[Scenic Sounds]

Cathryn Crawford's latest!

[Cathryn Crawford]

Ping!

If you want on or off this ping list, let me know.

[longtermmemmory]

bump

[forktail]

So I live and work in NYC... I don't smoke. I go to bars now and again.

While on one hand I really like not stinking of cigarettes for two days after getting a pint (or 12) of Guinness I really don't want The Government (TM) legislating this sort of thing. Sure ban smoking in hospitals, day-care centers and schools... but BARS?

Seems like a wase of time, money & energy.

[rapture-me]

I understand the concept that you propose & mostly agree. In the interest of public safety, could we also automatically have each patron deposit their car keys with the bartender and require a Breathalyzer test before they are returned to the car owner prior to leaving the bar?

[SheLion]

Those who endorse the public health side of this issue contend that health issues outweigh every argument. They believe that people have the right to always be in the safest environment possible (whether they want to be or not), and that legislation is the proper vehicle by which to ensure public health.

Then this just means that the "Government" will only "protect" us when it suits THEM.

For instance:  911.............On September 11th, the EPA went into NYC and ASSURED the City that it was SAFE to breath that AIR!  Then, months down the line when workers were becoming sick, they backed their Safe Air Train up.  People caught the EPA in a LIE!

So, when it suits the Government...................that's how "I" look at it.

[SheLion]

Why not just require restaurants and bars that permit smoking to post a notice advising prospective customers of the hazard?

My very favorite place in all the world to eat..........The Par and Grill..............did a big remodeling.  They glass enclosed the non-smoking room.  Big beautiful glass enclosed room for the non-smokers.  Although I hardly ever saw anyone in there.

Then, they installed 4 huge ceiling smoke eaters.  You couldn't even SMELL any smoke, and you had to look to see if anyone WAS smoking!  The bar section had tables and booths where we could enjoy a good meal, (full menu), a beverage and enjoy a cigarette.

On the door outside, there is a sign "This Is A Smoking Establishment."

They went all out to accommodate all the patrons.  But that wasn't good enough for the Maine Health Coalition.  THEY want a level playing field.  Level to whom?  I'm sure it's going to "level" quite a few revenues!

[SheLion]

Until smoking is banned altogether, the decisions regarding the right to smoke in privately owned businesses should be left up to the individual discretion of the owner. Otherwise, choice is removed and replaced with full control by the government, which invalidates the entire idea of private ownership.

Like I said.......I shudder to think who else the Government has on their "HIT LIST" now that they got their foot in the door with the smoking ban.  Everyone with a business who hasn't been hit, keep your backs covered.  It COULD happen to YOU!

[jmc813]

WOD Ping

[Ichneumon]

When someone makes a decision (any decision), they must decide for themselves what risks are involved, and weigh them rationally against the benefits.

One of the best one-liners on this topic, which makes the point concisely: One time a busybody saw humorist Robert Benchley drinking hard liquor and asked him, "Don't you know that stuff's slow poison?" Benchley replied, "That's okay, I'm in no hurry."

[Senormechanico]

I quit smoking in 1970, but I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK !!
We are slowly losing all our freedoms.
What's next? Jogging without a helmet?

SM

[freeeee]

When most people think of communism they think of money. The most famous characteristic of classic communist countries is a nationalized economy: communist governments don't recognize an individuals right to assert private property rights over a business. This is chiefly done to deny a private business owner's property right to his profits, hence the tendency to think of communism as a purely economic phenomenon. But when closely analyzed, the key component of communism isn't merely state control of money, it's the state's failure to respect private property rights of all sorts.

Money isn't the only property right a business owner has. He has the right to determine what occurs on his or her property. His right extends to the cash in his register, the music he plays, the food he serves, the products he offers, and yes, what behavior is tolerated on his property, including smoking.

The communist holds that the will of the people outweighs the rights of the individual, hence they will themselves become owners of businesses, and collectively assign themselves its property rights. It is said communist governments assert this "ownership" on behalf of the people. But at least they're honest and upfront about it: they tell you right to your face that you can't own a business.

However a more insidious form of communism exists: government, always seeking power and therefore money may seek to take advantage of the prosperity of the free market. It operates under a false façade of ownership, alleging private property rights exist and doling them out in barely sufficient amounts as privileges in order to lure productive individuals to create wealth. This is properly called fascism.

So when any people vote to steal a man's property right to allow smoking on his premises, they are by definition behaving as communists. When they allege he still owns his business, they are fascists. Few will own up to this because it would expose them for what they are. They'll call themselves free or capitalists, but then again I can call myself a fire hydrant. They are defined by their actions, and now you know who and what they really are.

[freekitty]

I don't smoke anymore, and I don't see any reason for these stupid laws banning smoking; especially since they are not about banning smoking. That's the point. They are about controling the masses rather than any health issue. Most control issues are. One of the tactics is scaring the hell out of you on just about anything. Now they are doing it with food. What's next? The talk police?

P.S. I loved smoking and really hated to give it up; but it was my decision. And some day I just may have one more.

[secretagent]

kcpq
Businesses Vow To Ignore Smoking Ban
The Associated Press

December 27, 2003, 10:56 PM PST

TACOMA -- As many as 40 bar and restaurant owners say they plan to disobey the Pierce County smoking ban set to go into effect next Friday, and are raising money to sue to overturn it.

The ban would prohibit smoking in bars, restaurants, bowling alleys, minicasinos, hotels and most other non-tribal businesses in Pierce County.

The business owners had been relying on the Washington Restaurant Association to lead the charge. But that group has backed away from the threat of legal action.

The ban, by the Tacoma-Pierce County Board of Health, which would be the first of its kind in the state. Harry Johnson, owner of Pegasus Restaurant in Tacoma, says business owners have already pledged 25-thousand dollars to overturn the ban. In the meantime, many plan to let their customers keep right on puffing Friday, even though that could bring fines on both the smokers and businesses. Violators also could lose licenses needed to stay open for business.

Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press

[William Terrell]

I am without the scientific qualifications to resolve that issue, but I am comfortable assuming that cigarette smoke doesn't become safer just because one person has inhaled it before it gets to me.

You don't have to have any scientific qualifications to evaluate an issue of commonsense. The fact is that most smokers smoke most of their lives and do not die of heart disease, lung cancer and emphysema. It's only necessary to note that these people pull smoke directly into their lungs without dilution by the surrounding atmosphere.

So-called secondhand smoke has been filtered through the lungs of the smoker and is diluted by large cubic volumes of the atmosphere, even in a crowded room. The only way a person who breathes secondhand smoke can contact an illness from it is if they already are fragile enough to contact an illness from simply living in a medium size city.

Our current world population is at levels that argue against any significant number of these delicate people. All this is quite beyond the fact that secondhand smoke studies have been proven to be junk science.

Many people don't like the smell of (unscented)tobacco smoke. Heretofore, they have not been able to say anything because they produce bad smells themselves, albeit out of the other end, although (in most cases) not as often.

These are the people who refuse to let go of their holy reliance on the mentioned junk science, and since their cause is to further impact individual civil liberties, politicians, who loathe civil liberties as a limit on their powers, help them out.

[Poser]

I love smokers. Every time they buy a pack of cigarettes, they pay a few dollars tax that I won't have to pay.

Thank you guys.

[MissAmericanPie]

"Granting that assumption, which deserves priority"

No assumption deserves priority. Science is divided on the effects of second hand smoke.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Until smoking is banned altogether, the decisions regarding the right to smoke in privately owned businesses should be left up to the individual discretion of the owner.

Is this a forgone conclusion---smoking to be ultimately banned?

[Old Professer]

If health issues outweighed every argument, we wouldn't be agonizing over what to do with the Aids Brigade.

[the_french_gynecologist]

in quebec the drinking age is 18 and but is usually ignored if you look older than 16... restaurants are required to have a seperate non-smoking section... bars are exempt and attempts to restrict owners from advertising their video gambling units have also failed... the ban on smoking in the workplace is still very new and so far has been successfully ignored

all food and drink establishments must conform to the french language law and have french signs, menus and french speaking personnel... protection of the french minority is older than the canadian constitution itself... so far the non-smokers, ex-smokers, and the we know what's good for you lobby does not yet enjoy similar protection and we can still smoke without being harassed by constitutionally protected "non-smokers"

so why don't bars have no-alcohol sections for recovering alcoholics

a friend of mine once said that the degree to which you're allowed to break the law is an indicator of the freedom of a society... we pay a lot of taxes and aren't allowed to make right turns on red... but rarely is anyone locked up for smoking a joint... i quit smoking years ago but i don't preach or harp on anyone that wants to light up in my home or a company truck... i play the good host or crack open a window...

i hope the anti-tobacco lobby doesn't succeed because that's what the government would love... another moral excuse to judge and sentence americans

[swarthyguy]

Fat chance.

Smokers are the new macacas!

The only group everyone can dump on without any misgivings.