Smoking Ban

[Thorfinn]

You may be right. But then again, the people who would know would be the bar owners themselves, who actually have money riding on the decision. If they could really make more money going smoke free, you can bet they would take the cheaper insurance and toss the ashtrays...

[EDIT]
That didn't come out quite right. What I meant was that if it was, indeed, a better business model to be smoke-free, at least a few of the smoke-free bars would have been paying propositions, and since they would have lower insurance, would be at a competitive advantage, and the rest of the bars would feel pressure to go smokeless as well, just to keep from being driven out of business.

If there were a monetary advantage to a smokeless bar, you wouldn't have to force businesses to go smoke-free -- they would have done it on their own.
[/EDIT]

[ 05-11-2003, 02:01 AM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]

[Mordenheim]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Mordenheim: The bigger picture is a political correct America that has you in jail for sneezing.

But does nothing if you kill someone with secondhand smoke? [/QUOTE]show me proof

a single case will do

[Mordenheim]

Originally posted by Reeka: Even PRIVATE BUSINESS (which are open to the public)cannot by law expose their patrons to health hazards. Now if it is a PRIVATE CLUB, yes, I agree with you completely. The public assumes, and rightfully so (thanks to the government imposing standards of practice) that any estalishment open to the public is safe. And on the matter of employees, employees do have rights, the right to work in as safe an environment as can be provided---this is why we have OSHA.

They can work in a non smoking job. Plenty of places allow smoking. They don't have that right.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: I smoke, cheap foul smelling cigars, if you don't like it don't come to my house. I smoke at work if you don't like it don't patronize my business. But It WILL be a cold day in "Hale" before I'm forced to stop, they'll plant my red-neck rear end in the ground before I'm forced to doing anything I don't want to do.

No-one's forcing you to stop smoking. What are you talking about John?

The law is catching up with smoking in public places. Places where nonsmokers have had to endure smokers inconsideration for years now.

Planes, trains, and now bars are gradually becoming places where those of us ALERGIC to tobacco, no longer have to avoid, or endure smoke under duress. Why should I have to give up singing in public because people don't have the courtesy to not smoke around non smokers?

Most smokers just don't give a shyt. I've seen smokers blow smoke over people (who don't have a cigarette) like they hold them in disdain, Which they don't. Many don't ask. I am so appreciative when a smoker ASKS if I mind if they smoke near me. Frighteningly rare though.

So now, finally smokers are forced to be considerate of others. If you want a cig, smoke at home, outside, in private, just not around nonsmokers or in public places where your choice to smoke overrides the nonsmokers choice not to. [/QUOTE]What the "Hale"! You are saying that a bar that is owned by a private individual, private company, Or PUBLIC TRADED COMPANY for that matter is a public place? Have you lost your mind? It's not a public place it's called private property. There is noway around that FACT. Sorry but you are not going to even have that point at all. If you try to sing in a bar and the bar owner doesn't want you there and tells you to leave, if you don't leave it is CRIMIMAL TRESPASS and you go to jail, DO NOT PASS GO DO NOT COLLECT $200, period end of story. Where's your public place now? HHHHHMMMMMMM? So yes they are FORCING me to STOP, in those locations. Noway arround it at all. Yes Miss Reeka ma'am, that does smack of communism!, Nazism, or any other Totalitarism that anybody wishes to label it. There is a world of differance in the owner of the busines saying he doesn't want smoking in their business and the Government telling a business owner that they MUST not have smoking in their business.

I pulled this gem out and qouted it in full So now, finally smokers are forced to be considerate of others. If you want a cig, smoke at home, outside, in private, just not around nonsmokers or in public places where your choice to smoke overrides the nonsmokers choice not to. you just testified against yourself and for me, please note the word force. normaly at this time if I was going to be mericful I would say "The prosecution rests" but tonight I'm not "feeling" mericful, which is ok since it's a "FEELING

Smokers distain nonsmokers, that very well maybe, but it's not against the law to distain others. How do you know if an individual is distaining another or not distaining another? Can you see into their heart? Show me the nail holes in your hands, your feet, or where the spear piereced your side that qualifies you to make that kind of judgment into another's heart? If they are there then you can appear beside me right now as I'm writing this... Nope no appearance. That point is mute, as you already tesified in your above quote "Which they don't".
I appeciate alot of things, but does that give me the right to make others bend to my will? Or you the right to make others bend to your will? If it does then it works BOTH ways! It is my will that the non smoker shut up about it. I'll bet right now that there is going to be a lot of flak about my stament of will by people not wanting to bend to my will that want me to bend to thiers. Any takers on that bet?

Show me ONE verifable death that has come from second hand smoke! "Hale" you can even enlist the help of the good Doctor Attilaus (I knew I'd blow the spelling) to help you in your search. I'm sure he has access to the world's major medical journals and studies and could help you in that quest. But don't hold your breath to find even ONE verifiable case.

Let's be honest here (and it's been my experiance that not a whole "Hale" of a lot of people possess suficant testoterone producing glands to be honest) the majority of non smokers don't like smoking because they think smoking is yucky and smells bad. I think alot of things are yucky smell bad, sound bad, look bad, taste bad or feel (as in the sense of touch) bad. Are you going to give me the same right to decide what can and can't be done by you. As you are demanding I give you. If not it is complete Hypocriacy, noway around that either.

As you (universal "you" for anyone wishing to enter in to this scrap) can tell I got a dog in this fight and you better pack your lunch and come loaded for bear, because you're going to be at it for a looooonnnngggg time. You better come with verifiable facts and not "feelings" because I'll use my "feelings" agianst you. You will HAVE to submit to my "feelings" if you try to make me submitt to your "feelings" or face the fact of your Hypocriacy.

[Chewbacca]

I know a few regular bar goers that are giving up thier favorite Boston pub for one out in the suburbs in a community which actually gives the bars a choice in the matter. Imagine that, a choice...

Talk about pork- Boston has hired 8 inspectors to enforce this prohibition the same time they are laying off cops and firefighters.

Choice- an idea worth being self-righteous about. Everyone is going to die, whether its by smoking, a car or a gun, but not everyone gets the freedom choice.

I would rather die slowly from empazyma so I may have time to give my final regards to friend and family than die swiftly in a car wreck or by a gun wound.
So I think the health nazi's should be more obsessed with enforcing simple traffick laws or getting handguns away from criminals than whether or not a privately owned establishemnt allows some or all tobacco consumption.

We should give the bars the same freedom to choose for thier customers as a non-smoker has to work and play somewhere no smokers dwell.

[ 05-11-2003, 04:40 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Reeka: well, I think that there are alot more drinkers out there than smokers--drinkers who do not smoke that is. I except that bar owners will find thier business increasing.

Miss Reeka Ma'am, I doubt that very much, if it was true then there would allready be more non smoking bars opened by private individual and companies, then bar that alow smoking. There's what about 1,000,000 folks in greater B'ham, Al how many non smoking bars are there? There's nothing like the motvation of profit to get a business up and going [img]smile.gif[/img]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: I know a few regular bar goers that are giving up thier favorite Boston pub for one out in the suburbs in a community which actually gives the bars a choice in the matter. Imagine that, a choice... Talk about pork- Boston has hired 8 inspectors to enforce this prohibition the same time they are laying off cops and firefighters. Choice- an idea worth being self-righteous about. Everyone is going to die, whether its by smoking, a car or a gun, but not everyone gets the freedom choice. I would rather die slowly from empazyma so I may have time to give my final regards to friend and family than die swiftly in a car wreck or by a gun wound. So I think the health nazi's should be more obsessed with enforcing simple traffick laws or getting handguns away from criminals than whether or not a privately owned establishemnt allows some or all tobacco consumption. We should give the bars the same freedom to choose for thier customers as a non-smoker has to work and play somewhere no smokers dwell.

HOLD YOUR HORSES "HALE" has frozen over this southern red-neck conservative applauds the liberal yankee Preach it brother Chewie, PREACH IT!
edit execpt for thg gun part, but that's a whole 'nother scrap

[ 05-11-2003, 04:56 AM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[johnny]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Mordenheim: The bigger picture is a political correct America that has you in jail for sneezing.

But does nothing if you kill someone with secondhand smoke? [/QUOTE]Are you on a mission or something ? Kill people with secondhand smoke ? Give me a break, you inhale more crap by just walking outside in the city, than when you're in a bar where there's a few people smoking. Maybe they should ban heavy industry, cars, and airfields as well, so that we can all be healthy and happy ?

[Lord Dracon]

Interesting fact

If all the tobbaco crops in the world were replaced with grain (or some other food) then you could feed all the starving people in africa for about half a year.

P.S. Can't really remember it accurately, but there's something for you to think about

[johnny]

Originally posted by Lord Dracon: Interesting fact If all the tobbaco crops in the world were replaced with grain (or some other food) then you could feed all the starving people in africa for about half a year. P.S. Can't really remember it accurately, but there's something for you to think about

And what AFTER that half year ? A lot of people would be angry, cause they can't smoke anymore, and the Africans will be back where they left off.

Your comment doesn't hold any water. What they REALLY need to do, is replace the governments of those countries, with leaders who CARE for their people, and don't keep everything to themselves.

But no... blame it on the smokers, they're the ones responsible for the hunger in Africa. They're all criminals i tell ya.

[ 05-11-2003, 06:28 AM: Message edited by: johnny ]