Applebee's will ban smoking

Tribune Chronicle ^ | 05/11/04 | Staff, wire reports

[MissTargets]

LEXINGTON, Ky. - Applebee's restaurants in Niles and Boardman will be among those in Ohio that will go nonsmoking after a decision by Thomas and King, the nation's 11th-largest restaurant operator, the company announced Monday.

The policy at the Niles restaurant will take effect Monday and be implemented at all stores by month's end, the company said. Robert Holmes, 83, of Warren said he'd like to see other restaurants follow Applebee's lead in the no-smoking policy.

''Second-hand smoke is known to be bad for people,'' Holmes said Monday at the Eastwood Mall. ''Smoking spoils my dinner.''

Holmes, a former tobacco user, said he has eaten at Applebee's in Niles several times.

Besides Ohio, the smoking ban also will take effect at the franchise company's Applebee's and Johnny Carino's restaurants in Kentucky, Arizona, Pennsylvania and Indiana locations, the company said. Franchises owned by other operators would not be affected.

Mike Scanlon, Thomas and King's chairman and chief executive officer and vice-mayor of Lexington, was a vocal supporter of the city's indoor smoking ban that went into effect April 27. Scanlon said the timing of the company's action was coincidental.

''I can see both sides of the issue,'' Scanlon said. ''However, as a businessman, I need to listen to my customers and do what I believe is right for my business.

''While this decision will inconvenience a small percentage of our customers, I am certain that our new policy will attract many new customers who are seeking a smoke-free dining experience,'' he added.

Some of Thomas and King's nearly 80 restaurants already are smoke-free, including those in cities with municipal smoking bans such as Lexington and Tucson, Ariz. Scanlon said three restaurants the company has opened in the last year - one each in Arizona, Ohio and Kentucky - are smoke-free by choice.

Six months ago, the company banned smoking for employees. Scanlon said two of the company's nearly 6,000 workers quit over the issue.

Applebee's, based in Overland Park, Kansas, operates about one-third of its locations with the rest run as franchises.

[Critter]

My response was to an assertion that cigarette smoke is to blame for kids with allergies and asthma.

[Dan from Michigan]

I have no problem if private businesses ban smoking or not.

My only problem is when big government invades castles and businesses.

[Dan from Michigan]

But since you tried to confuse things, isn't it interesting that the trailer-park babe giving the thumbs up on the nekkid Iraqis had a cig in her mouth

And I can easily counter that with "Is is interesting that almost all the leaders of the smoke ban lobby are also gun grabbers.(Robert Woods Johnson Foundation, and any 'public health lobby' for starters)

[Ditter]

Kids have allergies if they inherit the genes from their parents. The children who have inherited allergy genes will become allergic to some of the things to which they are exposed.
Why one child developes an allergy to the family cat, or mold & another becomes allergic to cigarette smoke, when both have been exposed to both allergens is something I doubt if even a Dr could answer.

Why an allergen will give one person a headache & the same allergen will give another person asthma is a mystery to me. Just be happy if you do not have allergies to pass on to your kids.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Why don't you read my #178.

The whole point of this line of argument is that it is fallacious. I do not undermine a vegetarian diet by stating that Hitler was a vegetarian or actors by stating that Lincoln's assassin was an actor. Its fallacious reasoning.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

Well, you are not really correct here. You are not paying for your health care. Your insurance company is paying for your health care. They negotiate a fee with doctor and the doctor accepts payment for that service.

If you are healthy, your premiums and deductibles could far exceed the amount of care you actually receive. That excess pays the freight of others that use alot of service. Some receive service far in excess of their premium and deductible. Hence, they are being carried by the more healthy policyholder.

If your insurance carrier does not differentiate between the premiums paid by the lean and the obese, the lean probably pay more than they receive in benefits.

If smokers use more health care than non-smokers and the carrier does not differentiate between the two in the amount paid in premiums, the non-smoker will pay the freight of the smoker.

If you have never had a claim on your car insurance, you are paying the freight for some lead-footed kid who has been in loads of accidents.

There is a difference between entering into these insurance transactions voluntarily and having the guvmint picking up the tab and forcing it down the throats of the taxpayer.

[MissTargets]

I have no problem if private businesses ban smoking or not.

Me either, it is their choice. As is my choice, not to spend my money there.

As you know, Ohio passed CCW. Signs went up in many business banning firearms (my favorite grocery store included). I will not patronize them either.

[MissTargets]

Smoking and obesity too?

Obesity is a problem nation wide, not just in Northeast Ohio.

[Gabz]

but I was responding to someone's attempt to make a connection between anti-smoking advocateswith pro-homosexual activists.

I am the one that made the comment, and it was only in response to being compared, as a smoker, to the pro-homosexual activists. It was no attempt to make any connection with anti-smoker advocates to gay adctivists, it was just stating facts in the face of blatant falsehoods.

[Gabz]

I am paying for my insurance coverage and through it and my taxes am paying for those who neither have insurance nor pay taxes.

It doesn't matter if I smoke or not I am still being forced to pay for those who choose not to pay and crank up my premiums and taxes in the process.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

No. You are wrong and I was not making a "blatant falsehood". I was not comparing smokers to homo-activists. I was stating that smokers, like homosexuals, engage in behaviors that increase the risk of illness. That is not false. You were linking anti-smoking activists with pro-homo activists, engaging in a logical fallacy.

[Gabz]

I engaged in no fallacy whatsoever.

One of the most well known and well-paid anti smoker activists is a national figure in the pro-gay adoption (and everything else) movement. He claims he and his "partner" are better parents and role models than my husband and I because they do not smoke.

Anyone that brings up any kind of comparison to smokers advocating private property rights to gay activists is going to get the exact same response.

[Don'tMessWithTexas]

There is no inherent "right" to smoke. Smokers working in an office, owned by someone else, do not have a right to smoke in that building if the owner wants to ban smoking. Smokers in a public building, owned by some governmental entity do not have the right to smoke there either.

A proprietor of a restaurant does have a right to have place for smokers or non-smokers without government interference. Smokers have a right to smoke in their own homes. Smokers do not have a right to smoke in my home.

No need to make any comparison to homo-rights activists.

[Myrddin]

Obesity is a problem nation wide, not just in Northeast Ohio.

Just making an observation about a heavy population of smokers.

[Paved Paradise]

yep. They can afford to throw their money away since they aren't going to need it for their old age since they'll probably die earlier due to the smoking. Give me a break.

[Gabz]

I never said there was an inherent "right" to smoke. I just believe it is the inherent "right" of a business owner to make the determination whether or not he/she wishes to permit it in his/her property.

Public property, i.e. government buildings, are a different story. Even as a smoker, who is also a taxpayer, I can understand no-smoking policies for those buildings because in many instances the non-smoking public is FORCED to enter those premises. Non-smokers are never forced to enter a private business establishment.

As I have repeatedly said on this and many other threads, I have nothing against businesses that choose to go non-smoking............I am and always will be against the use of the strong arm of government to force businesses that do not choose such a route to do so.

[Paved Paradise]

Huh? You have got to be kidding! That's why animals and babies are repulsed by cigarette smoke and why most people have a natural aversion to it. It's because it is not natural or normal or good. It is unnatural, abnormal and harmful. One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to understand that basically the human lungs weren't designed to the repeated abuse of inhaling the toxins from smoke. In fact, it is testament to the marvelous wonder of our bodies and the creator Himself that we can tolerate as much as we do. But, why should I have to put up with it? I try hard not to by avoiding it as much as I can. They don't call them cancer sticks for nothing.

[Gabz]

You can't seriously believe what you just posted, can you?????

[Gabz]

I'm not kidding.....you are the one with the problem here, not me.

If exposure to smoke is as "unnatural, abnormal, and harmful" as you claim I assume you burn nothing and are never exposed to anything that is burned. No grilling, no fireplaces, no automobiles, no hot food of any sort...................I seriously doubt that.

Get a grip. Smoking is a habit I choose to engage in, the fact you don't share the same past time is of no consequence to me.

I try my best to avoid as much as possible anyone that is bothered by my cigarette smoke. I just wish those people would put the same effort into trying to avoid me.

[Ignatz]

I smoke cigars, never cigarettes, but I'm a polite smoker and would never light up in an enclosed area other than my home or local cigar bar.

I have a few Nat Sherman's, an Avo, and some Punch double-maduros at home in my humidor right now! I think I'll enjoy one after supper tonight.