Turn Off Ads?

View Poll Results: Do you vote to Ban Smoking? (those in Cincinnati only please)

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ban Smoking

    17 38.64%
  • Reject Ban.

    23 52.27%
  • Undecided/ Abstaining

    4 9.09%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 93

Thread: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

  1. #46
    Queen Christine
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Columbus Ohio
    Posts
    394

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    I live in Columbus and I'd like to see data backing that up.
    I don't know about the suburbs. But i do know that it has been hurting business enough that they are considering making exceptions for establishments that sell over 50% of their total sales on alcohol. I work in a restaurant/bar and there are a lot of people not happy with it, because we are in the middle of a mall and we have no patio doors for people to go outside.
    Just remember the golden rule...Good Pitching Always Beats Good Hitting~ Jason Anderson(Columbus Clippers)
    :coffey: Your my boy Blue!

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #47
    Team Puffy Leadoff Hitter CbusRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Bexley OH
    Posts
    1,252

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    I live in Columbus and I'd like to see data backing that up.
    I think its too early to tell.

    I will say that the city is eventually going to have to do something about ciggarrette litter outside the bars, walk up to any bar and check out the ground directly in front of it.

    I would say the majority of bars are either directly defying the ban, or making strides to do other things to keep their smoking customers coming back, i.e. heated patios, ect..

    I myself am a casual smoker, and go out alot. I play in a band that plays in different bars, and I must say that this ban doesnt bother me nearly as much as I originally thought it would. Maybe im not as "addicted" to cigarettes as other smokers, but I see no problem in having to go outside to smoke. For one, it helps me cut back, and two, you dont wake up the next morning with burning lungs from breathing second hand smoke all night.

  4. #48
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,388

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by DoogMinAmo
    Why should 80 percent of the population be compromised by 20 percent. Other than drunk brawls and driving, excessive drinking was never seen as a habit that harmed others directly. Secondhand smoke is a very real problem, and this is an opportunity to cut back on it greatly.
    Then don't eat at restaurants or drink at bars that allow smoking.

    And as far as inconveniencing those who smoke, and it not really contributing to a reduction of habit, I have many friends who started smoking because it was always prevalent, and it became equated with social gatherings (ie the community smoke break). I have employees who smoke not to satisfy so regretable a habit, but to sit around and gossip. Taking away the consistency will reduce consumption by default.
    Actually, it'll just reduce the places at which smoking occurs. Same thing happened when the government banned alcohol.

    And just because the government taxes the hell out of smokers, and makes a pretty penny off of it, does not mean it is ok or right by any means. They should find another source of income that does not jeopardize the health of the masses.
    Never said that taxation justifies smoking. But I can guarantee that if tobacco is outlawed, you're going to see a bajillion non-smokers complaining about how their state and/or local taxes suddenly went up.

    As far as telling owners what they can and can not do in their establishments, if you view the issue strictly from the point of view of health and safety, then it is not such a stretch. In another thread someone made a parallel between a smoking ban and fire code regulations. Both are considered costly expenses that threaten an operation, but the end far and above justifies the means.
    There's no comparison between second-hand smoke and fire code (or food safety) regulations. You know upfront whether or not an establishment allows smoking. But you can't see if the proper number of fire extinguishers is kept in a kitchen. Nor is there any way to know if the food stored at that location is stored properly.

    But you know whether or not an establishment allows smoking when you see the first ashtray. The only way your position makes sense is if you claim people are too dumb to figure that out.

    When I lived in San Francisco, it was amazing. There were absolutley no deterrents. We would go out all the time, and it made for a healthier social scene. Now as it stands, people will avoid going out for maybe one or two quick drinks because they don't want to come home smelly. I know this, because I hear it all the time, and I use the excuse myself.
    Not going to a bar that allows smoking is a choice you have the freedom to exercise.

    The problem is such small institutions are hesitant to lose what business they have, because they feel there is nothing to gain from going smoke free. The reality might very well be that people will still go to the local pub for its convenience, but just not smoke there. Additionally, more local people might be encouraged to go out.
    And yet, there are plenty of good businesspeople who allow folks to smoke in their establishments and those establishments thrive. In fact, I've been in bars that allow smoking and the places are packed to capacity. You can't get any more productive than PACKED TO CAPACITY.

    I'm seeing a trend of "Well there's no smoking here and the places are packed." But that doesn't mean there's a causality link between not allowing smoking and packed bars or restaurants.

    This is an opportunity for Cincinnati to reverse its Twainian conservatism (the infamous ten year delay) and be ahead of the times. Instead of viewing this as a deterrent, it should be viewed as a marketing possibility, a distinguishing characteristic of a family-values city.
    This is not a "family values" issue.

    Side Note: Oddly enough, Kentucky is the number smoking state in the country, but both Lexington and Louisville have passed the ban. Why so hesitant here?
    I don't live in Cinci, so I can't answer that question. What I can theorize is that maybe Lexington and Louisville local govenments don't trust their own citizens.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  5. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    350

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    For everyone crying free market, the government regulates things all the time for our safety. Should the restaurant owner be able to choose how clean he keeps his kitchen? I mean the market will decide whether or not it wants clean food right?
    Beat me to it - I was going to mention the same point. We have no problem with 'Big Brother' regulating how food should be kept and prepared in the interest of public health. Why should smoking be any different? It's kinda funny - cause if you were to picture the cook at your favorite establishment smoking over top of the stove while he cooked your food, you would be revolted. But if someone were to light up right beside you while you were eating the food, suddenly it's their right to smoke where they want and you should have thought twice before choosing to eat there? Personally, I'd rather eat the ashes from the cigarrette than inhale the smoke - much healthier for you.

    As far as tax revenue go - up here in Soviet Canuckistan (where the government still pays for health care), the governments have much more incentive to ban smoking. The revenue they lose from taxes will more than be made up by the savings in health care expenses. Down in the USA, where your health care is on your own dime, the government doesn't stand to save as much money.

    I think smoking should be banned in public - everywhere. You want to smoke, do it on your own house where you are the only one to be affected by it.
    "Time to Condense the Nonsense" Terrible Terry Tate - Office Linebacker

  6. #50
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,682

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    I do not think smoking should be banned until, at the very least, alcohol is banned.

    However, since smoking tobacco products in public is legal, shouldn't the ACLU be defending the rights of smokers to not have government interference in private establishments with their right to smoke?
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  7. #51
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,388

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by DoogMinAmo
    One smoker in a room with ten non-smokers has turned what should be a non smoking establishment into a smoking one, where 11 people are now exposed to toxins. It is not like smokers huddle together and only smoke there, and nonsmokers are trying to take over that space. If you look in a bar, hardly 50% of the people are smoking directly, but all are indirectly.
    Then why are the non-smokers in that bar?

    If smokers could literally smoke in a bubble, then they could do it where ever they wanted, it is just that wherever one smokes, that has now become a place that an adamant nonsmoker can not go.
    The "adamant nonsmoker" has no God-given right to go to there in the first place.

    So instead of ostracising a minority that partakes in an unhealthy habit, you are advocating alienating a majority that is trying to take care of their health, doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
    No. I'm speaking to the concept of intelligent rational choice. If you choose to enter an environment you believe to be hazardous to your health, it is you who are doing harm to yourself.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  8. #52
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,134

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    They've done the ban in Columbus, and are now thinking of repealing it.

    There's smaller municipalities inside Columbus that don't have the ban.. Restuarants/bars in those areas are now seeing a huge increase in business relative to Columbus due to the ban (at least according to the local news).. Also, many bars are openly defying the ban (again, going on the news saying they'll just keep on paying the fine).

    If there's a market for a non-smoking bar, someone should open one up and get rich.
    (Yes, there may be a market for one, that wasn't sarcastic).

    But I oppose more government restrictions. We already have enough of those.

    Plus, I think the second hand smoke stats are very misleading. Surely, every nonsmoker who dies of lung cancer can't blame second hand smoke.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  9. #53
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,388

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Catch22
    Beat me to it - I was going to mention the same point. We have no problem with 'Big Brother' regulating how food should be kept and prepared in the interest of public health. Why should smoking be any different?
    Because food storage and preparation is an invisible risk. You are not privy to storage and preparation condition information. And even if you were, you'd need to be an expert in the field to determine whether or not said storage and prep conditions were truly harmful.

    But you know if smoking is allowed the moment you see an ashtray.

    HUGE difference of circumstance.
    Last edited by SteelSD; 03-29-2005 at 11:32 AM.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  10. #54
    Where's my chair? REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Posts
    21,134

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    I live in Columbus and I'd like to see data backing that up.
    I don't think they've done a formal study, but you have bar owners on the news openly defying the ban. Their patrons are donating money into jars to help pay the fines.

    Also, as I said, the pockets of non-Columbus incorporated areas inside the city are seeing a LOT more business. The day the ban went into effect, a TGIF owner in a smoking zone said it was the busiest day he ever had.
    Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  11. #55
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,802

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    I don't think they've done a formal study, but you have bar owners on the news openly defying the ban. Their patrons are donating money into jars to help pay the fines.
    The same thing is happening in Lawrence, KS (home of KU). Bar patrons are chipping in to help pay fines. It's been so effective that the city council has considered allowing police to shut down any bar allowing smoking.

    Sounds like Prohibition all over again.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  12. #56
    Please come again pedro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    portland, oregon
    Posts
    14,747

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    The problem with leaving it up to the establishment is that almost no business owner will risk excluding potential clients. How many no smoking bars do you know of?

    However, I can really see how in someplace like Columbus, where people can choose go somewhere outside city limits, it could hurt business.

    As such, it would probably be better handled at the state level or not at all.
    Last edited by pedro; 03-29-2005 at 12:26 PM.

  13. #57
    Score Early, Score Often gonelong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,139

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by DoogMinAmo
    Why is it so important to you to smoke in a restaurant/ bar? Is it the habit that controls you, or truly the principle of the "right to smoke?"
    I smoke about 4-5 cigars a year. I don't believe I have ever smoked in a restuarant in my entire life. In fact, my wife is very uncomfortable around smoke.

    The argument is not about me or you, but about rights in general.

    If it was just the habit, why could you not smoke elsewhere? Maybe if there were designated smoke rooms? Just brainstorming out loud here.
    Why should people have to smoke elsewhere If the establishment wants to allow smoking? Why don't you find a place that is non-smoking?

    As far as the right to smoke, what about my right to not smoke? If I am in an establishment first, and a smoker enters, all of a sudden "my" space has been invaded. Does it really become a "I was here first" proposal in order to succeed? I hope not.
    Its not "your space", its the restuarant's.

    Nobody is forcing you to go to a restuarant.

    The restuarant should decide what goes on at its establishments.

    Is smoke was contained, it would be a moot point. But it affects everyone around it, so I think it should be up to the governing body to look after the best health interests of the majority. Just my 2 cents.
    It doesn't affect you if you don't go to the places that allow smoking. Stay at home or go elsewhere. Better yet, open up a place of your own that is non-smoking. I'd sincerely bet it would do gang-buster business.

    Look out for yourself, the government does an incredibly poor job of looking out for you.

    GL
    Last edited by gonelong; 03-29-2005 at 12:28 PM.

  14. #58
    MarsArmyGirl RosieRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    2,783

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Quote Originally Posted by pedro
    However, I can really see how in someplace like Columbus, where people can choose go somewhere outside city limits, it could hurt business.

    As such, it would probably be better handled at the state level or not at all.
    I have to think there's a similar risk of lost business involved if Cincinnati does ban smoking. People can just go out in Northern Kentucky or in the suburbs, instead of in Cincinnati. (And many people already do that.)

  15. #59
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    8,066

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    I was about to make the same point as Pedro. I think one of the reasons this program works so well in California is that it is state-wide. Even if it were state-wide in Ohio, Cincinnati might fare differently being so close to the borders of two other states.

    Rem

  16. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Newport Beach, CA
    Posts
    8,066

    Re: Smoking Ban in Cincinnati

    Boy, I see a lot of people on this thread saying, "stay at home if you don't want to smoke". How about, "stay at home if you do want to smoke". Same argument, different side of the coin.

    That should bring some flack.

    Rem


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25