No... I go out fairly often, and I've never been to a bar/club/pub that allowed smoking indoors.
Minnesota smokers act out
- Thread starter DBear
- Start date
No... I go out fairly often, and I've never been to a bar/club/pub that allowed smoking indoors.
sonorakitch
Overseas hunter
ROFL! Do you live in a cave?How do you think these places operated before? The reason for this type of legislation/regulation is because the market failed.
Can you give me one example where the "free market" has advanced the health interests of non-smokers? (in terms of public spaces* becoming non-smoking) I can't, at least not in the places I've lived. All the small steps forward... no-smoking sections, then no smoking in restaurants altogether, no smoking in airports, in other public places, almost uniformly done because of regulation.
Yes, you will find cases where the market played catch up, where some segment took it upon itself because a precedent was already set by regulation. But, almost always the leadership was from the need to regulate to protect non-smokers.
This paranoid fear of reasonable regulation is comical.
*in this sense "public" means open to the public, not governmentally owned.
Coincidentally, I do live in a large cave, but it is close to town and I do get cable news!
Anyways...I am not sure if you understand my point (or maybe I don't understand yours). The free market, in terms of dining and drinking establishments, have definetely not failed (prior to this legislation). Some restaurants would allow smoking, and said restaurants were frequented by smokers. Certain bars would not allow smoking, and those establishments would be frequented by non-smokers. The choice whether or not to dine at one establishment or another was left to the consumer. Now, you have bar owners fuming because the government is telling them what legal substances can be consumed on their premises. That is bull.
Why is there a need to protect non-smokers? Why can't they protect themselves from choosing which places to frequent?
Why can't a bar owner choose what legal substances can be consumed in his place of business? If the owner can refuse service to anyone, that no longer makes it public domain.
Who cares if a restaurant/bar owner doesn't protect the interests of non smokers in his establishment?
I agree with regulating tobacco use in government buildings and gathering places where there is no alternative. But with the free market of dining and bar sites, there is so much choice already that it seems foolish, and downright oppressive, to regulate tobacco use (a legal pastime) in these privately owned facitilities.
And really, how has the free market failed in this industry?
~Chris
Drinking and driving is a crime for a reason.
Smoking and driving is not.
and even if a bar has a high-tech air filtration system, it still is not allowed to allow smoking.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
Scenario A:
I walk into a bar and order a drink. The person next to me has a few cigarretes. At the end of the night, we go our separate ways.
Scenario B:
I walk into a bar and order a drink. The person next to me has a few drinks. At the end of the night, we go our separate ways.
Now, in which scenario have I inflicted the most harm on myself?
skadistic
Caomhanach
Let the free market decide!
Seriously let the establishments decide. People can always chose to go to the no smoking place if they don't like it.
Seriously let the establishments decide. People can always chose to go to the no smoking place if they don't like it.
Masquerouge
Deity
I don't know how it was in Ca before the ban, but in France, since all bars wanted to accommodate both smokers and non-smokers, it was impossible to find a single bar smoke-free. And that had been going on since 150+years. So how exactly did the free market solve that issue?
skadistic
Caomhanach
Id just like to point that you are indeed harming your self. You could always not go to the bar and sit next to the smoker.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
Yeah, I know. But sometimes you don't have a choice. And I am only pointing out that the damage inflicted by smoke is different from alcohol.
Masquerouge
Deity
But if there are no non-smoking places, then what?
Perfection
The Great Head.
In the bars that I go to, people are always in costume.
skadistic
Caomhanach
Open you own and cater to a nitch.
skadistic
Caomhanach
You always have the choice not to go in the first place. The guy hit by the drunk driver most likely didn't chose to the bar.
Masquerouge
Deity
That's way too much trouble for someone who just wants a nice drink, you know?
skadistic
Caomhanach
Then drink at home. You don't have to go out. You can chose to stay home. You can chose not to spend your money at a bar.
What you're describing is not this mythical free market so many people say will solve everything. If fact, you've just helped show why the idea of a "free market" is a myth. There are other reasons, but in this case, the fact that there's no real choice (your only choice if you want a smoke free bar is to not go to a bar) for the consumer is the point.
@sonor, not ditching your well-thought out reply, just want to reply in kind and haven't the time atm. Hopefully, I won't forget.
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
I'd like that. However, people will get angry that the state is interfering in their decisions about their health. And think of the money in tobacco and the people who earn an honest living in those companies.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
Smokers should just self-inject a lethal dose of cyanide and tobacco, and cut to the chase.
...
...
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
And that should be blamed on the smoker? So, because anti-smokers aren't willing to make an effort to start a bar where they can enjoy a night out, the smokers have to be limited.
I support the idea for non-smoking bars, besides smoking ones. Unfortunatly the antismoker doesn't grant me the same courtesy.
