Smoking Ban: First Weekend Reactions

[registerthis]

You can't smoke on domestic air travel. You can't smoke on greyhound busses. Most cabs don't want you to smoke in them. You can't smoke in most areas of airports, shopping malls, ballparks, hotels, etc. You can't smoke in any ole place in a resturant. You can't smoke inside most any store like Loews, Bed Bath & Beyond, Radio Shack, etc. You can't smoke in most offices or office buildings. Heck, I've been in 300,000sqft plants that don't allow smoking.

I know...it's wonderful, and everyone is a little bit healthier because of it.

But it's all about making the smoker happy?

I want smokers to be happy to...I just want them puffing away outside, away from me. But they're welcome to enjoy the same establishments as me, and do so in a relaxing, smoke-free environment.

let's drop the pretend notion that non-smokers are this hunted group with nobody to protect them and are just at the mercies of the big bad evil smokers.

I harbor no such illusions--clearly, as far as smoking goes, things are much better for non-smokers than they were back in the days when people could light up on aircraft (which is just astounding to me--but, hey, people used to doubt that cigarettes were harmful, too). I'm not asking for smokers to give up smoking--I'm only asking them to pursue their habit in a way that doesn't affect me. And this is one instance where I don't mind coming off a bit selfish--if a few smokers are inconvenienced by having to puff away outside rather than at their bar stools, so be it.

The smoking ban's been in effect in D.C. for about 5 months now, the restaurants, bars and clubs are hopping, no one's really complaining, and myself, my wife, and all of our friends can go out where we please without having to worry about the effects of tobacco smoke. Sorry, but you're simply never going to convince me that this isn't a positive thing.

[Johnny Footstool]

Sorry, but you're simply never going to convince me that this isn't a positive thing.

It is a positive thing, except for the loss of personal freedoms for a minority of the population.

Personally, I don't like it when the government takes those away over a matter of convenience.

[TeamCasey]

Sorry, but you're simply never going to convince me that this isn't a positive thing.

Are you a bar owner?

[Rojo]

Easily 2-3 times a week for me, pub culture is a big part of the PDX scene, and places that are smoky tend to be either "old man" bars like Moe's Tavern or Hipster Doofus joints where all the guys have haircuts like the characters in the Hot Wheels Cartoon from the 70's. Folks drag their kids to the pub by Pedro's for dinner and lounging on the porch and lawn out front, all smoking occurs in the open air.

An "old man" bar is a true bar. A pub is something else. When the regulars at Terry's Lodge have to extinquish their butts for once-a-month yuppies, then somethings wrong.

[Ltlabner]

When the regulars at Terry's Lodge have to extinquish their butts for once-a-month yuppies, then somethings wrong.

[registerthis]

It is a positive thing, except for the loss of personal freedoms for a minority of the population.

Personally, I don't like it when the government takes those away over a matter of convenience.

Happens all the time...there are noise ordinances, laws dictating public behavior, zoning and planning boards to dictate the appearance of public buildings, etc.

In the case of smoking, one person's personal freedom infringes upon another's right to enjoy a public space. I'm fine with a little government intrusion now and then--i've never claimed to be a complete libertarian.

[registerthis]

Are you a bar owner?

I wish I was in my neighborhood. They do a booming business.

[registerthis]

An "old man" bar is a true bar. A pub is something else. When the regulars at Terry's Lodge have to extinquish their butts for once-a-month yuppies, then somethings wrong.

What's a yuppie doing in Terry's Lodge?

[TeamCasey]

Terry's Lodge has been bulldozed for a TGIFridays.

[SunDeck]

Sugar is bad ....... carbs are bad ........ fat is bad ......... cars can be dangerous ........ alcohol is bad ........ stress is bad ........ genetic disposition is bad ........

Ban them all.
Especially that last one.

[GAC]

Smoking bans have nothing to do with the health of the smoker or increased healthcare costs; but the inconvenience to and health-risk (exposure) of the non-smoker.

But when we have special interest and/or the government wanting to ban a behavior because they say it's bad for you or it creates a "burden" that society overall has to shoulder (such as healthcare costs), then they sure as heck can't stop at smoking. Which "detrimental" societal behavior is next?

That's where it starts to get somewhat scary, as well as intrusive into personal freedoms/rights. Yes, you can open up a "Pandora's box". I've alreay read numerous articles where some have suggested it is child abuse and parental neglect if you have an obese child.

[TeamCasey]

Ban them all.
Especially that last one.

[registerthis]

But when we have special interest and/or the government wanting to ban a behavior because they say it's bad for you or it creates a "burden" that society overall has to shoulder (such as healthcare costs), then they sure as heck can't stop at smoking. Which "detrimental" societal behavior is next?

I understand the concern here--it's frequently used when arguing against seatbelt laws. I can't say I necessarily reject it. I'd also point out, however, that if you talk about "special interests" injecting themselves into society's day-to-day lives, one of the greatest offenders of modern times has been the tobacco industry, which lied (and continues to lie) through its teeth in order to avoid regulation, prevent (or cloud) the release of studies pointing to the detrimental health effects of smoking, and do everything possible so as to ensure that their customers become hopelessly addicted to their product.

I somewhat view the anti-smoking pushback as a type of market correction, if you will.

[registerthis]

Terry's Lodge has been bulldozed for a TGIFridays.

Well, they're starting to ban saturated fat now. Let's see how Friday's fares.

[Johnny Footstool]

Happens all the time...there are noise ordinances, laws dictating public behavior, zoning and planning boards to dictate the appearance of public buildings, etc.

In the case of smoking, one person's personal freedom infringes upon another's right to enjoy a public space. I'm fine with a little government intrusion now and then--i've never claimed to be a complete libertarian.

The problem is, there were designated areas that segregated smokers from non-smokers. Granted, most places didn't segregate all that well, but non-smokers still had plenty of space. This law is just about non-smokers not wanting to share.

It infringes on the proprietors of private business, too. They can't purchase a smoking license and allow their patrons to smoke.