"Leave this decision up to the private business owners!
And don't forget: CIGARETTES ARE A LEGAL COMMODITY!"
And they should stay legal.
To be able to use tobaaco around non-users you need a way to keep it from getting on to other people. If it could be swallowed this issue would go away. Or you take nicotine pills or gum or inject it... anything so you don't get it on bystanders.
And I see nothing wrong with private smoking clubs that are not open to the public - but places of public accomodation are different when you operate such a business you incur responsiblity to not harm the people who come in.
Why respect the owner's rights only for private smoking clubs? Why not permit the owner of ANY property to excercise the decision of what he will permit on the property HE paid for?
Obviously, certain things are more reasonable areas of restriction. Practices that pose a danger to unsuspecting patrons, or that endanger people not even on the property, could conceivably be controlled. But smoking isn't one of these things. Tobacco smoke can be easily, almost instantly detected by anyone entering a restaurant or bar. And, outside of that restaurant or bar, it doesn't really affect anyone. If people want to avoid the easily detected danger or cigarrette smoke, they can simply go elsewhere. There's no need for government involvement, perhaps beyond requiring warning signs.
Ultimately, though, I suspect these bans have little to do with harm and a lot to do with convenience. No one is really that afraid of cigarette smoke, they just want to be able to go into any restaurant they want and have it cater to their wishes. Sad, really.
Now! Why on earth would I want to alter the way I have enjoyed cigarettes for so many years just because YOU don't like the SMELL??!! heh!
And I see nothing wrong with private smoking clubs that are not open to the public - but places of public accomodation are different when you operate such a business you incur responsiblity to not harm the people who come in.
All restaurants AND bars are privately owned businesses. They are not government owned. Therefore, the business owner should continue to have the right to run his business the way he and his patrons see fit.
If you don't want to be around smokers, spend your money in a restaurant or bar where there is no smoking or very little. You still have a choice!
But do not, for heaven's sake, beg the government to do dirty work for you and continue closing doors on the smaller businesses. What's the matter with you!
"And I see nothing wrong with private smoking clubs that are not open to the public - but places of public accomodation are different when you operate such a business you incur responsiblity to not harm the people who come in."
Sorry to disagree with you. If people believe that going into your business will harm them, they won't come in in the first place. That is called market forces. If I want to go to a place that has no smoking, then I will go there. Let the people decide where to go, not the government. Let the pocketbook make the decisions, not some public official who has an agenda.
I am sick and tired of the this damn nanny state mentality that is taking over my country. For God's sake, people are supposed to be adults, let them act like it and stop treating government as one big mommy who needs to tell us what to freaking do.
It's a private business that is publically accessable, IF PROSPECTIVE CUSTOMERS CHOOSE TO PATRONIZE said establishment!
I don't know how things are were you live, but for me, if a business or place does NOT have an atomsphere that I find comfortable; I LEAVE, and/or CHOOSE NOT TO ENTER!
If for some reason you have had to endure an environment not to your liking; I suggest you call the police the next time someone puts a gun to your head and FORCES you to enter.