SMOKING BAN ACCOMPLISHES LITTLE, OTHER THAN BURDENING BUSINESSES

Niagara Falls Reporter ^ | August 26 2003 | David Staba

[SheLion]

I agree. In my area, the public was against the smoking bans voted in, but now they love it and are in favor of it. It's a selfish agenda vs. the big picture.

News from Florida:

The ban has been especially tough on smaller, local hangouts like Rodbender's Raw Bar and Grill in Cutler Ridge.

For nearly two months after the law took effect, owner Kathy McMillan banned smoking. She said she lost almost 90 percent of her customers, and more than $14,000 in sales.

[MrLeRoy]

A business open to the public can't justify offenses against any single customer by claiming privaye property.

If they give advance notice of the "offenses," they certainly may.

[Mears]

I'm in Massachusetts,let me know if you open one. Sounds like fun!!!

[HEY4QDEMS]

I guess I'll need a password

[Judith Anne]

Tobacco is so addictive that it cuts the brain power of smokers in half..."

Do you know, have you read, or are you aware of the effect of cigarette smoking on brain waves? Do you know which, smokers vs non-smokers, have the most beta waves, the brain waves associated with critical reasoning, and which have the most alpha, the brain waves associated with a dreamlike, emotional haze?

Do you know the relationship between Alzheimer's disease and smoking?

I'm going to say something so UN-PC that you may be shocked: Tobacco smoke smells nice. It is as pleasant as incense. It is alluring, on a man wearing a wool sweater and a leather jacket...it's pleasing on a woman in silk, and it blends nicely with her perfume...It's a relaxing smell, soft, non-intrusive, and a great background to slow jazz music and interesting conversations...The smells of fresh baked bread, hot coffee, and a cigarette are intoxicating in the morning...after dinner, the smell of cigarettes blends perfectly with the single-malt scotch in a heavy crystal glass...Smoke is so much more than a smell, it's the soft rise of misty swirls, it's the lipsticked kiss on the end of a filter, the click and fire of the lighter...it's an adult pleasure, it's a zone that says relax...

I'm a part-time smoker...I smoke a pack in four or five days...I think you people are uncultured busybodies...

[CSM]

You could use the following:

You through small window in thick door, "What can I do for you?"
Me: "I need a hugh cigarette right now!"
You: "Is it series?"
Me: "Yes, vey!"
You: "Come in and smoke em if you got em!"

[Judith Anne]

What about private clubs? I haven't seen much about them...I remember being in Wichita in the 80s...the bars there had a novel way of getting around the laws, every bar was a private club, and you could join for a small fee at the door...then you could be served the way customers were at any corner tavern in Missouri...

[E Rocc]

A business open to the public can't justify offenses against any single customer by claiming privaye property.

So what you are saying is that if Donald Wildmon walks into a bar, they must quit serving alcohol because drinking offends him?

-Eric

[Mears]

Password-----"Joe Camel rules!"---Works for me.

[MrLeRoy]

Tobacco smoke smells nice.

I'm all for the right to use tobacco or any other recreational substance---but I can't agree with this statement.

[E Rocc]

The antis (I forget which group) sued OSHA to set a zero limit for ETS, when OSHA refused they sued. the lawsuit was quietly dropped because the antis finally got it through their collective blockheads that had OSHA set PELs for ETS, smoking would be permitted nearly everywhere.

A PEL of zero is impossible because most of the compnents of tobacco smoke already have acceptable PEL level and all sorts of things would have had to be eliminated - most of it having to do with cooking!!!

A PEL of "zero" would have had two problems. First of all, when speaking of chemical analysis there is no such number as "zero". All methods of analysis have detection limits, below which they cannot reliably detect the presence of the substance in question.

Second of all, cyanide has an OSHA established 8 hour time-weighted average PEL of 5 mg(CN)/m3. To say that ETS has a PEL of "zero" would be to say that it is more toxic than cyanide, an obviously absurd proposition.

However, if they establish a PEL, the whole thing becomes an issue of engineering, not behavior modification, defeating their purpose.

-Eric

[E Rocc]

The guy had a slamming business before the smoking ban; every night of the week was packed to the gills with 28-65 year olds of all kinds who wanted to hang out at what was pretty much the only non-smoking bar in town.

In a town the size of Rochester, the bolded part speaks volumes.

-Eric

[Gabz]

What about private clubs? I haven't seen much about them...

Different jurisdictions are handling that different ways. I'm not sure how NY is handling, my only direct experience is how Delaware is handling it.

In Delaware there are exemptions to the ban for Fraternal organizations such as the Moose and the Elks and the Lions, Volunteer Fire Companies, and VFWs and American Legions.

Private clubs are practically non-existent in Delaware, but the few that are (mostly country clubs) are exempt.

Opening a private club that serves alcohol is practically impossible in Delaware. If for example Joe's Bar & Grill wanted to become a private club they would have to show prove that the organization has specific membership guidleines, is not open to the public, has a specific goal, and can produce a minimum of 6 months worth of meeting minutes in addition to their by-laws. And while doing all of that - they would be unable to have a liquor license, have to pay a $500 non-refundable application fee, and go through all kinds of other hoops and loops.

In other words, the types of private club you are proposing is pretty much out of the question in Delaware.

[Gabz]

Thank you for your very clear explanation. I understand the concepts, but not being an engineer or chemist, I occasionally have difficulty coming across as clear as I would like to.

However, if they establish a PEL, the whole thing becomes an issue of engineering, not behavior modification, defeating their purpose.

That pretty much sums up the situation.

[Labyrinthos]

The free air legislation was never intended to increase business. It was meant solely to to prevent rude and inconsiderate tobacco addicts from contaminating the air for non-addicts.

W R O N G ! ! ! The smoking ban in New York was enacted specifically to protect the health of employees who work in bars and restaurants, which is why the Federal District Court sitting in Syracuse may strike the law as unconstitutional under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. Why is that, you ask? Because Congress in creating OSHA decided that the Feds should occupy the areas of workplace safety in order to have uniformity across the country and as a result, the states may not pass workplace safety laws that conflict with federal law.

Tobacco is so addictive that it cuts the brain power of smokers in half...

Yup, look what smoking did to Judge Scalia... turned him into a walking idiot. < /sarcasm >

[bc2]

There was a few other non-smoking bars in town, plus a bunch of non-smoking restaurants and clubs.

I should have said he was the most prominant.

[bc2]

I hope you aren't really in charge of anything, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Private property is not silliness. Smoking is certainly offensive to some people. It matters not, because you are free to patronize, or not, whatever businesses you choose to. Welcome to a Free Country (for now). You show how little you know by calling them "open to the public". They do not have to justify anything. There is no force involved in you patronizing, or not, their business; you are free to go to non-smoking bars and restaurants, repair shops where the mechanics don't smoke, shoe stores that have no smoking policies, etc.

You have every right to open a restaurant, and burn tires after dinner. It is your private property! I have every right to be offended. What I *DO NOT* have the right to do is dictate, through the force of government, what you do on your private property.

You also show how little you know by stating the legislation was enacted to keep the air clean for other customers. You're wrong: the legislation was passed under the guise of protecting the air quality for EMPLOYEES.

Here is a novel idea: why don't you mind your own damn business on your property, and if you are offended by an activity taking place on someone elses property, remember that at any time you are free to leave.

If not, you should call the police and file kidnapping charges.

It's idiots like you that will soon enable these nannys to ban steaks, and ice cream, and fatty foods etc.

If you don't believe me check out the website of John Banzhaf, a simple Google search will get you there. You will be shocked.

That is, unless you are just another nazi who can't wait for total control of every aspect of society.

[Great Dane]

Just came back from a little trip out of town, stopped in at our favorite little restaurant to see how they were doing, waitress said, look around, the clients are running me ragged, there were 2 of them, the place seats appr 75, keep in mind, our ban has been in effect over 2 years, things are not getting better.

[Great Dane]

Waitresses have higher rates of lung and heart disease than any other traditionally female occupational group,

Besides, there is no mentioning of whether the study included smoking wait-staff, thus the study is a farce as always.

[SheLion]

Waitresses have higher rates of lung and heart disease than any other traditionally female occupational group,

I thought some of the AIR LINE FLIGHT ATTENDANTS claimed this same thing???!!!!