To both of you and others, I appreciate the discussion. Look, I understand and agree with some of your agruements. I don’t like the idea of the government getting involved and telling folks what they can and can’t do. They have and in this instance I will admit to being glad they did.
Is it right that you shouldn’t have a place to frequent where you can smoke cigarettes and cigars and have a drink? I don’t think so.
It seems to me there should be a habidachery or some place where smokers could congregate and smoke. Then OSHIA would come in and step on that plan.
Let me ask you folks something. If the free market had gone it’s course and every establishment in the state would have gone non-smoking, would you have accepted that?
I expect one of two responses, one more than the other.
Here’s the one I expect most. That wouldn’t have happened. Some places would have remained a smoking establishment. AT first I would agree. But then as the business dwindled, I’m not so sure it would have remained that way.
Here’s the one I expect after that. No.
I know you didn't ask me, but I would like to chime in.
Yes, I would have accepted that and used the opportunity to open my own place that permitted smoking and create my own market niche.
One of the very first bars to go non-smoking, on it's own, in Delaware was doing a booming business. Then the state-wide ban went into effect. The place, after many, many successful years went, out of business within a year or so of the ban. The state essentially stole the market niche the owner had created for himself.
Absolutely. The owner has a right to make a business decision. I do find it intersting that the non-smokers have organized and imposed their views on smokers, but I have not heard of any widespread movement among smokers to force all bars and restaurants to allow smoking.
DoughtyOne, I appreciate this writing back and forth, you indeed understand the slippery slope, most antis on here don’t: oh, and I don’t think you are an anti...
OSHA was asked to regulate smoking by ASH, but when OSHA responded that they would set a standard of a permissible level, ASH withdrew their request and asked OSHA not to do anything.
There is no safe level of smoke according to ASH, just like there is no safe level of Man-Made global warming to Gore.
If you are interested, this recent article in Skeptic Magazine is a good historical run-down of what’s been going on with these bans:
http://www.nycclash.com/Zion-Skeptic-Science_And_SHS.html
It’s accessed from a Pro-Smokers website, with permission from the author [click the ‘Article link]
And, if the free market had gone it’s course, I would accept it. When the car came into being, horse buggy manufacturers were upset, but lost customers because people gravitated to autos. One can still buy a horse buggy, but they are few and far between.
The trend is now, less people are smoking, that’s fine - but to Ban an activity to a private business owner who still wants to cater to a smoking society is against a free market.
To bar people from enjoying an activity they once loved is Nanny-State.
To ban buggies and force everyone to drive cars would have been ludicrous.
A Ban is a Ban, it’s not progress, it’s restrictive.
“I don’t like the idea of the government getting involved and telling folks what they can and can’t do. They have and in this instance I will admit to being glad they did.”
So, you admit that you support Conservatism, except when it is convenient to support socialism. We call that convenient conservatism around here. Or to put it more succinctly, the current Republican party.