Good for you, I hope you enjoy no rights because you want no compromise. I would vote to keep the bans over having none. You lose people like me with your all or nothing positions.
It should be the absolute and sole decision of the OWNER!
And it isnt stopping at bars and restaurants. NY is considering banning smoking in YOUR CAR!
I agree. We should all bend over, spread our cheeks, and compromise away our private property rights. That is certainly the solution.
There is a history behind the all or nothing position. The proponents of these bans insist on no compromise at all. they rely on lies and deceit, back door wheeling and dealing and out right back stabbing.
I don't like having an all or nothing attitude but that is exactly what has been forced upon these business owners by the antis and their bought and paid for politicians on both sides of the aisle.
I've been dealing with these things since at least 1988 and although I have seen a lot - I know I haven't seen it all when it comes to the lows to which the antis will stoop to force their will on everyone else.
Since only about 25% of the population smokes, if there was such a high demand for non-smoking don't you think smart busines people would go that way???? One sports bar/restaurant I know of in Dover lost about 50% of it's regular happy hour clientele BEFORE the ban went into effect, after the manager was quoted in the paper stating the ban wouldn't hurt his business because his customers didn't come in there to smoke. He had never polled any of his regular customers about it. over the courseof a couple of weeks I paid attention to how many people were sitting at the bar (not in the bar too difficult) Of the 25 people that could comfortably sit at the bar the average was a steady 80% smokers.
give me a break, so you want me to have no rights because I stick up for my rights and will not compromise? What a silly notion.
I will fight for every one of my constitutional rights, giving none of them up without a fight
That appears to be a little over-reaction to someone not agreeing with your proposition for smoking licenses, wouldn't you think? Phantom Lord wasn't being snotty with you, and he even identified some very valid points of the pitfalls of licensing schemes, and you come back with that kind of retort? He was 100% right that rights have been eroding. Anti-smokers took the gloves off years ago and are not willing to compromise. Put in smoking areas they said. Spend money for separate ventilation systems for smoking areas they said. Aw hell, forget about it, we'll just ban it all, they now say. That constitutes nothing less than governmental taking of privately owned property without just compensation.
Fact is that it's "people like you" who are asking someone else to take care of your problems for you. Smokers are not asking for accomodation. I could care less if places banned smoking on their own, and I've been in plenty which have done just that. I used to at least have at least one drink before moving on for more ameniable accomodations, but now I don't do that anymore since anti-smokers are now telling us it's all smoke-free or nothing wherever they can. Now I walk in and say how nice, but I have to move on. Do you think any the anti-smokers crying for smoke-free places should open a smoke-free place of their own or continue to whine loudly that the business owner who put his own capital and sweat equity on the line should have a law forcing him to do it?
Oh, BTW, I didn't know private property rights were up for votes, negotiations, and compromise, especially those that belong to someone else, not you. Zoning laws are excepted to keep some things like strip clubs out of residential areas, since property owners usually know what activities are allowable in the community before they purchase the property. But to take away rights is abominable. I don't know if you do own your own business, but it is very sad how it's mostly those without their own business to worry about who are so quick to vote for such restrictions on those who do.