DC is Smoke Free!! Now VA is too!

[jrockster21]

I know I'm probably way behind the curve on this one, but I just noticed a sign on the bus this morning that said as of January 2nd, all bars and restauraunts in DC are smoke free now!! This is awesome news, and means I can start going out in DC again! Hopefully some others of you haven't heard about this as well, and the news will be as exciting for you as it was for me!! :)

The worst thing ever is coming home after a night out smelling like an ashtray...so disgusting. Mad props to DC voters!! :applause: :applause: :applause:

March 10th EDIT: Looks like VA is following suit: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/09/AR2009030900832.html

[stwasm]

My lungs salute this news! :applause: :cheers:

[zoony]

I wish they would do that around here. :mad:


But TN will probably be the last state in the country to pass something like this. I think TN has more smokers than any other state (per capita)

..

[jrockster21]

I wish they would do that around here. :mad:


But TN will probably be the last state in the country to pass something like this. I think TN has more smokers than any other state (per capita)

..


Virginia will never change either, because we're a tobacco state. :mad:

[Midnight Judges]

eh you guys are wusses. :finger: Maybe next you will outlaw camp fires and rooms that are not made out of rubber.

[zoony]

eh you guys are wusses. :finger: Maybe next you will outlaw camp fires and rooms that are not made out of rubber.


Not so much for me, for my infant son. I don't mind it so much, although I hate it when I go to a bar and the next morning my clothes smell like an ashtray.


A lot of times when we go out to eat, we end up having to wait for a table even longer b/c the only non-smoking table is right up against the smoking section.

Once you have kids you'll see what I mean.

....

[stwasm]

Virginia will never change either, because we're a tobacco state. :mad:

Well, there could be some hope as the Clarendon Ballroom is smoke-free. We could only pray that other establishments follow suit.

[KingGibbs]

I think TN has more smokers than any other state (per capita)
..


and fewer dentists apparently.



I keed, I keed.

[Midnight Judges]

Not so much for me, for my infant son. I don't mind it so much, although I hate it when I go to a bar and the next morning my clothes smell like an ashtray.


A lot of times when we go out to eat, we end up having to wait for a table even longer b/c the only non-smoking table is right up against the smoking section.

Once you have kids you'll see what I mean.

....

I'd be fine with that if it were just resturants and not late night bars.

[Ax]

And yet, cancer will continue to kill both the smoker, and the non smoker. Just like it did before there were smoke filled bars.

Alcohol is just as deadly as smoking, if not more. Can't wait for that ban to try and come back around.

[SkinsNut73]

...we've been smoke free in CT for a few years now. It is nice to go into a smoke free restaurant....though when you first go in the restaurant you have to go through the line of smokers standing outside at the entrance.

...and there is always a group of a dozen or so smokers outside the bars I drive by...shivering in the cold, standing in the pouring rain....


Went to Germany on a business trip recently and those folks are still lighting up right there at their desk...one guy went on a rant about how we Americans get our panties in a bunch over the stupidest things....

[jrockster21]

And yet, cancer will continue to kill both the smoker, and the non smoker. Just like it did before there were smoke filled bars.

That may be, but I won't have to go home smelling like an ashtray anymore!! :)

The difference between alcohol and tobacco, imo, is alcohol and socializing are the entire reason for going out in the first place. Some people go without drinking, but others drinking doesn't stain their clothes with a disgusting smell (unless they happen to be puked or spilled on, which is the minority of cases - EVERYONE leaves a bar smelling like smoke if they're there for longer than 30 seconds). You don't go to a bar just to smoke a ciggarette.

[KingGibbs]

Alcohol is just as deadly as smoking, if not more. Can't wait for that ban to try and come back around.

Actually, there are no benefits to smoking other then the fact that it keeps the population under control and medical insurance rates at a rate that many can't afford.

However, it has been documented that there are indeed benefits to drinking alcohol in moderation.

Moderation being the key word.

[PleaseBlitz]

DC just lost a LOT of money.

[PleaseBlitz]

Actually, there are no benefits to smoking other then the fact that it keeps the population under control and medical insurance rates at a rate that many can't afford.

However, it has been documented that there are indeed benefits to drinking alcohol in moderation.

Moderation being the key word.


Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

[Gallntfox]

DC just lost a LOT of money.

My sister in law is a bar owner in DC and she is figuring that it will hit her in the wallet...how much remains to be seen.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

Although I've never smoked, I've always heard there's a complementary relationship between smoking and drinking.

[manleyistheman]

If you want to control what others do while you're out, why go out at all? At home you can control who is there, what they think, how they smell, how they look, and what they do. I'm a non-smoker and also hate to smell like cigarrettes but I'll be damned if I think my needs and wants should be imposed on the general public in public spaces. I would understand having smoke-free bars/restaurants and smoke-allowed bars/restaurants. But for a goverment, be it federal, state or local, impose such a city-wide law is a little much for me and cannot cheer it.

[rictus58]

Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

And they suppress your appetite.

[PleaseBlitz]

Although I've never smoked, I've always heard there's a complementary relationship between smoking and drinking.


This is scientific fact. Beers and cigs go together like peanut butter and jelly.

[Redskins Diehard]

The primary purpose of this legislation is to give people a smoke free work place(bartender, wait staff, etc) not necessarily to give people a smoke free drink place...that just turns out as an added benefit.

I always wonder if those people huddled up outside smoking in the cold and rain really feel like outcasts for partaking in an activity that society has deemed disgusting and repulsive.

[NattyLight]

Eh, whatever, I'll just puff in the bathroom.

[PleaseBlitz]

The primary purpose of this legislation is to give people a smoke free work place(bartender, wait staff, etc) not necessarily to give people a smoke free drink place...that just turns out as an added benefit.

Well, those people just took a pay cut for it.


I always wonder if those people huddled up outside smoking in the cold and rain really feel like outcasts for partaking in an activity that society has deemed disgusting and repulsive.


Well, seeing as there are always big groups of us, I would say no.

[Midnight Judges]

Actually, there are no benefits to smoking other then the fact that it keeps the population under control and medical insurance rates at a rate that many can't afford.


Is that a fact? I've heard that before but it seems the people compiling the data are pretending people who die from lung cancer would not have died of somthing else otherwise. As if lung cancer treatments are 100% waste because those people would have lived forever otherwise. Is lung cancer that much more expensive to treat than say, heart disease, pancreatic cancer, breast cancer, not to mention 30 more years of back problems, old folks homes and collecting social security.

Just saying, I'd like to see numbers on that, because I've seen them before, and the argument was weak.

[TexasRedskinFan]

Smoking has been banned in Austin for about a year now. I love it. There's a huge difference when I go out here and when I'm back home in San Antonio.

At first bars were freaking out about it, but I haven't heard anything lately. It might be different for you guys, but since Austin is the "Live music capital of the world", people are still attracted to bars for that sole purpose (the live music).

[jrockster21]

DC just lost a LOT of money.

Eh...maybe short term, but not long term. This won't keep people away forever. DC is still a fun place to go.


Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

Make beer taste better?? BLASPHEMY!! :laugh:

[TexasRedskinFan]

Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

But it makes YOU taste like ****. I hate kissing a girl that smokes.

[tizzod]

But it makes YOU taste like ****. I hate kissing a girl that smokes.

Ding!

Cigarettes are absolutely disgusting and I can't imagine for the life of me, with all the information out there now about them, people still "suck 'em down like Coca-Cola!" -Kramer.

Addiction must be a terrible thing.

[Redskins Diehard]

Well, those people just took a pay cut for it.




Well, seeing as there are always big groups of us, I would say no.

You really think that? I bet that just as many people will begin to frequent these places because they are smoke free as abandon them because of the same. Its been the way of doing business in San Diego for years, NYC for a while. I bet they don't lose much of anything.

The size of the group doesn't indicate anything, other than it helps you feel better knowing that others are in the same boat. Lepers have been know to hang out in big groups also.

[jrockster21]

You really think that? I bet that just as many people will begin to frequent these places because they are smoke free as abandon them because of the same. Its been the way of doing business in San Diego for years, NYC for a while. I bet they don't lose much of anything.

Exactly. I personally know quite a few people who don't like to go out explicitly because of the smoke-problem. Now that DC is smoke free, I'm sure a lot of people will start to frequent the bars downtown.

A good majority of the smokers will too, because where else are they going to go??


The size of the group doesn't indicate anything, other than it helps you feel better knowing that others are in the same boat. Lepers have been know to hang out in big groups also.

LOL. Smokers = lepers. :laugh:

Smown3d.

[redskinss]

Not so much for me, for my infant son. I don't mind it so much, although I hate it when I go to a bar and the next morning my clothes smell like an ashtray.


A lot of times when we go out to eat, we end up having to wait for a table even longer b/c the only non-smoking table is right up against the smoking section.

Once you have kids you'll see what I mean.

....
i like george carlins theory on this.
he says having a smoking section in a resteraunt is like having a peeing section in a pool

[MikeInJc aka M.I.A.]

Having been a former smoker for about 6 or 7 years at 2 packs a day, I applaud and welcome this smoking ban. I was able to quit cold turkey about 4 months ago and I still hate going to bars in VA and having to come home smelling like smoke. Then I think to myself, "man I used to do that and smell like that?":puke: :puke: :puke:.

I totally agree on the level of nastiness when kissing a chick that smokes. You might as well lick an ashtray, it gives you the same taste.

As for beer tasting better when you smoke????? :wtf: :bsflag:

[SkinsNut73]

....the bars/restaurants in CT cried they would lose business because of this a few years ago when it was implemented. Fact is, the bars and restaurants are just as crowded as always. Whether it's more non-smokers frequenting these places because they are smoke free, or the same smokers still going out, I don't know. But these businesses are not suffering any side effects from the smoke out.

[rincewind]

This is scientific fact. Beers and cigs go together like peanut butter and jelly.




Make beer taste better?? BLASPHEMY!! :laugh:



Gotta agree with Jrock on this one. You're talking about beer - the sweet, sweet nectar of life. It taste fine by itself. You smoke while drinking, you alter the taste of the beer. Bad.




And I prefer peanut butter and chocolate. Which may be why I prefer beer and smoking not tobacco. :)

[PleaseBlitz]

You really think that? I bet that just as many people will begin to frequent these places because they are smoke free as abandon them because of the same. Its been the way of doing business in San Diego for years, NYC for a while. I bet they don't lose much of anything.

I do think that. People will whine about smelling like smoke, but the still GO to the bars.

Smokers WONT go. They will go to Arlington. Trust me. I smoke.

And someone posted that their sister in law owns a bar and is worried. She knows the bar biz a lot better than you do.


The size of the group doesn't indicate anything, other than it helps you feel better knowing that others are in the same boat. Lepers have been know to hang out in big groups also.

Thats the dumbest argument ive ever heard. The question is do smokers feel like outcasts. The answer is no, there is always a big group of us.

[PleaseBlitz]

Gotta agree with Jrock on this one. You're talking about beer - the sweet, sweet nectar of life. It taste fine by itself. You smoke while drinking, you alter the taste of the beer. Bad.


Do you smoke?

[PleaseBlitz]

Exactly. I personally know quite a few people who don't like to go out explicitly because of the smoke-problem. Now that DC is smoke free, I'm sure a lot of people will start to frequent the bars downtown.

A good majority of the smokers will too, because where else are they going to go??




Arlington.

[jrockster21]

Do you smoke?

I used to smoke, and beer tastes just as good as it ever did now that I don't smoke. :)

And yeah, people will still go out to Arlington, true. But Arlington gets old after awhile, IMO. And people from DC rarely leave the city (one of those snobbish, I live in DC, why would I want to leave? kind of things). DC bars will be fine.

[zoony]

Arlington.


Don't kid yourself, you're gonna go where the hot women are :silly:


So it might be Arlington, it might not. Depends on how many hot women smoke in that area. :)

[SkinsNut73]

...if I remember correctly, there was a ban in Texas (not sure if it was the whole state, or just a portion of it) and they actually showed restaurants and bars with an increase in profits after a smoking ban. I remember them using that as an example when CT instituted our ban.

[SkinsNut73]

Don't kid yourself, you're gonna go where the hot women are :silly:





Ding, ding, ding...winner :silly:

[jrockster21]

Don't kid yourself, you're gonna go where the hot women are :silly:


So it might be Arlington, it might not. Depends on how many hot women smoke in that area. :)


Trust me....Arlington is STACKED. :)

[PleaseBlitz]

Don't kid yourself, you're gonna go where the hot women are :silly:


So it might be Arlington, it might not. Depends on how many hot women smoke in that area. :)


Think about it this way. The types of women that SMOKE are probably the ones that have a "whatever" attitude about things. Smoking isnt good for you, but its enjoyable so they do it anyways. Smoking has this big negative stigma, but they dont care. What other activity does that sound like? And why are you at a bar? Anyone catching my drift?

THESE are the girls that you want to be around.

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? When is boils down to it, the free market should decide. If you want to open a bar that is smoke free next to a bar that allows smoking, then that is fine. Almost everyone on here who posted in favor of the ban did so because of their personal preference not to "smell like an ashtray." But if your personal preference is your reasoning for supporting the ban, then I hope you see the irony that it is at the expense of robbing the restaurant/bar owner of his personal preference.

[Midnight Judges]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? When is boils down to it, the free market should decide. If you want to open a bar that is smoke free next to a bar that allows smoking, then that is fine. Almost everyone on here who posted in favor of the ban did so because of their personal preference not to "smell like an ashtray." But if your personal preference is your reasoning for supporting the ban, then I hope you see the irony that it is at the expense of robbing the restaurant/bar owner of his personal preference.

You make a good point. If non-smoking bars are in such high demand and don't actually lose money as the folks on this thread are claiming, why don't we see non-smoking bars popping up all over the place in areas with no ban?

[PleaseBlitz]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? When is boils down to it, the free market should decide. If you want to open a bar that is smoke free next to a bar that allows smoking, then that is fine. Almost everyone on here who posted in favor of the band did so because of their personal preference not to "smell like an ashtray." But if your personal preference is your reasoning for supporting the ban, then I hope you see the irony that it is at the expense of robbing the restaurant/bar owner of his personal preference.

:applause:

Issues like this are what prompted the Revolutionary War.

We should just rip up the Constitution right now. This isnt the America that I know. The America I know lets people own all the guns that they want. The America I know affords the KKK the freedom of speech. The American that I know lets teenagers have all the abortions they want.

But i cant smoke in a ****ing bar??????

http://www.geocities.com/god_bless_america_lyrics/katesmith1.wav

[Redskins Diehard]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? When is boils down to it, the free market should decide. If you want to open a bar that is smoke free next to a bar that allows smoking, then that is fine. Almost everyone on here who posted in favor of the ban did so because of their personal preference not to "smell like an ashtray." But if your personal preference is your reasoning for supporting the ban, then I hope you see the irony that it is at the expense of robbing the restaurant/bar owner of his personal preference.

The government is telling businesses that their employees are entitled to a smoke free work place. It has nothing to do with patrons not wanting to smell like an ash tray. More to do with waiters not getting lung cancer.

[PleaseBlitz]

The government is telling businesses that their employees are entitled to a smoke free work place. It has nothing to do with patrons not wanting to smell like an ash tray. More to do with waiters not getting lung cancer.


Then they should ban coal mines.

[Redskins Diehard]

I do think that. People will whine about smelling like smoke, but the still GO to the bars.

Smokers WONT go. They will go to Arlington. Trust me. I smoke.

And someone posted that their sister in law owns a bar and is worried. She knows the bar biz a lot better than you do.



Thats the dumbest argument ive ever heard. The question is do smokers feel like outcasts. The answer is no, there is always a big group of us.

Have you ever been to NYC? I think people still hang out there.

Someone's sister in law is concerned has to be the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Back it up with facts that bars are losing money in places where the ban has been passed.

People party in NYC, they party in Austin, they party in San Diego...and don't smoke in any of them.

The question of whether or not you feel like an outcast has nothing to do with how many of you there are. Society has decided that your disgusting habit has to go somewhere else...have fun in Arlington

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

The government is telling businesses that their employees are entitled to a smoke free work place. It has nothing to do with patrons not wanting to smell like an ash tray. More to do with waiters not getting lung cancer.

You are right, they are. Just not at my bar where I allow smoking. Again the same argument applies here. They are not forced to work at a bar.

[twa]

The government is telling businesses that their employees are entitled to a smoke free work place. It has nothing to do with patrons not wanting to smell like an ash tray. More to do with waiters not getting lung cancer.

Horse****, it is about control.
The nazi's here try to tell me I can't smoke in my own business.

[PleaseBlitz]

Have you ever been to NYC? I think people still hang out there.

Ive never been to NYC. Have you?


Someone's sister in law is concerned has to be the dumbest argument I have ever heard. Back it up with facts that bars are losing money in places where the ban has been passed.

Really? Someone that WORKS in the industry's opinion counts less than yours? What do you do for a living?


People party in NYC, they party in Austin, they party in San Diego...and don't smoke in any of them.

I guarantee that they still smoke.


The question of whether or not you feel like an outcast has nothing to do with how many of you there are. Society has decided that your disgusting habit has to go somewhere else...have fun in Arlington

I will have fun in Arlington.

So..............feeling like an outcast has nothing to do with how many people you are with. :laugh: Ok, so when i tell people I am going to have a cigarette, and half the group joins me, im an outcast. :wtf:

[909997]

smoking is overrated

[jrockster21]

I guarantee that they still smoke.


Yeah...outside!! :silly:

[JohnLockesGhost]

Yeah...outside!! :silly:

Do they have their own water fountains and restrooms too?

[Coooleeey]

I'm really torn on the issue. I'm a smoker so this kills my good time a little bit, but I do smell a whole lot better when I get home. Smokers don't smell like a huge ashtray, many smokers smoking at the same time in a small area with no venilation makes you smell like an ashtray.

I have no problem stepping outside to have a cigarette. I do that at work, my parents house, etc...its just passing a law about it that sort of gets me. Why can't the bar owners decide whether they want smoking in their restaurant. The employees know when they fill out the application and accept the job there is smoking allowed so that argument is retarded.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Guys the Clarendon Ballroom has been smoke free for who knows how long

And its packed every night

This will have no impact on DC except I can home without smelling like ass

My opinion on this

If they can having a smoking ban in Italy of all places, where everyone smokes reds, it certainly can and will be just fine in Washington DC

[PleaseBlitz]

Yeah...outside!! :silly:


Yea, im sure that sucks in San Diego.









Ive been to San Diego, most bars have patios that you CAN smoke on. Here is the 10 day weather forecast:

http://www.weather.com/weather/tenday/USCA0982?from=36hr_fcst10DayLink_undeclared

[jrockster21]

Guys the Clarendon Ballroom has been smoke free for who knows how long

And its packed every night


Ironically, I can't stand the Clarendon Ballroom. :laugh:

[PleaseBlitz]

Guys the Clarendon Ballroom has been smoke free for who knows how long

And its packed every night

This will have no impact on DC except I can home without smelling like ass

My opinion on this

If they can having a smoking ban in Italy of all places, where everyone smokes reds, it certainly can and will be just fine in Washington DC


Yeah, because now its the ONE bar in Arlington that is smoke free, so it attracts ALL of the non-smokers.

If ALL bars were non-smoking and they had 1 bar where smoking was allowed, that bar would be full every night.

[rincewind]

Do you smoke?


No, but I have. In my experience tobacco makes everything taste like tobacco.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Yeah, because now its the ONE bar in Arlington that is smoke free, so it attracts ALL of the non-smokers.

If ALL bars were non-smoking and they had 1 bar where smoking was allowed, that bar would be full every night.


Half of my friends smoke and never have a problem with hitting up the Ballroom. Its never been an issue, I can't think of anytime any of them objected to the ballroom, during winter, because they can't smoke. In fact its never happened

This will have no impact on bars or clubs in DC. I'll just smell as good at the end of the night as I did at the start of the night :cheers:

[PleaseBlitz]

No, but I have. In my experience tobacco makes everything taste like tobacco.


Ok, maybe "taste better" isnt the right words.


I will modify it.

Nothing goes better with a beer than a cigarette.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Ok, maybe "taste better" isnt the right words.


I will modify it.

Nothing goes better with a beer than a cigarette.

How about another beer?

[PleaseBlitz]

Half of my friends smoke and never have a problem with hitting up the Ballroom. Its never been an issue, I can't think of anytime any of them objected to the ballroom, during winter, because they can't smoke. In fact its never happened

This will have no impact on bars or clubs in DC. I'll just smell as good at the end of the night as I did at the start of the night :cheers:


I have a hard time buying that if your friends are real smokers, not just the type of people that will have a cigarette or 2 a night if they are drinking and someone offers them one. I have lots of friends that do that too. (****ing bums).

This WILL have a big impact on bars in DC unless bars set up convenient smoking areas outside.

[jrockster21]

Yeah, because now its the ONE bar in Arlington that is smoke free, so it attracts ALL of the non-smokers.

If ALL bars were non-smoking and they had 1 bar where smoking was allowed, that bar would be full every night.


The bottom line is this; there are plenty of nonsmokers who currently tolerate the smoky atmosphere that exists in bars. Now that they are smoke-free, there will be just as many smokers who tolerate having to go outside to smoke, and the bars won't lose much business at all.

My question to smokers is this: you act like its this grave injustice to outlaw smoking, however how is it fair for nonsmokers to tolerate a smoke-filled bar?? I mean, its not like smoking is being outlawed, just smoking inside.

[PleaseBlitz]

How about another beer?

:laugh: Well you dont have another beer WITH a beer (at the same time) unless you are a true alky.

[jrockster21]

:laugh: Well you dont have another beer WITH a beer (at the same time) unless you are a true alky.

:paranoid:

[JohnLockesGhost]

The bottom line is this; there are plenty of nonsmokers who currently tolerate the smoky atmosphere that exists in bars. Now that they are smoke-free, there will be just as many smokers who tolerate having to go outside to smoke, and the bars won't lose much business at all.

My question to smokers is this: you act like its this grave injustice to outlaw smoking, however how is it fair for nonsmokers to tolerate a smoke-filled bar?? I mean, its not like smoking is being outlawed, just smoking inside.

It's just another indication of the flippant nature of some people's attitude towards the property rights of their fellow citizens.

[PleaseBlitz]

The bottom line is this; there are plenty of nonsmokers who currently tolerate the smoky atmosphere that exists in bars. Now that they are smoke-free, there will be just as many smokers who tolerate having to go outside to smoke, and the bars won't lose much business at all.

You dont understand because you arent a smoker.

You arent ADDICTED to not smoking. Your body doesnt PHYSICALLY CRAVE a non-smoking atmosphere when you are drinking.


My question to smokers is this: you act like its this grave injustice to outlaw smoking, however how is it fair for nonsmokers to tolerate a smoke-filled bar?? I mean, its not like smoking is being outlawed, just smoking inside.

You act like coming home smelling like smoke is like getting shot. Are you going to wear those clothes again without washing them, whether they smell like smoke or not?

And the point is, why not leave the decision to the private property owners? A law banning all smoking is WAY too excessive.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I have a hard time buying that if your friends are real smokers, not just the type of people that will have a cigarette or 2 a night if they are drinking and someone offers them one. I have lots of friends that do that too. (****ing bums).

This WILL have a big impact on bars in DC unless bars set up convenient smoking areas outside.


These are real smokers. I make fun of them because they make the least out of all of us yet spend a good chunk of their pay checks on cigs

I'd propose another bet with you, albeit longer term (with studies and whatnot) that will prove that this will have no impact on the DC bar/club scene

[jrockster21]

It's just another indication of the flippant nature of some people's attitude towards the property rights of their fellow citizens.


:confused: What about smokers' "flippant attitude" towards the effects of their nasty habit on my lungs?? :whoknows:

[herrmag]

These are real smokers. I make fun of them because they make the least out of all of us yet spend a good chunk of their pay checks on cigs

I'd propose another bet with you, albeit longer term (with studies and whatnot) that will prove that this will have no impact on the DC bar/club scene

Sure it will. Now every bar I go to will have a bunch of drunk smokers standing right outside the door. ;)

[PleaseBlitz]

These are real smokers. I make fun of them because they make the least out of all of us yet spend a good chunk of their pay checks on cigs

I'd propose another bet with you, albeit longer term (with studies and whatnot) that will prove that this will have no impact on the DC bar/club scene


Political sig bets are GAY.

[jrockster21]

You dont understand because you arent a smoker.

Read earlier in the thread - I used to smoke like a chimney. My bar in Dania (Dockers, w00t!) was a non-smoking bar. We had to go outside to smoke, and it wasn't a big deal. Even when I was a smoker, I preferred not stinking like a cigarrette when I got home.


You arent ADDICTED to not smoking. Your body doesnt PHYSICALLY CRAVE a non-smoking atmosphere when you are drinking.

Trust me, I used to be. And in some bars my body does crave a smoke-free environment. My eyes start to burn and water, and I have trouble breathing. What about people with asthma? Their bodies will definitely crave a smoke-free environment.


You act like coming home smelling like smoke is like getting shot. Are you going to wear those clothes again without washing them, whether they smell like smoke or not?

That would be fine if it was just your clothes. Its not. It gets in your hair and on your skin as well. I come home, completely change, and I still reek of ciggarettes. :puke:


And the point is, why not leave the decision to the private property owners? A law banning all smoking is WAY too excessive.

I think the law is just fine!! :D

[PleaseBlitz]

:confused: What about smokers' "flippant attitude" towards the effects of their nasty habit on my lungs?? :whoknows:

Why? Because they smoke in bars? :laugh:

[SkinsHokieFan]

Sure it will. Now every bar I go to will have a bunch of drunk smokers standing right outside the door. ;)

:laugh:

I say one thing to the negative extranalities known as smokers....quit

[PleaseBlitz]

Read earlier in the thread - I used to smoke like a chimney. My bar in Dania (Dockers, w00t!) was a non-smoking bar. We had to go outside to smoke, and it wasn't a big deal. Even when I was a smoker, I preferred not stinking like a cigarrette when I got home.



Trust me, I used to be. And in some bars my body does crave a smoke-free environment. My eyes start to burn and water, and I have trouble breathing. What about people with asthma? Their bodies will definitely crave a smoke-free environment.



That would be fine if it was just your clothes. Its not. It gets in your hair and on your skin as well. I come home, completely change, and I still reek of ciggarettes. :puke:



I think the law is just fine!! :D


:laugh: The worst type of smoke-nazi's arent non-smokers, they are ex-smokers.

[jrockster21]

Why? Because they smoke in bars? :laugh:

That was a response to the JLG's post. But yeah...do you particularly care that the non-smoker next to you is getting lung cancer because of you?? :whoknows:

[jrockster21]

:laugh: The worst type of smoke-nazi's arent non-smokers, they are ex-smokers.

:laugh: Alright...you're starting to use political thread argument tactics; if you have no rebuttal, just point and laugh. :silly:

[PleaseBlitz]

That was a response to the JLG's post. But yeah...do you particularly care that the non-smoker next to you is getting lung cancer because of you?? :whoknows:

No, and i dont care that they are getting cirrhosis either. THEY ARE IN A BAR!!!!!

[rictus58]

I wish they would ban Ugly people in Bars.

[Stuckinphilly1]

That may be, but I won't have to go home smelling like an ashtray anymore!! :)

The difference between alcohol and tobacco, imo, is alcohol and socializing are the entire reason for going out in the first place. Some people go without drinking, but others drinking doesn't stain their clothes with a disgusting smell (unless they happen to be puked or spilled on, which is the minority of cases - EVERYONE leaves a bar smelling like smoke if they're there for longer than 30 seconds). You don't go to a bar just to smoke a ciggarette.

Unless maybe you're in Amsterdam, and then it'd be a "funny" ciggarettee anyway.

Honestly, I'm a smoker...live in NJ which was first to impose the ban. My wife and I went to Philly much more often if we were going out to eat then not being able to CHOOSE to smoke if we wanted to.

Now Philly has put in a similar ban against smoking, you have to make a certain profit from food to impose it so real bars are still smokable.

As I can understand it for people w/kids I still don't approve of it. Does it mean that people are going to stop smoking???? Of course not. I could understand a self imposed non-smoking bar, it's the owners choice if they want to allow smoking or not. Even Restaurants I guess too.

But lets face it, ventaliation systems, especially in restaurants can keep you from being bothered by smoke. Even being a smoker CAN'T stand the smell of smoke when I'm eating. I NEVER RECALL it bothering me sitting in a smoking section of a restaurant, I truly don't.

People that are for this ban are not realizing it's just another step in the Government controling our lives. I thinkn this Country was founded for a reason, and celebrates Thanksgiving while Great Britain doesn't for a reason. I think those reasons are becoming more and more vague as life goes on. If I CHOOSE to do something damaging to myself than fine so be it as long as it doesn't HARM others.

[Santana Clause]

If you want to control what others do while you're out, why go out at all? At home you can control who is there, what they think, how they smell, how they look, and what they do. I'm a non-smoker and also hate to smell like cigarrettes but I'll be damned if I think my needs and wants should be imposed on the general public in public spaces. I would understand having smoke-free bars/restaurants and smoke-allowed bars/restaurants. But for a goverment, be it federal, state or local, impose such a city-wide law is a little much for me and cannot cheer it.

Except for the fact that second-hand smoke kills you. If it just made your clothes smell bad it would be a different story. I'm not pro goverment regulation of much but when it comes down to 2/3 or more of the public having to make a choice between staying home, being killed by second-hand smoke, or waiting for some grass roots private campaign to outlaw smoking by bars and restaurants everywhere, I think I prefer government interaction.

[Ax]

My question to smokers is this: you act like its this grave injustice to outlaw smoking, however how is it fair for nonsmokers to tolerate a smoke-filled bar?? I mean, its not like smoking is being outlawed, just smoking inside.

First, I quit 5-6 years ago. The wife still smokes. Doesn't bother me at all.

As to your question: For me the problem is this. If I understand it right, a person who wanted to open a smokers only bar, with only smoking employees, can't. Why not? How is that fair?

[PleaseBlitz]

I wish they would ban Ugly people in Bars.

I wish bar owners got to make the decision for themselves whether or not to ban ugly people.


Just drink more, they'll get prettier. :)

[JohnLockesGhost]

:confused: What about smokers' "flippant attitude" towards the effects of their nasty habit on my lungs?? :whoknows:

I'm sure you're a big boy and can take care of your lungs without the nanny state doing it for you.

You're not going to develop lung cancer because you go out to a bar for three hours a couple times a week.

[jrockster21]

You arent ADDICTED to not smoking. Your body doesnt PHYSICALLY CRAVE a non-smoking atmosphere when you are drinking.


Oh, and I call shenanigans on using the addicted argument. That's not a valid argument at all. Many people are addicted to heroin, crack, etc, yet they are all still illegal.

This is a common trend. Driving drunk is proven to cause accidents - so driving drunk has been made illegal. Second hand smoke has been proven to give people lung cancer, and kill them. So second hand smoke is slowly being eliminated from public places. To me, those are one and the same.

[Stuckinphilly1]

maybe I'm nuts or it's because I'm a smoker but I don't remember STINKING of smoke. :whoknows:

[JohnLockesGhost]

First, I quit 5-6 years ago. The wife still smokes. Doesn't bother me at all.

As to your question: For me the problem is this. If I understand it right, a person who wanted to open a smokers only bar, with only smoking employees, can't. Why not? How is that fair?

Maybe instead of a ban, the government should make bars have patrons sign a release saying that they know there will be smoking inside and they won't act like a whiny ***** about how their clothes are going to smell.

[PleaseBlitz]

Oh, and I call shenanigans on using the addicted argument. That's not a valid argument at all. Many people are addicted to heroin, crack, etc, yet they are all still illegal.

This is a common trend. Driving drunk is proven to cause accidents - so driving drunk has been made illegal. Second hand smoke has been proven to give people lung cancer, and kill them. So second hand smoke is slowly being eliminated from public places. To me, those are one and the same.

CIGARETTES arent illegal. Heroin is. So that comparison is retarded.

Now i am being banned from enjoying a LEGAL substance in a bar.


If you really think that going to a bar exposes you to enough second hand smoke to give you lung cancer, then you wouldnt have ever gone to a bar.

[Stuckinphilly1]

CIGARETTES arent illegal. Heroin is. So that comparison is retarded.

Now i am being banned from enjoying a LEGAL substance in a bar.


If you really think that going to a bar exposes you to enough second hand smoke to give you lung cancer, then you wouldnt have ever gone to a bar.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: you guys are killin me :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[KingGibbs]

You dont understand because you arent a smoker.

You arent ADDICTED to not smoking. Your body doesnt PHYSICALLY CRAVE a non-smoking atmosphere when you are drinking.



You act like coming home smelling like smoke is like getting shot. Are you going to wear those clothes again without washing them, whether they smell like smoke or not?

And the point is, why not leave the decision to the private property owners? A law banning all smoking is WAY too excessive.

Hey blitz? Go outside and smoke a cigarette. It'll calm your nerves. ;)


I have many friends and family members who were HEAVY smokers and decided to quit and now have the same reaction to smoke as non-smokers if not worse and say that they didn't realize how much of an impact the smoke had on us non-smokers.

Sorry, I look forward to the day that they ban smoking all together. The impact that **** has on our health and health insurance is sickening and I'll answer your next question by saying yes I know there are many things that cause health issues, but this one can be prevented because it is a habit of an INDIVIDUAL(S).

[Brad_Edwards_Fan]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: you guys are killin me :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Maybe we should ban them arguing in the tailgate, they are still allowed to be here, they just have to argue outside.

[KingGibbs]

Maybe instead of a ban, the government should make bars have patrons sign a release saying that they know there will be smoking inside and they won't act like a whiny ***** about how their clothes are going to smell.

Yeah, that's the only thing that concerns me about smoking because getting lung cancer from second-hand smoke is not that big of a deal.

[KingGibbs]

Maybe we should ban them arguing in the tailgate, they are still allowed to be here, they just have to argue outside.

There's your new forum MODS! 'The Smokers Lounge.' :D

[skinsdude]

CIGARETTES arent illegal. Heroin is. So that comparison is retarded.

Now i am being banned from enjoying a LEGAL substance in a bar.

If you really think that going to a bar exposes you to enough second hand smoke to give you lung cancer, then you wouldnt have ever gone to a bar.

No you're being banned from killing the guy next to you. :cool:

[DjTj]

CIGARETTES arent illegal............yet. ;)

[JohnLockesGhost]

Yeah, that's the only thing that concerns me about smoking because getting lung cancer from second-hand smoke is not that big of a deal.

If you're so concerned then DON'T GO.

I don't smoke and I go out to have a drink occasionally. I come home and think, "man, I smell like smoke." What I don't do is then proceed to the next city council meeting demanding bar-owners cater to my "needs." I'm not entitled to anything of anybody else's.

[Redskins Diehard]

Ive never been to NYC. Have you?

Yes




Really? Someone that WORKS in the industry's opinion counts less than yours? What do you do for a living?

I didn't say their opinion counts any more or less than mine. They are concerned. Back that concern up with fact. Their are plenty of bars still making money in places where people are not allowed to smoke


I guarantee that they still smoke.



Not in the bars they don't


I will have fun in Arlington.

So..............feeling like an outcast has nothing to do with how many people you are with. :laugh: Ok, so when i tell people I am going to have a cigarette, and half the group joins me, im an outcast. :wtf:

Yeah, and to borrow your reference to the KKK...if you were at a meeting and tell people you are going to a lynching...half of them would probably join you also.

[jrockster21]

I'm sure you're a big boy and can take care of your lungs without the nanny state doing it for you.

You're not going to develop lung cancer because you go out to a bar for three hours a couple times a week.


Dang man...what did I ever do to you?? :laugh:

[SkinsHokieFan]

Political sig bets are GAY.


Its not political, and its not a sig bet

I just want another free night of drinking :laugh:

[Redskins Diehard]

I'm sure you're a big boy and can take care of your lungs without the nanny state doing it for you.

You're not going to develop lung cancer because you go out to a bar for three hours a couple times a week.

It is not only about patrons. The law is to protect the people that earn their living there also. And it takes more than 3 hours a couple of times a week to do that.

[KingGibbs]

If you're so concerned then DON'T GO.

I don't smoke and I go out to have a drink occasionally. I come home and think, "man, I smell like smoke." What I don't do is then proceed to the next city council meeting demanding bar-owners cater to my "needs." I'm not entitled to anything of anybody else's.

:laugh: By looking at your post maybe you should consider smoking.

See, that's the difference between a smoker and non-smoker I am concerned about my health, but to answer your question I enjoy going out even if people are smoking, but I do notice less and less people are smoking even where smoking is allowed.

[jrockster21]

First, I quit 5-6 years ago. The wife still smokes. Doesn't bother me at all.

As to your question: For me the problem is this. If I understand it right, a person who wanted to open a smokers only bar, with only smoking employees, can't. Why not? How is that fair?

I guess its a catch-22; its not fair to smokers to ban them from bars, but its not fair to non-smokers to expose them to smoke inside bars. The state has just decided to side with the healthy side of the issue. :whoknows:


I don't smoke and I go out to have a drink occasionally. I come home and think, "man, I smell like smoke." What I don't do is then proceed to the next city council meeting demanding bar-owners cater to my "needs." I'm not entitled to anything of anybody else's.

Not once have I gone to a city council and demand bar-owners cater to my needs. I have voted for it on the ballot, but I had no part in putting said legislation on the ballot.

[JohnLockesGhost]

It is not only about patrons. The law is to protect the people that earn their living there also. And it takes more than 3 hours a couple of times a week to do that.

There are many more jobs more dangerous than bartender. If you choose to work there, be prepared for the environment.

[JohnLockesGhost]

Not once have I gone to a city council and demand bar-owners cater to my needs. I have voted for it on the ballot, but I had no part in putting said legislation on the ballot.

Well you are using the power of the state to force other citizens to do cater to your feelings regarding their property. You may be a more passive participant, but you are still validating the process. I find the whole thing to be an unwarranted incursion into the personal property of others.

[Redskins Diehard]

There are many more jobs more dangerous than bartender. If you choose to work there, be prepared for the environment.

Oh, since there are other jobs more dangerous than we shouldn't make this one more safe.

I can't imagine you are advocating that business owners have a right to do whatever they please with their establishment. That is so 1950s

[Redskins Diehard]

Well you are using the power of the state to force other citizens to do cater to your feelings regarding their property. You may be a more passive participant, but you are still validating the process. I find the whole thing to be an unwarranted incursion into the personal property of others.

Kind of like Martin Luther King

[SkinsHokieFan]

Well you are using the power of the state to force other citizens to do cater to your feelings regarding their property. You may be a more passive participant, but you are still validating the process. I find the whole thing to be an unwarranted incursion into the personal property of others.

It is an interesting argument you are making, but I am not really buying into it. You do have to remember the costs of negative externalties and the drag they have on production and society

Cig smoking is one of them

[JohnLockesGhost]

Oh, since there are other jobs more dangerous than we shouldn't make this one more safe.

I can't imagine you are advocating that business owners have a right to do whatever they please with their establishment. That is so 1950s

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, "those who would sacrifice liberty for a little safety deserve neither."

I believe people should be able to run their businesses, because they are their businesses. It is their right because it is their property.

[zoony]

To paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, "those who would sacrifice liberty for a little safety deserve neither."

I believe people should be able to run their businesses, because they are their businesses. It is their right because it is their property.


What about a business that pimps young boys to NAMBLA members?


.....

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

Please see my post #44. No one has said anything that is a valid argument against this post.

[JohnLockesGhost]

It is an interesting argument you are making, but I am not really buying into it. You do have to remember the costs of negative externalties and the drag they have on production and society

Cig smoking is one of them

I reject arguments concerning collectives like "society" or "the people" or "the masses." I believe in individuals not collectives. These collectives are just an amalgam of individual desires, wants and needs. I'm not going to indulge in an argument that contends for some nebulous benefit to the "productivity of society" at the expense of individual liberty.

[zoony]

I'm not going to indulge in an argument that contends for some nebulous benefit to the "productivity of society" at the expense of individual liberty.


Why, because it counters your arguments?

Fact is, we all give up certain rights for the betterment of the whole. It's sort of the definition of society.

..

[jrockster21]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? When is boils down to it, the free market should decide. If you want to open a bar that is smoke free next to a bar that allows smoking, then that is fine. Almost everyone on here who posted in favor of the ban did so because of their personal preference not to "smell like an ashtray." But if your personal preference is your reasoning for supporting the ban, then I hope you see the irony that it is at the expense of robbing the restaurant/bar owner of his personal preference.

My personal preference is to not get lung cancer, but not have to sacrifice a night out on the town.

[JohnLockesGhost]

What about a business that pimps young boys to NAMBLA members?


.....

What about it? Young boys aren't fully legal citizens for a reason. Because they lack the capacity for fully-formed decision-making. Therefore, anybody, save legal guardians, making decisions for them is against all laws, both civil and common.

[KingGibbs]

Please see my post #44. No one has said anything that is a valid argument against this post.

You mean like the reason we have a gov't is so that they can legislate issues such as this and protect the people?

[JohnLockesGhost]

Why, because it counters your arguments?

Fact is, we all give up certain rights for the betterment of the whole. It's sort of the definition of society.

..

No, because it's counter to my philosophy. Free individuals make a better society. You don't/can't work backwards.

[jrockster21]

People, we also have to consider what UNITS of smoking we are talking about. Are we talking about smoking a kilocigg, or a megacigg? And we're not talking about lung-cancer, we're talking about UNITS of health. One lung cancer = 1 heart attack. Therefore, the sky is purple.

[Major Harris]

DC just lost a LOT of money.

pb, refresh my memory....didn't monongalia county, i.e. morgantown, ban smoking several years ago?

i know you can't in restaurants, not sure about bars.

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

My personal preference is to not get lung cancer, but not have to sacrifice a night out on the town.

Finally, you are agreeing that it is a personal preference. Just like whether I want someone to smoke in the establishment that I own or not.

The root of the issue is that it is still a choice. Now whether that choice can possibly give you lung cancer doesn't mean that it ceases to be a choice. You are not granted an inalienable right to be protected by the government that says you can get drunk without being exposed to cigarette smoke all the while on someone else's property. You are not being forced to patronize any one bar. Get a group of investors together (there seem to be a number on here that agree with your beliefs) and open a bar that doesn't allow smoking.

[zoony]

No, because it's counter to my philosophy. Free individuals make a better society. You don't/can't work backwards.


As much as I'm sure you bask in taking the extreme position and defending it at all costs with preposterous hyperbole and idiotic circumstance, I think deep down you know that what you're talking about is completely unrealistic.

Fact is, free-markets run counter to the good of society in several instances. If your theories were implemented, we'd all be dead from rampant chemical dumping and pollution. I could go on with thousands of other examples, but I haven't the patience or the time. And besides, like I said, I think you just like to argue, and you aren't really foolish enough to believe your own arguments :2cents:


....

[PleaseBlitz]

pb, refresh my memory....didn't monongalia county, i.e. morgantown, ban smoking several years ago?

i know you can't in restaurants, not sure about bars.


:laugh: Yeah, just like they banned underage drinking, smoking weed, and burning couches.

I went to almost every home football game this year, and went to ChicNBones every time. Smoked it up just fine.

[PleaseBlitz]

People, we also have to consider what UNITS of smoking we are talking about. Are we talking about smoking a kilocigg, or a megacigg? And we're not talking about lung-cancer, we're talking about UNITS of health. One lung cancer = 1 heart attack. Therefore, the sky is purple.

:rotflmao:

ITS .002 OF A CIG, NOT .002 OF A PACK!!!!!

[Major Harris]

:laugh: Yeah, just like they banned underage drinking, smoking weed, and burning couches.

I went to almost every home football game this year, and went to ChicNBones every time. Smoked it up just fine.


i'm jogging my memory here, but i think it has to do w/ the % of the establishments sales that are from food. if it's high enough to be considered a restaurant, it has to be smoke free. if it's a bar, smoke 'em if you got 'em.

pretty sure you wouldn't be burning one in chic 'n bones if it was banned. there are hefty fines for owners.

[Major Harris]

i'd also like to add, this sucks, because now it'll be harder to disguise my big phatty boom batty blunt when i'm out in dc. :(

[GrimReefa]

Well you are using the power of the state to force other citizens to do cater to your feelings regarding their property. You may be a more passive participant, but you are still validating the process. I find the whole thing to be an unwarranted incursion into the personal property of others.

Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.

I can't just whip it out and pee all over a bar, either, even though it's my "it" and my pee.

Furthermore, you can't walk into a bar and whip out your pistol and start firing it in the air.

There are a lot of things you can't do with your property, and most of them have to do with the safety and comfort of those around you.

Don't like it, smoke at home. That's the difference bewteen a private and a public place.

[PleaseBlitz]

i'm jogging my memory here, but i think it has to do w/ the % of the establishments sales that are from food. if it's high enough to be considered a restaurant, it has to be smoke free. if it's a bar, smoke 'em if you got 'em.

pretty sure you wouldn't be burning one in chic 'n bones if it was banned. there are hefty fines for owners.


Well that is basically a decision left up to the owners then. You want a smoking establishmetn.......sell less food.

And if ChicNBones banned smoking, i'd go to Bent Willys.

[Major Harris]

Well that is basically a decision left up to the owners then. You want a smoking establishmetn.......sell less food.

And if ChicNBones banned smoking, i'd go to Bent Willys.


i understand that you'll suck on those things until you die no matter what. i was just trying to remember if this same legislation was passed in morgantown, which i think we have figured out that it was not.

[KingGibbs]

Originally Posted by BURGUNDYBLEEDER
Please see my post #44. No one has said anything that is a valid argument against this post.

Now respond to #118. :)

[PleaseBlitz]

Your right to swing your fist ends at my face.

I can't just whip it out and pee all over a bar, either, even though it's my "it" and my pee.

Furthermore, you can't walk into a bar and whip out your pistol and start firing it in the air.

There are a lot of things you can't do with your property, and most of them have to do with the safety and comfort of those around you.

Don't like it, smoke at home. That's the difference bewteen a private and a public place.

Why not just open up SMOKING establishments and say IF YOU ENTER, THERE WILL BE SMOKE. Why a BAN????

Also, a bar is PRIVATE PROPERTY. It is owned by one entity.

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

Compliments of dictionary.com

choice (n)
1) an act or instance of choosing; selection

requirement (n)
1)that which is required; a thing demanded or obligatory


Remember if you want your choice to go to a bar AND not be around smoke, you are saying that your choice trumps the property rights of the owner of the establishment which you wish to visit. Also you want to have your cake and eat it too.

[PleaseBlitz]

Compliments of dictionary.com

choice (n)
1) an act or instance of choosing; selection

requirement (n)
1)that which is required; a thing demanded or obligatory


Remember if you want your choice to go to a bar AND not be around smoke, you are saying that your choice trumps the property rights of the owner of the establishment which you wish to visit. Also you want to have your cake and eat it to.


Also saying that their choice trumps the choices of people that want to go to a bar AND smoke.

[Major Harris]

i see both sides' arguements, but one point that the pro-smokers are neglecting entirely is that this was passed for smoke-free workplaces, not smoke free watering holes.

and the coal mine comparison doesn't fly, imo.

[jrockster21]

Another point is - the state regulates which establishments have liquor licenses, and which establishments do not. So, if a bar owner wants to revoke his liquor license and turn his private property into a smoking room, more power to him. The state will not allow him to have a liquor license, however. This is no different than their regulation to not allow the sale of liquor to minors.

[iheartskins]

PB, smoking outside is, from what I gather from my single friends, the best way (and place) to meet women--I'm not sure how this is a bad thing. :)

[Major Harris]

PB, smoking outside is, from what I gather from my single friends, the best way (and place) to meet women--I'm not sure how this is a bad thing. :)
pb isn't single.

[jrockster21]

pb isn't single.

He ain't married, either! ;)

[Major Harris]

He ain't married, either! ;)
just whipped?

[jrockster21]

just whipped?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :owned:

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

Now respond to #118. :)

I don't think #118 addressed my #44 in anyway but I will take a stab at what I think you may be trying to argue.

That the government is supposed to protect people?

Again it is a choice and the government is not making people go to bars and inhale 2nd hand smoke while probably drinking to excess anyway (health freaks).

But if the government is to protect us in this manner than the following items must be banned because if people CHOSE to use them in certain manners it could be harmful: guns, knifes, scissors, plastic bags, nails, screws, automobiles, fatty foods, alcohol, cigarettes, etc.

[iheartskins]

Even if he isn't single--the outdoor smoker area is it's own fun social environment--that's how it's evolved in NYC.

(Coincidentally, as a non-smoker, I'm psyched to not have to deal with the smoke.)

[PleaseBlitz]

Jeez, i leave for 5 minutes and you guys throw be under the bus.


:nutkick: <---For Major
:nutkick: <---For Jrock


Yeah, like i said im one of my previous posts replying to someone that said they dont smoke in NYC anymore. Ive never been to NYC, but i can guarantee people are still smoking, and im sure the bars that create the best outdoor smoking environment will thrive, while the ones that dont will suffer.

[PleaseBlitz]

i see both sides' arguements, but one point that the pro-smokers are neglecting entirely is that this was passed for smoke-free workplaces, not smoke free watering holes.

and the coal mine comparison doesn't fly, imo.


Why not? If they are so concerned about their health, then they should get another job. Except that Bartenders in DC make a ****LOAD of loot and they generally arent qualified for any other job that would pay them as much.

Coal miners make a good living too, but they take the job knowing the health risks. If they could get a job paying the same without the health risks, dont you think they would? What is the dif?

[jrockster21]

Yeah, like i said im one of my previous posts replying to someone that said they dont smoke in NYC anymore. Ive never been to NYC, but i can guarantee people are still smoking, and im sure the bars that create the best outdoor smoking environment will thrive, while the ones that dont will suffer.

Well, a lot of bars in DC have patio areas, IIRC. We will easily be able to test your theory. :)

[KingGibbs]

I don't think #118 addressed my #44 in anyway but I will take a stab at what I think you may be trying to argue.

That the government is supposed to protect people?

Again it is a choice and the government is not making people go to bars and inhale 2nd hand smoke while probably drinking to excess anyway (health freaks).

But if the government is to protect us in this manner than the following items must be banned because if people CHOSE to use them in certain manners it could be harmful: guns, knifes, scissors, plastic bags, nails, screws, automobiles, fatty foods, alcohol, cigarettes, etc.

You're right, because most of those you mention aren't basic needs (knif(v)es, scissors, plastic bags, nails, screws, automobiles) . Right?

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

You're right, because most of those you mention aren't basic needs. Right?

And go to a bar is? I am failing to see your point.

[PleaseBlitz]

Well, a lot of bars in DC have patio areas, IIRC. We will easily be able to test your theory. :)

To be honest with you, I am a HUGE fan of outdoor places anyways when the weather is nice (still pissed that Mama Quans shut down), and i have no problem taking my biz to places that will cater to me. I just dont see the need for the government to get involved and outright BAN smoking.

First transfat.
Then smoking.
Whats next? Alcohol? Chocolate? Can they make unprotected sex illegal?


Yet guns and ****ty drivers and sloth are still legal. When is the government going to step in and make people get the **** out of the house and go for a jog? All you people are SO concerned about your health, would you have a problem with a government mandated fitness routine?

[ThatGuy]

Why not? If they are so concerned about their health, then they should get another job. Except that Bartenders in DC make a ****LOAD of loot and they generally arent qualified for any other job that would pay them as much.

Coal miners make a good living too, but they take the job knowing the health risks. If they could get a job paying the same without the health risks, dont you think they would? What is the dif?

Smoking has been banned here for 3 years or so. The 1st thing that happened was every bar that could built patios. Now the talk is they may ban smoking on anything that is enclosed on more than 1 side or something of that sort, as a lot of these patios were expanding to include a roof and other covers of sort to protect from the elements.

EDIT: I just heard on the radio over the weekend that an apartment management company in Edmonton (Alberta) is banning smoking in their buildings even the individual units.

[jrockster21]

To be honest with you, I am a HUGE fan of outdoor places anyways when the weather is nice (still pissed that Mama Quans shut down), and i have no problem taking my biz to places that will cater to me. I just dont see the need for the government to get involved and outright BAN smoking.

When did Mama Quans shut down? I was just there a couple months ago!

[PleaseBlitz]

Smoking has been banned here for 3 years or so. The 1st thing that happened was every bar that could built patios. Now the talk is they may ban smoking on anything that is enclosed on more than 1 side or something of that sort, as a lot of these patios were expanding to include a roof and other covers of sort to protect from the elements.

WHY? They effectively kept the smoke away from the non-smokers. And they are STILL whining. ****. :mad:


EDIT: I just heard on the radio over the weekend that an apartment management company in Edmonton (Alberta) is banning smoking in their buildings even the individual units.

Thats fine. An individual company made the decision to ban smoking. I have ZERO problem with that.

[PleaseBlitz]

When did Mama Quans shut down? I was just there a couple months ago!


Like a month and a half ago.

I basically spent my whole summer there. :laugh:

Great place. Im not sure what is going to be put there.


Ive since moved onto the deck at the Front Page when its nice.

[jrockster21]

Smoking has been banned here for 3 years or so. The 1st thing that happened was every bar that could built patios. Now the talk is they may ban smoking on anything that is enclosed on more than 1 side or something of that sort, as a lot of these patios were expanding to include a roof and other covers of sort to protect from the elements.

See, I think that this is taking it overboard. At a bar, smoking outside on the patio should be 100% legal, even if it is covered. If its exposed to the elements and separated from the rest of the bar, more power to you.

[jrockster21]

Like a month and a half ago.

I basically spent my whole summer there. :laugh:

Great place. Im not sure what is going to be put there.

Ive since moved onto the deck at the Front Page when its nice.


I was there last for Clarendon Day...but I can't for the life of me remember when the hell that was!! :laugh:

[KingGibbs]

And go to a bar is? I am failing to see your point.

Your failing to see my point or are you lacking a reasonable repsonse? I think it's the latter.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Yet guns and ****ty drivers and sloth are still legal. When is the government going to step in and make people get the **** out of the house and go for a jog? All you people are SO concerned about your health, would you have a problem with a government mandated fitness routine?


Honestly, I would love it

Maybe some sort of strong incentive to get out and run a mile per day

But thats another topic all together

[KingGibbs]

Smoking has been banned here for 3 years or so. The 1st thing that happened was every bar that could built patios. Now the talk is they may ban smoking on anything that is enclosed on more than 1 side or something of that sort, as a lot of these patios were expanding to include a roof and other covers of sort to protect from the elements.


Now see, I don't have a problem with businesses building these seperate structures for smokers providing they are outdoors.

[PleaseBlitz]

Your failing to see my point or are you lacking a reasonable repsonse? I think it's the latter.


I think he made a valid counter-point.

He said:


But if the government is to protect us in this manner than the following items must be banned because if people CHOSE to use them in certain manners it could be harmful: guns, knifes, scissors, plastic bags, nails, screws, automobiles, fatty foods, alcohol, cigarettes, etc.

To which you replied:


You're right, because most of those you mention aren't basic needs (knif(v)es, scissors, plastic bags, nails, screws, automobiles) . Right?


Yet we are talking about going to a bar and being able to smoke or not smoke, neither of which are a basic need. Right?

[Shadowplay]

I'm really torn on the issue. I'm a smoker so this kills my good time a little bit, but I do smell a whole lot better when I get home. Smokers don't smell like a huge ashtray, many smokers smoking at the same time in a small area with no venilation makes you smell like an ashtray.

I have no problem stepping outside to have a cigarette. I do that at work, my parents house, etc...its just passing a law about it that sort of gets me. Why can't the bar owners decide whether they want smoking in their restaurant. The employees know when they fill out the application and accept the job there is smoking allowed so that argument is retarded.

I'm with you. Even though I don't smoke much anymore I like to come home and know that I don't have to throw my clothes into a trash bag so they don't stink up the whole house. I actually enjoy smoking outside more anyway. I've found that you can meet all sorts of people in that little smokers parlor right outside of a bar. I've gotten action before just by being the only guy outside with a bunch of chicks who were smoking!

[PleaseBlitz]

Honestly, I would love it

Maybe some sort of strong incentive to get out and run a mile per day

But thats another topic all together



So would I. But what % of people would be horrified at the thought of having to get up off their fat asses, but down the doritos, and exert themselves physically? Probably most.

I think maybe 15% of people would love it, 85% would HATE it. Never underestimate the laziness of Americans. And a good chunk of the 15% that love it would see no need for a LAW that MANDATES it.

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm with you. Even though I don't smoke much anymore I like to come home and know that I don't have to throw my clothes into a trash bag so they don't stink up the whole house. I actually enjoy smoking outside more anyway. I've found that you can meet all sorts of people in that little smokers parlor right outside of a bar. I've gotten action before just by being the only guy outside with a bunch of chicks who were smoking!

For the past hundred years, possibly the best pick up line/conversation starter EVER is "gotta light?"


:)

[KingGibbs]

For the past hundred years, possibly the best pick up line/conversation starter EVER is "gotta light?"


:)

I don't know. I have a big dick has always worked for me.

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

Your failing to see my point or are you lacking a reasonable repsonse? I think it's the latter.

My point is a choice is a choice is a choice is a choice. What is yours?

[KingGibbs]

Yet we are talking about going to a bar and being able to smoke or not smoke, neither of which are a basic need. Right?

To answer your question, no, neither are a need, but my arguments point out the risks involved in smoking in general and not just banning smoking in a "bar."

You have failed to come up with one benefit in smoking and why should the majority suffer because of one's unhealthy habit?

I know plenty of people who go to bars to socialize and eat w/out ordering a drink.

[KingGibbs]

My point is a choice is a choice is a choice is a choice. What is yours?

My point is my "choice" is to be healthy and not be exposed to a potential illness due to second-hand smoke. How am I affecting your health?

[PleaseBlitz]

To answer your question, no, neither are a need, but my arguments point out the risks involved in smoking in general and not just banning smoking in a "bar."

You have failed to come up with one benefit in smoking and why should the majority suffer because of one's unhealthy habit?

I know plenty of people who go to bars to socialize and eat w/out ordering a drink.

One benefit of smoking: I enjoy it.

I would like to counter your point, but i havent located one yet. Help me out here.

[PleaseBlitz]

My point is my "choice" is to be healthy and not be exposed to a potential illness due to second-hand smoke. How am I affecting your health?

Well your "choice" is counter to my "choice." And your "choice" is a "choice" not a "right" or a "need." Why does your "choice" take precendence in a privately owned establishment?

[KingGibbs]

One benefit of smoking: I enjoy it.

I would like to counter your point, but i havent located one yet. Help me out here.


:laugh:

[DjTj]

Well your "choice" is counter to my "choice." And your "choice" is a "choice" not a "right" or a "need." Why does your "choice" take precendence in a privately owned establishment?Bottom line: neither smokers or non-smokers have a "right" or "need" here. It used to be that a majority of people didn't give a crap about smoking in bars. Now, a majority of people want to ban it. We live in a democracy, and majority rules.

[KingGibbs]

Well your "choice" is counter to my "choice." And your "choice" is a "choice" not a "right" or a "need." Why does your "choice" take precendence in a privately owned establishment?

You still didn't answer how I affect your health.

[BURGUNDYBLEEDER]

My point is my "choice" is to be healthy and not be exposed to a potential illness due to second-hand smoke. How am I affecting your health?

So why are we going back and forth as it sounds like we either agree or are talking about different topics?

If you're choice is to be healthy and you consider inhaling 2nd hand smoke in a bar unhealthy, then don't go to said bar. I am not arguing that smoking is healthy. I am simply saying that ones choice to go to a bar does not mean that automatically that choice MUST include a smoke-free bar.

I am getting off work...everyone have a great evening.

[KingGibbs]

Bottom line here: neither smokers or non-smokers have a "right" or "need" here. It used to be that a majority of people didn't give a crap about smoking in bars. Now, a majority of people want to ban it. We live in a democracy and majority rules.

That's right and I have used the term "majority" in this thread several times.

[KingGibbs]

So why are we going back and forth as it sounds like we either agree or are talking about different topics?

If you're choice is to be healthy and you consider inhaling 2nd hand smoke in a bar unhealthy, then don't go to said bar. I am not arguing that smoking is healthy. I am simply saying that ones choice to go to a bar does not mean that automatically that choice MUST include a smoke-free bar.

I am getting off work...everyone have a great evening.

Again, why should I be imprisoned because I don't want to risk health issues.

[jrockster21]

Bottom line: neither smokers or non-smokers have a "right" or "need" here. It used to be that a majority of people didn't give a crap about smoking in bars. Now, a majority of people want to ban it. We live in a democracy, and majority rules.


Suck it, smokers!! :nana:

[PleaseBlitz]

Bottom line: neither smokers or non-smokers have a "right" or "need" here. It used to be that a majority of people didn't give a crap about smoking in bars. Now, a majority of people want to ban it. We live in a democracy, and majority rules.


Dont bar proprietors have a "right" to run their private business as they see fit?

Im calling the ACLU.

[PleaseBlitz]

Again, why should I be imprisoned because I don't want to risk health issues.

If you are so concerned about health issues, you shouldnt be going to a bar anyways.

[jrockster21]

Dont bar proprietors have a "right" to run their private business as they see fit?

No. See my previous post. They must obtain a liquor license from the state. If they want a liquor license, they have to adhere to the laws that govern them.

If they want to run a smoke-house, where people just come inside and smoke, then yeah, more power to them.

[PleaseBlitz]

No. See my previous post. They must obtain a liquor license from the state. If they want a liquor license, they have to adhere to the laws that govern them.

If they want to run a smoke-house, where people just come inside and smoke, then yeah, more power to them.


Will said "Smoke House" be able to serve beer?

[KingGibbs]

If you are so concerned about health issues, you shouldnt be going to a bar anyways.

Why is it that "you shouldn't go to bars" is the best you can do when I have given multiple reasons as to why I agree with the smoking ban. Like I said, I know plenty of people who go to bars to simply socialize and enjoy the food w/out drinking and if they do drink it is one or two drinks max. I have yet to see a smoker light one or two cigarettes.

[jrockster21]

Will said "Smoke House" be able to serve beer?


No. You need a liquor license.

[KingGibbs]

I guess I am anti-smoking because I almost lost my best friend, my father, four years ago. He had a stomach aneurism caused by, you guessed it, smoking. That came from the doctor's mouth and not my opinion. He quit cold turkey and hasn't touched one since.

[PleaseBlitz]

Why is it that "you shouldn't go to bars" is the best you can do when I have given multiple reasons as to why I agree with the smoking ban. Like I said, I know plenty of people who go to bars to simply socialize and enjoy the food w/out drinking and if they do drink it is one or two drinks max. I have yet to see a smoker light one or two cigarettes.

You havent given multiple reasons. You have given 1 reason: That you will catch cancer if you go to a bar. Ironically, ive spent thousands of hours in bars, and im cancer free. :thumbsup:

There are plenty of places where people can go and enjoy food and socialize without smoking or drinking. These establishments are called "restaurants" and there are literally thousands of them in DC.

But, because one segment of the population wants a place to go that is smoke free, then ALL places have to be smoke free. Thats bull****. I am being persecuted.

[DjTj]

Dont bar proprietors have a "right" to run their private business as they see fit?Apparently not. :D

There's a zillion things that private businesses aren't allowed to do - you can't serve liquor without a license, you have to close at 2am, you have to pay extra taxes on alcohol ... you can't even open a bar without a zoning permit and a business license. Banning smoking is probably one of the least intrusive government regulations that a private business has to deal with. People have rights. Businesses ... not so much.

[Major Harris]

Why not? If they are so concerned about their health, then they should get another job. Except that Bartenders in DC make a ****LOAD of loot and they generally arent qualified for any other job that would pay them as much.

Coal miners make a good living too, but they take the job knowing the health risks. If they could get a job paying the same without the health risks, dont you think they would? What is the dif?


well, on one level, most coal miners do it because they can't get other jobs. coal is a valuable, necessary resource. mining it is a necessary evil. me inhaling your smoke is not a necessary evil.

[PleaseBlitz]

I guess I am anti-smoking because I almost lost my best friend, my father, four years ago. He had a stomach aneurism caused by, you guessed it, smoking. That came from the doctor's mouth and not my opinion. He quit cold turkey and hasn't touched one since.

Sorry to hear about your dad, but was it 2nd hand smoke? Or did he himself smoke?

[PleaseBlitz]

well, on one level, most coal miners do it because they can't get other jobs. coal is a valuable, necessary resource. mining it is a necessary evil. me inhaling your smoke is not a necessary evil.

They can get other jobs, they just cant get other jobs that pay as well. Same as bartenders.

[Major Harris]

They can get other jobs, they just cant get other jobs that pay as well. Same as bartenders.

you haven't spent much time in WV outside of morgantown, have you?

[jrockster21]

Apparently not. :D

There's a zillion things that private businesses aren't allowed to do - you can't serve liquor without a license, you have to close at 2am, you have to pay extra taxes on alcohol ... you can't even open a bar without a zoning permit and a business license. Banning smoking is probably one of the least intrusive government regulations that a private business has to deal with. People have rights. Businesses ... not so much.


Exactly. There really is no such thing as "private business," because all aspects of "private business" are highly regulated. This is just another thing on the list.

[PleaseBlitz]

you haven't spent much time in WV outside of morgantown, have you?

I absolutely have. Yes, i realize that many towns economies are based on coal mining. I also realize that towns need more than just coal miners to exist.

Furthermore, a friend of mine is a bartender at Sequoias. She makes six figures a year. She has no college education and no other marketable skills (well, unless you count being hot as a skill). There is no other job she can get that would pay her that kind of money legally. Trust me, she wasnt threatening to quit unless smoking got banned.

[Henry]

I have to admit I am generally against smoking bans in bars, but the non-smokers in this thread are putting forth a pterry good case. I may have to re-think.

In any event, we'll be setting up a smoking section on ES shortly. Until then, all smokers please refrain from posting in the regular threads. ;)

[KingGibbs]

You havent given multiple reasons. You have given 1 reason: That you will catch cancer if you go to a bar. Ironically, ive spent thousands of hours in bars, and im cancer free. :thumbsup:

There are plenty of places where people can go and enjoy food and socialize without smoking or drinking. These establishments are called "restaurants" and there are literally thousands of them in DC.

But, because one segment of the population wants a place to go that is smoke free, then ALL places have to be smoke free. Thats bull****. I am being persecuted.

I hope you're never a victim of cancer, but many people don't get cancer until years later.

Yeah, I love dancing in a restuarant. :doh: That is part of the bar scene you know.

Why can't you just step outside when you have that urge to smoke? They are not taking away your right to smoke.

[Major Harris]

Furthermore, a friend of mine is a bartender at Sequoias. She makes six figures a year. She has no college education and no other marketable skills (well, unless you count being hot as a skill). There is no other job she can get that would pay her that kind of money legally. Trust me, she wasnt threatening to quit unless smoking got banned.


:bsflag:


tell her to :phone: :cool:

[KingGibbs]

Sorry to hear about your dad, but was it 2nd hand smoke? Or did he himself smoke?

I said he quit cold turkey. Do you think I meant he held his breath around smokers? ;) :D

[PleaseBlitz]

Apparently not. :D

There's a zillion things that private businesses aren't allowed to do - you can't serve liquor without a license, you have to close at 2am, you have to pay extra taxes on alcohol ... you can't even open a bar without a zoning permit and a business license. Banning smoking is probably one of the least intrusive government regulations that a private business has to deal with. People have rights. Businesses ... not so much.


There's a zillion things people cant do either. Cant murder, cant rape, cant steal....gotta get a license for a firearm, need a permit to hold an assembly, etc. etc. etc.

Business are generally given a fairly free hand in this country to operate. Its one of the things that makes America great. Government mandates like this are socialist in nature. The government needs to know its role.


Also re: your point about majority rules in your previous post. I dont recall a vote. :whoknows:

[PleaseBlitz]

:bsflag:


tell her to :phone: :cool:


Hooking isnt legal MH. :laugh:

[jrockster21]

There's a zillion things people cant do either. Cant murder, cant rape, cant steal....gotta get a license for a firearm, need a permit to hold an assembly, etc. etc. etc.

Business are generally given a fairly free hand in this country to operate. Its one of the things that makes America great. Government mandates like this are socialist in nature. The government needs to know its role.


Also re: your point about majority rules in your previous post. I dont recall a vote. :whoknows:


That's because you don't live in DC, so therefore you would not have voted on a smoking regulation in DC. When I was in Florida, it was on the ballot there, and I voted for it. They have the partial ban - smoking is banned only if a certain % of your sales are due to food.

If it ever makes it to the VA ballot, then you will be able to vote on it. ;)

[JohnLockesGhost]

As much as I'm sure you bask in taking the extreme position and defending it at all costs with preposterous hyperbole and idiotic circumstance, I think deep down you know that what you're talking about is completely unrealistic.

Fact is, free-markets run counter to the good of society in several instances. If your theories were implemented, we'd all be dead from rampant chemical dumping and pollution. I could go on with thousands of other examples, but I haven't the patience or the time. And besides, like I said, I think you just like to argue, and you aren't really foolish enough to believe your own arguments :2cents:


....

Funny enough, I'm not too fond of being called a "fool." Of course I believe my arguments. Do you honestly think I assume some sort of alter ego to stir-up trouble on messageboards. I chose my handle for a reason. I believe it is through individuals, not in government, that we define our society. If individuals are well-served by government, then society is well-served.

I love how you characterize my position as "extreme" when I'm merely taking the other side of the argument. So I suppose, anyone who disagrees with you is an extremist shill?

I'm defending centuries of common law tradition that has been and is being ignored by the whims of a few "concerned citizens" and "advocacy" groups. We continually ignore the rights of the individuals and their freedom of choice in deference to the "public good" (whatever the hell that is). My position is, the "public good" is always best served through the protection of individual rights to life, liberty and property. Basic American stuff, y'know? Or have we forgotten?

[PleaseBlitz]

I have to admit I am generally against smoking bans in bars, but the non-smokers in this thread are putting forth a pterry good case. I may have to re-think.

In any event, we'll be setting up a smoking section on ES shortly. Until then, all smokers please refrain from posting in the regular threads. ;)

Nice, i would like a section where these health nazis will leave me the **** alone. :)

[JohnLockesGhost]

Bottom line: neither smokers or non-smokers have a "right" or "need" here. It used to be that a majority of people didn't give a crap about smoking in bars. Now, a majority of people want to ban it. We live in a democracy, and majority rules.

To paraphrase Winston Churchill, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others."

We live in a democratic republic. We have majority rules and minority rights. The majority can't have whatever it wants.

What limits would you accept on governmental action regarding its regulation of businesses?

[PleaseBlitz]

That's because you don't live in DC, so therefore you would not have voted on a smoking regulation in DC. When I was in Florida, it was on the ballot there, and I voted for it. They have the partial ban - smoking is banned only if a certain % of your sales are due to food.

If it ever makes it to the VA ballot, then you will be able to vote on it. ;)


Im pretty sure i would have read about it in the Post. Do you know one way or another if there was a vote on the ban in DC?

[DjTj]

There's a zillion things people cant do either. Cant murder, cant rape, cant steal....gotta get a license for a firearm, need a permit to hold an assembly, etc. etc. etc.

Business are generally given a fairly free hand in this country to operate. Its one of the things that makes America great. Government mandates like this are socialist in nature. The government needs to know its role.I think your point about individuals supports the point that I'm trying to make about government regulating all sorts of things more intrusive than smoking. I can definitely see your point (and to tell you the truth I'm a non-smoker that still doesn't really care about smoking in bars), but I don't see some inalienable right at work here.

What makes America a great business environment is that Americans generally choose to keep their government a little more laissez-faire regarding businesses. In this case, Americans went the other way, like we have with environmental regulations, labor laws, and many other things. But where something like minimum wage could be considered socialist in nature, I don't see the socialism in banning smoking - there's no money changing hands or anything - it's just a rule the majority has laid down.
Also re: your point about majority rules in your previous post. I dont recall a vote. :whoknows:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/04/AR2006010401310.html
The D.C. Council gave final approval yesterday to a broad ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places, voting 11 to 1 to add the nation's capital to a growing list of smoke-free cities and states. edit: that's an article from last year. Here's one from this week: http://www.examiner.com/a-485474~D_C__smoking_ban_extends_to_bars.html
WASHINGTON - Smokers are being forced outside of the District of Columbia's bars and nightclubs on Tuesday, and some businesses say they're worried about losing dollars to their counterparts in Virginia, known for its strong ties to tobacco.

The smoking ban passed last January by the D.C. Council took effect in April 2006 for restaurants and offices and extends to bars and nightclubs after New Year's Day.

[Major Harris]

Hooking isnt legal MH. :laugh:


hey, i'll just put her out on dates. what she does after that is up to her. ;)


anyways, stripping is legal and debunks your claim. :D

[PleaseBlitz]

I think your point about individuals supports the point that I'm trying to make about government regulating all sorts of things more intrusive than smoking. I can definitely see your point (and to tell you the truth I'm a non-smoker that still doesn't really care about smoking in bars), but I don't see some inalienable right at work here.

I dont see any inalienable rights at work here on either side. Im not saying ALL bars should allow smoking. Im saying bars should be allowed to choose. What is the problem with some bars being for smokers and some being smoke free.

Im certainly not going to get into an argument about what the law says and precedence and so on with you Dj (because i know i'd lose), but it seems that common sense would dictate giving BOTH sides what they want. Some bars are smoking bars, some are smoke free, and they are clearly marked as to which is which so that smokers know where to go and non-smokers know where not to go.


What makes America a great business environment is that Americans generally choose to keep their government a little more laissez-faire regarding businesses. In this case, Americans went the other way, like we have with environmental regulations, labor laws, and many other things. But where something like minimum wage could be considered socialist in nature, I don't see the socialism in banning smoking - there's no money changing hands or anything - it's just a rule the majority has laid down.

Its just one more instance of the government putting its hands in something it doesnt need to. Whenever that happens, things get ****ed up.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/04/AR2006010401310.html edit: that's an article from last year.

I was talking about a popular vote, but ok. And from what ive seen from the DC city council over the past 5 years, if they voted FOR this, and im AGAINST it, then that just reaffirms that im right. :)


Edit: I need a cigarette. BRB. :silly:

[DjTj]

I dont see any inalienable rights at work here on either side. Im not saying ALL bars should allow smoking. Im saying bars should be allowed to choose. What is the problem with some bars being for smokers and some being smoke free.I'm just saying that in a democratic society, what bars "should be" allowed to do regarding smoking is something that the majority can decide.
Im certainly not going to get into an argument about what the law says and precedence and so on with you Dj (because i know i'd lose), but it seems that common sense would dictate giving BOTH sides what they want. Some bars are smoking bars, some are smoke free, and they are clearly marked as to which is which so that smokers know where to go and non-smokers know where not to go. But to try to throw a novel argument out there, it's possible that most of the people in a bar would prefer no smoking, but they aren't willing to stop going out to bars because they allow smoking. On the other hand, smokers would stop going to a bar that became non-smoking, so there is no real incentive for any individual bar owner to make the switch. But if all the bars go non-smoking at the same time, then everyone still goes out but instead of the non-smokers having to put up with the smoke, the burden is placed on the smokers to go outside to smoke ... instead of the majority suffering for the minority; the minority is then suffering for the majority. Maybe this is the kind of changeover that actually works best by government fiat rather than by organic market processes.

But I have no data to back that up, so who knows really ... What I definitely do know is that a majority of the people in the District did not want smoking in bars, so that's what they got.

Edit: I need a cigarette. BRB. :silly:
Where did you go? The smoking forum?

[Dallsux]

Not so much for me, for my infant son. I don't mind it so much, although I hate it when I go to a bar and the next morning my clothes smell like an ashtray.





You take your infant son to bars? I don't think the smoke should be your concern. ;)

[triple6mafia]

I dont smoke, but i think its stupid and i think that it will hurt the business.

[mrhetzler]

Cigs keep you up, calm your nerves, and make beer taste better. So, three benefits. :)

Makes WHOSE beer taste better?

[jbooma]

I dont smoke, but i think its stupid and i think that it will hurt the business.

actually it helped when they did in ny and boston

the town is so much better for everyone when it is smokefree, the only problem is the md and va will pay because all the smokers will go there now :(

[jrockster21]

actually it helped when they did in ny and boston

the town is so much better for everyone when it is smokefree, the only problem is the md and va will pay because all the smokers will go there now :(

:doh: Yet another reason for me to avoid going out in NOVA...:doh:

[jbooma]

On the other hand, smokers would stop going to a bar that became non-smoking, so there is no real incentive for any individual bar owner to make the switch.

you are so wrong, after working in the industry for over 10 years a smoke free bar always is busier then one that allows smoking, any business owner understands it, plus your place does not smell like smoke witch is always a reason some people will not go too

[jbooma]

:doh: Yet another reason for me to avoid going out in NOVA...:doh:

you live in nova :laugh: :laugh:

soon arlington, alexandria, fairfax and loudon will be smoke free, like md they will take one area at a time

[jrockster21]

you live in nova :laugh: :laugh:

I know! :(


soon arlington, alexandria, fairfax and loudon will be smoke free, like md they will take one area at a time

I doubt it...VA is too tied to the tobacco industry for that type of legislation to ever make the ballot. But one can only hope, right?? :)

[Gallntfox]

I got tired of reading this thread hours ago but before doing so I came to the conclusion that it would be a riot to hang with PleaseBlitz and drink lots of beer and smoke a pack of cigarettes. :laugh:

[Redskins Diehard]

I hope you're never a victim of cancer, but many people don't get cancer until years later.



My father died from small cell lung cancer 15 years after his last cig. 14 days from first symptom until death. January 14th will be the one year anniversary

[KingGibbs]

My father died from small cell lung cancer 15 years after his last cig. 14 days from first symptom until death. January 14th will be the one year anniversary

Man I'm sorry. Unfortunately stories like this won't stop people from smoking.

[jbooma]

I know! :(



I doubt it...VA is too tied to the tobacco industry for that type of legislation to ever make the ballot. But one can only hope, right?? :)

sourthern va is not northern, like md they will have to change it county by county

[jrockster21]

whatever,

just means revenue losses for the district.


You really think you're going to lose money over this?? I think it will end up evening out in the end. People are still gonna go out to DC...

[Major Harris]

yeah, i really don't buy that dc will lose money over this. i'd like to see a study of the impact in a year or two. i'd almost bet money there's no fall off.

[ntotoro]

whatever,

just means revenue losses for the district.

Maybe in the immediate future, but business will pick back up within a month. Ultimately, people need somewhere to go and I hardly think there will be a giant boycott of twenty-something smokers sitting in their homes or standing around on street corners.

The fewer places that allow smoking, the better. This is one area where I have truly draconian views.

[rictus58]

I'm pretty sure that NYC bars did not see the fall off of business the bar owners expected when they went smoke-free. I'm all for smoking in bars, restaurants,work,airplanes and church. However, i seriously doubt it is going to have a significant impact on the industry in the district.

[capt1an chaos]

jbooma I have to disagree, I have also been working in the bar industry for sometime now and moved to San Deigo CA for a while, where smoking in bars is prohibited. What happens when a bar got caught with smokers in it would be a 500 dollar fine. So we took the fine every time we got busted because the bar drew soooo much business from allowing smokers. We had three bars within 10 minute walking distance and 2 of them went under within a year due to lack of business from not allowing smokers and the third bar was a hole in the wall that didnt drum up much business anyway. I believe this will happen in DC after a while depending on how much the fine will be. By the way the bar was Ye Olde Plank Inn in Imperial Beach CA, I recommend it :)

[BG]

I am definitely in favor of the smokers in this case. While I understand and sympathize with the non-smokers, this shouldn't be a governmental mandate. What they are doing is taking control of the air in privately owned establishments. That much is ridiculous and I think many people can agree with that.regardless of the fact that only so many people can step into said establishment, not just anyone can. Persons not of age or persons who have posed a threat before cannot enter these establishments. Therefore, a notion that these businesses should be "safe" for everyone is preposterous, in my opinion.

I do feel, however, that legitimate restaurants and diners should be smoke free. Many are, at this time, due to children and the elderly frequenting such establishments and the plain fact that smokers and non smokers don't like to mix smoke and food. Only afterward, is there the great need to get that fix...

It gets a bit tough though when we are talking about bar/restaurants. Some of those types of establishments keep the bar and restaraunt separate, yet some are in the same room. It should be banned in the latter type.

They are starting the same process down here in Charleston. It's not so cut and dry as this is a smaller town, is much more dependent on tourism at the beaches and in historic areas yet conservative politics is the standard here and that is not being followed. Strange how social measures and politics don't see eye to eye always, huh?

The magazine I work for has an article about it on our site: http://www.charlestonmag.com

I personally feel that the government should be involved as little as possible. Perhaps some sort of incentive, tax-wise, is given to establishments that make the effort to have a "cleaner" environment when it comes to the air quality.

[BG]

whatever,

just means revenue losses for the district.

It's good to see the tradition is back.

[dccomic]

I notice you have "Alexandria" as the location of your humble abode.... hmmm... funny thing... I'm from DC proper... you're lucky to go home without "having" to smell like an ashtray... what a dilemma... you're also lucky you haven't taken up permanent "dirt" residence in DC with a bullet in the forehead, or suffered lung cancer from the 100's of "30" buses rolling around and farting in your face all day long.. but, hey, at least you don't have to worry about that dirty old "second-hand" smoke anymore... There's a real nice place down in Anacostia off Bowen Rd. SE that's completely non-smoking (well, not cigarettes).. would be a good place for you and your friends to hang out... tell 'em I sent you... good luck to you and God bless...

[Major Harris]

I notice you have "Alexandria" as the location of your humble abode.... hmmm... funny thing... I'm from DC proper... you're lucky to go home without "having" to smell like an ashtray... what a dilemma... you're also lucky you haven't taken up permanent "dirt" residence in DC with a bullet in the forehead, or suffered lung cancer from the 100's of "30" buses rolling around and farting in your face all day long.. but, hey, at least you don't have to worry about that dirty old "second-hand" smoke anymore... There's a real nice place down in Anacostia off Bowen Rd. SE that's completely non-smoking (well, not cigarettes).. would be a good place for you and your friends to hang out... tell 'em I sent you... good luck to you and God bless...


someone read one post and went on a rant. :laugh:

:secret:you're from denver....that's not dc proper;)



i am glad that you bumped this....i'd like to hear from CCS or anyone else that bartends or works in the bar/ restaurant biz in dc.....how has this affected business?

i was out in adams morgan 2 weekends ago, and it was bumpin' just like it is every time i go down there.

[Major Harris]

so have all the bars closed down due to the huge loss of business that all the smokers predicted?

[SkinsHokieFan]

so have all the bars closed down due to the huge loss of business that all the smokers predicted?

:laugh:

[Fletch_Lives59]

What ever happen to dccomic??? His last activity was 4 mins after that post..

[buenosdiaz]

what made you think of this? lol

[Fletch_Lives59]

^^^^Major pain in the Harris bumped it, not me

[Major Harris]

what made you think of this? lol
the people smoking @ fed ex thread made me think of this.

[Thiebear]

I quit smoking 6 years ago this month.
I still go on smoke breaks as that is the information library of things going on.
I really don't notice it at bars/restaraunts because like christains I dont care.. its not my concern what they are doing.

Smoke nazi's. They already have internment camps setup to smoke in, leave them alone. Its not illegal.

[PleaseBlitz]

so have all the bars closed down due to the huge loss of business that all the smokers predicted?


No, they've all built nice smoking lounges though, so we smokers ended up getting the best real estate in the joint. :D


Also, 35% of bars have reported a decline in revenue.

http://www.ramw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=42


The Restaurant Association Metropolitan Washington (“RAMW”) reports that a survey of members reflects that D.C restaurants, bars and nightclubs have been affected by the mandatory smoking ban. Over 35% of those responding to the survey reported a decline in revenue since the ban took effect, with one respondent reporting a 50% decrease in revenue.

“As we expected, and as has been reported in other jurisdictions adopting them, businesses are hurt by mandatory smoking bans”, said Andrew J. Kline, General Counsel of RAMW. “Most affected are our local restaurant and bar businesses”, said Kline.

[zoony]

I can't remember where I was recently, either alabama or florida... but I was reminded immediately how nice it is to live in a state where there is a public smoking ban. It is wonderful to walk into a restaurant and not have the foul stench of tobacco smoke steaming up from the carpet and curtains, hanging in the air like 10 day old carrion.

Sure, it sucks for smokers, but it's nice for me :D

[Major Harris]

No, they've all built nice smoking lounges though, so we smokers ended up getting the best real estate in the joint. :D


Also, 35% of bars have reported a decline in revenue.

http://www.ramw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=42

hmmm

[PleaseBlitz]

hmmm


In your face beeeyatch! :laugh:

[zoony]

In your face beeeyatch! :laugh:


I'm wondering how much of it has to do with the economy in the area. It's one of the hardest hit in the country, and spending $9.99 for a martini that you can make at home for 50 cents is one of the first things cut when times are tight.

[jrockster21]

so have all the bars closed down due to the huge loss of business that all the smokers predicted?


Also, 35% of bars have reported a decline in revenue.

http://www.ramw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=42


I'm wondering how much of it has to do with the economy in the area. It's one of the hardest hit in the country, and spending $9.99 for a martini that you can make at home for 50 cents is one of the first things cut when times are tight.


That's what I was wondering. What is the % decline in revenue of business in general in the district for comparison? I've been to plenty of bars since the ban, and at least the ones I go to have not lost any business.

No, I don't go to gay bars you jackasses. :silly:

[zoony]

No, I don't go to gay bars you jackasses. :silly:


damit, you got out in front of that one :mad: no fair

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm wondering how much of it has to do with the economy in the area. It's one of the hardest hit in the country, and spending $9.99 for a martini that you can make at home for 50 cents is one of the first things cut when times are tight.


Well, the study was released in April 2007. Was the economy around here suffering then? I cant remember.

[jrockster21]

damit, you got out in front of that one :mad: no fair

:laugh: I've been posting here long enough to know you *******s and what you're gonna post. :laugh:

[Mooka]

Why is the government telling private citizens how they can and cannot use their private property? Unsafe working environment to work in a smoke filled bar. Generally these bans are for the employees of these places.

I always smoke outside anyway, I hate smoking inside. I don't smoke in my house or in my car. Plus its annoying finding creative places to exhale so you're not blowing smoke in people's faces. Even as a smoker, I hate it when I'm sitting down and people are blowing smoke in my face, its obnoxious. Of course, I'd never be such a wussy as to complain in a friggin bar about some smoke. :silly:

A city right next to me banned smoking in public. There's a coffee shop I frequent and there's now just a pile of cigarette butts where the ash-tray used to be. I've never once seen a cop try and give me or anyone else a ticket, never even seen one just say put it out you can't smoke here. Place is filled with cops too.

[rdsknbill]

the state of Pennsylvania goes smoke free in one month

[moviedude25]

So sad when people celebrate the Government being nannies :(

Redskins - Good
Taking away people's rights - BAD

[jrockster21]

So sad when people celebrate the Government being nannies :(

Redskins - Good
Taking away people's rights - BAD


I agree. By allowing smoking in bars, we are taking away the bar employees right to a clean and safe work environment. :2cents:

[PleaseBlitz]

These are real smokers. I make fun of them because they make the least out of all of us yet spend a good chunk of their pay checks on cigs

I'd propose another bet with you, albeit longer term (with studies and whatnot) that will prove that this will have no impact on the DC bar/club scene


Uh oh. Paging SHF. Paging SHF, please pick up the white courtesy phone.

http://www.ramw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=47&Itemid=42

[zoony]

I wish they would do that around here. :mad:


But TN will probably be the last state in the country to pass something like this. I think TN has more smokers than any other state (per capita)

..


Just as an update, TN went smoke free at the first of this year. :applause:

I love me some phil bredeson. he also hiked the taxes on them so that smokers can pay for my son's education :applause:

[PleaseBlitz]

Just as an update, TN went smoke free at the first of this year. :applause:

I love me some phil bredeson. he also hiked the taxes on them so that smokers can pay for my son's education :applause:


A little late for the dental industry in that state. ;)

[zoony]

A little late for the dental industry in that state. ;)


he's got a plan for that to. we're gonna convert all of our outhouses to dental offices. By 2010, we should have running water :applause: