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.

[Cboldt]

The last time I looked at a CO detector the minimum detectable of amount of CO was 9 PPM. Thanks for proving my point.

I don't see how that fact proves your point in any way whatseover.

Are you asserting that the level of CO in a typical public indoor space with second hand smoke is 9 ppm and will set off a CO detector?

[CSM]

"You have a problem that the market creates large companies that have disproportionate sway over laws and regulations. Unfortunately, that is the free market at work."

As soon as a market can be controlled with laws and regulations, allowing for one company to be successful over another, then we no longer have a free market. We end up with a government controlled market. What would a government controlled market be, except for say......satisfying to you. It would be a let's see, hmmm..............a communistic government or a socialistic government.

Why do you never directly answer the questions that I post to you?

[Madame Dufarge]

You don't get as many as non-smokers do.

It's a small price to pay to avoid the company of the real oxygen thieves.

[E Rocc]

"The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has established a maximum safe working level for carbon monoxide at 35 parts per million (ppm) over an 8 hour period, in the general work-place. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established that residential levels are not to exceed 9 ppm over an 8 hour average."

People don't spend 24-7 in a bar or other workplace like they might in a house. The OSHA limits are more applicable.

Why do the smoke nannies fear setting a real-number limit? The reason is clear: said limit could be acheived by engineering controls instead of behavior modification and the latter is their objective.

-Eric

[Shethink13]

Have a nice day, addicts. You don't get as many as non-smokers do.

You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. Several of us, myself included, have stated that we are NOT smokers, but agree with the private property argument.

Of course, we wouldn't want the FACTS to interfere with your ill-formed, socialist opinions, would we?

[Rebelbase]

Pigs, mud.................

[Madame Dufarge]

I agree 100%.

Thanks for the common sense.

[Graybeard58]

"Cut us "newbies" some slack, we didn't enter Free Republic as people who have never had a coherent thought"

...I want to take this oppurtunity to amend the above statement made by me. There are democrat lurkers here and obviously they DID join without the benefit of ever having had a coherent thought.

[Mears]

I just read through this entire thread and it's hysterical.

The best way to respond to VRWC_Minion is to ignore him.I feel he gets his kicks from knocking smokers.

I was especially amused to see his comment that smoking in the presence of a child is abusive. Tell that to the generation that raised the Boomers,many of us were smokers and certainly resent being called abusers.

How on earth did the Boomers get so healthy when so many were abused in this way? Could anyone answer that?

[VRWC_minion]

prove it NOW,

It is the logical extension of the current smoking bans. If you cannot see that then let me explain.

The various states are enacting laws under the guise of protecting employee health from second hand smoke. Once these are firmly established, the "anti's" will commence a new battle front. The argument will run along the lines of, if our restaurant and bar workers need to be protected from cigarette smoke then surely our children who are exposed to smoke all day long at home must also be protected.

First, there will be information campains warning parents of this destuctive practice of smoking around children. Most parents will choose to avoid smoking in the presence of their children. After a few years, the first laws will require that children not be exposed to smoke in vehicles. Once that takes place, the second round will be fought for the ban in homes of children. By then the public will assume its not only harmfull but that its imperative to protect the children. After the education cycle the abuse cycle will start. I guess in about 5 years some states will prosecute parents for smoking in the precense of the children.

Its simply a natural outgrowth.

As for how we were all brought up with smokers etc, the counter to that is the car seat. Its considered illegal to transport a child without a car seat even though we used to stand on the back seat as kids.

[Madame Dufarge]

Competition is done at all levels not just in the sales field.

It's not competition if the "non-profit" control freaks that drive government today interfere.

Good jobs at good wages for the otherwise unemployable, pestering adults.

[Shethink13]

You have a problem that the market creates large companies that have disproportionate sway over laws and regulations. Unfortunately, that is the free market at work. It isn't pretty but thats how it works. Competition is done at all levels not just in the sales field.

I think you need to bone up on your study of economic models. Government regulation of private business is more akin to fascism, and has no correlation whatsoever to the free market.

[Just another Joe]

The person here that has not advanced a valid argument yet is yourself.

You won't provide any substantiation on any of your statements except that smoking may cause harm to human beings (We already knew that) and that restaurants are subject to some regulation.

We, OTOH, have provided much substantiation on the effects of ETS, including links to govt agencies, peer reviewed scientific studies, and many others.

Don't run away mad, just run away.

[VRWC_minion]

If this is really the market at work, the legislation would have been unnecessary

Welcome to the real world. The market has always used gov't to advance their products. This goes back to our earliest governments.

[Im4Starr]

I thought you'd find this interesting:

I did some research recently and found that, ironically, one of the supposed cures for cancer is smoking pot.

(There's also a scene from the movie Stepmom where one of the main characters has been diagnosed with cancer and she's in a public park smoking pot under doctors orders.)

So, to review, smoking causes cancer and smoking also cures it. :)

[VRWC_minion]

HURRY TO OUR SIDE HURRY TO OUR SIDE. heh!

Temporary. The bans are in process of being nation wide.

[Just another Joe]

Have a nice day, addicts. You don't get as many as non-smokers do.

BITE ME YOU SANCTIMONIOUS SOB!

[Liberal Classic]

You're saying private businesses have no expectation to private property rights, which in my opinion is far from the truth. No one has to go to a restaurant or bar, and no one is forced to work at one. If you don't like it, don't go. Whatever you do don't get the state legislature breathing down business owner's neck. Yay capitalism.

[CSM]

"Welcome to the real world. The market has always used gov't to advance their products. This goes back to our earliest governments."

My point is that this is wrong. I believe in a free market economy and you support government intervention. Just because it has happened in the past does not make it right!

[Shethink13]

...I want to take this oppurtunity to amend the above statement made by me. There are democrat lurkers here and obviously they DID join without the benefit of ever having had a coherent thought.

Wow! You're a quick learner - LOL! Welcome to FR!