Smoking in South Carolina (Columbia, Charleston: home, live in, restaurants)

[KMT]

From what limited research I have been able to do, it appears that South Carolina still allows smoking in restaurants and other locations.

Is this something that anyone coming from states that do ban smoking have considered? I did not until today.

Is anyone aware of any legislation in progress to ban smoking? I plan on researching it more but was looking for quick answers.

I want to clarify that I have nothing against smokers...just breathing smoke.

Keith

[anonymous]

there may be local bans in places, but I've never seen a place here in Columbia, or one in Charleston that bans smoking.

[KMT]

Originally Posted by anonymous

there may be local bans in places, but I've never seen a place here in Columbia, or one in Charleston that bans smoking.

Thanks. During the brief moment I had to research a statute I saw something about local jurisdictions and their ability (or lack of) to enact ordinances, but I needed to read further.

Keith

[KMT]

I answered my own question.

According to the SC State Legislature site,

H 3795 General Bill was introduced and passed on 04/26/06 Yeas-55 Nays-52


A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 44-95-25 SO AS TO PROHIBIT SMOKING IN A RESTAURANT AND TO PROVIDE A PENALTY FOR VIOLATION.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Chapter 95, Title 44 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 44-95-25. (A) It is unlawful for a person to smoke or possess lighted smoking material in any form in a restaurant.

(B) A person violating subsection (A) is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined not less than fifty nor more than seventy-five dollars."

SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon approval by the Governor.

Looks like it awaits the Govenors signature.

Keith

[margo]

I am from Ca, and I love the fact that people can't smoke in public places; however, I would not move into tobacco country and expect the same laws to apply. As long as I can say please don't smoke in my home or car, I am fine. It is always a shock to us when we leave CA.

[Sonrise]

KMT,
Being millitantly anti smoking the one if not only thing I like about Cali. is the fact that you can't smoke in doors anywhere. Thank God! In Greenville it seems to be optional thus far but most of the restaurants we visited were smoke free. Pleasant suprise. We spoke to a waitress @ Stax's, a local chain of diners (awesome food) and they were all smoke free. She said that it'll be soon that smoking indoors will be banned. Yeah!

[anonymous]

well, to be honest, you're dealing with something that runs very deep, politically speaking. Not 'smoking', exactly, but libertarianism. One MAJOR difference between CA and SC, for example, is that in CA nobody thinks twice about banning something. If it's 'good for public health', it'll get banned in California.

In South Carolina, that would never pass. The reason it's been sitting on the gov's desk unsigned, is because our governor (and our citizens) are very anti-government. Generally speaking we (and I) believe that banning smoking is simply the gov't stepping on the toes of citizens. I mean, if an establishment wants to ban it, that's perfectly within their rights. But having the state mandate that.. well, that's different. most south carolinians are for small gov't, and believe that banning smoking is simply the state government over-extending their boundaries.

This is the sort of 'conservativeness' that south carolina has. It has more to do with independence and personal responsibility than it does with the 'moral majority' type B.S., although both come into play.

[KMT]

Originally Posted by anonymous

well, to be honest, you're dealing with something that runs very deep, politically speaking. Not 'smoking', exactly, but libertarianism. One MAJOR difference between CA and SC, for example, is that in CA nobody thinks twice about banning something. If it's 'good for public health', it'll get banned in California.

In South Carolina, that would never pass. The reason it's been sitting on the gov's desk unsigned, is because our governor (and our citizens) are very anti-government. Generally speaking we (and I) believe that banning smoking is simply the gov't stepping on the toes of citizens. I mean, if an establishment wants to ban it, that's perfectly within their rights. But having the state mandate that.. well, that's different. most south carolinians are for small gov't, and believe that banning smoking is simply the state government over-extending their boundaries.

This is the sort of 'conservativeness' that south carolina has. It has more to do with independence and personal responsibility than it does with the 'moral majority' type B.S., although both come into play.

Anonymous:

I can see that staunch independence coming out in South Carolinians! I'm glad to see a law is on the Gov's desk however. I am all for a persons right to smoke but feel restrictions are in order for public places given the health problems affiliated with second hand smoke...especially in a restaurant. One cannot control where the smoke goes (other people, the kitchen on the food, etc.).

The Bill awaiting signature also accounts for other public places and in some cases, the designation of specific smoking areas.

I live in Florida and greatly appreciate the smoking ban.

Keith

[Marks]

Originally Posted by KMT

Anonymous:

I can see that staunch independence coming out in South Carolinians! I'm glad to see a law is on the Gov's desk however. I am all for a persons right to smoke but feel restrictions are in order for public places given the health problems affiliated with second hand smoke...especially in a restaurant. One cannot control where the smoke goes (other people, the kitchen on the food, etc.).

The Bill awaiting signature also accounts for other public places and in some cases, the designation of specific smoking areas.

I live in Florida and greatly appreciate the smoking ban.

Keith

Good point, Keith. I live in CA and I appreciate the smoking ban here as well. It's not about "banning smoking" it's about restricting the "public" places one can smoke. Who would want to go to a restaurant filled with smoke?

Mark

[anonymous]

well, i think the point is that any establishment already has the authority to ban smoking if they wish, and it's not necessary for the government to tell everyone to do it.

I'm not a smoker, and I get irritated when people smoke next to me in restaurants as well. However, I blame the smoker and the restaurant, in that order. If the government were to get involved in the situation, I'd get a little worried.