No Smoking in Bars.....

Options
1…1213151718…20

Comments

  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    dunkman wrote:
    no

    you'll kill the bar staff.. imagine 30-40 people smoking in a small pub.

    also before its raised... "he/she can just decide not to take that job".. now i live in rural Scotland.. my nearest pub is more than 3 miles away.. the next ones after that is in the town centre (5 miles or so)

    now, if i was a barman and the pub nearest me went "pro-smokers" and i refused to take that job then it'd be the next pubs 5 or so miles away... beyond that... hmmmm 21 miles away or so... so now i have to hope i can find a job that requires a 42 miles round trip for a 5 hour shift... not economically viable for me.. nevermind my emmission travelling to my "non-smoking" employment!

    now imagine i was disabled and had no transport

    would all of you stub out your ciggies if a busload of travelling pregnant women came into a local pub for something to eat... i bet you all fucking would.. yet you wouldnt extend me the same courtesy.. thats selfishness encapsulated :)

    What if the bar staff doesn't care that it is a smoking bar.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    dunkman wrote:
    but what you do to you my health is my business

    But my smoking is not affecting your health. Roland has a problem with me smoking. I live no where near him so my smoking has no affect on him. So in short it is none of his business.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    mammasan wrote:
    But I'm not infringing on those right. When I go outside after work and light up am I infringing on your right to health. No, so what I do to my body is none of your business.

    Isn't this entire thread about smoking indoors in public places...bars in particular? where's the comparison?

    Does not every bar have the option of creating a smoke free section?

    Why isn't that being done everywhere if smoking clientèle is so coveted and lucrative...

    Reason? because smokers are the VAST minority in society...

    A dying breed so to speak... ;)
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    Derrick wrote:
    Like I said earlier, they should just legalize MJ.

    Then this thread wouldn't be approaching 20 pages long. We'd be saying...

    "Yeah, cigarettes suck"
    "Cool"
    "Do you wanna get some chips?"
    "Yeah"

    lol :D hahaa
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • Derrick
    Derrick Posts: 475
    mammasan wrote:
    What if the bar staff doesn't care that it is a smoking bar.
    Gov't still tries to protect those who don't care about themselves as best possible, otherwise suicide wouldn't be illegal. :-)
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Isn't this entire thread about smoking indoors in public places...bars in particular? where's the comparison?

    Does not every bar have the option of creating a smoke free section?

    Why isn't that being done everywhere if smoking clientèle is so coveted and lucrative...

    Reason? because smokers are the VAST minority in society...

    A dying breed so to speak... ;)

    To me this thread is about business owners rights.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    mammasan wrote:
    But my smoking is not affecting your health. Roland has a problem with me smoking. I live no where near him so my smoking has no affect on him. So in short it is none of his business.


    You too missed the concept of this thread...wtf?
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    Derrick wrote:
    Gov't still tries to protect those who don't care about themselves as best possible, otherwise suicide wouldn't be illegal. :-)


    And whose life is it anyway? Same as the informed person who wants to walk into a smoke filled bar.

    Anyway, you (in general) railing for health to everybody must have long walks to work everyday as I can tell you take health to the extreme that you can't possibly drive a vehicle the way you think of others.

    And there should be an option to open a bar with smoking in it.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    mammasan wrote:
    To me this thread is about business owners rights.

    Not not exactly. You're skipping a big part there for sake of trying to be right in an argument you probably can't win due to the common sense factor alone.

    They can build a smoking section if they think it's so lucrative, but no one is doing it. There's lot's of common sense things the government regulates that smokers don't complain about. Why is that????
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    even flow? wrote:
    And whose life is it anyway?

    Exactly...whose life is it affecting? In public this is very different situation. I'll not be affected by someone blinded by a destructive addiction.


    Anti smokers could be called racist (if you will) if it wasn't for the fact that their actions actually operate along the terms of saving peoples lives :rolleyes:

    That's really the bottom line..the rest is mere folly and circular banter...
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • floyd1975
    floyd1975 Posts: 1,350
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Exactly...whose life is it affecting? In public this is very different situation. I'll not be affected by someone blinded by a destructive addiction.

    If you do not want to be affected, you may want to stay away from the bars where smoking is allowed. That is a common sense way to be unaffected by smoking.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    Not not exactly. You're skipping a big part there for sake of trying to be right in an argument you probably can't win due to the common sense factor alone.

    They can build a smoking section if they think it's so lucrative, but no one is doing it. There's lot's of common sense things the government regulates that smokers don't complain about. Why is that????

    I'm not skipping any part of the arguement. I agree that smoking is bad. I agree that second hand smoke is bad. I agree that if I was a non-smoker i would not want to be around smokers. I actually prefer non-smoking establishments. I'm not even arguing wether there should be non-smoking establsihments because I think there should be I just don't believe that the government should force it upon the business owner to do so. If you still have trouble understanding my arguement I can try to simplfy it a little more for you.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • RolandTD20Kdrummer
    RolandTD20Kdrummer Posts: 13,066
    mammasan wrote:
    I'm not skipping any part of the arguement. I agree that smoking is bad. I agree that second hand smoke is bad. I agree that if I was a non-smoker i would not want to be around smokers. I actually prefer non-smoking establishments. I'm not even arguing wether there should be non-smoking establsihments because I think there should be I just don't believe that the government should force it upon the business owner to do so. If you still have trouble understanding my arguement I can try to simplfy it a little more for you.

    There are so many things the government regulates. Many of of them are not contested because they are such common sense laws that they are considered public health/safety issues and just..well...standards. Would you like to see little or no government control in those areas as well? There's too many to mention that we all take for granted.
    Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
    and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
    over specific principles, goals, and policies.

    http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg

    (\__/)
    ( o.O)
    (")_(")
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    Derrick wrote:
    Gov't still tries to protect those who don't care about themselves as best possible, otherwise suicide wouldn't be illegal. :-)

    Well suicide shouldn't be illegal. If I decide to end my life what business is it of the governments.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    mammasan wrote:
    Well suicide shouldn't be illegal. If I decide to end my life what business is it of the governments.

    Thank you. I have no idea why people seem to think the government owns their life.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Sludge Factory
    Sludge Factory Posts: 976
    mammasan wrote:
    Well suicide shouldn't be illegal. If I decide to end my life what business is it of the governments.

    I find it funny that it's even considered illegal. Who are they going to arrest, your corpse?
  • jlew24asu
    jlew24asu Posts: 10,118
    Sludge Factory wrote:
    I find it funny that it's even considered illegal. Who are they going to arrest, your corpse?

    no, the doctor who helps.
  • mammasan
    mammasan Posts: 5,656
    RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:
    There are so many things the government regulates. Many of of them are not contested because they are such common sense laws that they are considered public health/safety issues and just..well...standards. Would you like to see little or no government control in those areas as well? There's too many to mention that we all take for granted.

    There are areas that, I believe, government intervention is necessary. A good example would be the FDA. Obviously I argee that we need tro have saefty standards set for the food we buy and eat. As individuals we really don't have the power to control the industry so we need someone with more authority to do so, that is when government comes in. As for smoking bans we do have the power to make changes their as individuals. That is how I make the distiction.
    "When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,821
    zstillings wrote:
    That's what people say but what about the bars where only the owners work? Then there are no employees. I have been to a few bars like this that are covered under the ban in places as well. The bans are actually becoming a reason for a roving band of anti-smoking lobbyists to feel good about themselves.

    In L.A., there is a bar called Tiki Ti, and since all of the employees are owners, having a smoke there is a-ok
  • JOEJOEJOE
    JOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,821
    mammasan wrote:
    What is wrong with this picture is that what I do to my body is really none of your business. You choose not to smoke I do get over it.

    But, smokers require, on average, much more healthcare when they get old, and the government often foots the bill with our tax dollars, so, yes, it is everyone's business!

Categories