Damn anti smoking fanatics! Bars can't serve food and allow smoking? WTF!

[MRT144]

I definitely think most of this stems from the status quo of smoking in places and it being viewed as a historical right since the dawn of time. the idea that it can be regulated and changed is fundamentally distressing to the few people who enjoy that right, like the loss of slavery was to many people.

[Asher]

Originally posted by MRT144
I definitely think most of this stems from the status quo of smoking in places and it being viewed as a historical right since the dawn of time. the idea that it can be regulated and changed is fundamentally distressing to the few people who enjoy that right, like the loss of slavery was to many people.

yup

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by MRT144
I definitely think most of this stems from the status quo of smoking in places and it being viewed as a historical right since the dawn of time. the idea that it can be regulated and changed is fundamentally distressing to the few people who enjoy that right, like the loss of slavery was to many people.

Oh god.

Slavery?

Next will be talking about gay, smoking slaveowners.

ACK!

[MRT144]

you are taking the analogy too literally in the actualy actions being displayed in the status quo.

the similarities are how engrained the status quo is and how shaking it was to change that. and the past has shown that jarring and engrained status quos can be changed for the benefit of many people.

[rah]

If you agree that an all smokers club doesn't harm any non-smokers, Your arguements are already lost.

Everything else is an economic issue that can be resolved, except for the fact that you guys are selfish and don't want anyplace to allow smoking. The government has determined who is allowed to make what for years.

Who's the selfish one here.

For those that say not enough places would ban it unless there was a total ban. I say irrelevant.
I was only asking for 10% and got jumped on by all saying it had to be 0%. What a joke.

[MRT144]

if being selfish was dissallowed then our entire economic and political system would be thrown out

[Jon Miller]

No. The point is that smokers are unreasonable. If there is a nonsmoking bar, and a smoking bar, they will always want to go to the smoking bar. Thos of us who don't smoke are more reasonble.. so we end up going to the smoking bar and not having as good of a time.

Bars know this, so there are very few nonsmoking bars.. (I had to go to a whole different area of the DC metro area to find one before the smoking band) because of this, there are a lot less options. And nonsmokers, even when they are going out by themselves (with no smokers in attendance) still have to go to a smoking bar because there are no nonsmoking bars close by (like within 30 miles).

We get tired of that, and choose to legislate it. It is a lot easier to vote for something than to argue with your freind about whether to go to the bar down the street, or go 45 minutes away to the nonsmoking bar.

Bars (Almost) all went smoking because they knew that nonsmokers would go to them anyways (although grumbling) and smokers would go out of their way not to go to them. If there had been real choice (nonsmoking bars and smoking bars all in the same area) I think you would find that the nonsmoking bars would do OK for themselves.

JM

[Asher]

Originally posted by rah
If you agree that an all smokers club doesn't harm any non-smokers, Your arguements are already lost.

No, that's ridiculous to say.

I agree that all smokers clubs for smokers only should be allowed, but that's by a minor detail.

The overwhelming argument in favor of this stands. Whether you think both gay sex brothels and all-smoking clubs should be permitted is a new issue. By default, smoking in public indoor places should not be permitted.

[Jon Miller]

But we would still be pressured to go to teh smoking bar when we went out with our freinds.

You smokers really are unreasonable.. having to quit what you are doing every hour or two to go out and have a smoke.

Many of you don't even smoke in your houses.. (which I think is some of the interest in having smomking bars)

At least in DC/MD I think that the Hookah type places still have smoking allowed inside.

JM

[Arrian]

But we would still be pressured to go to teh smoking bar...

Meh, deal with it. Have a backbone. Say no.

I was a very reasonable smoker. I smoked outside, and generally made an effort to get downwind of any non-smokers around.

-Arrian

[MRT144]

meh, deal with democracy

[Jon Miller]

If there had been bars close by, I think I could have had some backbone. I forced us to go to a college bar last Tuesday so I could check out the chicks.. although it was a bit loud for talking after 11pm.

It is just that it isn't reasonable to go 45 minutes to a bar, especially when a couple people in the group don't want to go there (and everyone would rather go 5 minutes away).

As you can see by the votes, a lot of us are tired of it.

JM

[MRT144]

so the flow of this entire discussion has been:

smoker: dont go to a bar if there is smoking
non:its inconvienent
s:too bad
n:its easier to just have the minority inconvienced for their once an hour consumption decision
s: its a property rights issue too, owners have the right to determine this
n: but there are many cases where property owners and business owners dont have that overarching right and thats determined by the public
s: well it shouldnt be that way
n: well thats the way
s: well im going back to the beginning with it being a choice

[Drake Tungsten]

The smokers have some non-smokers on their side, too.

[Ben Kenobi]

It is just that it isn't reasonable to go 45 minutes to a bar, especially when a couple people in the group don't want to go there (and everyone would rather go 5 minutes away).

So what you are saying is the convenience of a bar 5 minutes away trumps the ills of a smoking bar.

If driving another 40 minutes to go to a bar outweighs having to breathe in second hand smoke, then I don't know why you are complaining. It is your decision to go with your friends to a smoking bar.

As you can see by the votes, a lot of us are tired of it.

Obviously not tired enough. Why should businesses be forced to comply with your desires when they will lose money by doing so?