Wisconsin, Michigan -- No Smoking Rooms In Hotels -- Period. Thank Liberals. (Brown, biased)

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by Katiana

Analogies about country music, fried chicken, etc have nothing to do with cigarette smoke which is a hazard to OTHERS!

You are correct however the peanut analogy is spot on, using your logic if you are allergic to peanuts and walk into a peanut shop and get sick this is somehow the responsibility of the proprietor because they have peanuts? Certainly if you are allergic to peanuts or don't like peanuts you might want to avoid peanut shops instead of depriving others who enjoy peanuts the pleasure of eating them?

[Osito]

Well good. Only that doesn't help me deal with both my neighbors' smoke.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by nightflight

Of course it fits. Its "principle". Why do you insist on trying to silence people who disagree with you?

You probably shouldn't even waste your time, nightflight. This poster (and quite a few others like her), just either cannot or do not -- whether intentional or related to a larger agenda -- grasp the larger principles and points involved.

To "them" it is always going to be about "them" and/or the Nanny State they want to see become a reality.

Of course, there are degrees and shades and overlaps of all this...ranging from the Puritian types who feel they are annointed and on a divine mission to save other less enlightened commoners from their own "unhealthy" habits....all the way down to the "useful idiots" who have grown up believing they are the center of the universe and adopt the attitude that the role of government is to make sure they are not inconveniced.

You will never get thru to this ilk. They are simply incapable of comprehending the larger point...and seeing the forest for the trees.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by Osito

Well good. Only that doesn't help me deal with both my neighbors' smoke.

Huh? Can you elaborate further? I don't want to misunderstand your point. Did you move into the place knowing ahead of time your neighbors smoked? If so, why?

[suzy_q2010]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Fine it's a peanut bar. You want to nit pick I can keep on going, it's actually quite easy since there is so many things similar.

You're an adult, yes? Are you incapable of making adult decisions?

Peanut allergies are terrible for those who have to deal with them, and food establishments who use them now commonly place warnings so that people with allergies can choose not to come inside.

Peanuts --- and the other foodstuffs you are using in your attempts to develop analogies --- have nutritional benefits, and it is not necessary for everyone to avoid them.

Environmental smoke affects everyone. There are no beneficial effects at all. No one should be exposed to it, just as no one should be exposed to radioactive uranium. Tobacco smoke is poisonous. No business owner should be allowed to expose his customers to it, even those who do not mind being exposed.

Supporting bans against indoor tobacco smoke is an adult decision.

[wade52]

Originally Posted by Yooperkat

Michigan and Wisconsin have banned smoking in hotels. This happened last year. Jennifer Granholm is an anti-freedom slob and a left wing zealot. It's no wonder that Michigan elected a Republican this time for Governor.

My wife and I recently went on vacation down south. Coming back north we discovered that we couldn't get a smoking room at any hotel in WI or MI.

Why would these states discourage tourism? Tourism is one of Michigan's biggest industries. It's stupid.

If someone smokes in a hotel room -- IT WILL NOT KILL THE FAMILY IN THE NEXT ROOM. Get it Democrats?

Why is it that whenever LIBERALS are in charge ..... AMERICANS lose their FREEDOM?

Both Wisconsin and Michigan have GOP governors and legislatures.

What was that you were saying? Seems like you were trying to make some sort of a point.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by suzy_q2010

I did miss that you are a non-smoker. Sorry.

No problem!

I still do not believe that smoking bans infringe on the rights of individuals or business owners any more than other regulations on business activities do. Smokers are still free to smoke. There are just places where they cannot do it, because it is unsafe for other people sharing those spaces.

You may not believe it, but I venture to say major reason for not believing it is because you are one of those on the scale from 1 - 10 (sorta defined earlier ranging from pure Putitan zealots all the way to those who simply don't accept/see the larger dangers) as around an 8. No personal insult intended in the least, but Lenin had it right in another day and age defending the existence of the Socialistic State, when he called those on the other end "useful idiots." You strike as more of one with a true agenda.

Would you say it is up to a convenience store to decide whether to allow someone to smoke while he places gasoline in his car?

Another non-sequiteur, Suzy, as this would obviously violate public safety standards and fire-codes.

I am going to respectfully decline to give any details on my business or my husband's, as that would infringe on my anonymity here. Let us just say we are both familiar with the ins and outs of running a small business, even if it is not in the hospitality sector.

That's fine. I empathize completely on the details of the business for privacy reasons. HOWEVER, it seems evident that the business you ran/help run, are not of the type that involve catering to long established customers and patrons who come in the eat, drink, stay a few days, etc. There is a difference.

And the clue to the solution for your home town restaurant lies in the phrase I have highlighted in your anecdote. Total smoking bans make it much easier for business than partial bans. Compliance with a total ban does not require any large investment. Probably all you have to do is make a few no smoking signs and you are set to go.

Total bans also level the playing field. No business gains an advantage because it has the financial resources to put in totally separate smoking areas with fancy ventilation systems. Such facilities are not needed.

*shakes head sadly again*. We are really just talking past each other, ma'am. LOL You will never see just how righteous and self-superior -- even if you don't intend it that way -- come across.

By your own admission, you have absolutely no experience with running a business of this nature. But simply take for granted your credentials to tell those who do, what they should do. Ultimately however, it involved a total smoking ban, right?

Why don't you just come out and say right out that you would like to see a total prohibition on smoking and the manufacture/sale of smokeable tobacco products? I could honestly respect that one a lot more, because it fesses up the the ultimate agenda and would save us both from wading thru the BS and cutting thru the rind and to the melon.


[QUOTE} Please note that smoking bans are not "to save others from their own bad habits." They are to save bystanders from the effects of the smoker's bad habit.[/quote]

Is there really that much difference in the general outlook and attitude? I can't see much at all, but I just one of those dinosaurs who believes in traditional ideals of freedom!

Anyway, so your purpose is to save "bystanders" from the effects of "smoker's bad habits", correct?

First? Give your definition of a "bystander", please. I mean, in the realm of patronizing a private establishment where they knew smoking was allowed aforehand?

Second: How does the said definition of the "bystander" offset any responsibility to take care of their own health issues?

I eagerly await the answers!

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by suzy_q2010

Peanut allergies are terrible for those who have to deal with them, and food establishments who use them now commonly place warnings so that people with allergies can choose not to come inside.

So it's sign you want that says this establishment allows smoking? No problem, I can agree with that.

[Katarina Witt]

Oh, quit twisting what people say. A sign about peanuts does not equate to wanting a sign about cigarettes.

[Osito]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

Huh? Can you elaborate further? I don't want to misunderstand your point. Did you move into the place knowing ahead of time your neighbors smoked? If so, why?

Nope.