Should smoking be banned in restaurants and bars?

[RiverSpirit]

The Michigan has voted to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and the governer is expected to approve the bill next week.

I watched a loved one die a horrible death from lung cancer and I for one applaud this action. If a person can't go without a smoke for a couple hours while they're at dinner or in the bar, then something is wrong.

[RiverSpirit]

That should be Michigan Senate. My bad.

[Fish]

New Jersey did the same thing recently and I can't wait until Pennsylvania follows suit. It's inevitable that it will happen nationwide. It's just a matter of time.

I believe people have a right to smoke but they have to be responsible about it. My sister smokes and she would never think to do it indoors and bother other people with it. She doesn't even smoke in her own home, even though she has a right to.

It's also understandable that some smokers will probably post that their rights are further being eroded, but non-smokers have just as much a right to go to a bar or restaurant as a smoker. And I personally am sick of breathing it in and having my eyes irritated. Telling a non-smoker to not go if they don't like it is not an acceptable response.

I agree with RiverSpirit that there's no reason a smoker can't put off a cigarette until the meal is over -- for the comfort and health of everyone.

[Beaware]

Here in BC, there is NO smoking in ANY indoor public places. That includes doorways, near windows and school grounds, etc.

At all the stores the cigarettes are covered, locked and no advertisements are visible either.

I agree with you. Should be able to go a few hours without a smoke.

[Freemind]

Why isn't it good enough to have designated smoking areas indoors? There may be a little odor, but your not going to get cancer.

[Fish]

Freemind wrote:

Why isn't it good enough to have designated smoking areas indoors? There may be a little odor, but your not going to get cancer.

What science of yours backs up that claim? Designated areas do not keep smoke from the general areas.

[Gatormeister]

RiverSpirit wrote:

The Michigan has voted to ban smoking in bars and restaurants and the governer is expected to approve the bill next week.
I watched a loved one die a horrible death from lung cancer and I for one applaud this action. If a person can't go without a smoke for a couple hours while they're at dinner or in the bar, then something is wrong.

Sorry about your loved one.
I have to disagree with your stance. I do not care for government interferance in private business. A business owner tries to tailor their business in a way that will support an income to live on. Non smokers can support the non smoking places and smokers can support the smoking places. The owner can decide which way will best enable a successful business. As for employees: many jobs have risks=if you do not wish to participate in the risk then go to a less risky position.
I can understand the desire to mandate a lifestyle change and smoking is harmful, but not at the expense of hurting the business owner' choice on how to best run their business.

[RiverSpirit]

Freemind wrote:

Why isn't it good enough to have designated smoking areas indoors? There may be a little odor, but your not going to get cancer.

Your point is a valid one, but there are many, myself included, who literally have a hard time with smoke. I can walk into a room where someone has smoked the day before and within five minutes, I'm plugged up so bad I can scarcely breathe. There is nothing worse than the stale odor of cigarette smoke on someone's breath and clothes, unless it's breathing in someone's secondhand smoke. If people want to smoke, they can do it in their own homes or cars.

[elise]

I used to feel that bars should be allowed to have smoking. My brother, a musician, had to point out to me that I can always leave if the smoke gets to me but the workers have breathe that air continually for hours at a time.
If a person needs to smoke when they drink, they should probably do it at home.

[RiverSpirit]

Another advantage to giving up smoking - think of the money one would save. With gas prices the way they are these days, with some people it will come down to (if it hasn't already) "Do I spend my money on gas or do I spend it on smokes?" No brainer IMHO.

[Beaware]

Gatormeister wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry about your loved one.
I have to disagree with your stance. I do not care for government interferance in private business. A business owner tries to tailor their business in a way that will support an income to live on. Non smokers can support the non smoking places and smokers can support the smoking places. The owner can decide which way will best enable a successful business. As for employees: many jobs have risks=if you do not wish to participate in the risk then go to a less risky position.
I can understand the desire to mandate a lifestyle change and smoking is harmful, but not at the expense of hurting the business owner' choice on how to best run their business.

I can somewhat agree with you. But since BC did pass the smoking ban, it really didn't have an effect on business owners. People still go to the bars, restaurants, etc. I believe it does have something to do with us having our healthcare somewhat paid for by the Government. Also have WCB regulations for the workers who used to work in a smoke environment. I guess it is called preventative maintenance for future claims due to smoke inhalation. Which in fact keeps our medical costs down in the long run.

[Rhett]

Should smoking be banned in restaurants and bars?

Bars: I don't know and have no opinion because I'm a non-drinker. Leave it to the bar owner.

Restaurants: Yes, and smoking is now banned in Colorado restaurants, as it should be, because children are taken into restaurants. They have no choice in the matter.

[Gatormeister]

Beaware wrote:

<quoted text>
I can somewhat agree with you. But since BC did pass the smoking ban, it really didn't have an effect on business owners. People still go to the bars, restaurants, etc. I believe it does have something to do with us having our healthcare somewhat paid for by the Government. Also have WCB regulations for the workers who used to work in a smoke environment. I guess it is called preventative maintenance for future claims due to smoke inhalation. Which in fact keeps our medical costs down in the long run.

Thus Pandora' box will be opened. I'd like to see smoking or non=smoking bars. People can choose which to frequent and people who wish to work in a bar can choose. Mainly the owner can decide what works best. I do not like government intrusion. Forcing for the healthier lifestyle of the individual. Pandora' box. What will be next. Obese people are a tremendos burdon on the health care system and generally not as productive workers as physically fit workers are. When the smoking thing is cleared up then do we allow the health industry to work a way to 'eliminate' the obese? They will if they can because it's all over money. They have already started on unhealthy eating habits. Didn't one of the states wish to ban fat people from resturants?
I want to make a living, you wish to make a living and so does the business owner. If they don't set up what the customers what then they'll go out of business.
Personally I enjoy the non-smoking resturants, but let comsumer demand decide=not more government intrusion and laws.

[RiverSpirit]

Rhett wrote:

Should smoking be banned in restaurants and bars?
Bars: I don't know and have no opinion because I'm a non-drinker. Leave it to the bar owner.
Restaurants: Yes, and smoking is now banned in Colorado restaurants, as it should be, because children are taken into restaurants. They have no choice in the matter.

I was in a restaurant awhile back where you had to walk through the smoking section to get to the nonsmoking section (good planning - NOT) and at one of the tables were two women, both puffing away - while their babies were next to them in their carriers breathing in the smoke. I almost said something.

[Freemind]

Fish wrote:

<quoted text>
What science of yours backs up that claim? Designated areas do not keep smoke from the general areas.

Most that I've seen do. Most have an exhust fan in the ceiling. What little smoke does not get caught by the fan is hardly going to harm anybody. I suspect that you just don't like the odor. Well, sometimes life stinks.

[Gatormeister]

elise wrote:

I used to feel that bars should be allowed to have smoking. My brother, a musician, had to point out to me that I can always leave if the smoke gets to me but the workers have breathe that air continually for hours at a time.
If a person needs to smoke when they drink, they should probably do it at home.

Your brother chose to work in the smoke-he was not forced. I would like to see seperate places, but decided on by the owner. Your brother can then choose which place to play. I also get the choice to work in high risk or low risk.

[Freemind]

RiverSpirit wrote:

<quoted text>
Your point is a valid one, but there are many, myself included, who literally have a hard time with smoke. I can walk into a room where someone has smoked the day before and within five minutes, I'm plugged up so bad I can scarcely breathe. There is nothing worse than the stale odor of cigarette smoke on someone's breath and clothes, unless it's breathing in someone's secondhand smoke. If people want to smoke, they can do it in their own homes or cars.

I see. I have a hard time with people's bad body odor. Within five minutes of breathing it I am physically ill. There is nothing worse than the stale odor of dried urine or feces, or the smell of a mouth whose teeth have gone unbushed for 2 weeks, or a body unwashed for who knows how long. If people want to eat or drink but they smell, they should do it in thier own homes or cars. Smelly people should be banned.
I jest of course. We can not ban smelly people. Sometimes life just stinks.

[Freemind]

elise wrote:

I used to feel that bars should be allowed to have smoking. My brother, a musician, had to point out to me that I can always leave if the smoke gets to me but the workers have breathe that air continually for hours at a time.
If a person needs to smoke when they drink, they should probably do it at home.

If a person is opposed to cigarette smoke, they should not seek employment in a bar.

[Gatormeister]

RiverSpirit wrote:

<quoted text>
I was in a restaurant awhile back where you had to walk through the smoking section to get to the nonsmoking section (good planning - NOT) and at one of the tables were two women, both puffing away - while their babies were next to them in their carriers breathing in the smoke. I almost said something.

Well then you have a choice to make. Either make smoking illegal or make stupidity illegal. Certainly it's a very poor choice for those two women and the children probably have it much worse at home. I still don't like forced government ordered lifestyle. Should they hand out a booklet on how you must live? No smoke, no fast food, ban certain vehicles as not very safe, no walking on roads without sidewalks. I agree the children do not have a choice and I feel sorry for them. I think what the parents are doing is pure stupidity and I would support a law saying they can't smoke around children. Parents should take children to non-smoking resturants and it's too bad about their inconvience.

[Beaware]

Gatormeister wrote:

<quoted text>
Thus Pandora' box will be opened. I'd like to see smoking or non=smoking bars. People can choose which to frequent and people who wish to work in a bar can choose. Mainly the owner can decide what works best. I do not like government intrusion. Forcing for the healthier lifestyle of the individual. Pandora' box. What will be next. Obese people are a tremendos burdon on the health care system and generally not as productive workers as physically fit workers are. When the smoking thing is cleared up then do we allow the health industry to work a way to 'eliminate' the obese? They will if they can because it's all over money. They have already started on unhealthy eating habits. Didn't one of the states wish to ban fat people from resturants?
I want to make a living, you wish to make a living and so does the business owner. If they don't set up what the customers what then they'll go out of business.
Personally I enjoy the non-smoking resturants, but let comsumer demand decide=not more government intrusion and laws.

It is like comparing apples and oranges. Your country has different laws with respect for healthcare and WCB regulations within the workplace. So I could debate myself to death with you! LOL
All I am saying is it works just fine here. Everyone is used to it here. As for forcing a healthier lifestyle, I don't believe that to be true. People are still going to smoke regardless. Not even a reason to bring 'obese' into the mix. I can't foresee a ban happening in the future here anyway. We don't have any bans on anyone 'obese' in restaurants here must be some State there.