Florida: Complaints over restaurants not complying with smoking ban

First Coast News ^

[SheLion]

DUVAL COUNTY, FL -- Florida's smoking ban was officially put into place on July 1st but not everyone is abiding. The state has had close to 800 complaints on restaurants that are not complying with the rules.

In Duval County, there have been 19 complaints with the majority coming from customers of RP McMurphy's located in Jacksonville Beach. The restaurant has received a warning and has 30 days to comply.

[metesky]

This has been my argument from the beginning, Clemenza. These people are promulgating rules and regs for neighborhood bars and workingmans bars and biker bars that they will never set foot in in their entire health obsessed lives.

I've been drinking in bars for 45 years. I don't like fern bars and most of the people in fern bars wouldn't like me. I like drinking in the working places where you can meet the people who keep things running, the folks with dirt under their nails.

[VRWC_minion]

So, by your reasoning: We already took some rights, so it is OK that we take more!

We should be consistant. If its an employee's right to work smoke free, they should have that right regardless of their chosen profession.

[SheLion]

Don't worry though, the only people that will have to suffer from this legislation are business owners without porches. And who cares about them? Or their tax dollars?

VERY sad!

[Just another Joe]

One of the silliest things that smokers do is to claim that the government somehow has no right to regulate health issues in businesses that serve food or drink.

There is no valid scientific evidence that ETS is a health issue to the vast majority of people.
Do we ban peanuts in bars and restaurants because some few people have an allergic reaction to peanuts? No.

Why should ETS be any different on health issues?

[Clemenza]

I've been drinking in bars for 45 years. I don't like fern bars and most of the people in fern bars wouldn't like me. I like drinking in the working places where you can meet the people who keep things running, the folks with dirt under their nails.

Yep, unfortunatly the Califonia/Boston transplants in Manhattan don't give a damn about places like Bay Ridge or Staten Island and wouldn't even set foot there anyway. There are no more bars in Manhattan these days: there are "lounges."

[E Rocc]

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A CASE OF A WAITER WHO HAS DIED FROM SECOND HAND SMOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If true, this would put smoking bans up at least 1-0 in the mortality score. A bouncer got killed in New York City attempting to enforce Bloomberg's Folly.

To me, the most offensive thing about these idiotic laws is the smoke nannies don't ticket the people who are smoking. They ticket the bar that is "allowing" smoking. This proves its all about money, the bar has a fixed address and a liquor license and is more likely to pay the mordida. Meanwhile, it's the people allegedly being "protected", the bar employees, left holding onto the clintony end of the law enforcement stick.

-Eric

[Wheee The People]

Following the whole "business-owners-should-be-able-to-decide" line of reasoning, I'll just say, business owners who don't like this rule should relocate their businesses to a smoker-friendly state.

Ouch, that's gotta sting. Turning their own argument around on 'em....LOL

[kegler4]

"Food preparation is under the FDA Regulations. Tobacco, still today, is not."

I realize that. But you said "WRONG" to the contention that every restaurant is already regulated in some way. The poster was NOT saying that every restaurant is regulated as to smoking -- he or she was saying every reastaurant is regulated in some way. I was questioning why you would say this is not so when it obviously is.

[SheLion]

Good to see you, Joe!

[CSM]

"We should be consistant. If its an employee's right to work smoke free, they should have that right regardless of their chosen profession."

Yep, we should be consistent and raise taxes every year to cover the additional spending required to run our government. How about 5% annually, wouldn't want to be inconsistant now would we.

Consistently taking of rights makes minion happy!

[Shryke]

Yes, it is sad Ms. Lion. However, as with every single damn "social" type idea, where private property gives way to annoyed mobs, it will end in disaster. These things tend to snowball over time.

Personally, I expect that many restaurants that are suffering from this law will either a) ignore the law, or b) circumvent it, like going completely "private club". Ofcourse, then we will see more whiney non-smokers rushing up to the door "demanding" smoke-free service.

[SheLion]

They ticket the bar that is "allowing" smoking. This proves its all about money, the bar has a fixed address and a liquor license and is more likely to pay the mordida. Meanwhile, it's the people allegedly being "protected", the bar employees, left holding onto the clintony end of the law enforcement stick.

That's good, Eric. You seem to know what your talking about. And yes, it's all about the money. I just wonder how long they think the money will hold out? It's getting mighty thin.

[petercooper]

"Why are you against letting nonsmokers choose to be waitstaff ?"

I'm not. This is a free country, and if people who want to be waiters/waitresses feel that some secondhand smoke might make them reconsider the occupation, then so be it.
Maybe they could become bricklayers instead.

[CSM]

"Ouch, that's gotta sting. Turning their own argument around on 'em...."

Yep, those evil business owners and capitalists should just move out of the state!

How very DU of you.

[SheLion]

Customers aren't allowed in the kitchens anyway. So we have to have the government control and protect the way our food is being cooked.

But in the patrons area, people who can't stand being around smokers just need to find the next place down the street that has none. Not have the government mandate all bars and restaurants to be under their control. The government didn't pay the mortage on these places. The owners did.

[kegler4]

"This is an 'apples and oranges' comparasion."

You need to go back and read the post I was responding to. The poster proposed taking ALL government regulations off of restaurants -- not just regulations to do with smoking. All I was doing was pointing out problems that might cause. I wasn't "comparing" anything to anything. In fact, if you look at my posts, I have yet to even comment on the cigarette issue.

[Just another Joe]

I happen to care about the poor person that is serving your drinks and meals.

BS, minion. You just don't like the smell, anymore, and have admitted such on other threads.
Don't come running in with your sanctimonious BS now.

You're outed, bud.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

1. How do the compounds and elements you listed adversely affect second hand smokers?
2. What percentage of them are actually filtered out or absorbed in a smoker's lungs?
3. How many have been eliminated through new fertilizers?
4. Why don't major health studies reflect your presuppositions?

[Hanging Chad]

"...If its an employee's right to work smoke free..."
- - -
Do employees have a right to work "peanut free"?
Or "curry free"?
Or "incense free"?
Or "CNN free"?
Or "loud boisterous laughing free"?
Or "third-shift week-end call-out free"?
- - -
And what exactly constitutes "smoke free"?
What if the customer's clothes 'smell like cigarettes'?
- - -
Why would someone who is offended by nudity
want to be a waitress in a topless night club?
But wait, according to you, they have a "right" to it.

[kegler4]

My posts have pretty much just pointed out the dangers and folly of having no government regulation of restaurants at all. Even good restaurants were dangerous places to eat in the past. If you go back and look you'll see I have not argued in favor of or against regulating cigarettes in private businesses.

Actually, I am former smoker who is happy he stopped that vile , expensive and unhealthy habit, but who still frequents smoked-filled bowling alleys and other places they allow smoking.