1/2/2010 9:20:05 PM

Quote :

"The difference here is that I don't agree with removing the owner's choice about whether or not his establishment allows smoking."

If the owner is that hard up to allow smoking, he can become a cigar bar or a "private" club that charges $1 membership. That's what they've been doing in King County since their smoking ban was passed.

1/2/2010 9:20:45 PM

i don't think it's as simple as charging a $1 membership and calling it a "private club"

http://tobaccopreventionandcontrol.ncdhhs.gov/smokefreenc/faq.htm

Quote :

"Non-profit private clubs and country clubs - In order to qualify for this exception, the club must satisfy all of the following criteria: • Membership: The club must maintain selective members. • Operations: The club must be operated by the members. • Restricted service: The club must not provide food or lodging for pay to anyone who is not a member or a member’s guest. • Nonprofit status: The club must either be: o incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under state law (found in G.S. Chapter 55A); or o exempt from paying federal income tax under federal Internal Revenue Code. "

[Edited on January 2, 2010 at 9:39 PM. Reason : +]

1/2/2010 9:35:52 PM

Interesting they put a non-profit clause in there.

Well, I guess you have to become a cigar bar or throw up a patio then

1/2/2010 9:38:26 PM

yeah that non-profit thing is the kick in the "butt"

1/2/2010 9:39:59 PM

Quote :

"Is hookah smoking allowed? Smoking hookah is only allowed if the hookah establishment in not a restaurant, bar or lodging establishment, does not serve food or drink for pay and is not required to comply with state public health laws related to food and drink sanitation."

It's BS that cigar bars are okay but hookah bars aren't. That sucks for Marrakesh

1/2/2010 9:41:17 PM

if you're talking about the place on Hillsborough St

that place is gone, replaced by some hippie joint called "Shakedown Street"

[Edited on January 2, 2010 at 9:44 PM. Reason : caps]

1/2/2010 9:43:58 PM

They've been doing this for a while in DC. I just walk outside to smoke. Big fucking deal.

1/2/2010 10:02:35 PM

^^ Shit really?! That was one of my favorite places to get lunch when I was still in Raleigh

1/2/2010 10:28:13 PM

is the one on glenwood (near peace st) still open?

1/2/2010 10:29:03 PM

^ nope, that one closed months ago. There's one on Peace St though, across from the McD's.

[Edited on January 2, 2010 at 10:46 PM. Reason : .]

1/2/2010 10:30:34 PM

I'm glad I didn't try to go while I was home. I would have been then marched over to Mitch's for hummus

1/2/2010 10:31:42 PM

i came in here to make the "shit on a table" comparison. looks like somebody beat me to it. oh well.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:46 AM. Reason : ]

1/3/2010 2:35:46 AM

Couldn't they at least put the ban into effect in the spring or the fall when the weather is nice

Then they ween you into the extreme hots and colds of summer and winter...its no big deal to go outside to smoke when its 65 degrees and sunny right?

1/3/2010 2:39:43 AM

It's pretty clear that the vocal supporters of this law completely fail to make any valid points. I expect to see many groups publish point-by-point rebuttals to help address the many completely stupid arguments being made by supporters of this law.
I mean, many of them apparently don't even know what the debate is over! For instance, here:

Quote :

"I didn't expect to see so many people arguing for the right to smoke in bars. Strange."

and here:

Quote :

"I seem to have missed the section in the constitution that allows for trampling the rights of the minority in favor of the majority. Could you point that out for me? K thx Edit: FYI, the minority I'm referring to are the business owners being told what they can or can not allow on their private property. Not the smokers themselves. Thought I'd clear that up."

Quote :

"For the millionth time, your rights aren't being trampled. YOU AREN'T BEING PREVENTED FROM SMOKING IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO WHERE YOU WANT TO PARTY AND DRINK AND BE SOCIAL, OR EAT, ETC. You just can't continue to do it in a fashion that harms those that don't smoke."

These two supporters of the law seem to think that the issue is over the right of smokers to smoke in bars and restaurants. This of course is wrong, and hilarious…like smokers should have the right to go into any bar and restaurant and light up. (No.)

Promisingly, nearly all the support for this bogus legislation is similarly off-point or otherwise easily refuted. This law won't survive.

1/3/2010 11:18:07 AM

I've read this thread and I want to send out a huge LOL to AngryOldMan for completely dismantling McDanger. That guy clearly could benefit from being knocked down a few pegs.

Another thing I thought was interesting, was vinylbandit saying that his majority-smokers workplace has people that are deciding that this is the time to quit BECAUSE of the new law. To me that is a really awesome "side effect" of the law. If the law provides that impetus that smokers need to quit their cancer sticks, I like it.

Smokers have had the upper hand for a long damn time now. It's about time the majority (i.e. non-smokers) ruled.

1/3/2010 11:29:43 AM

i would like to see more comparisons with this law and laws to prevent gay marriage, please

1/3/2010 11:32:33 AM

^^ Based on what I saw yesterday, no one is quitting. The only complaint was that they could've waited until it was a little warmer to force everyone outside.

1/3/2010 11:43:04 AM

In my humble opinion, lawmakers should have related the smoking ban to the protection of children from the "evils" of second hand smoke. Any establishment that allows children through their doors should be smoke free. It would keep people from having to deal with smoke in most restaurants, allow bar owners to do as they please, and better withstand any scrutiny.

but o well.

1/3/2010 11:43:37 AM

yeah. o well.

1/3/2010 11:44:57 AM

1/3/2010 11:48:27 AM

Quote :

"n my humble opinion, lawmakers should have related the smoking ban to the protection of children from the "evils" of second hand smoke. Any establishment that allows children through their doors should be smoke free. It would keep people from having to deal with smoke in most restaurants, allow bar owners to do as they please, and better withstand any scrutiny. "

[/thread]

and I do not see why hookah lounges were not exempt. I suppose "cigar" lounges are ok just like how you can not buy a fucking beer at Carter Finley, unless though you pay $2000 to sit in the Vaughn towers at which point you can drink cocktails the whole game along with the mayor.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 11:57 AM. Reason : ds]

1/3/2010 11:57:11 AM

HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUR

1/3/2010 11:58:10 AM

Quote :

"These two supporters of the law seem to think that the issue is over the right of smokers to smoke in bars and restaurants. This of course is wrong, and hilarious…like smokers should have the right to go into any bar and restaurant and light up. (No.)"

No, we know the fundamental argument is private establishment owners "rights", as if it is written into the Constitution somewhere. It's already been addressed with the food prep and sanitation laws and alcohol permit laws. In your Libertarian fantasy land all those laws go away and the market self regulates. The businesses that are careless with food prep will go out of business...but not before a few people die of ecoli or salmonella poisoning in the process or they burn the bar down being careless for some reason or the other (this happens anyway, even WITH laws). That one shuts down, the next one that opens up is careful for awhile until they get lazy or cut costs and the cycle repeats. Sure, many restaurants will be well managed, many will not be and will injure folks on their way to failure.

The sad thing is, the argument has resorted to this stark absolute when the reality is the smoking minority has been catered to for many decades and the new law is merely a mild inconvenience for those that smoke. But please, keep crying about the slippery slope of liberty for restaurant owners.

1/3/2010 12:35:56 PM

^ I think that's my biggest problem with Libertarianism as a whole. MOST people can't seem to make the conceptual leap that even without government dictating things, societal dictation and regulation still ends up being a form of governance, only now without the lack of institutional accountability.

In short: it's fucking mob rule. And mob rule goes against all the "fairness" you guys continually rattle on about.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 12:43 PM. Reason : but it's nice to think about utopia, isnt it? ]

1/3/2010 12:42:52 PM

^ & ^^ don't know what libertarianism is. (It's not anarchy or mob rule, and it doesn't condone unreasonable risk of harm.)

If you really want to be effective supporters of this law, you'll have to try harder. Your obvious straw man fallacy arguments are too easily defeated. As I said earlier:

Quote :

"It's pretty clear that the vocal supporters of this law completely fail to make any valid points. I expect to see many groups publish point-by-point rebuttals to help address the many completely stupid arguments being made by supporters of this law. .... Promisingly, nearly all the support for this bogus legislation is similarly off-point or otherwise easily refuted. This law won't survive."

I only wish I had the time to compile such a publication, or to have lengthy debates on college message boards. Oh, well.

1/3/2010 12:55:52 PM

TOO EASILY DEFEATED


LIKE THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS THAT BANNED SMOKING IN PUBLIC LOCATIONS


RIGHT?



get the fuck out of here.

1/3/2010 12:58:04 PM

^ Someone is a militant non-smoker. You better settle down cowboy or you are going to give yourself a heart attack.

1/3/2010 1:01:08 PM

did you find your other brain cell, boy-o?

1/3/2010 1:06:26 PM

Snarf Snarf
Snarf Snarf

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 1:38 PM. Reason : l]

1/3/2010 1:38:21 PM

just another stupid thing democrats have done recently

1/3/2010 1:42:34 PM

Quote :

"It's BS that cigar bars are okay but hookah bars aren't. That sucks for Marrakesh"

Yeah, it is. Because guess which one legislators are likely to frequent? They've banned smoking for all the peons, but our lords and masters still have nice fancy clubs where they can light up stogies.

1/3/2010 1:49:42 PM

I'll be glad to sit at Cup A Joe today and have my coffee and read my books and then come home and NOT have to immediately do laundry to remove the nasty smell of skank cigarettes.

All the smokers: My dad smoked for 40 years. He had a double lung transplant in 2006. He takes around 15 pills a day. He has a tube shoved down into his lungs to scrape away cells to make sure his body isn't rejecting his foreign body parts every few months. And before his transplant, they told us he would be dead within 2 years. He couldn't walk from his car to a restaurant without stopping to catch his breath.

So, yeah, screw smoking.

1/3/2010 1:51:16 PM

I thought the whole appeal of Cup A Joe was the fact that you could smoke inside. I know it can't be the coffee.

1/3/2010 1:53:55 PM

OK, well I'm real sad about your little story there. But while we're throwing around pointless anecdotes, I'll mention that my only surviving grandfather smoked more than two packs a day for forty years, outlived his nonsmoking wife and siblings, and currently has no health problems to speak of.

Your appeals to emotion are falling on deaf hears, sweetheart.

1/3/2010 1:54:44 PM

Quote :

"Yeah, it is. Because guess which one legislators are likely to frequent? They've banned smoking for all the peons, but our lords and masters still have nice fancy clubs where they can light up stogies."

EXACTLY

Quote :

"I'll be glad to sit at Cup A Joe today and have my coffee and read my books and then come home and NOT have to immediately do laundry to remove the nasty smell of skank cigarettes."

you see I 100% AGREE with the smoking bans for places like this.

1/3/2010 1:56:25 PM

Were there not other coffee places on Hillsborough? I went to Cup-a-Joe precisely and only because I could sit in that one room and smoke while I studied. You fuckers had the option of going to any of the half-dozen other places specializing in coffee on that street.

But I guess one smoking friendly place with wifi was out of the goddamn question. I'm so sorry to have inconvenienced you by wanting one shitty coffee place.

1/3/2010 1:58:55 PM

Well congrats for your grandfather, GrumpyGOP. My dad was not so fortunate.

However, I am STILL glad that I won't have to risk my health for someone else's bad habit.

Oh, and...

Quote :

"Were there not other coffee places on Hillsborough? I went to Cup-a-Joe precisely and only because I could sit in that one room and smoke while I studied. You fuckers had the option of going to any of the half-dozen other places specializing in coffee on that street."

I say, WHAAAA.

Quote :

"Your appeals to emotion are falling on deaf ears, sweetheart."

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:02 PM. Reason : ..]

1/3/2010 2:00:19 PM

There are nonsmoking facilities of every type around Raleigh. You did not have to risk your health. But apparently the inconvenience of not being able to go to EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY GODDAMN PLACE was so much that you now support the government forcing us, at gunpoint, to do as you wish.

1/3/2010 2:02:12 PM

Look at the angry smoker. I hope that anger keeps you hot enough to stay warm while ou stand outside and kill yourself. I'll be glad to wave at your while I sit inside and enjoy my rights...at EVERY GODDAMN PLACE I CHOOSE.

1/3/2010 2:04:20 PM

Cup A Joe will be a casualty of the smoking ban. And then you'll have to go to the 5 other places on H'boro.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:05 PM. Reason : .]

1/3/2010 2:04:57 PM

someone tried to get all preachy with me last night in the bar and wouldn't shut up about how happy she was about the ban and then she straight up started cheering "we won. we won!"

i told her even though i have to go outside to smoke now, she's still fat and ugly

1/3/2010 2:07:34 PM

I personally prefer the coffee at Global Village but people are getting so up in arms about their rights, they are just fun to mess with.

Sorry Grumpy. I hope you're not out of breath from all this huffing and puffing.

1/3/2010 2:07:53 PM

Where did you get the impression that you had a right to sit in a smoke-free privately owned building?

And unlike some people, my lungs work perfectly fine.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:09 PM. Reason : ]

1/3/2010 2:08:15 PM

I know enough athletes who smoke that I'll never buy the "smoking ties directly to poor health/fitness" argument.

1/3/2010 2:09:07 PM

^^^^ You should have told her that if someone forced her to go outside once in a while, she might not be so fat.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:09 PM. Reason : .]

1/3/2010 2:09:37 PM

When I was in ROTC Sgt. Holliday was renowned for his ability to chain smoke while running a two mile, except in reality it was like a six mile because he would run back and forth up the line to check on the different speed groups. So yeah, I'm not buying the fitness thing, either.

1/3/2010 2:10:25 PM

^^^^Again, congrats. You are defying science.

I, however, might not have such wonderful health.

Anyhow, I do feel sorry for smokers. My mom is going to be a BITCH to be around since she cannot smoke while eating anymore. *sigh* It's really going to ruin going out to eat with her.

[Edited on January 3, 2010 at 2:11 PM. Reason : ..]

1/3/2010 2:11:08 PM

Quote :

"Were there not other coffee places on Hillsborough? I went to Cup-a-Joe precisely and only because I could sit in that one room and smoke while I studied. You fuckers had the option of going to any of the half-dozen other places specializing in coffee on that street. "

WTF this is a no win situation. I argue for smoker's rights at some venues and have dipshits like kiljadn clogging the thread with voice vomit. At another point I admit that I agree with the theme of this law for preventing haphazard 2nd hand smoke at place like a coffee shop that is not designed as a "sin" avenue (place like a club).

1/3/2010 2:11:32 PM

they say that smoking promotes weight loss

1/3/2010 2:11:54 PM