NC officially bans smoking in bars / restaurants

[Synovia]

You can always go to a non-smoking bar .

Before the bans in my state (was MA, now IL), I had never seen a non smoking bar, so no, that wasn't a choice.

 

[Laughing_Gnome_Invisible]

Before the bans in my state (was MA, now IL), I had never seen a non smoking bar, so no, that wasn't a choice.

But it was a choice of the owners of these bars. There has never been a law that enforces smoking

 

[jezter6]

Gonna bring it up agian: Where I lived at the time, there were no non smoking establishments. They didn't exist.

That's up to you and bar owners. It was perfectly legal to open a non-smoking bar. Just because there isn't one, doesn't mean you need to legislate on everyone else.

There's not a KFC near my house and I love chicken. Should I rally up my chicken loving friends and lobby the government to MANDATE a KFC on every corner? Or should I encourage someone to build one or do it myself?

 

[Synovia]

But it was a choice of the owners of these bars. There has never been a law that enforces smoking

Completely irrelevant. Its a public health law. At some point, it was legal to have rats running around your restaraunt. There was never a law advocating you had to have rats. Now its not. Its for the better health of the patrons.

MA allows "cigar bars", which can serve beer if they want. Go to one of those if you want to smoke. Open one of those if you want to have a smoking bar. Restaraunts are there to serve food, and it is their responsibility to serve the food in an environment that isn't toxic to their patrons.

 

[Boerderij_Kabouter]

If there were no non-smoking bars to begin with, is there a real demand for them???

 

[menschmaschine]

Completely irrelevant. Its a public health law. At some point, it was legal to have rats running around your restaraunt. There was never a law advocating you had to have rats. Now its not. Its for the better health of the patrons.

Putting the rat argument aside, which is not worth discussing IMO... limiting sodium, portion calories, the use of certain types of fats, not allowing Fatty Arbuckle to order that 5th double-cheeseburger, not allowing corporate food scientists to engineer foods to make you want to come back for more... those are all for the better health of patrons too. Where does it stop?

 

[Laughing_Gnome_Invisible]

There is no public demand for rats. Dumb argument.

 

[springer]

Putting the rat argument aside, which is not worth discussing IMO... limiting sodium, portion calories, the use of certain types of fats, not allowing Fatty Arbuckle to order that 5th double-cheeseburger, not allowing corporate food scientists to engineer foods to make you want to come back for more... those are all for the better health of patrons too. Where does it stop?

Fatty Arbuckle having a 5th double cheesburger has no effect on me sitting next to him.. unless he craps himself or farts while doing so.

 

[springer]

There is no public demand for rats. Dumb argument.

then why do the sell them in pet stores ? This thread is past its usefulness

 

[Braid]

I agree springer! Why can't everyone just be the lemings we're supposed to be and stand in line for our cup of the special Kool-Aid?

 

[Synovia]

If there were no non-smoking bars to begin with, is there a real demand for them???

Seeing how business in bars has gone way up, clearly.

 

[Synovia]

There is no public demand for rats. Dumb argument.

Its not about public demand though, isn't it about property rights? Shouldn't a restraunt owner have the right to have rats? Its a slipperly slope. Where does it end?

 

[HenryHill]

Its not about public demand though, isn't it about property rights? Shouldn't a restraunt owner have the right to have rats? Its a slipperly slope. Where does it end?

Clearly, it began at bathroom exhaust fans, and ultimately, it ends at homebrew.

 

[menschmaschine]

Fatty Arbuckle having a 5th double cheesburger has no effect on me sitting next to him.. unless he craps himself or farts while doing so.

Well, I guess you're right about that.

My point is that allowing the government to make decisions for me regarding what I can and can't do in what is healthy and what isn't would tell me that I'm just intellectually lazy and unwilling to bear self-responsibility.

 

[Synovia]

My point is that allowing the government to make decisions for me regarding what I can and can't do in what is healthy and what isn't would tell me that I'm just intellectually lazy and unwilling to bear self-responsibility.

Its not about what you can or can't do. Its about what you can or can't do to someone else.

 

[Ego Archive]

Before the bans in my state (was MA, now IL), I had never seen a non smoking bar, so no, that wasn't a choice.

People keep bringing this up, but it doesn't make any sense to me. You still have a choice, you just may need to go further then your used to, or open one yourself, or convince a local establishment with collective buying power.

In my city there are no resturants that serve Bunny. So is it the onerous of the collective resturant owners to start selling rabbit legs because I have a craving for deep fried longear? No, I can either go to someplace that has rabit on the menu...probably not in my state, or I can open up a rabbit serving resturant. If those aren't an option, then it is up to me to find a resturant that is receptive to doing a bunny special once a week, or something like that.

 

[menschmaschine]

Its not about what you can or can't do. Its about what you can or can't do to someone else.

Then don't go to a smoking establishment. Look, if you read some of my previous posts, you should be able to infer that I'm not of the opinion that smoking should be allowed anywhere and everywhere. But what bothers me is that the public was virtually silent, while laws were made under the guise of worker safety. The non-smoking majority sat back and let it happen because they (dare I say, we) don't like breathing in second-hand smoke in restaurants and other public establishments.

What else could that happen to now? That's essentially how prohibition started. I fully agree that indoor public smoking should have been significantly decreased. But as I said before, there were other ways to accomplish this than to counter-act the fundamental freedoms of enterprise we enjoy in this nation.

 

[niquejim]

Its not about public demand though, isn't it about property rights? Shouldn't a restraunt owner have the right to have rats? Its a slipperly slope. Where does it end?

While I quit smoking over a year ago, I feel that if I want to open a bar that caters to smokers who want to bring their pets I should be allowed to. We are way past half way down the slippery slope

Wow my post was on page 2 and we are talking from different sides of the argument