[Gabz]

Prohibiting smoking is no different than any of those other restrictions on a "private" business.

Actually it is, on many levels.........but primarily the fact that all the other restrictions were in place and agreed upon before openning the doors to "some" members of the public.

As to my "selfish views," it is those who wish to smoke that are exhibiting selfishness.

Not if it is the owner that is the smoker. You dictating his use of his property is selfish. No one has to patronize an establishment where they do no like the atmosphere. telling him he can't smoke in his own place is like mandating he serve certain types of food because you don't like what he is currently serving. If you don't like the place, go elsewhere or better yet, spend your own money and open your own place and leave small business people alone.

[Lucky Dog]

Actually it is, on many levels.........but primarily the fact that all the other restrictions were in place and agreed upon before openning the doors to "some" members of the public.

Do you think that there were no business in existence when any of those previous restrcitions were enacted? Do you think that the owners of those businesses should have been exempted just because their businesses existed prior to the law's enactment?

You dictating his use of his property is selfish.

If he opens his (or her) business to the public, then he or she is restricted by law what he or she can do in the business. This true for any business. For example, a smoker may not smoke in an explosive manufacturing business, even if it is his, nor may a smoker light up in the operating room of a private hospital, even if it his business.