In Lexington, an ordinance was passed not too long ago that will ban smoking in most public buildings, including bars and restaurants. It takes effect sometime in October. I have mixed feelings about this, and I do not recall seeing a similar thread on it.
On the one hand, I think that private businesses should be allowed to permit smoking on their premises. If someone does not like the fact that the business allows smoking, they should not patronize it. I see very little need for there to be an outright ban, especially in bars. Several restaurants are already non-smoking, and more became so every year.
On the other hand, I do not smoke or chew tobacco. Secondhand smoke does not bother me when I am not eating or drinking, but tobacco is not particularly enjoyable, and is too expensive and addictive. I will love it when I am able to go into a Waffle House without having to breathe in smoke. I really will. So I dunno what to make of this.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
*wonders what state said Lexington is in*
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Kentucky, sorry. It may be in my user profile as well, but I am too drunk to check.
Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
Well, I live in California, and I really enjoy being able to go out and not have to deal with secondhand smoke. Not only am I an asthmatic, but I really detest the smell of cigarette smoke. Since it is a proven fact that secondhand smoke presents a health risk, I have no problem with banning smoking in public places. I'd be interested in knowing what smokers think of this.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I live in Ottawa and we already have a smoking ban. It's terrible for smokers, especially in the winter- you should see them freeze outside- but wonderful for people who don't want to breathe in smoke all the time.
Nice pink lungs!
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I think it's a foolish, unnecessary, big brother type law. Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
quote: I have no problem with banning smoking in public places.
If it's a space paid for by the public, go nuts. If it's a bar,restaurant, or other privately owned establishment, the portion of the public who doesn't like cigarette smoke can choose not to come into that person's business and take their cash elsewhere.
Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
Sorry, I used the wrong word. I meant that I don't have a problem banning smoking in privately owned places.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
In Florida they just passed an admendment that bans smoking in restaurants while smoking in "public" buildings has long been illegal. Personally this goes against my belief people should be able to do anything legal in their private places. However, I would also support tobbacco being illegalized. In fact I hate smoking so much it pretty much overrides any other ethical objections on my part. On the other hand it does increase smoke outside of restaurants which is almost as bothersome.
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
I can't take my shoes off in a restaurant or a bar, even though I keep my feet scrupulously clean. Why should people be able to go in and smoke?
Actually, though, I don't have as much of a problem with smokers as I do with individuals (men or women) who douse themselves in cologne or aftershave or perfume. A little is fine, but frankly it seems like some people actually bathe in the stuff. Yesterday I was at the ATM (outside in the open air, mind you), and a gentleman came up to use the next ATM. I don't know what he had on, but it set me off on a coughing fit that lasted until well after I had gotten back in my car. Smoke does that to me, as well, but usually not nearly as badly as scents do.
Posted by Toretha (Member # 2233) on :
I also support it. Ever since they banned smoking at my job, it's been a MAJOR relief to me, I can now go outside of the office safely, without worrying about smoke, and I am even able to eat lunch with the other people from maintenance, which I couldn't before, because they all smoked. Allowing smoking in resturants and such, when smoking doesn't do much but harm both smokers and people around them seems like a bad idea to me. But then, as another asthmatic, I'm prejudiced.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
We have the same new law in New York.
The rational for the law is not to protect the people who frequent the establishments, but rather the employees who have to be in their eight hours a day. One statistic they mention is that the average worker in a smoke filled restaurant or bar gets the equivelant of two packs of cigarettes a day. I see no problem forcing businesses to provide a safe environment for their workers, and second-hand smoke is a signifigant health risk.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)