[Dan Nunn]

when only 25-30% of the patrons smoke (rough estimate because I have heard much higher), vote to smoke or not to smoke, smokers lose out every time.

Understandable, unfortunate, but democratic. The opponents here think they should have full rule over what they can do in their business, but that the citizens should have no say in the laws.

Hey, if it went to a vote and couldn't pass, that would be fair. How is it fair to deny a majority of the population who wishes clean air?

[SheLion]

Hey, if it went to a vote and couldn't pass, that would be fair. How is it fair to deny a majority of the population who wishes clean air?

No one is "entitled" to clean air.  The following was written to the letter of the Editor:

All citizens do NOT have any "right" to breathe clean air.  If we did, then all planes, automobiles, trucks, factories, and
breweries (the source of toxic poisons in the air) would be banned. Only then we all  "breathe truly clean air".

The Report by the Surgeon General, Richard Carmona, who is a self-described rabid anti-smoker, does not show any "new evidence" as they claim. As the Report itself states, it is merely a compendium of previous reports and biased "studies" written by and/or paid for by the anti-smoker industry. No new studies, no new evidence.

No one has ever died from being around secondhand smoke but this conveniently escapes the anti-smoker zealots.  Coronary heart disease is usually genetic in origin, but it's politically correct nowadays to claim that secondhand smoke is the culprit. Never mind that no unbiased, scientific study has ever proven that secondhand smoke has ever caused anyone any harm; the real truth isn't on their agenda. 

The anti-smoker campaign has never been about health, it's always been about power and control by The Nannies (along with millions of dollars for the anti-smoker and pharmaceutical industries).

Hey!  How about letting the free market decide instead of the government?  Let the business owner and his patrons decide if there should be smoking or not?  We do not need more heavy hand of government coming down on us like this.

How about a few signs in the windows???

                  

[Gabz]

How is it fair to deny a majority of the population who wishes clean air?

How is it fair to dictate a business owner's clientele?

As to clean air.......how come a place can burn candles, incense, a fireplace or a big smoky BBQ but can't permit folks to light a cigarette or cigar? Smoke is smoke.....if it's clean air you want you better eliminate all the other sources of smoke or else you are being hypocritical.

[Badray]

Hey pal, can you find the word 'democracy' anywhere in the Constitution?

Don't bother looking. It's not there. We are not a democracy. We live in a free country. I am free to allow smoking in my restaurant. You are free not to come in. That's the only frigging vote you get.

[Normal4me]

I just have to chime in here. If the neighbors don't like what I do in my own home do they have a say? No. If the patrons of a private business find something offensive to them than they have the right to not patronise that business.

I did construction on a bar/restaurant where I live. They had over $12,000 a week in sales. The state of Florida imposed the smoking ban and they decided they would rather be a restuarant than a bar. They are now making $3500 a week in sales. It was the choice of the OWNERS of the place and I don't blame them a bit.

I go to a little hole in the wall bar that serves food like hot dogs and hamburgers and sandwhiches. They quit selling food after 4 pm because if their sales equal 10% of their net they have to ban smoking. 75% of us smoke which makes us a majority. There is outdoor seating for those who don't like the smoke.

It is up to the consumer on where they decide to spend their money, not the government. Period.

[elkfersupper]

How is it fair to deny a majority of the population who wishes clean air?

People in hell wish for ice cubes.

What's your point?