[CSM]

"In a private home fine. In a public business....there are rules."

Yep, and most of those rules are to protect a customer from dangers that they can not see. Food prep, cleanliness of cooking area, etc. are all out of sight of the customer. Smoking is clearly detectable by the non smoker, therefore their freedom to choose to leave is not infringed upon! I would state that the government rules are wrong in all of the cases. I would love to set up a certification business and run it privately. I could use a rating system and charge a certification fee to inspect and rate a restaurant. That would eliminate the government and allow potential customers to get the same assurances.

The owner of the property should have more rights than any one else on that property. The owner should be able to refuse access to that property to anyone they wish. I think they should refuse access to all Anti's and nanny needers!

If the anti smokers wanted a place to dine and socialize over adult beverages, no one was stopping them from investing in such a place. If a market existed, then they would have been successful. Instead, the government legislated bans are killing a market that existed. All in the name of fairness, they would rather eliminate businesses than invest in competition. This just shows how weak they are in expecting the government to for their convenience. No work done or risk taken, yet they are now able to not be offended anywhere they may want to go!

[Chad Fairbanks]

Agreed. All that "We'd be out there patronizing these places if htey'd just get rid of the nasty stunky selfish smokers! We would! And there are a lot more of us than there are smokers." was a load of hooey from the get-go...

Anti-smoking activists are no JUST busybodies, but liars, too.

[Gabz]

The owner should be able to refuse access to that property to anyone they wish. I think they should refuse access to all Anti's and nanny needers!

IIRC, restaurant owners in Pueblo Colorado did just that to the members of the city Council who were supporting a ban. Apparently it worked!!!