Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:39 PM
 
Location: Maryland
7,814 posts, read 6,391,086 times
Reputation: 9974

Advertisements

are we going to ban BBQs and wood smokers next? They cant be good to breathe in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:43 PM
 
59,040 posts, read 27,298,344 times
Reputation: 14281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cletus Awreetus-Awrightus View Post
of course not. the public air is the only property in question, and it isn't something that belongs to the smoker.
I disagree. The air inside a busines does NOT belong to the gov't.

NO ONE is FORCED to go into a private business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,023,344 times
Reputation: 6192
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Government can permit or forbid businesses from having alcohol consumption on its grounds. Why is smoking any different?
Government can insist you have a license to serve alcohol. Slightly different distinction. For that type of licensure, it's about making someone abide by regulations from that licensure body. Primarly, this has been concentrated around tax revenue for alcohol.

The more important question, I believe, is why you think it's okay for government to dictate to businesses how they sell alcohol? Are you getting the bigger picture yet?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:48 PM
 
59,040 posts, read 27,298,344 times
Reputation: 14281
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHartphotog View Post
I believe smokers should have the right to smoke (although I never would), so long as they are not affecting anyone else. What they do NOT have the right to do is pollute the air others have to breathe with massive toxins and carcinogens. That is tantamount to assault, and over the long term (like if you live with a smoker who smokes in the home), assault with a deadly weapon.
People can CHOOSE to go into that bar or NOT. If you DON"T go in you won't be exposed to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:50 PM
 
59,040 posts, read 27,298,344 times
Reputation: 14281
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
A well designed ventilation system would eliminate most of the smoke in bars but some would still complain about the smell.
There are exhaust systems today made for smoke. You can't even smell the smoke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 02:52 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Western Massachusetts
45,983 posts, read 53,478,433 times
Reputation: 15184
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
Government can insist you have a license to serve alcohol. Slightly different distinction.
Hmm. I thought any business that has drinking needs a license.


Quote:
The more important question, I believe, is why you think it's okay for government to dictate to businesses how they sell alcohol? Are you getting the bigger picture yet?
I didn't make any statement whether I believe it's okay for government to dictate to businesses how they sell alcohol. My point was that it seems to be the norm in most places.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 03:07 PM
 
Location: Meggett, SC
11,011 posts, read 11,023,344 times
Reputation: 6192
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
Hmm. I thought any business that has drinking needs a license.




I didn't make any statement whether I believe it's okay for government to dictate to businesses how they sell alcohol. My point was that it seems to be the norm in most places.
Actually, the license is for serving alcohol which allows them to skirt around the property rights issue. I agree that it is indeed the norm and why so many people went along with smoking bans.

While I have issues when government uses loopholes to get around making legal activities essentially illegal, the smoking bans don't even try to pretend they are using legitimate government authority. It is a clear property rights violation. They need to either making smoking illegal or stop with all of these property rights violations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 03:10 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
Air in my bar is not "public air".
But your bar isn't completely a private property either. You can give up your license to do business and call it a home and the law would be fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 04:12 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,950,358 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
But your bar isn't completely a private property either. You can give up your license to do business and call it a home and the law would be fine.
Actually, it is entirely private property.

Unless the owner specifies, it is "assumed" that it is open to the public and the licenses simply tells the public that the business meets all of the standards established (building code, fire code, health code, etc... ) so that a person can reasonably expect a safe and legitimate business environment.

The business owner could very easily put up a sign that says private, members only, or he could sit at the door and dictate who enters and who does not. It is solely under their discretion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2011, 05:09 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,621 posts, read 19,163,062 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailordave View Post
Though I don't smoke, I've always been against government smoking bans on private property. Many businesses were already going smoke free of the owner's choice based upon customers wishes.
That's true, and I respect that and would actually patronize some businesses that had bans, although probably less frequently.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top