Posted on 01/10/2003 7:41:00 PM PST by Max McGarrity
Secondhand smoke "might make your hair smell," but it's not a proven health risk, Bears-coach-turned-restaurant-owner Mike Ditka said Thursday, leading the charge against a proposed restaurant smoking ban in Chicago.
With a cigar in one hand and a drink in the other, Ditka said his steelworker father was living proof that it's baloney for medical experts to claim that exposing a restaurant employee to an eight-hour shift's worth of secondhand smoke is the equivalent of smoking a half a pack of cigarettes.
"My dad smoked four packs of Luckies from the time he was 12 until the time he was 60. He lived to 80. He died of hardening of the arteries. He didn't die from what smoking caused. He worked in the steel mill where every morning, you woke up and there was half an inch of soot on the cars," Ditka said.
"People who have survived in industrial areas of our country late into their 80s and 90s have inhaled more smoke than all the smoking in the world can give you. I find it hard to believe that people try to shove the secondhand smoke theory down your throat because I don't believe it. I don't believe it even hurts you. It might make your hair smell a little bit, but that's about it."
Ditka said he has nothing against Ald. Edward M. Burke (14th), the City Council's leading anti-smoking crusader. He simply believes the restaurant business would "suffer tremendously" if Burke and Health Committee Chairman Ed Smith (28th) persuaded their colleagues to ban smoking in restaurants and bars.
"These people who are popping off and throwing their weight around better open up their eyes and understand that you've got freedoms in America. If you don't want to come in this restaurant, don't come in. If you don't want to go where people smoke, don't go. They run the City Council. Let the people down here run the restaurants," Da Coach said.
Reminded that smoking has been banned for years in California restaurants and bars, Ditka said: "That's fruits and nuts. That's what they are. A lot of liberals. . .. All the do-gooders in the world. The people in California who abolished smoking are the same people who want to legalize marijuana. Come on. Give me a break."
At a Health Committee meeting earlier this week, restaurant owners attempted to slow the anti-smoking steamroller.
They warned that a Chicago-only restaurant smoking ban would send customers fleeing to the suburbs and prompt conventions to move elsewhere. They argued the ban would create an enforcement nightmare, with confrontations between tip-seeking servers and their customers.
Mayor Daley sympathized, called for more City Council hearings on the controversy and backed away from his earlier endorsement of a restaurant smoking ban.
On Thursday, restaurant employees held a news conference at Ditka's Restaurant, 100 E. Chestnut, to reiterate those arguments and pile on a few more.
"This city is rich in character--full of taverns, neighborhood joints, steakhouses and family restaurants. A smoking ban would completely expunge that character. It would absolutely reduce this city to another generic, dime-a-dozen, two-bit town," said Glenn Garlisch, a waiter at the Chicago Chop House, 60 W. Ontario.
If second-hand smoke viciously killed non smokers, smokers lives would be very short indeed.
Billions of dollars in tax money were earned from the big lie. Now fatty foods are in the cross-hairs.
Did it make you turn green, make you sick? Did it cause a brain tumor to start growing in your head within a few minutes?
Or perhaps the poison just made your nostrils a little uncomfortable.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Ditka's restaurant is HIS restaurant. Its not a "public place". If he didn't like you, he could ban you from it. On the other hand, if you don't like smoke, instead of bitching, go elsewhere. If a restaurant allows smoking, and I decide to light up, I don't want to have to hear your snide remarks, or see your dirty looks. I want to enjoy my meal without a hassle. If I'm in a no smoking establishment, I don't smoke.
As for being weak or stupid: Some of us just enjoy it. Some people like sky-diving, but personally, I'll never jump out of a perfectly functioning airplane. Everyone chooses their own life style, and are entitled to. Who the he$$ do you think you are to mandate no smoking, no alcohol, no fatty foods, no salt, no sugar, etc. In fact, just to pi$$ you off, I'm going to run around the living room WITH SCISSORS!!!
You said it here. IF. You have a choice. If you don't want to be there, don't go! In fact Ditka himself tells you that! There other places to go.
The perfect solution is to have both types of restaurants and bars. Some that allow smoking and those that do not. Any patron in the wrong place is there of their own accord and has no reason to gripe.
Most restaurants had non smoking sections and that still wasn't good enough for the anti-smoke nazis. So now they want it all. Why should only non smokers be comfortable? By having both types of establishments smoking and non-smoking, then both sets of patrons can be comfortable.
As for workers, the same applies. You know when you fill the application whether or not the place allows smoking. Don't want the smoke, then don't apply. If you apply, then you have made a choice to accept the smoke as part of the job. Just like people in factories pr other work places that have to work with questionable materials. Sure safety standards say that you have the 'right to know', but that's it. You can't refuse to work with it, because it would cost you your job. I've been in that type of situation. Some work places tell you up front, so you can make your choice then. Continue with the application for employment or walk out the door.
Choice. It's all about choice. And just as the non smoker gets a choice about going to a smoking or non smoking environment, so too should the smoker be given that choice. The choice shouldn't be eliminated.
Would people like choice of soda limited to ONE? Or choice of beer limited to ONE? And that ONE determined by someone else?
A consumer driven market is based on CHOICE! jmo
You sir, are on the wrong forum.
Perhaps you could be so kind and let us know what is wrong with the above statement. Just to help the thought process along, I have taken the liberty of bolding a few things you just might want to key in on.
Are SUV's ok? Guns? Turn off the test pattern, ok?
Now run along and slime your way back to DU. They love to assimilate your type.
LVM
A simple free market soloution is to allow the restaurant or bar owner to make the decision wether to allow smoking or not allow it. If you don't like smoking you will vote with your feet and frequent any establishment that doesn't allow smoking.
Restaurants and bars are privatly owned and therfore their policies should be made by the owners. Not by the goverment.
I am a non-smoker, and there is only a few things that bug me more than smokers. Rest assured that one of those things is non-smokers who moan about smokers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.