Smoking bans result in higher drunk driving fatality rates.

[jim schmidt]

I'm not really a fan of smoking bans, but I do think that citizens can rightfully decide to ban things from public spaces. Cigarettes might not be the best example, but if the personal freedom is shitting on the table in restaurants, it's easier to see the necessity of societal norms.

This is the problem with anarchist philosophies -- taken to the logical end, they serve to infringe rather than to enable.

[jiffy]

You would think that supply and demand would solve the smoking ban problem.

If there are so many people that don't like smoke then a non-smoking bar would do good business against smoking bars.

[PhilB]

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

I'm not really a fan of smoking bans, but I do think that citizens can rightfully decide to ban things from public spaces. Cigarettes might not be the best example, but if the personal freedom is shitting on the table in restaurants, it's easier to see the necessity of societal norms.

This is the problem with anarchist philosophies -- taken to the logical end, they serve to infringe rather than to enable.

Uh huh. Good thing then no one around here is an anarchist, isn't it, Captain Strawman?

Originally Posted by jiffy

You would think that supply and demand would solve the smoking ban problem.

If there are so many people that don't like smoke then a non-smoking bar would do good business against smoking bars.

Given a free market to work in, that would probably be the common result, thus meeting the needs of everyone without violating the rights of anyone. But then the bureaucrats and do-gooder busybodies wouldn't have anything to do, and we can't have that now, can we?

PhilB

[jim schmidt]

Originally Posted by PhilB

Uh huh. Good thing then no one around here is an anarchist, isn't it, Captain Strawman?
PhilB

Walks like a duck...

Though I don't personally favor the idea, but there is simply nothing wrong with a community deciding that it doesn't want to mix smoke (or shit) with its food. I realize this notion might be hard for a me-firster to grasp, but it seems fairly obvious to me.

[bush]

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

Walks like a duck...

Though I don't personally favor the idea, but there is simply nothing wrong with a community deciding that it doesn't want to mix smoke (or shit) with its food. I realize this notion might be hard for a me-firster to grasp, but it seems fairly obvious to me.

There is also nothing wrong with a community deciding that it doesn't see a problem with mixing smoke (or shit) with its food.

[psudy]

They passed a smoking ban here recently. Now I am a smoker(unfortunalty), but I don't smoke in restrants and rarely go to bars(twins killed that(and I don't smoke around my kids)), but the whole idea of government stepping in and telling private business what they can and can't do is BS in this instance. People have a choice to go to whatever establishment they choose, and private business owners should have the choice to decide if they want to market to the smokers,or the nonsmokers. City hall even took it a step further by not allowing it in private clubs(Vet clubs) and hotels. Now the local hotels have to renovate their smoking rooms to become compliant, which costs a lot of money. City commissioners added this admendment at the last meeting and didn't allow any public comment. Its funny because the do gooders are not even the ones that frequent the bars. They could have done it with a little more tact. I don't think anyone would have had a problem with them banning it in resturants or other eating establishments, but the broad sword had to sweep.

[BigBadBoom]

Originally Posted by psudy

They passed a smoking ban here recently. Now I am a smoker(unfortunalty), but I don't smoke in restrants and rarely go to bars(twins killed that(and I don't smoke around my kids)), but the whole idea of government stepping in and telling private business what they can and can't do is BS in this instance. People have a choice to go to whatever establishment they choose, and private business owners should have the choice to decide if they want to market to the smokers,or the nonsmokers. City hall even took it a step further by not allowing it in private clubs(Vet clubs) and hotels. Now the local hotels have to renovate their smoking rooms to become compliant, which costs a lot of money. City commissioners added this admendment at the last meeting and didn't allow any public comment. Its funny because the do gooders are not even the ones that frequent the bars. They could have done it with a little more tact. I don't think anyone would have had a problem with them banning it in resturants or other eating establishments, but the broad sword had to sweep.

Mark this day, I agree with psudy.

Currently they are trying to push this in Michigan. My main concern is that the business owner who takes all the risk to open up a business has the decision to be a smoking or non-smoking establishment taken out of their hands.

[Tripped1]

Originally Posted by BigBadBoom

Mark this day, I agree with psudy.

Currently they are trying to push this in Michigan. My main concern is that the business owner who takes all the risk to open up a business has the decision to be a smoking or non-smoking establishment taken out of their hands.

New Mexico used to allow bars and business that did over 60% of their business in booze allow smoking.

THEN that jackass Bill Richardson decided to run for president. Of course, this is the same tard that said that "We need to revise the restrictions on travel to Mexico, it's safe for US Citizens." the day before another Mexican Police Chief was killed and there were 6 violent murders just in Jaurez the next day.

Why do we elect stupid people again?

[HighsideSV]

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

Now there's an unintended consequence for ya. But it seems transitional. When every place bans smoking (which I don't support) the incentive to drive far goes away.

Conversly, one of the arguments in favor of passing the bans is that they would help bars and restraurants by making them a more pleasant place for a wider cross-section of people. More people going to bars = more people driving home afterwards.