You want support to stop bans on smoking for owners that no one knows personally yet none of you would support a legal fund for an owner to get remibursed by the state that bans smoking. You smokers think thats consistant. The only consistant thing about it is the selfish smoker only wants to help the owners rights if it allows him to smoke, otherwise they cannot give a crap about his rights.
The only consistent thing is that we want the OWNER to be able to decide. This is in line with other LEGAL commodities that do not cause harm, on a second hand basis, to a vast majority of people.
I personally don't give a damn if an owner of a bar in New York City wants to make his business nonsmoking.
When he is NOT ALLOWED, BY THE GOVT, to ALLOW smoking in his business because of junk science, scare tactics, and annoyed nanny state apologists like yourself, THAT is when I think I should need to get involved.
NOT by patronizing their business but by expressing my personal opinion to the politicians and doing my best to see the ones defeated that side with a nanny state govt.