If this passes the general assembly Imma go light up in the courthouse

3/23/2007 11:24:39 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans_in_the_United_States

Here's to making that list alot longer! yarr

I like the list of outdoor smoking bans haha.

3/23/2007 11:33:24 AM

Quote :

"Sullivan's Island, effective July 20, 2006, a ban on smoking in workplaces, including restaurants and bars. Upheld by the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas on December 20, 2006. "

I was just at some bars there in early February and there were plenty of people smoking

Maybe some bars will just not choose to even think about enforcing this law

Reminds me of a funny story though...we were in Waffle House on Hillsborough Street late night eating some late night patty melts or something...anyway we were smoking and we werent in the smoking section...some people at an adjacent table, also in the nonsmoking section, complained to Miss Betty about our smoking...her response was something like "well thats just too bad"

Quote :

"Wisconsin Ashland, May 1, 2000 banned in restaurants. Exempts bars, and any restaurants with physically separated and ventilated smoking rooms. "

thats all i ask

theres no fucking constitutional right thats says you are entitled to breathe in clean air while you poison yourself with alcohol

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 11:52 AM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 11:48:43 AM

alcohol isn't poison in moderation. there are plenty studies saying that alcohol can have a positive effect in reasonable quantities.

Quote :

"Reminds me of a funny story though...we were in Waffle House on Hillsborough Street late night eating some late night patty melts or something...anyway we were smoking and we werent in the smoking section...some people at an adjacent table, also in the nonsmoking section, complained to Miss Betty about our smoking...her response was something like "well thats just too bad""

HILARIOUS. you're both assholes.

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:05 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:04:15 PM

Quote :

"One could argue that salt, caffeine, sugar, and fat--among other things--contribute to the poor diet of individuals in our society. These poor diets lead to increased health-care costs for everyone and an out-of-shape population, which has national security implications. Seeing these alarming situations, an overzealous and Utopian politician could introduce legislation to reduce, replace, or eliminate all "dangerous" foods and ingredients"

But these things aren't dangerous in appropriate amounts. A single cigarette blackens the lungs and leads to increased risk of cancer AND...AND...effects the people that didn't intend or want to breathe the polluted smoke.

3/23/2007 12:06:17 PM

nobody makes you go to a smoking establishment.

3/23/2007 12:15:40 PM

Nobody says you have the right to blow smoke in my face and to take my health out while you are taking yours out.

Btw, your wording is whack.

Why am I a non-smoker? Why is it a "smoking" establishment.


Lets call it like it is.

It's a bar or a resteraunt where the patrons are allowed to infringe on the health of other patrons.


[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:22 PM. Reason : a]

3/23/2007 12:19:47 PM

Quote :

"It's a bar or a resteraunt where the patrons are allowed to infringe on the health of other patrons"

only the ones that choose to visit that establishment.

3/23/2007 12:23:26 PM

Even though I don't smoke anymore, I'm against this bill on the grounds that it prevents business owners from deciding what legal activities go on in their business.

3/23/2007 12:24:05 PM

^is my main beef too.

3/23/2007 12:24:33 PM

Quote :

"alcohol isn't poison in moderation"

well then you better enact some more government laws to make sure nobody drinks excessively

Quote :

"HILARIOUS. you're both assholes"

miss betty is an asshole? more like the punk bitches complaining were assholes with a sense of entitlement like our bald troll friend here in this thread

Quote :

"A single cigarette blackens the lungs "

nobody is saying smoking is good for you but thats complete and total bullshit that "a single cigarette blackens the lungs"

Quote :

"It's a bar or a resteraunt where the patrons are allowed to infringe on the health of other patrons."

what gives you the right to go to that restaurant moreso than anyone else?

I hope you don't hit your head on the doorway because your horse is pretty high up

3/23/2007 12:25:48 PM

Quote :

"Exempts bars, and any restaurants with physically separated and ventilated smoking rooms. "

I'd be down for that. I doubt any normal bar is going to go to that effort though.

Quote :

"theres no fucking constitutional right thats says you are entitled to breathe in clean air while you poison yourself with alcohol"

There's also none that say you have a right to smoke in restraunts.

Quote :

".some people at an adjacent table, also in the nonsmoking section, complained to Miss Betty about our smoking...her response was something like "well thats just too bad"

That person could report the restraunt and after enough fines I'm sure they'd start to care.

Anyway it's becoming the law in more and more cities and states. In 10 years the few people who do smoke will be doing it in their private houses or outside. Might as well accept it and move on.

3/23/2007 12:27:07 PM

Why should such a small unhealthy minority have so much power to influence the health of such a large majority?

You completely missed the point that it is a restaurant or a place to socialize with friends, drink some beers, or listen to bands...not places where you go so you can smoke cigarettes. You can do that virtually anywhere and you won't be infringing on my right to a safe bar experience.


I realize you guys think private clubs should have the power to do as they please. The free market will reign true right? I mean, what if a club owner wants to have a concert with a popular band, and due to some negligence, they accidentally set the place on fire and kill over 100? They should be allowed to do that right? I mean, I had the choice when I went in there knowing (or did I know?) that it could happen.

3/23/2007 12:27:55 PM

if so many people really cared so much about this, their economic impact (from not visiting b/c of smoking) on the establishments in question, should be enough to cause the owner to ban smoking on his own, right?

Quote :

"due to some negligence, they accidentally set the place on fire and kill over 100? They should be allowed to do that right? I mean, I had the choice when I went in there knowing (or did I know?) that it could happen."

nowhere near the same thing.

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:29 PM. Reason : ,]

3/23/2007 12:28:03 PM

Quote :

"In 10 years the few people who do smoke will be doing it in their private houses or outside. Might as well accept it and move on."

more like people will always smoke and you might as well accept THAT and move on

Quote :

"a restaurant or a place to socialize with friends, drink some beers, or listen to bands...not places where you go so you can smoke cigarettes"

thank god we have a steroid abusing baldheaded faggot to translate the intention of every single bar and restaurant, regardless of what the actual owners and managers of every bar and restaurant think themselves that they should be able to do on property they own and pay taxes on

3/23/2007 12:31:16 PM

Quote :

"If this passes the general assembly Imma go light up in the courthouse"

That is already illegal.

3/23/2007 12:32:17 PM

Quote :

"you won't be infringing on my right to a safe bar experience"

where exactly are you guaranteed the "right to a safe bar experience"

3/23/2007 12:37:23 PM

Quote :

"more like people will always smoke and you might as well accept THAT and move on"

I agree that people will always smoke (although the numbers are declining). It doesn't bother me at all as long as your polution stays away from me. You can harm youself all you want for all I care as long as it doesn't harm others at the same time.

3/23/2007 12:37:29 PM

Quote :

"nowhere near the same thing."

Explain how it isn't. It's a public safety issue. You go into buildings, you expect them to be safe and secure. Sure, free market theory says if one falls on someones head (say, a Hardees) then people will stop frequenting the establishment...but that didn't help the 100 people that had to die to learn that lesson. The market moves slowly.

Quote :

"if so many people really cared so much about this, their economic impact (from not visiting b/c of smoking) on the establishments in question, should be enough to cause the owner to ban smoking on his own, right?"

I think it ends up being the prisoner dilemma. And, like I said, the market is slow. We are already seeing many places in the area begin to ban smoking, and they are doing ok.

3/23/2007 12:38:42 PM

^^well i dont disagree with that

but what makes you think (hypothetically) that if John Doe owns a bar (building and business)...and John Doe happens to be a smoker...what makes you think you should have the right to go into John Doe's bar and not be exposed to cigarette smoke...isn't what happens in John Doe's bar up to him since its his business that he owns and runs? Assuming its legal of course. Are you saying John Doe can't smoke in his own bar?

Quote :

"You go into buildings, you expect them to be safe and secure."

You just go onto other peoples' property and expect safety? wow...your sense of entitlement is absurd

3/23/2007 12:40:14 PM

businesses open to the public have a responsibility to be safe.

3/23/2007 12:43:09 PM

and if they have a sign up that says "WE ALLOW SMOKING INSIDE" the public has the responsiblity to read the sign and make a choice of whether or not they want to go to this building

3/23/2007 12:44:06 PM

Quote :

"Explain how it isn't. It's a public safety issue. You go into buildings, you expect them to be safe and secure. Sure, free market theory says if one falls on someones head (say, a Hardees) then people will stop frequenting the establishment...but that didn't help the 100 people that had to die to learn that lesson. The market moves slowly."

it's not an expectation that you will have a fire emergency when you enter a bar, it is an expectation to see people smoking in one. If you knew about the fire before hand, you wouldn't go would you?

Quote :

"I think it ends up being the prisoner dilemma. And, like I said, the market is slow. We are already seeing many places in the area begin to ban smoking, and they are doing ok."

if the market is already moving that way, what's the problem. Sounds like you have pleny of smoke free establishments to frequent.

3/23/2007 12:44:51 PM

Quote :

"But these things aren't dangerous in appropriate amounts. A single cigarette blackens the lungs and leads to increased risk of cancer AND...AND...effects the people that didn't intend or want to breathe the polluted smoke."

State409c

Exactly--concerning the emphasized part of your quotation. Then why are fast-food restaurants being sued? What was the purpose of the movie Supersize Me?



Also, many smokers and those exposed to secondhand smoke never develop any health problems. Contrary to your assertions, direct or indirect exposure to tobacco smoke is not a guarantee of illness.

3/23/2007 12:47:49 PM

fast food restaurants being sued has nothing to do with this.

3/23/2007 12:49:06 PM

banning unhealthy foods has everything to do with this

when a shitload of nonsmokers are against this dont you think they might have a point?

btw i'm sure lots of you all go to bars and drink one glass of red wine and leave since you're not drinking excessively?

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:51 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:49:50 PM

Quote :

"Also, many smokers and those exposed to secondhand smoke never develop any health problems. Contrary to your assertions, direct or indirect exposure to tobacco smoke is not a guarantee of illness. "

It may not be guaranteed, but it is an elevated risk.

Quote :

" when a shitload of nonsmokers are against this dont you think they might have a point?"

what about the smokers who are for this?

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:51 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:51:12 PM

one guy's eating a big mac doesn't (directly) affect others.

3/23/2007 12:51:28 PM

^what are the health risks associated with one guy smoking one cigarette

are you going to get lung cancer and die if one guy smokes one cigarette in his bar while you are in his bar?

Quote :

"what about the smokers who are for this?"

they dont have the willpower to quit so they want the govt to help them

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:53 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:52:16 PM

1000 other guys eating hamburgers around me isn't going to affect my health.

3/23/2007 12:53:12 PM

Quote :

"are you going to get lung cancer and die if one guy smokes one cigarette in his bar while you are in his bar?"

that is assuming one guy and only one guy and only assuming that it happens once in your lifetime.

Quote :

"they dont have the willpower to quit so they want the govt to help them"

that is a very blanket statement there. I support banning smoking in public places (also means businesses that are open to the public), but i'm a smoker

[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 12:55 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:53:52 PM

Quote :

"1000 other guys eating hamburgers around me isn't going to affect my health"

and a bar that allows smoking that you dont go to isn't going to affect your health either

Quote :

"When in Rome..."

Quote :

"I support banning smoking in public places (also means businesses that are open to the public), "

so you DONT support property rights

you guys are acting like theres one restaurant within a 100 mile radius of where you live and you are forced to swim through plumes of smoke to eat and live

3/23/2007 12:54:07 PM

Quote :

"Also, many smokers and those exposed to secondhand smoke never develop any health problems. Contrary to your assertions, direct or indirect exposure to tobacco smoke is not a guarantee of illness."

Here is an anecdote for you. I am a bastion of health. I stay out of bars 98% of the year. The other night, I had to go to Amedeos, and I had to sit in the bar area because that was the only thing that wasn't on a wait. I go in, and after about 5 minutes, the 2 behind me decide to have their post dinner "dessert". Before I could even detect the smell, I could feel my throat tighten a little and the air going in and out wasn't as effortless as it was 10 minutes before. And I don't have asthma.

Why should someone with asthma be excluded from enjoying these establishments when the smoker is just as free to step outside to salve their addiction?

3/23/2007 12:56:39 PM

Quote :

"and a bar that allows smoking that you dont go to isn't going to effect your health either"

but it does affect the health of people who are there who aren't smokers. Someone eating a hamburger strictly affects themself and no one else. someone smoking a cigarette in a bar affects everyone in the bar.

this isn't even an aprt comparison

Quote :

"so you DONT support property rights you guys are acting like theres one restaurant within a 100 mile radius of where you live and you are forced to swim through plumes of smoke to eat and liv"

I do support property rights. however, the state has every right to regulate the saftey of the property. it is a risk of doing business..


[Edited on March 23, 2007 at 1:01 PM. Reason : .]

3/23/2007 12:56:40 PM

Quote :

"you guys are acting like theres one restaurant within a 100 mile radius of where you live and you are forced to swim through plumes of smoke to eat and live "

i'm sure there are plenty of small towns in the state where this isn't too far from the truth.

3/23/2007 12:58:43 PM

Quote :

"The other night, I had to go to Amedeos, and I had to sit in the bar area because that was the only thing that wasn't on a wait"

why? why the fuck did you "HAVE TO" go to Amedeos?

Did someone put a gun to your head?

Quote :

"someone smoking a cigarette in a bar affects everyone in the bar. "

everyone in the bar knows there is smoking or not...they know the rules of the bar

3/23/2007 12:58:45 PM

Quote :

"if the market is already moving that way, what's the problem. Sounds like you have pleny of smoke free establishments to frequent."

The market is moving this way. By way of legislature. People are voting on these they aren't just magically passed. That's what is happening right now in NC. I guess this is a difference in opinion on economics I guess. This is in my opinion is a tragedy of the commons situation. The best situation will not come to pass on it's own. Research and previous instances of smoking bans has showed it actually increases bar business and productivity, reduces healthcare costs for companies, and the only sector negatively impacted is the tobacco industry. Hence the best situation is no smoking in public places. I don't mind regulation to get it there.

Quote :

"Are you saying John Doe can't smoke in his own bar?"

Do you believe John Doe should be able to insulate his business with asbestos if he wants to?

3/23/2007 12:59:07 PM

^how come instead of answering my question you just made a laughable analogy?

OMG SHOULD JOHN DOE BE ABLE TO PUT GASOLINE IN HIS FOOD AND SERVE IT WITH EBOLA