people didn't need to have that choice/right.
|
|

11-23-2007, 01:25 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
143 posts, read 131,678 times
Reputation: 38
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcsteiner
Small amounts of alcohol (e.g., wine) might actually be healthy. FWIW.
|
Yes, it's apparent now that people frequent bars to improve their health.
|
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.
|
|