Maui to ban restaurant smoking

Honolulu Advertiser ^ | Wednesday, August 21, 2002 | Timothy Hurley

[Vidalia]

WAILUKU, Maui

[Ramius]

If you know of something positive that occurs let me know.

It keeps me from running other drivers off the road when they do really stupid things. When would you prefer that I quit?

I have some other bad habits too. Do you want the whole inventory so that you can render your Oh-so-wise opinions on them and then thanks-be-to-diggerwillow I can finally be a more perfect person?

Or-- perhaps we can agree to just leave each other the heck alone. Maybe that would work too?

Regards,

[what's up]

One word. Relaxation.

[supercat]

The article says 70% of the establishments were in favor of the ban, however, why didn't they just go ahead and do it?

Because they believe having the ban be universal is the only way they'll get the business of smokers. They believe that other businesses that allow smoking are stealing "their" customers, and they want to stop that.

I am reminded here, btw, of a restaurant called the "Cream Top Tavern" which opened up across from the campus of University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. The owners were laughably inept, and when a popular restaurant, Randy's, was firebombed, people would joke that it was probably the Cream Top restauranteurs that did it. What's crazy is that the jokesters were right.

The owners of the Cream Top Tavern had indeed firebombed Randy, believing that it was responsible for their lack of business. They couldn't possibly imagine that they might lack for business because...

• University lunch breaks are not long enough for people to spend over an hour in a restaurant, even one directly across the street. Even though Randy's was over a mile away, people could still go there, get food, and return much faster than they could get a meal at the Cream Top.
• Customers who show up for dinner didn't appreciate that most of the items on the dinner menu are unavailable until after 10:00pm [yes you read that right--people who eat dinner at normal times were basically limitted to burgers].
• They were unwilling to accept any polite suggestions from people who would like to have a quick lunch, or have dinner at a 'normal' hour.

Needless to say, the Cream Top Tavern did not experience any meaningful increase in business as a result of their shutting down Randy's for a few weeks, even before its owners role in the firebombing was discovered (Randy's did reopen, and there's still a Randy's in Whitewater though I don't know if it's the same ownership). The owners believed that if they eliminated the competition everyone would flock to their door; somehow, though, that just didn't happen.

Returning to the subject of smoking: I would expect that the only restaurants which would likely benefit from the smoking ban are either drive-ins (a smoking ban for patrons' automobiles would likely be unenforceable), drive-throughs, or other takeout places. I would expect smokers would be far more likely to shift their business away from sit-down restaurants in general than to shift it to businesses which pushed for the smoking ban.

[Ramius]

In the places I go where smoking is universally verboten, there are always a few places where the rules are either not enforced or openly flaunted. They are always packed with business. The bars that enforce the smoking ban are generally empty, or have transitory traffic. People come in for one beer, but leave. Nobody stays for very long.

There is a place in San Carlos, CA that I know and they just give the finger to the law. They're doing a bangup business.

There is a place in Boulder, CO (where there is a city ordinance that bans smoking pretty much everywhere) that is just plain hysterical. Every hour on the hour they make an announcement over the PA system that "smoking is not allowed withing the city limits, please extinguish any smoking materials". Nevermind that the bartender making the announcement is smoking at the time. Nevermind that EVERYONE in the place is smoking. Nevermind that the place is packed to the gills and every other tavern in town is going under.

The cops roll through every other hour or so, looking for these scofflaws and hardened criminals that DARE to actually defy the will of the MOMMYS in the town council. Everybody cups their smokes and continues to shoot pool. Life goes on.

[altair]

That's an interesting story.

I would expect that the only restaurants which would likely benefit from the smoking ban

If there's a market for it (non-smoking restaurants) the market should decide. I live in Tokyo where a greater percentage of the population smokes. Restaurants are free to decide whether to permit smoking or not. Non-smoking restaurants exist and they don't seem to be closing down. If it can work here, it can work there too.

[Gabz]

People choose to smoke and the resteraunt owners have the right to choose to let people on their propert. The government has no place interfering in those decisions.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!

I just wish more people would see and understand the reasonableness of this statement.

Talk to the owner of your preferred place of drinking or dining. Or open your own establishment that prohibits smoking.

Why do these people insist the GOVERNMENT has todo it for them?????

[Gabz]

Open your own establishment. It's very simple.

I guarantee, as soon as you sink your life savings into it you will be wishing the government would get out of your hair.

But until you do, please, leave those that have done so alone.

[Gabz]

You're right it is just a choice thing - the choice of the owner of the establishment to choose the clientele.

If you dislike Thai food you will not go to a Thai restaurant, so if you don't like a place that permits smoking just don't go there.

Sounds very simple to me. Why is it that some folks are willling to talk to the proprietors about the smoking "problem" but othrs INSIST the government has to do something about it?

[Gabz]

It's not about being pro-smoking or anti-smoking.

You are correct. It is about the property rights of the owner of the establishment.

If you don't like smoking talk to the owner about changing his policy or open your own establishment.

Getting the government involved is a liberal's way out of things and I have a hard time understanding why so many on FR are so gung-ho for it when it comes to cigarettes.

[SheLion]

All those letters we wrote last winter to Hawaii didn't mean a thing. Really sad that such a resort is falling for this.

Wait until the Japanese find out.  They will never fly over to Hawaii again!

(Thanks for the ping.  I signed off early last night, and just got this!)

[SheLion]

Why are conservitives pro-smoking?

Conservatives are Pro, period.  We are pro-rights for business owner's to decide what they want to do with their business.  Just because we smoke a legal commodity, does not make us any less a Conservative.

Klintoon is the one who started this war on the smoker.  Why is his hatred carrying over now into our Administration?  I fear we still have a lot of Clinton Lap Dogs out here.

Frightening that everyone can't see what is really going on here.  It's all about rights!  Or is having rights for one ok and not rights for another.

[Khepera]

Why not? We breathe yours!

[SheLion]

Sorry, but this ex-smoker is all for it. There is not one positive thing that comes from filling your lungs with smoke.

That's a personal opinion.  Just because it's something that you do not like or enjoy, your for taking it away from people who do?  What Country do YOU live in!

[Khepera]

Yea they can open the "No smokers Bar and Grill". Good luck (Riddance) to them!

[SheLion]

Heck, lets just kill off freedom, and hand over everything to our waiting government?

Exactly!  Let's ban the SUN!  It, too, is a Class A Carcinogen.  Let's ban it too, how about it! heh!

[SheLion]

It's not about smoking, per se, it's about private property rights. The article says 70% of the establishments were in favor of the ban, however, why didn't they just go ahead and do it? They don't need a total government ban in order to ban smoking on their own premises. The 30% not in favor are certainly within their rights to allow smoking if they choose. Customers who don't like it don't have to go there.

Exactly!  We do not need Government intervention in every walk of life in America!  I guess some people can't think for themselves, so they need the Nanny Government to think for them.  I do not!  I was weaned from my Mother when I was a baby.

 

[1Old Pro]

Why are conservitives pro-smoking?

Conservatives are pro-Freedom. Next they will outlaw perfume, then they will outlaw kids and smelly diapers.There is no documented proof about second hand smoking being harmful.

It may annoy you, but perhaps things you do annoy me.

[Gabz]

Yea they can open the "No smokers Bar and Grill".

If there was such a call for non-smoking bars and restaurants there would be one on every corner.

I guess there is no major call for them, since they only appear after the grubmint mandates it. and that only happens after a bunch of whiney sniveling cry babies run to Big Brother to "do something."

Those kind of people make my skin crawl.

[SheLion]

Smoking has the benefit of lessening the demand for Social Security benefits as smokers die off early. Is it worth the costs in medical care for cancer? I don't know.

Smokers are not a financial burden as you imply: Smoking-related healthcare costs are a pittance to overall healthcare costs (8% in my state of Maine).

If every smoker quit, healthcare costs would go down only temporarily and then rise above the amount you are complaining about now, because nonsmokers get sick too and for more years.

Smokers more than make up for their extra cost by dying (their choice-not yours) sooner; collecting less social security and pensions, and less time in nursing homes. The state tax on cigarettes is all gravy. This is all backed up by facts. 

Smokers not only pay "their own damn bills," they pay the bills for a whole hell of a lot of nonsmokers as well. And they/we have since at least 1994 when taxes were a lot lower than now. The only way you can conclude that smokers cost society is to make the assumption that no one else ever gets sick, has an accident, or dies. You've been hornswoggled by the anti juggernaut.