Michigan bar owner fighting smoking ban.

[Millefleur]

Tell him to put on an Australian accent..

[PsychoSerenity]

I reject the proposition that the choice is "working in a smoky bar or not working at all." They can work somewhere else.

"Let them eat cake."

[Svartalf]

My beef with the smoking ban is that now, I'm threatened with choking and emphysema everytime I pass in front of a bar. Now that they can't light up inside, smokers take all the seats at the outside tables, which means honest folk can't find any, and they make the atmosphere unbreathable for passerbys who rarely have the option to cross the street.

[sandinista]

Interesting thread. I don't think there are any cigar bars in canaduh, you can't smoke anything anywhere really. Hotels, bars, restaurants, cabs, even some streets are non-smoking. I agree it is hypocritical considering the fact that driving is more than encouraged on a daily basis and car exhaust is as bad if not worse for humans than cigarette smoke. (kind of like advertising and encouraging drinking constantly yet putting people in jail for "drug" use) I think the reason they won't allow a smoking bar is that it would take business away from other bars. I remember a few years back when smoking was still allowed in areas of buildings. At my work there was a smoking room next to the cafeteria. There would be wall to wall people in this small room and a big empty cafeteria. The same with this food court in a mall, huge food court...empty, with a little smoking corner jam packed full of people. A smoking bar would be packed around here, no doubt, other bar owners would most likely switch to smoking.

[Geoff]

Interesting thread. I don't think there are any cigar bars in canaduh, you can't smoke anything anywhere really. Hotels, bars, restaurants, cabs, even some streets are non-smoking. I agree it is hypocritical considering the fact that driving is more than encouraged on a daily basis and car exhaust is as bad if not worse for humans than cigarette smoke. (kind of like advertising and encouraging drinking constantly yet putting people in jail for "drug" use) I think the reason they won't allow a smoking bar is that it would take business away from other bars. I remember a few years back when smoking was still allowed in areas of buildings. At my work there was a smoking room next to the cafeteria. There would be wall to wall people in this small room and a big empty cafeteria. The same with this food court in a mall, huge food court...empty, with a little smoking corner jam packed full of people. A smoking bar would be packed around here, no doubt, other bar owners would most likely switch to smoking.

It's interesting how things have changed here over the years. When i first started in the restaurant trade, back in the seventies, we had two separate restaurants (within the sane building), one smoking; one not. At first, the smoking one was by far the fullest, but things gradually shifted over a period of perhaps 10 years, and nowadays, even before the ban was introduced in 2007, non-smoking ones were far more popular. Pubs/bars, especially those that don't serve food, have been slower to follow suit, but the trend was still there even before '07.

In the 70's, roughly 60% of adults (in the UK) smoked; now it's down to around 20%.

[sandinista]

Things have changed here as well, but I'll tell you, if a smoking pub opened up it would be a gold mine and every other pub in the city would be fucking pissed off.

[klr]

Back when I was young (let's say the 1970's), there was widespread assumption in Ireland that smokers had the right to smoke almost anywhere. This wasn't the product of any long term public dialogue, civil movements or legislation. It just "was". Not too many people really thought about it too much, or if they did, not too many of them did anything about it. Non-smoking areas were rare.

Times change, attitudes change. The idea that someone's rights to do as they please should not impinge on the basic rights of others is now pretty well entrenched. People aren't allowed to make excessive noise in the presence of others (exact amount depending on context), so why should smoking be treated any differently?

As for giving people "choice", the experience here in Ireland was that this never really happened by itself. Inertia is a powerful force (I know, I know), and also a great many people were reluctant to make their premises non-smoking because of the perceived risk of going out on a limb and suffering financially.

Things have changed here as well, but I'll tell you, if a smoking pub opened up it would be a gold mine and every other pub in the city would be fucking pissed off.

SNAP! And that is exactly why the Irish ban is a blanket one. If a small minority of premises allowed smoking, they would get a serious amount of business - from the smoking minority. But many other businesses might me tempted to follow suit, on the grounds they were somehow losing out. It's a quite common reaction.

And all it takes is a small number of smokers in a given area to foul things up for a lot of other people. So that minority is quite capable of spreading out and taking us back to square one.

[Coito ergo sum]

I reject the proposition that the choice is "working in a smoky bar or not working at all." They can work somewhere else.

Convincing argument.

It wasn't an argument - it was identifying a fallacy in someone's argument - the fallacy of "false dilemma."

Not altogether false, over here at least, it's not that easy to get any bar job (unless you're an attractive girl...my son's been looking for ages!)

But, bar jobs aren't the only jobs in that skill-set.

[Coito ergo sum]

I reject the proposition that the choice is "working in a smoky bar or not working at all." They can work somewhere else.

"Let them eat cake."

Err...no. The acknowledgment that there are more options than "work in smoke" on the one hand and "be unemployed" on the other is just an acknowledgment of reality.

[Coito ergo sum]

Interesting thread. I don't think there are any cigar bars in canaduh, you can't smoke anything anywhere really. Hotels, bars, restaurants, cabs, even some streets are non-smoking. I agree it is hypocritical considering the fact that driving is more than encouraged on a daily basis and car exhaust is as bad if not worse for humans than cigarette smoke. (kind of like advertising and encouraging drinking constantly yet putting people in jail for "drug" use) I think the reason they won't allow a smoking bar is that it would take business away from other bars. I remember a few years back when smoking was still allowed in areas of buildings. At my work there was a smoking room next to the cafeteria. There would be wall to wall people in this small room and a big empty cafeteria. The same with this food court in a mall, huge food court...empty, with a little smoking corner jam packed full of people. A smoking bar would be packed around here, no doubt, other bar owners would most likely switch to smoking.

noGod forbid that people actually be allowed to have what they want....

[Coito ergo sum]

Interesting thread. I don't think there are any cigar bars in canaduh, you can't smoke anything anywhere really. Hotels, bars, restaurants, cabs, even some streets are non-smoking. I agree it is hypocritical considering the fact that driving is more than encouraged on a daily basis and car exhaust is as bad if not worse for humans than cigarette smoke. (kind of like advertising and encouraging drinking constantly yet putting people in jail for "drug" use) I think the reason they won't allow a smoking bar is that it would take business away from other bars. I remember a few years back when smoking was still allowed in areas of buildings. At my work there was a smoking room next to the cafeteria. There would be wall to wall people in this small room and a big empty cafeteria. The same with this food court in a mall, huge food court...empty, with a little smoking corner jam packed full of people. A smoking bar would be packed around here, no doubt, other bar owners would most likely switch to smoking.

It's interesting how things have changed here over the years. When i first started in the restaurant trade, back in the seventies, we had two separate restaurants (within the sane building), one smoking; one not. At first, the smoking one was by far the fullest, but things gradually shifted over a period of perhaps 10 years, and nowadays, even before the ban was introduced in 2007, non-smoking ones were far more popular. Pubs/bars, especially those that don't serve food, have been slower to follow suit, but the trend was still there even before '07.

In the 70's, roughly 60% of adults (in the UK) smoked; now it's down to around 20%.

I remember about 15 years ago, most bars allowed smoking and the idea that a law could be made to ban it seemed outlandish. In the town where I worked there was a bar or two that were smokeless and they did fine - stayed in business, anyway.

With 60-80% of the population not smoking, I would imagine that bars and restaurants would cater to that. If, however, smokers want to congregate at a bar that caters to them, I have no idea in the world why that ought not be allowed.

I mean - heck - how about have a smoking license, like a liquor license, and at least permit SOME bars that want to be cigar or cigarette friendly to do so. Limit the quantity of bars, or make it only places that only allow people over the drinking age to enter. Something.

The Puritantical Prohibitionist mood in 'merka these days is just downright scary. It's like we're back in the 20's, being ruled by teetotallers....

[Coito ergo sum]

Things have changed here as well, but I'll tell you, if a smoking pub opened up it would be a gold mine and every other pub in the city would be fucking pissed off.

SNAP! And that is exactly why the Irish ban is a blanket one. If a small minority of premises allowed smoking, they would get a serious amount of business - from the smoking minority. But many other businesses might me tempted to follow suit, on the grounds they were somehow losing out. It's a quite common reaction.

Well....if businesses that added smoking were, in fact, booming because they are smoking, wouldn't it be reasonable for another business to think that they could get a piece of that action too?

And all it takes is a small number of smokers in a given area to foul things up for a lot of other people. So that minority is quite capable of spreading out and taking us back to square one.

Smokers are, of course, part of the "us."

[MrJonno]

Everyone makes choices in life. Roofers are forced to choose between working in high places rather than on the ground. Landscapers have to choose between working out in the impossible heat here in Florida or not.

I would expect any employer of a roofer to make sure their employees are using decent safety equipement, are properly trained etc, with landscapers I would expect the employee to be given time for a break, given time off if they report being ill etc.

Employee obviously has some responsbility for their safety as well but its definitely shared with the employer

[Geoff]

Things have changed here as well, but I'll tell you, if a smoking pub opened up it would be a gold mine and every other pub in the city would be fucking pissed off.

SNAP! And that is exactly why the Irish ban is a blanket one. If a small minority of premises allowed smoking, they would get a serious amount of business - from the smoking minority. But many other businesses might me tempted to follow suit, on the grounds they were somehow losing out. It's a quite common reaction.

Well....if businesses that added smoking were, in fact, booming because they are smoking, wouldn't it be reasonable for another business to think that they could get a piece of that action too?

And all it takes is a small number of smokers in a given area to foul things up for a lot of other people. So that minority is quite capable of spreading out and taking us back to square one.

Smokers are, of course, part of the "us."

Well yeah, but as one of the smoking subset of "us", another aspect I haven't yet mentioned is that I welcome it partly because it's helped me to cut down. I can't produce figures, but anecdotally, I suspect a lot of people besides myself are smoking less simply because it's more inconvenient (not just in pubs, but on public transport, for example).
If the option of a smoking pub was there, I'd probably be tempted - I freely admit to having low willpower in that regard.

[klr]

Things have changed here as well, but I'll tell you, if a smoking pub opened up it would be a gold mine and every other pub in the city would be fucking pissed off.

SNAP! And that is exactly why the Irish ban is a blanket one. If a small minority of premises allowed smoking, they would get a serious amount of business - from the smoking minority. But many other businesses might me tempted to follow suit, on the grounds they were somehow losing out. It's a quite common reaction.

Well....if businesses that added smoking were, in fact, booming because they are smoking, wouldn't it be reasonable for another business to think that they could get a piece of that action too?

That's my point. So they start to "compete" for smokers, to the general detriment of non-smokers.

And all it takes is a small number of smokers in a given area to foul things up for a lot of other people. So that minority is quite capable of spreading out and taking us back to square one.

Smokers are, of course, part of the "us."

Point taken, but Geoff's point above is also relevant: Smoking is fiercely addictive, and a goodly proportion of smokers welcome the fact that their opportunities for smoking are restricted.