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.
And here I thought we were (debating) talking about the “reason” for the laws themselves! Laws themselves are worthless if there isn’t any reason for them! So we’re back to the question about the business owner and should he honor the health laws that we’re talking about? Now I'm wanting to go out and smoke a cigarette
If there wasn't any logical rational reason for the laws why have them?
Then STAY AWAY from businesses that allow smoking. It's that simple.
If business' want to make money, then they don't want non-smokers to STAY AWAY. They want non-smokers to COME AND INVEST. It's very bad business for most of them to keep a smokers enviroment, especially with all the successful lawsuits against cigarette companys. Most smokers are not at all bothered by the non-smoking laws, at least the ones that I know.
And here I thought we were (debating) talking about the “reason” for the laws themselves! Laws themselves are worthless if there isn’t any reason for them! So we’re back to the question about the business owner and should he honor the health laws that we’re talking about? Now I'm wanting to go out and smoke a cigarette
If there wasn't any logical rational reason for the laws why have them?
Exactly, we are not discussing whether the owners should obey the laws as you stated earlier. IMO, the laws are unreasonable and should be considered unconstitutional because they violate the property rights of the owner.
If business' want to make money, then they don't want non-smokers to STAY AWAY. They want non-smokers to COME AND INVEST. It's very bad business for most of them to keep a smokers enviroment, especially with all the successful lawsuits against cigarette companys. Most smokers are not at all bothered by the non-smoking laws, at least the ones that I know.
I agree completely. This is allowing the market to handle it, instead of the nanny state.
Exactly, we are not discussing whether the owners should obey the laws as you stated earlier. IMO, the laws are unreasonable and should be considered unconstitutional because they violate the property rights of the owner.
So you’re saying that the laws are unreasonable because they violate the property rights of the owner. Now I’m talking about both laws the health issue of the latex glove not being used in the restaurant and the smoking ban. Both laws are health issues.
So you’re saying that the laws are unreasonable because they violate the property rights of the owner. Now I’m talking about both laws the health issue of the latex glove not being used in the restaurant and the smoking ban. Both laws are health issues.
I make the distinction because cooks having to wash their hands and having to wear gloves are matters that are transparent to the customer and should be required to protect them from unforeseen dangers. However, a room full of smoke and/or smokers is quite obvious, thereby allowing the customer a choice of whether to patronized such a business or not and be subjected to the smoke.
I didn't read this whole thread, but did anyone mention cities like Calabasas where they have pretty much banned smoking everywhere? Indoors and outdoors?
I didn't read this whole thread, but did anyone mention cities like Calabasas where they have pretty much banned smoking everywhere? Indoors and outdoors?
Thanks for that warning. If you'll give me the state its in, I'll make an effort to avoid that city.
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.