Eateries resist telling smokers to snuff it
Posted on 03/02/2003 5:11:15 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
Eateries resist telling smokers to snuff it
Owners say they aren't obliged to enforce ban; Poss endorsed
03/02/2003
If Dallas Mayor Laura Miller expects restaurateurs to become her anti-smoking patrol, she's mistaken, industry leaders said Saturday on the first day of Dallas' restaurant and bar smoking ban.
The Greater Dallas Restaurant Association is instructing owners to abide by the new city ordinance, such as by posting "no smoking" signs. But it is telling them not to feel compelled to enforce it.
"We are not going to get into a confrontational situation if someone is smoking," said Mark Maguire, president-elect of the Greater Dallas Restaurant Association and owner of Maguire's Regional Cuisine and the M Grill & Tap in Dallas. "We're going to choose not to confront it."
At a smoke-free happy hour at Maggiano's Little Italy restaurant, Mayor Laura Miller praised the ban as a victory against illness.
"It's a public health issue, first and foremost," she said. "You have to stay strong and believe in that."
RICHARD MICHAEL PRUITT / DMN Jeramy Tuggle, a waiter at Dick's Last Resort in the West End, had to go outside for his smoke break Saturday. |
But count restaurant association leaders among the nonbelievers.
Ms. Miller angered them enough that the association on Saturday made its first mayoral endorsement ever - recommending City Council member Mary Poss, who is challenging Ms. Miller in the May 3 election.
Ms. Poss vowed Saturday that, if elected, she would attempt to overturn the ban.
"Some of these businesses will not be in business," she said. "Others will move to the suburbs."
Ms. Miller played down the endorsement.
"It doesn't surprise me. The restaurants are nervous because this is a big change," she said. "They'll come around quickly."
The mayor cited studies indicating that smoking bans increase restaurant patronage rather than drive it to other cities, as some restaurateurs fear.
At the Cadillac Bar in Dallas' West End, general manager Mark O'Brien said he opposed the ban, although he reported normal business Sunday and no problems among nicotine-starved patrons.
In keeping with the restaurant association's guidance, he said he would not harass customers who decide to light up at the risk of being fined as much as $200.
Among the smokers who were grumbling but not puffing at the Cadillac was Jared Davidson.
He said he would consider taking his cigarettes - and money - to restaurants in Addison, Arlington or Fort Worth.
But he remained at the Cadillac on Saturday.
Mr. Davidson sat quietly, his food before him and a half-empty glass of suds inches from his left hand. But at his right, the ashtray was gone.
"It's really weird - really weird - going into a bar, having a beer and not being able to have a cigarette," said Mr. Davidson, gesturing as if holding an invisible cigarette between his index and middle fingers. "It's going to take some getting used to."
MONA REEDER / DMN Mayor Laura Miller says restaurant owners eventually will see the wisdom of the city's smoking ban, which went into effect Saturday.
|
At Dick's Last Resort, a West End bar and restaurant, Douglas and Karen Lambert sat at the bar drinking beer. Mr. Lambert smokes; his wife doesn't.
He said he would abide by the ban; he doesn't even smoke in his own house. But that doesn't mean he likes the new city restrictions.
"It should be up to the establishments, the owners, to decide where customers can and can't smoke," he said.
Likewise, it's up to customers to take their business to restaurants that appeal to them, Mr. Lambert said. "If you don't want to smell smoke, don't come in."
Jason Buckner of Dallas said he agreed with the ban.
Dining in a Dallas restaurant without the smell of burning tobacco wafting his way, and coming home without smelling of smoke, will be a welcome change, he said.
"I can't really stand smoke," he said. "The ban is a real benefit to people who want to be healthy."
Hey guys, make sure you remind me NOT to vote for Illbay if he ever runs for national office.
And, if he happens to run for a local office, I need to find out who he's running against. I'll send some money to that person.
I'll spell out what I'm saying. I don't like your thought process here. I don't like that you support these bans on a restuarant owners rights to operate a business as he chooses. Therefore, since you support these laws, I wouldn't vote for you. Doesn't matter if its a local or national issue. Its all about you, but you knew that already.
The moment you also insist that any business can allow group-sex, or contaminated food, or any other such "regulated" activities or items, then I'll know that you are an altruist.
As it is, I suspect you're just so self-centered with regard to your addiction that you want to turn it into a high virtue.
That's simply ridiculous.
The privilege to engage in group-sex, too, right?
Yeah, what's up with that?
Do you have a driver's license? If so, you are submitting to having your "rights" limited.
Still not clear to me whether your support UNRESTRICTED "rights" of business owners. Hence my "group-sex" analogy. If you disagree that a restaurant can allow group-sex, then you are admitting there might be limits to the activities permitted on its premises.
Then it just becomes a case of your own selfish motives.
If you own a hotel, you have to keep the bathrooms clean.
BlahBlahBlah.
Do you favor UNRESTRICTED rights for any business owner who operates a place of public accomodation?
Then you must favor the right of the owner to allow group-sex.
If you do NOT favor that right, then you DO allow that restrictions can be placed on the operators of places of public accomodation. In that case, this stupid argument about "unrestricted rights" is just that: A stupid argument.
Then that means that ANY air is "good enough" for you, right?
And therefore, that means that you don't believe it is possible to have some air "cleaner" than other air, right?
Perhaps you need to rethink your arguments. You argue like a ten year old.
Give me example of totally free association, and totally free trade. These terms are not absolute.
Yes, my right not to smoke trumps all these other "rights." Just as my right NOT to have to witness sexual congress on the floor of a restaurant trumps that couple's right to engage in such congress.
All these arguments are simply rationalizations to allow your unfettered right to engage in your addiction at any time and any place, no matter how you affect the rights of others to enjoyment of the emoluments of a restaurant without having to deal with YOUR choice to be addicted.
Your choice, YOUR consequences. I do not have to pay the consequences of YOUR choice.
Wrigley, your string of unbroken lies remains intact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
