Opinions are like a##holes, everyone has one. You consider smoking to be offensive. Not everyone does. It is a legal substance, but the politicians won't ban it because it is a cash cow for them. They would rather add 61 cents a pack tax to fund another socialist program.
If smokers would go outside or simply hold off smoking for the hour to hour and a half they were in the establishment, none of this would be taking place.
Why should they be inconvenienced if they would like to enjoy a cigar after dinner with a cognac? There would be no problem if people had choices between smoking and non-smoking restaurants and bars. Then there would be no one offended. You know as soon as you enter what the policy is. We don't need the smoke-Nazi to decide for us.
You have advocated to have feet make the decision. I don’t think that would alleviate the problem, but that’s my thought on it.
It is only a problem because we have some people trying to impose their views on others using the government as the instrument of enforcement. Taking it out of the hands of the individual consumer and business owner is the cause of the problem. Again, if smoking is that offensive and bad, it should be banned period.
Sorry you still can’t comprehend it.
The smokers are the ones who make it miserable for others. It isn’t the other way around. Non-smokers don’t do something that impacts the other party. They can’t simply stop breathing for an hour and a half. Smokers can stop smoking for an hour and a half.
You flip it upside down when you state that non-smokers are the gulity party just because they object to the folks that do take actions to offend others.
You’ve got it so bass akwards that it’s hillarious.