Too much common sense for mass consumption.

Eaker

Non-smokers move away from a smoker?? NO WAY!

That would mean they lose their "Victim" status!

A lot of people are just hateful. Smoking is just a label to try to justify their hate.

In MegaPhone: "Move away from the Smoker... Close yer yap and move away from the smoker."

No one was more shocked than I upon seeing this in the redstar. About once every two or three months they do something like this, it's their idea of balence.

But only every two or three months. The rest of the time, its the Paul Wellstone show.

Application of common sense? What the hell is wrong with you?! /sarcasm

It should be up to the proprietor of an establishment to decide whether smoking is allowed or not.

When I was in college, I used to go to a bar & grill that was frequented by a lot of smokers and smoking was allowed in the place. I'm a non-smoker and I don't want to hang around it too much. So what was my solution? I would hang out on the open-air roof deck. The owner of the place was smart enough to provide a separate bar and grill on the roof where the smoke would just float away and not bother us non-smokers. Bada-bing, everybody's happy.

Even if there was no roof deck, so what? I would frequent a different establishment. Why is it my God-given right to go to that particular place and not smell smoke?

The owner of an establishment should be able to dictate where smoking is allowed and not allowed, and the free market system will determine how much money he makes or loses. What's wrong with that?

>It should be up to the proprietor of an establishment to decide whether smoking is allowed or not.

I don't have strong feelings on this issue and I'm not about to get into a smoking flame war on the topic, but...

IF you believe that the "proprietor" of an establishment can decide whether or not to ban smoking, then it's not too big a leap to simply observe that we the people are the "proprietors" of this establishment called the "United States." If we "decide" (i.e., use normal, accepted judicial channels to pass laws) to ban smoking as a community, then there is little difference from the owner of a restaurant deciding to ban smoking. It's the same principle but on a larger social scale.

Mark W.

You'd figure that somewhere, some bar owner would have the smarts to pick his slowest night of the week, and make that one nite, a non-smoking night.....I myself don't enjoy spending a few hours in a smoke filled room, especially cigars let alone the sight of overfilled ashtrays...and if one of my local pubs had a no smoke nite, I;d be inclined to go in, eat a burger at the bar, watch a ball game, and have a few beers, play a little pool.....but as you correctly state, I voluntarily chose to withhold my patronage..

Sorry Mark. It's a failure logically. The proprietor owns the business. You do not own America any more than the smoker does.

Puff

It's the same principle but on a larger social scale.

Sorry, but no it is not. We are talking about the principle of private property and the rights of property owners, not the collective will of the majority to impose it's whims upon an unpopular minority.

In many restaurants, the smoke from the smoking section still wafts to the non smoking section.

I don't eat in those places.

I always enter first and check for smoke stench. If it's present, we leave.

It's pathetic that we have to travel to the Peoples' Republic of Vermont to eat without stench.

I don't believe there should be laws about it.

When will restaurant owners in general get a clue I wonder?

>Sorry Mark. It's a failure logically. The proprietor owns the business. You do not own America any more than the smoker does.

I didn't say that I own America. And I didn't say that just the non-smokers do, or that just the smokers do.

I said that "we the people" own America. And this isn't an issue of opinion, it's just the way things are. (Sure, cynically, we might say that the Fortune 500 "own" America -- but, according to the documents, it's we the people.)

Smokers and non-smokers. And the way we as a group decide things is by passing laws. [shrugs] Logically it holds up quite well.

Everybody loves majority rule until they find themselves in the minority. Then they start whining about the tyranny of the majority. Screw it. That's the way things work in a free society. People vote on things. The majority wins. The minority deals with it.

(Except for the democrats of course. Then they bitch about principles that, they say, are more important, more transcendental than majority rule and the will of the people expressed through vote counts.)

Mark W.

No! Smokers should be able to poison the air where ever they damn well please! Non-smokers believe that smoke has a smell, is unpleasant, remains on clothes, is unhealthy, and is offensive. False!! Smokers should be able to burn tires or tobacco ANYWHERE!! People who complain are victims and deserve it.

I love idiot post like this. There is no s**t for brains worse than the smoker trying to defend himself on the grounds of personal freedom. There used to be a guy here, probably now dead, who felt that if a non-smoker simply drove a car, the smoker was justified. It is this kind of occassional posting that helps me realize the addictions of all those jerks huddled outside the building door and encourages me to complain to the guards to enforce the rules that makes them stand out in the cold rain. They don't believe in emphasima, maybe they'll learn to believe in pnemonia.

It is only a burning leaf for gosh sakes. These people that are nuts. If you don't like the smell, okay, you have a point. But when you tell me the second hand smoke is worse than the fumes coming out the tailpipe of your car, you show yourself to be a complete idiot

That's cool, I don't want to get into a big flame war, either.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I have the attitude that when you go into another person's place, you live by their rules (within reason). Don't like his rules? Then take it on down the road.

I don't think that it is a person's right to frequent a certain bar or restaurant. If I like the place and the atmosphere (or the smoking or the music or the people or whatever), I'll stick around. If I decide that I don't like it, I'm out of there. It's my decision to go in or stay out.

It's ridiculous to demand that everybody in a public place has to accomodate your needs and wants. Your mommy didn't drive you to the local bar & grill and force you to sit and have a meal.

You sound like you would have fit in pretty well with the Taliban. Same mindset.

Gee, you just thought you weren't going to get into a smoking war!

There is no arguing, or debating, or reasoning with militant non-smokers. You might as well try to argue with a smoker-mom, I mean soccer mom who thought Bill Clinton was just the cutest!