  Mikem Member Username: Mikem Post Number: 3398 Registered: 10-2003 |
If I were you, I'd be much more concerned about driving to and from the restaurant/bar. | ||
Rb336 Member Username: Rb336 Post Number: 759 Registered: 02-2007 |
There is sufficient technology to clean the air in bars -- I have seen small (a 6-inch box)HEPA systems clear out a 20x20x20 cube filled to opaque with cigar smoke in slightly more than a minute. As a smoker I hate the legislation, but it is infinitely rational. It's the same reasoning as the idea that your right to swing your fist ends just short of my face. smoke is bad, we do not have the right to subject others to our own bad habits. Karl, this is not "nanny state" legislation, this is legislation that protects others from MY bad behavior. Telling me not to smoke in my place, or outside, etc, would be "nanny state". Marijuana laws are perfect examples of "nanny state" legislation, as are all those laws against various sex acts that are still on the books, etc. Never hear the wingnuts use that argument against those laws. Now it's time for a little bitch about anti-smokers: When I'm outside, sitting at a bench or whatever, don't sit next to me and ask if I would please put out my cigarette. The answer is NO! You have all of indoors to not smoke, besides, i was here, smoking, before you. | ||
Arrogancy Member Username: Arrogancy Post Number: 10 Registered: 02-2007 |
Cigarette smoke is, like public nudity and other such things a "if what you do bothers the majority enough and is a luxury and has no positive benefits besides a pleasure mechanism then the will of the majority wins." And the majority has decided that they don't want to be subjected to people's stupid smoke fumes that force you to have to wash your clothes after being in a bar for two seconds or losing your sense of taste at a restaurant. All because inconsiderate people are hooked on a useless habit that they had no reason to start in the first place. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1982 Registered: 12-2003 |
quote: What about Indian Casinos who are not covered by this law. quote: There was just an article in the NY Post a few days/months ago about how smoking ban is no longer working and establishments are back smoking. A quick search, not sure how accurate put the closure at approx 150 places since the smoking ban in New York. The problem with these useless bans are the people (not on this forum) who come out of the woodwork talking about increased revenues and the bans working when the evidence is mounting to the contrary. | ||
Monahan568 Member Username: Monahan568 Post Number: 165 Registered: 04-2004 |
"There was just an article in the NY Post a few days/months ago about how smoking ban is no longer working and establishments are back smoking" i was there a few months ago and went to two different bars that looked the other way as their patrons lit up... This ban brings to my mind the example of how successful the Karras Brothers bar was though- as the owner marketed it as a Smoke-Free establishment...there was rarely any great number of customers in there, even on the weekends. The owner eventually had to sell it because he wasn't making any profit... | ||
Burningwheel Member Username: Burningwheel Post Number: 8 Registered: 06-2007 |
[quote]"Did large corporations go out of business when they banned smoking in office buildings?" "Did universities go out of business when they banned smoking in classrooms?" [/quote] and [quote] You didn't seriously just try to make that comparison, did you?? ...lol!! [quote] Motorcitydave you amuse me. what is wrong with this comment? it's true. people still fly on airplanes even though they are smoke-free. people still continue to shop in stores, even though they are smoke-free. get a grip dude, the world is changing and you are in the minority. the US will be smoke-free before you know it and there's nothing your "apparent friendly" bitching can do to change it. MANY countries are smoke-free now. | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 170 Registered: 02-2007 |
People complaining about cigarette smoke in their clothes. Thats what bars are/were, don't like it? Don't go. Reminds me of the people that frequent these micro breweries in Ann Arbor. Everyone sitting around choking down that crap and trying convince everyone they like it. Funny thing to watch.. I ain't drinking anything with junk floating in it. I don't care how trendy and cool the name is. This banning smoking is a really dumb move perpetuated by folks who think they know whats best for everyone else. As evidenced in the above posts. "Who knows what else they'll do" As mentioned your car does much more environmental damage than smokers do. And smoking is not the only self-inflicted health risk there is. How about drinking alcohol? How about obesity? How about eating the wrong foods? Are we going to pass laws on those too? This country was founded on freedoms, don't like smoke? stay away from it. We have to stop this mentality when something doesn't fit one's self perceived empirical lifestyle, mandates must be passed to make all others conform. | ||
Jt1 Member Username: Jt1 Post Number: 9638 Registered: 10-2003 |
quote: Don't like bullets in the head, stay away from them. I am indifferent about the proposed law but that is just a silly comment. Next time a child with asthma goes to a restaurant with his family and sit in the non-smoking section you should suggest that he 'stay away from the smoke' if it impairs his breathing. | ||
Sbradke Member Username: Sbradke Post Number: 19 Registered: 05-2007 |
But sstashmoo, those other self-inflicted health hazards you list only harm the person making the choice to engage in them. I'm sure you'd agree that I don't have the right to go spreading arsenic or anthrax in public, right? I don't care if you smoke, just don't make me do it too. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 804 Registered: 01-2005 |
Rb336: I agree with everything in your post. Well said. One of my best friends was an owner of the Old Woodward Grill in the 555 Building in Birmingham. It was a sports bar and IT WAS NON-SMOKING. It was the most successful, profitable bar in Oakland County for years (based on alky sales.) Even I thought he was nuts when he told me what he was going to do. If it's a level playing field nobody's going to get hurt. What do you think, because people can't smoke in bars they're going to stop going to them to drink and pick up girls? | ||
Sknutson Member Username: Sknutson Post Number: 909 Registered: 03-2004 |
There was much wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth here in CA when the ban on smoking in bars took effect. Then everyone settled down and got used to it. I am not aware of any bars that had to close. I know that I and my non-smoking friends frequent bars more often now that they are smoke-free. | ||
Fozzy3 Member Username: Fozzy3 Post Number: 28 Registered: 04-2006 |
How many of those bars were easily able to make an outdoor area for the smokers? Much easier in CA than MI. If this passes we'll have aready strapped small business owners struggling to finance a patio or something like that, much easier to close than go bankrupt. | ||
Kathinozarks Member Username: Kathinozarks Post Number: 739 Registered: 11-2006 |
Sstashmo: "How about drinking alcohol? How about obesity? How about eating the wrong foods?" Sbradke: "But sstashmoo, those other self-inflicted health hazards you list only harm the person making the choice to engage in them." ----------------- The 'self-inflicted' health hazards are one of the reasons that U.S. Health Care costs rise every year. That affects everyone. | ||
Diehard Member Username: Diehard Post Number: 74 Registered: 03-2005 |
I like to pee. It's relaxing. It's my right to pee. I'm gonna pee right here in the pool and nobody's gonna tell me not to. It's way too much hassle to step out of the pool to do it. If you don't like swimming in my pee, don't go to the pool. Once you start telling people they can't pee in the pool, all the pools will go out of business. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 2272 Registered: 02-2004 |
Karl, where did I say I agreed with a smoking ban? Whoever reads to you is not doing their job. | ||
Benjo Member Username: Benjo Post Number: 27 Registered: 02-2007 |
All this arguing is giving me a headache, I'm going to go smoke a cigarette. | ||
Docmo Member Username: Docmo Post Number: 284 Registered: 10-2005 |
Right of center Republican here. Ban smoking in all public places now. It is disgusting and incredibly unhealthy to those who are exposed secondhand, against their will, to these carcinogens. You alleged libertarians are fighting a losing battle. Smoking will eventually be banned in all public spaces, even in a politically regressive state like Michigan. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1312 Registered: 12-2003 |
Thank you, Docmo ...years from now, we will seem like total freaks for allowing people to choke on carcinogenic smoke inside buildings. And thanks for taking it out of the political arena. Lungs don't vote left or right. | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 342 Registered: 11-2005 |
Docmo, Very well put. You would think your post would end the debate aspect of the thread but no... tb336, I agree with your post as well. Nice job. I was living in NYC when the smoking ban took effect...At the time I was a casual smoker and could not believe NYC had the balls to ban smoking in bars... A 2-month grace period was successfully implemented to help bars and patrons cope with the change...A month after the grace period i didn't really notice the new law. I did notice how my hangovers were way less painful...I didn't wake up smelling like absolute shit...I must say it improved the quality of nightlife in the city. Also, I smoked way less and had equally great times pre and post ban. It was great to go outside to smoke and meet others doing the same. You always ended up meeting cool people. I don’t smoke anymore and can’t wait for Michigan to ban smoking in all public places. We can’t continue to be stupidly archaic and allow it. The times, they are a changing. Sooner then later! | ||
Davidmausolf Member Username: Davidmausolf Post Number: 25 Registered: 04-2006 |
Im really glad to see Michigan taking this important step of banning smoking. Many of us who dont smoke dont like to be subjected to second hand smoke when we go out. I am all for designated smoking areas. If anything I think they will see a rise in revenue from people going into bars who would normally steer clear of the smoke. There is no slippery slope here, nobody is going to be banning beer, remember how well that worked out in the 20's? (Message edited by davidmausolf on July 25, 2007) | ||
Rhymeswithrawk Member Username: Rhymeswithrawk Post Number: 817 Registered: 11-2005 |
surprised nobody mentioned this today yet.... http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=/20070724/NEW S06/70724028/1001/NEWS Cuz it cleared only a House committee. It's not even guaranteed a House vote let alone a Senate vote. With all of the urgent business the Legislature needs to be worried about right now, this is still a long, long way from being something poised to become law. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 2320 Registered: 07-2004 |
Smoking is archaic, period. Even if I sit in the non-smoking section in a restaurant, I'm still subject to smoke from the smoking section. I could never work in a casino because of the cigarette smoking. I'm surprised that casino workers haven't sued the casinos for allowing smoking. Also, like someone said, it's terrible to have to come home with my clothes smelling full of smoke. Also, I'm glad some of the local hospitals have banned smoking on their grounds. How would you like to be a patient and have to be around a nurse, or doctor who just came back from a "smoking break?" I know I wouldn't. I have no sympathy for smokers. Smoking is a crutch. Smokers need to come face to face with their addiction(and that's what it truly is)_and realized that the rest of us who don't smoke are tired of the inconvenience of having to breath cigarette smoke. Besides, the evidence is out there that smoking can cause numerous ailments and death? Why subject yourself and possibly others to a behavior that could lead to death? Trust me, restaurants and bars won't lose any money if there is a state-wide ban on smoking. Smokers also have a crutch called "drinking" that they also need to satisfy so they'll adjust. They can just run down the street, have a smoke, and come back in the restaurant/bar. I just can't see smokers staying away from smoke-free restaurants and bars because of the smoking-ban. Years from now when they've stopped smoking they'll just shake their heads and wonder why they ever smoked at all. BTW, Diehard I loved your "pee" analogy. It's priceless. Ssatchmoo, your arguments were the weakess. (Message edited by royce on July 25, 2007) | ||
Psip Member Username: Psip Post Number: 1977 Registered: 04-2005 |
Just outlaw booze while they are at it. That does 1000x more damage than smoking. | ||
Lmichigan Member Username: Lmichigan Post Number: 5841 Registered: 10-2003 |
You wish. Smoking-related emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease, etc...cause far, far more deaths and injury a year than cirrhosis, drunk driving deaths, and other alcohol-related injuries and death. To address a few other things, unlike fast food, which has some added health benefits (i.e. nutritional value no matter how small a value it may be), smoking has absolutely no health benefit or necessity, and, in fact, the opposite it true. (Message edited by lmichigan on July 25, 2007) | ||
Sstashmoo Member Username: Sstashmoo Post Number: 171 Registered: 02-2007 |
Psip, Exactly... These cant be bothered, live like me or else folks really make me tired. If they live in Detroit or any other large US city, the air is full of carbon monoxide and all other forms of carcinogens from vehicle emissions alone. To complain about someone smoking a cigarette is just nonsense. It's not cool to smoke anymore. Live like me or else. This is a dangerous precedent and methodology. Where is the line drawn? They complain about cigarette smell in their clothes. Guess what, your clothes smell like vehicle emissions as well. Can't smell it? You're used to it just like the smoker is used to cigarette smoke. If you hang out downtown your clothes smell like that too. Instead of forcing your lifestyle on someone else, stop going to the bar or restaurant if the smoke bothers you, if sales drop, then the owner will pass their own rules. Though, I'm guessing you won't be missed. In my experience, folks that don't smoke, don't drink much either. Bars can't make it on health nuts nursing one beer all night. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 8824 Registered: 09-2005 |
Big tobacco and big oil - the left hates 'em and they are 2 businesses that Democrats will tax/regulate out of business accordingly. Next step: no smoking in your own home and/or car. Already complete: all airliners, public property in many cities, many office properties, some entire hotel properties, rental cars. Next? And the left whines about losing freedoms/privacy? | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 345 Registered: 11-2005 |
Sstashmoo, whatever dude... When i smoked i could easily smell smoke on my clothes, hair, furniture etc... The notion brought up by rb336 cleanly sums up the contest: " It's the same reasoning as the idea that your right to swing your fist ends just short of my face. Smoke is bad (the fist), we do not have the right to subject others to our own bad habits. (stopping just short of ones face)" So what I hear smokers saying is it’s ok to make other breathe cancerous smoke they produce. Their choice, within public space, makes others choiceless in the same space. And for those of you who bring up the “cars cause cancer argument”…Cars are not being driven inside of bars and restaurants (closed structures)…They are outside in the open…Smokers should do the same. Also, smokers feel that their freedoms are being taken….this is not true. Smoke at home, in your car, on the sidewalk, in your bed while very tired…Just dont smoke in public places where you subject others to some form of harm. Someone needs to develop a special helmet for all smokers to sport. It can be a device that traps all second hand smoke so every last bit of chemical can be savored and ingested into their bodies. The helmet would also solve the second hand smoke problem. I picture the helmet to be bright orange or yellow with “rabbit ears so they can pipe in music”. (Zissou) I see the helmet evolving into a source of pride for the smoker. A symbol of... | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1322 Registered: 12-2003 |
DB... I always laugh when I see a smoker with arm languidly extended, so the smoke won't go into their face ...instead, it perfumes the air around the rest of us. Isn't the point to ingest every potent gulp of tar into your lungs? | ||
Dannaroo Member Username: Dannaroo Post Number: 98 Registered: 05-2006 |
UDMPhiKapBob said: quote: Regardless of how you feel about the smoking ban, that may have been the best quote I have ever seen on here! Kudos Bob! | ||
Defendbrooklyn Member Username: Defendbrooklyn Post Number: 347 Registered: 11-2005 |
Karl, I have no problem big tobacco and big oil...It just needs to be looked at honestly. If smoking is legal make other drugs legal? I would say let smokers smoke but legalize other drugs. Why some and not others? pffft, also when they are sitting at a table their elbow rests on the table and the stick is always above their head...This allows the rest of us to get the full effect of their shiza. Silly! |
