Hehe! I lived in Texas for a few years. What with what the guys wear on their belts and the gun racks in their pick-up trucks, I doubt if "I" would go around trying to enforce it either. 
I was in Austin during SXSW recently. They passed their ban in September. I don't know how many bars have closed, if any, but all the ones we were in still had people smoking. When I asked around they said that the police won't enforce it.
Hehe! I lived in Texas for a few years. What with what the guys wear on their belts and the gun racks in their pick-up trucks, I doubt if "I" would go around trying to enforce it either.
Texas bar patrols provide contrast with smoking ban
April 7, 2006
Given the controversy Appleton's smoking ban has stirred up, with some residents believing it infringes on their personal rights, a recent law enforcement program in Texas is worth noting.Lone Star State police officers and a special task force are entering bars undercover and arresting people for public drunkenness. The primary reason for the crackdown is to fight drunken driving, they say, and if they can arrest drunks before they get behind the wheel, society is better for it.
Basically, when you go to a public bar in Texas, you have to watch how much you drink. It doesn't matter if you drove to the bar or not, or if you weren't planning on driving afterwards. You'll be arrested for public drunkenness just to make sure you don't.
Ordinances and laws against public drunkenness probably exist in every municipality in the United States. That's fine. But their intent is to prevent people from wandering down the street at 3 a.m. while whooping and hollering, or urinating, or vomiting, or any combination thereof.
They weren't passed as a shortcut for police to get rid of drunk drivers. And they weren't intended to target people for legally drinking in licensed drinking establishments.
What does this have to do with Appleton? It illustrates the difference between personal rights and personal responsibility.
What Texas police officers are doing is preventing people from exercising personal responsibility. They're assuming that people who are acting like they've had a lot to drink are going to commit a serious felony.
The smoking ban isn't meant to protect those who are smoking. It's meant to protect those around them who aren't smoking.
Secondhand smoke is an involuntary threat from a legal activity, whereas drunk driving is a deliberate, conscious choice made after engaging in a legal activity.
A fine line? Perhaps. But the smoking ban limits one group's rights to protect the safety of another group. Texans' rights are being limited by suspicion and odds.