Still doubt the smoking ban's effects?

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!
SoftJock Rick said:
... Remember that "We reserve the right not to serve anyone" sign. I still have one.
Click to expand...
I sure remember that. Speaking of which, I have an old cast iron sign from Alabama that directs people to the "proper color" drinking fountain.

Jim Crow laws were perfectly legal until the Supreme Court deemed 'em otherwise. Compliance in some Southern states was token at best.

The "final solution" was perfectly legal in Nazi Germany because Der Fuehrer said it was.

Senator Joe McCarthy's witch hunts under the banner of anti-communism were accepted and tolerated for years.

Anyone else remember "blue laws"? Businesses were forced to close on Sundays. Essentials (drug stores) were allowed to remain open but sales were restricted on Sundays. Those archaic laws were rescinded due to a couple of reasons: No separation of church and state and the old double standard.

Until last year, Delaware had no Sunday liquor sales. Guess who lobbied to change that? The liquor store owners. Their winning arguement? Sales (and tax bucks) were going to Maryland every Sunday.

When you can put money in the public coffers, you have a case to fight City Hall.

But I digress. Last time I looked, we were living in America. We're supposed to have a representative republic around here. Or that's what them boys inside the DC Beltway keep telling folks over there in the Mid-East anyhow. Perhaps if they'd just stop mouthing the misguided term "democracy"... :rolleyes:

The local guv'mints and their Dudley DoRight rabble rousers are going after people who smoke... and they're ramming it to local business owners at the same time. This ain't about smoking ~ it's about the peoples' right to due process. Due process has been usurped again. That's just plain wrong.

Like Don said, when will it end?
 
When the law got enacted around here a couple of bars went the route of private club. For $5.00 you could join and remain a member. Those that didnt do this saw a drop in business, people were going where they could smoke.

I dont know everytime some old fart comes up to me at a wedding and tells me to turn it down its to loud. Even though the bride/groom hired you someones hearing is being affected........silly analogy I know but someone will get a bug in their craw someday.

Patrick I take no offense by your stance, because thats you, and I can respect that. But put this shoe on the other foot once. If something you loved to do and looked forward to doing. Something you put lots of time and effort, money sweet and tears into was now handcuffed where you couldnt earn the living you now earn because someone got a bug. Then got goverment backing to ban or limit your ability. Then you can see why the bar owners are in a tiff.

Is smoking good for you? No its not. But guess what Im 48 and I knew way back when I was 10 that it was bad. So what happens the state goverments win big lawsuits against tobacco companies because they lied and what do they do with that money? Put out a$$nine comercials on how they lied. Instead of using that money to help the people who where affected. Some states mine included are using the money to help balance budgets or giving up the big payout for a quick one.

Yup like the song says "Take The Money And Run". Its not about whats right or fair its about how much money can we get.

It use to be for the people by the people. But now its who has the most money to gain and can scream the loudest.
 
I don't smoke....and like papa, i do love coming out of a bar and not smelling like smoke........

however.....forcing private businesses to not allow smoking is wrong. Before the law changed in ohio...there were a few bars that were smoke free by choice....i enjoyed going to them.

If most people that went to bars didn't want to be around smokers, there would have been more non-smoking bars...that's how capitalism works.

in Ohio, all the private clubs were for it, because the lobbyists told them that the law would not effect private clubs...and there were bars applying for club membership also backing the bill.
After the vote...the Attorney General(who never disputed it during the campaign) ruled that the law WOULD apply to private clubs because they would be forcing their employees to be around smoke.....the VFW's and the like were not happy.

I think it would be fair to post signs outside of a business that lets potential customers know that smoking may take place inside, then the customer could choose whether or not to do business there.

BTW, my brother owns a place....business is down 50%. 10 employees that were "saved" by not having to be around smokers are now collecting unemployment and looking for jobs.

Ohio is trying to figure out why their revenues are down....the above scenerio should give them a clue.

That and the fact that thousands of buses daily take ohio citizens to detroit, winsdsor, niagra falls, AC, Erie PA, and Wheeling WV to gamble....Ohio doesn't want gambling because they say it's bad for us.....but they invest millions in advertising the lottery and allow horse race betting to exist and advertise daily.
So excuse me if i don't exactly think the current Ohio lawmakers are leading us in the right path with their smoking ban...or any other law they pass.
 
Thanks, Scott. That's similar to Delaware's predicament.

Before the smoking ban, there were no reports of guv'mint agencies being in the red. Much of Delaware's income comes from the racinos (race track/casino) and these venues are typically patronized by people who smoke. The racinos are still making good money ~ moreso than last year by their accounts ~ yet the state is seeing less of the take, partly due to capital improvements on the part of the racinos. Capital improvements equal tax writeoffs.

Just my unscientific opinion... but I feel that the racino owners are doing this to get even with legislators who voted for the smoking ban. They (the racino owners) vested quite a bit of dough to lobby against the smoking ban.

Dover Downs constructed a smoking lounge off the casino floor. It had to pass certain loopholes in the ban wording but they did it.

Two weeks ago, our lame duck governor raised the tax on a pack of smokes by 60 cents. Her justification? The highway fund is so deep in the red it ain't funny.

Not surprising since the state has been trying to stymie development by passing temporary halts on development and paying farmers and other landowners to not sell to developers. Then the developers are suing ~ and winning in court. DE's slice of the tobacco company payout was pissed away long ago... on things it wasn't supposed to be used for.

Many of the fraternal organizations have opened their doors since the smoking ban was instituted. The Legion, Moose, VFW and others that were once locked down are now sponsoring public events like dinners and raffles. Yup, smoking is permitted in these establishments, even when the public is invited. They're covered under the taproom exemption. A separate room for nonsmoking is often made available, ie the rental hall.

If it's any help, I don't care for doing shows in smoky venues either. They stink to put it mildly. But you've got to remember that many people make their living by working in these establishments.

I could understand a trial period at first. Let's give a smoking ban the benefit of the doubt... try it for one fiscal year then tally up the numbers. If it causes too much grief for business, let's modify it or find a better way. As a worst-case scenario, we could always implement changes over time to allow businesses and customers time to acclimate.

But that would make too much sense. :rolleyes:
 
I'll add another little ditty to this conversation...


When I came back to NY to take care of Granny (8 years ago!), smokes were getting downright expensive in these parts.

Since I couldn't afford 4-6 bucks per pack, I bought a little $40 machine, some tubes, and all natural tobaccy (the kind that doesn't make you weeze, and kill yer lungs). It costs me .80 cents per pack to make my own stoagies, and takes about 5 minutes of my time :)

Sooo, not only are my dollars not going to pay the ridiculous taxes on smokes in NY, but I no longer frequent bars or restaurants where smoking is not allowed.


Everybody loses in this sitrep, except me, as I now only smoke raw tobaccy, which has 95% less of the crap that makes smoking bad in the first place...

My drinking and partying are done at home now, and no money is going to bartenders, none to jukeboxes, none to bar owners or waitresses, none to cab companies to take me home after a rough night, etc.

I'm not the only one... ;)
 
Multi-edged sword

Ban smoking totally: Then you create an environmnet like prohibition.

Ban smoking in bars: Well, we see what is happening.

Allow smoking in bars: Then you have to listen to the vocal manority that complains.

I think we should take Rick's solution:

SoftJockRick for Dictator!​
 
Papa Deuce said:
A bar is PRIVATE BUT invites the public in..... now maybe the bar should be an exclusive private club that doesn't invite the general public in.
Click to expand...


That's how the strip bars work in this area. You get a "membership card" at the door....it's a sham that works the legal loophole- and perfectly acceptable to me if it will allow smoking in the bar. Unfortunately- and I'm not sure about this- what works for seeing strippers may not work ( at least in NJ ) for smoking. I need to do more research...

Anyway the key word there is INVITES- not forces. You have the right to refuse the invitation. There is no medical, moral, intellectual, or physical NEED to enter. Those needs are covered in truly public (paid for with tax dollars) buildings.
 
OK, so after HUGE amounts of esffort and time ( about 4 minutes and three mouse clicks..:sqcool:) These are the NJ exemptions...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NEW JERSEY

New Jersey's recently adopted “Smoke-Free Air Act” (P. L. 2005. c. 383) prohibits smoking in public places, including restaurants and bars. The legislation includes exemptions for casinos, cigar bars, cigar lounges, and tobacco retailers (see www. smokefree. nj. gov).

A “cigar bar” is any bar, or area within a bar, designated specifically for the smoking of tobacco products purchased on the premises or elsewhere. A cigar bar that is in an area within a bar must be enclosed by solid walls or windows, a ceiling and a solid door and equipped with a ventilation system that is separately exhausted from the nonsmoking areas of the bar.

A “cigar lounge” is any establishment, or area within an establishment, designated specifically for the smoking of tobacco products purchased on the premises or elsewhere. The same wall, window, ceiling, door, and ventilation requirements described above for a cigar bar apply to a cigar lounge that is an area within an establishment.

A “tobacco retail establishment” is one in which at least 51% of retail business is the sale of tobacco products and accessories, and in which the sale of other products is merely incidental.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We don't have the "Private Club" exemption here, though they do over the line in NY.

For those of you that will ask why not BUILD those separate enclosures: 1) The ban is illegal, so why should the owner have to pay EVEN MORE money out of their pockets to cover this invasion of property.


2) In this area, cost in money alone would be huge, plus more losses incurred during shut down time ( which may be MONTHS depending on municipal building codes and their small town inspectors, if you get my drift...).


3) Who's to say that, after paying a bundle and incurring huge losses, that the (illegal) ban won't be re-written on a whim- nulling this exemption too?


4) Room. Not all bars are big enough. Not practical for little neighborhood bars. Being unable to compete- they'd be history........Yeah, I know- That's life and capitalism....
 
Here we have what is hearlded as the toughest smoking law in Canada. You cant smoke within 25 ft of a door, anywhere inside in public, On the property of the local hospital, or even in your car on the hospital property. You cant even smoke in private clubs.

I personally think its atrocious that a WW2 veteran cant go in to his club (the Legion) and enjoy a smoke with his drink because some 25 year old yuppie SOB dosent like the smell of it. Or a member of the Elks that has been there for 50+ years cant have a cigar with the few buddies he has left

True story. Ill try and find a link from the local paper...

About 5 years ago there was a fellow from a local community 36 years old got caught nailing a 14 or 15 year old girl in his car. (14 is the legal age of consent in Nova Scotia). He was charged with public indecency. He was found not guilty because he was in his car and the onus is on others not to look in the window not for him to stay clothed. His car is his property.

But I cant have a smoke in the hospital parking lot in my car???

The people that think these things up should be tied to a table and casterated with a fish knife
 
Found this on another forum:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The US Supreme court ruled on what is a public building in 1992..

A U.S. Supreme court decision during the early 1970's ((Lloyd Corp v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551 (1992)) said a place of business does not become public property because the public is invited in.

So, by that same reasoning. A restaurant or bar is not public property. We need to support small business and stop regulating them out of business.

The Hawaii Bar owners are using this ruling to fight the smoking ban in Hawaii.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------


In other words, "My house, my rules" The ban's illegal.
 
I dunno how it works in Jersey... but in Virginia, "public" was anything that people paid to enter.

For instance, if you paid a couple dollars to a landowner to fish in his cattle pond, you needed a county fishing licence. On the other hand, if you were allowed to fish there for no entry fee and paid for the fish you caught, no license was required. Paying upon entry made it "public". It's weird how it works sometimes.

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like these statewide smoking bans will go away anytime soon. Health kicks are the latest "in" thing and many of those who support statewide smoking bans already have their minds made up. Attaching public health to any issue carries some serious weight.

Every law has loopholes. Determining the definition of "public" is one in this case. :)
 
Fred Stewart said:
Every law has loopholes. Determining the definition of "public" is one in this case. :)
Click to expand...


Fred, this is what truly scares me. Getting away with banning smoking on private property opens the way to dictating behavior in my own home. If they can get away with the illegality of the first, is the second far behind?
 
This is my quick response since I'm running out the door.....

I'm curious on how many people responding in this thread that are smokers and are against the ban....and of course I'm assuming that the ones that support the ban are non-smokers. It's hard for us to be objective on this issue.

While I think the "dangers" of second hand smoke are highly exaggerated I still support the ban. I am not a smoker and I do work in bars and in my area at least the ban has had little effect. I'm not sure how long your ban has been in effect Joe but while you're seeing first hand numerous bars close down, the numbers across the country where the ban has been in place for some time tell us something else. Most places are rebounding quite nicely after an initial slump and I'm sure your part of the world will do the same.

For the record I work in a bar weekly and the owner has told me there has been no effect at all.

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet or not but most of the bar owners around here are more upset that the casinos are exempt from this smoking ban!!!! If it is affecting their sales they feel that it's because the smokers can now go to the casino and smoke away. The only fair solution is to have them be on the same level playing field.
 
patrickrlewis said:
I have led that campaign for years!!!

I really should not be in this discussion, because my views on drugs, smoking and alcohol are about as hardline as you can get.
Click to expand...


Ban alcohol????!!!!! Now that's....(gulp)....going.....(swagger)......too.....farsh!!!!! :sqwink:
 
djdawg said:
While I think the "dangers" of second hand smoke are highly exaggerated I still support the ban.
Click to expand...

If you think that, I have a lot of x-rays and doctors reports I would be more than happy to send you. I have never smoked anything in my life, and within five years will have most likely have to be on a oxygen tank to breath because of all the second hand smoke I have inhaled.

Anyone who thinks second hand smoke is not real is completely blinded by the tobacco companies.
 
I am not going to get mean, lol....

But if anyone thinks non-smokers are in th minority, do this little test one time. Go to a restaurant that has a smoking an non-smoking section during peak lunch or dinner hours and look.

The non-smoking section (which is normally bigger) is packed and you have to wait to get into, while the smokng section is almost empty with no wait.
 
patrickrlewis said:
If you think that, I have a lot of x-rays and doctors reports I would be more than happy to send you. I have never smoked anything in my life, and within five years will have most likely have to be on a oxygen tank to breath because of all the second hand smoke I have inhaled.

Anyone who thinks second hand smoke is not real is completely blinded by the tobacco companies.
Click to expand...


Well I can assure you that I am NOT blinded by the tobacco companies and I hate cigarette smoking in all forms so you're preaching to the choir Patrick....fact remains though that in MOST cases (you are the exception of course and I feel badly of what you will have to go through in a few years) it is difficult to link second hand smoke to causing cancer. I don't have time to list all the stats but you can find a good story here:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,26109,00.html
 
On occassion will smoke for a celebration, far and between. So smoking isnt the issue for me. But telling a business owner who has spent their own money, effort, time and blood sweet and tears to run a business borders on dictating and last I new we still lived in a democracy, not a dictatorship.

Yet there are those who will continueally say they are doing it for a persons good. Smoking is legal flat out no ifs no buts about it. If a business owner wants to allow smoking well thats his business. They can put up signs that say smoking takes place inside enter at your own risk. I've stated that smoking isnt good for you but where does telling a business owner they can and cant do something.

We as djs scream about any dj that says you have to do it this way or that way and we will defend our right to do it our way. Yet a bar owner is being stripped of his right to run the bar his way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back