Prohibition Returns!

[Ó Flannagáin]

Giddy up mates! Finally hearing rational thought on a message board - I never thought it could happen.

Smoking bans are by far the worst idea I've ever heard. I mean, I don't mind if it's McDonald's or even a classy restaraunt, but a f-ing BAR? Everyone chain smokes in the bar, and if you don't somke, you still come out to the bar to have a good time. Sadly, they're using the 'employee' as the scapegoat in this thing. There are plenty of waitress/bartender jobs out there, and if you don't want to deal with the smoke, find a nice place like McD's to work. You shouldn't go discriminate against smokers because a dumb ass employee who doesn't want second hand smoke wants to work in a smoking establishment.

I'm all fine for non-smoking areas, even fully non-smoking places. But let that decision up to the owner of the place. If he wants to cater to smokers, then he should be able to. If a self righteous MFer wants to have a non-smoking bar, then all the whiny waitresses can go work there with the whiny customers who think smoking is the devil.

Don't like the smell of my smoke? Screw off. I don't like the smell of your 'too much perfume' or your 'haven't taken a bath in 3 days', but I don't have the right to shut you bastards out of places I want to go.

What ever happened to one of our greatest freedoms: the freedom of choice? I choose to smoke, but it seems that freedom is outweighted by a couple of butthole dingleberries who can't bother to choose NOT to go near a bunch of smokers. Nope, they have to come in and invade our establishments and then cry about it.

All this crap about alcohol is even worse. Getting arrested for PI inside a bar. Guess what, it's not illegal for a cop to arrest you for PI in the bar because it's a PUBLIC BAR. That's what P in PI stands for. They are basically begging you to come out and get arrested, and that's frickin crazy.

I'm all for private establishments like the Moose and the American Legion. Places where police can't just come in and start arresting people because it's private property. Police are not allowed in your club without a WARRANT! Now, let's get together and form more of these places and keep the namby pamby non-smoker non-alcohol people out of our way!

Viva la revolution!!!

I agree, mostly. I think it should be up to the owner of the restaurant or bar, but comparing stinky perfume to cigarette smoke is a big difference. I just quit smoking after 10 years (2 months ago) for health reasons, and the fact is, second hand smoke has adverse effects on your health. No two ways about it.

 

[Evan!]

Giddy up mates! Finally hearing rational thought on a message board - I never thought it could happen.

Smoking bans are by far the worst idea I've ever heard. I mean, I don't mind if it's McDonald's or even a classy restaraunt, but a f-ing BAR? Everyone chain smokes in the bar, and if you don't somke, you still come out to the bar to have a good time. Sadly, they're using the 'employee' as the scapegoat in this thing. There are plenty of waitress/bartender jobs out there, and if you don't want to deal with the smoke, find a nice place like McD's to work. You shouldn't go discriminate against smokers because a dumb ass employee who doesn't want second hand smoke wants to work in a smoking establishment.

I'm all fine for non-smoking areas, even fully non-smoking places. But let that decision up to the owner of the place. If he wants to cater to smokers, then he should be able to. If a self righteous MFer wants to have a non-smoking bar, then all the whiny waitresses can go work there with the whiny customers who think smoking is the devil.

Don't like the smell of my smoke? Screw off. I don't like the smell of your 'too much perfume' or your 'haven't taken a bath in 3 days', but I don't have the right to shut you bastards out of places I want to go.

What ever happened to one of our greatest freedoms: the freedom of choice? I choose to smoke, but it seems that freedom is outweighted by a couple of butthole dingleberries who can't bother to choose NOT to go near a bunch of smokers. Nope, they have to come in and invade our establishments and then cry about it.

All this crap about alcohol is even worse. Getting arrested for PI inside a bar. Guess what, it's not illegal for a cop to arrest you for PI in the bar because it's a PUBLIC BAR. That's what P in PI stands for. They are basically begging you to come out and get arrested, and that's frickin crazy.

I'm all for private establishments like the Moose and the American Legion. Places where police can't just come in and start arresting people because it's private property. Police are not allowed in your club without a WARRANT! Now, let's get together and form more of these places and keep the namby pamby non-smoker non-alcohol people out of our way!

Viva la revolution!!!

Of course, the whole idea of a place of business becoming "public" and therefore being placed under the same classification as a subway car, is idiotic to begin with. I've discussed this ad nauseum WRT to the DC smoking ban...there are a few things, like kitchen sanitation and emergency exit access, which sort of make sense for the bureaucracy to oversee in a place where anyone can enter. I mean, putting the onus on every customer to figure out whether they have a safe route out in case of fire is kind of ridiculous. But there's no "hidden danger" when you walk into a bar full of smoke. You know, as soon as the cloud hits your face, what the deal is, and any rational adult can easily make that decision on his/her own.

And as for the "workplace safety" argument, that too is bunk. There are plenty of dangerous occupations...ice fisherman...police officer...lumberjack. But plenty of people still choose to do those jobs, despite the danger. Why is working among second hand smoke any different?

The government should not be allowed to designate businesses as "public spaces" (and all the iron-handed regulation that comes with that designation) merely because people voluntarily frequent the place...and drinking in a bar should not be cause for "public intoxication".

 

[Evan!]

I agree, mostly. I think it should be up to the owner of the restaurant or bar, but comparing stinky perfume to cigarette smoke is a big difference. I just quit smoking after 10 years (2 months ago) for health reasons, and the fact is, second hand smoke has adverse effects on your health. No two ways about it.

Of course this is true, but I think his point was, if you don't like it, you are always free to leave and/or petition the owner of the establishment to adopt a partial or whole non-smoking policy. Nobody's denying the problems stemming from inhaling second hand smoke 6 days a week as a waitress, but at the same time, nobody's denying the problems stemming from crab fishing in the arctic ocean either. It's just that smoking is seen as "evil" and smokers are seen as second class citizens, so they get walked all over. And this coming from someone who hates cigarette smoke and has only had one cig in his whole life (and then, it was only while I was on the nose candy ).

 

[Aiko]

Actually its true, Texas passed a law allowing PI's to be given in a bar. I worked in a bar when all this was going on, I believe it was latter removed from the legislation, because of all the pissed off people and lawyers.

Thanks for the backup, I did actually see it, but no way to prove it. Yes, I think they recently stopped doing it, the bar owners were freaking!
As Jetser6 says:

Viva la revolution!!! :rockin:​

 

[Ó Flannagáin]

Of course this is true, but I think his point was, if you don't like it, you are always free to leave and/or petition the owner of the establishment to adopt a partial or whole non-smoking policy. Nobody's denying the problems stemming from inhaling second hand smoke 6 days a week as a waitress, but at the same time, nobody's denying the problems stemming from crab fishing in the arctic ocean either. It's just that smoking is seen as "evil" and smokers are seen as second class citizens, so they get walked all over. And this coming from someone who hates cigarette smoke and has only had one cig in his whole life (and then, it was only while I was on the nose candy ).

I agree 100%. I just hate comparisons that are not legit... i.e. perfume to cig smoke. I would still hang out in smoky bars and I'll sneak a cig if I'm getting good and drunk, and I hate having to step outside for it

 

[jezter6]

I agree 100%. I just hate comparisons that are not legit... i.e. perfume to cig smoke. I would still hang out in smoky bars and I'll sneak a cig if I'm getting good and drunk, and I hate having to step outside for it

It was the comparison I made on my rant, but the theory is the same. I can find something (anything) that I don't like about YOU that causes me distress (maybe won't kill me, but 99% of these tards are blaming 2nd hand smoke when what they really mean is "OMG it smells like nasty cigs").

I don't think a non-smoker coming in to eat dinner once a week at a bar where I smoke is going to die of 2nd hand smoke because we are in the same place. I don't think that 1 dinner session a week is enough to even cause physical harm, but that's for a doctor to decide.

The point is, it's one-way discrimination. We can't discriminate back at you, but you can sure come and discriminate against me for doing something I am LEGALLY allowed to do. You want to outlaw tobacco, FINE. I'll quit, or smoke it illegaly. But telling me I can smoke, but now I can't smoke here, I can't smoke there, then it's just going around the fact that they are trying to outlaw tobacco, but in a roundabout manner. It's backhanded. Just come out and say it, and see if you can get it passed, but don't try to come up with BS reasons why I can't smoke (like In my own car on public/gov't property).

 

[Ó Flannagáin]

It was the comparison I made on my rant, but the theory is the same. I can find something (anything) that I don't like about YOU that causes me distress (maybe won't kill me, but 99% of these tards are blaming 2nd hand smoke when what they really mean is "OMG it smells like nasty cigs").

I don't think a non-smoker coming in to eat dinner once a week at a bar where I smoke is going to die of 2nd hand smoke because we are in the same place. I don't think that 1 dinner session a week is enough to even cause physical harm, but that's for a doctor to decide.

The point is, it's one-way discrimination. We can't discriminate back at you, but you can sure come and discriminate against me for doing something I am LEGALLY allowed to do. You want to outlaw tobacco, FINE. I'll quit, or smoke it illegaly. But telling me I can smoke, but now I can't smoke here, I can't smoke there, then it's just going around the fact that they are trying to outlaw tobacco, but in a roundabout manner. It's backhanded. Just come out and say it, and see if you can get it passed, but don't try to come up with BS reasons why I can't smoke (like In my own car on public/gov't property).

I want a cigarette after all this talk. If this manager dude goes outside the cafe I'm at for another smoke, I might just have to bum one.

 

[kram]

Truly fascinating discussion. i have little to add to the generally sober and reasoned responses already posted.

MADD of course had a laudiuble cause, to stop people from carelessly drinking and driving. They have acheived this (years ago), responsible, thinking people don't drink and drive. presently dui accidents are caused (for the most part) by people who are irresponsible and thoughtless, (people who will drink and drive no matter what the laws are, sometimes because they're alcoholics and need help, other times becasue they'er A**holes) and by young, immature people who drink and drive (a tragedy, but it is due to being young and immature not alcohol).

MADD however, has to continue to deliver successes in their cause by fighting drinking because otherwise they have no function. They must create a reason for their existence and push ever closer to prohibition. it's much like a bad government program, once the original goal is acheived its no longer needed, so the goal has to move because peoples careers depend on keeping it alive.

... and politicians, well they're too afraid of looking bad to refute the false argument (so you're in favor of drunk drivers killing our children?) .

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

Interesting statistic: The use of automated traffic enforcement, such as photo-radar reduces drunk driving!

They pull cops off the road and let the machines do the "policing". And just like that, the number of DUI arrests go down by about 30%!!! What a great way to keep your revenue up, reduce your labor costs, and show the public that you're actually having an impact!!!

A good read on the subject of riding drunk...

http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/streetsurvival/riding_drunk/index.html

 

[jezter6]

I'd seriously love to know how automated enforcement actually does anything to reduce drunk driving.

I'm sorry, but automated law enforcement turns this country into a police state where you are constantly being monitored. I didn't live in Soviet Russia, and I'd like to continue NOT living as a communist thank you.

Automated enforcement options lead to more people attempting obsfucation techniques to try and get around the enforcement and do illegal acts without being caught.

Why do you think people buy radar detectors and anti-radar license plate covers? So that they can break the law and not get caught.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

I'd seriously love to know how automated enforcement actually does anything to reduce drunk driving.

It's a fact. Where photo-enforcement of speed limits is used instead of actual police officers, the number of DUI arrests is reduced. Just ask any politician. That's proof that the streets are becoming safer!

 

[WortMonger]

Don't know about you, but I would take the ticket for speeding/red light/whatever through the mail just to not have to talk to an officer. I am always respectful (sir yes sir, sir no sir) but they are all intimidating for the fact is is always their word against yours. I don't speed, and obey all the traffic laws, but even talking to an off duty cop makes me nervous.

 

[Alamo_Beer]

Thats why we need more/better public transit... When I was in Germany I got ripproarin drunk a number of times and just took the subways/busses back to the hotel/hostel whatever...

I realize that the US is MUCH larger than Germany though and it would be very difficult for it to work in places like Texas but...still something. Why do the busses stop running so early? I mean, I'd ride them.

Better yet, cops should become a free taxi service

 

[uglygoat]

Viva la revolution!!!

this is really what it is eventually going to boil down to, if you want to change anything in this country.

i think even old thomas jefferson said the liberty tree needs to be watered or sprinkled with blood from time to time. it's been a long drought by my count.

takes home brew equipment and heads for the hills...

 

[jezter6]

It's a fact. Where photo-enforcement of speed limits is used instead of actual police officers, the number of DUI arrests is reduced. Just ask any politician. That's proof that the streets are becoming safer!

Nail hit. Right on the head. Of course it reduces the number of DUI arrests. Why? Because you get a speeding ticket and can continue to drive drunk because you didn't get a DUI.

Hrmm...maybe I *am* beginning to like the police state idea. :cross:

 

[WortMonger]

Nail hit. Right on the head. Of course it reduces the number of DUI arrests. Why? Because you get a speeding ticket and can continue to drive drunk because you didn't get a DUI.

Hrmm...maybe I *am* beginning to like the police state idea. :cross:

EXACTLY!!!! lol No Cop, No Stop

I'm not saying I want a police state, cell phones are just as good with concerned citizens. I have called in several concerns before, they were probably just tired but...... who knows. They were all over the road.

 

[Dude]

Thats why we need more/better public transit... When I was in Germany I got ripproarin drunk a number of times and just took the subways/busses back to the hotel/hostel whatever...

I realize that the US is MUCH larger than Germany though and it would be very difficult for it to work in places like Texas but...still something. Why do the busses stop running so early? I mean, I'd ride them.

Better yet, cops should become a free taxi service

So what good would that do? The way some of these guys are talking, you could get a ticket for walking to the bus stop. Or waiting at the bus stop.

I still don't believe some of these stories--I am sure their were extenuating circumstances that got these guys in trouble. You have to be acting drunk to get noticed by a cop. You have to be doing something out of the ordinary to get noticed. No cop is going to go through with a PI charge for someone near a .06 unless that person is being a dick or something. Just my .02.

 

[Alamo_Beer]

Just my .02.

Be carefull...that .02 could turn into a .08!

Yeah, I guess my point is a bit moot then...still if your sloppy drunk waiting for a bus it's better (in a cop's eyes...at least I'd hope) than being buzzed and behind the wheel

 

[shafferpilot]

I still don't believe some of these stories--I am sure their were extenuating circumstances that got these guys in trouble. You have to be acting drunk to get noticed by a cop. You have to be doing something out of the ordinary to get noticed. No cop is going to go through with a PI charge for someone near a .06 unless that person is being a dick or something. Just my .02.

Believe whatever you want to. Why would these guys lie? If those people were really being a pain the a$$, they would have been charged with something other than PI (ie disturbing the piece, public menacing, etc.). The reality is that most small towns and municipalities live on the income from tickets written by cops. Almost none of them actually give quotas to their officers, but don't be fooled into thinking that means they don't exist. When I go into the city (where cops actually ARE only trying to keep things safe), I don't even get blinked at by cops, even if I am speeding a bit. But out in the suburbs I get pulled over regularly by cops that are just "checking". That means they are prowling for any ticketable offenses. Just go to one of their court dates and look around. A couple hundred people are there to pay on average $150 a person for crap like burned out tail lights, and not fully stopping at stop signs. I've said it before and I'll said it again: If you want to know why someone (or some entity) does anything the way they do, just follow the dollar signs!

 

[Buford]

Well, think about it: when's the last time you saw a politician propose a bill that increased our freedoms?

Actually, there was a bill introduced last session in the VA General Assembly by Morgan Griffith that would have no longer made non-smoking sections in smoking-allowed restaurants mandatory, but it would have reversed the signage requirements from "no smoking" to "smoking permitted". That was a bit of a compromise with the anti-smoking lobby but it would have left the choice with the business in question and done away with a govt. mandated rule on no-smoking sections. Interesting thing about it is Griffith himself is allergic to tobacco smoke but he wants to leave the choice up to the owners of the restaurants and not the state.

The bill got to Gov. Kaine, who then completely gutted it and turned it into a blanket smoking ban. His crusade led to the GA rejecting his changes and Griffith saying that no other anti-smoking measure will have a chance as long as he is governor due to that stunt. We were left with the status quo, no ban but mandatory no-smoking sections if smoking is allowed.

 

[WortMonger]

So what good would that do? The way some of these guys are talking, you could get a ticket for walking to the bus stop. Or waiting at the bus stop.

I still don't believe some of these stories--I am sure their were extenuating circumstances that got these guys in trouble. You have to be acting drunk to get noticed by a cop. You have to be doing something out of the ordinary to get noticed. No cop is going to go through with a PI charge for someone near a .06 unless that person is being a dick or something. Just my .02.

Ok, first I hate to go to clubs/loud smelly bars. In my little town, they will and do wait outside the door and even with a designated driver will take you to jail. If by meaning being a dick, you mean asking why they would like for you to wait until they can go down the line and talk to you, then yeah, I guess you deserve it. I have seen this since I was in college here 10 years ago. My roommate now got one leaving the bowling alley and doesn't own a car. His underage, non-drinking girlfriend was walking with him out the door and they ask politely, "Sir have you had anything to drink tonight?" Well, leaving the bar it is hard to lie, especially when you don't think you are going to be getting in any trouble (designated driver) he said yes sir. The cop didn't even ask him how many, just said he was going to jail. My jaw dropped. I hadn't been drinking so I was safe (well it is officer's discretion so as safe as one would think they were). No sobriety tests, nothing! Try to argue all the points how you are being responsible, and they just have that same sh1teating grin as they push your head into the car. Come here and I can prove it, any night of the week. They get their fill and leave. Sorta a buffalo theory, only you have no idea when to leave to be safe. It really, really sucks. Then they post in the local paper how many arrest for PI they had and it looks horrible. They ask for more money to "combat" this "growing" problem. "Statistically", we have a horrible problem with drunks in this town. Well of course, no way to test if they are "drunk". They are already under arrest and tests aren't necessary. Then they tell you, well it's only a $150 ticket and a night in jail. Insult to injury. Maybe this is why I am so biased in my opinion about the police. It is just plain wrong on so many levels. I'll tell you this too, we have a training facility and get cops from all over in my little town. They all hang out at the new Applebee's. Most of the older servers quit because they had to serve these pricks. If I were a good cop in this town, I wouldn't eat at Applebee's.

 

[Evan!]

Actually, there was a bill introduced last session in the VA General Assembly by Morgan Griffith that would have no longer made non-smoking sections in smoking-allowed restaurants mandatory, but it would have reversed the signage requirements from "no smoking" to "smoking permitted". That was a bit of a compromise with the anti-smoking lobby but it would have left the choice with the business in question and done away with a govt. mandated rule on no-smoking sections. Interesting thing about it is Griffith himself is allergic to tobacco smoke but he wants to leave the choice up to the owners of the restaurants and not the state.

The bill got to Gov. Kaine, who then completely gutted it and turned it into a blanket smoking ban. His crusade led to the GA rejecting his changes and Griffith saying that no other anti-smoking measure will have a chance as long as he is governor due to that stunt. We were left with the status quo, no ban but mandatory no-smoking sections if smoking is allowed.

Huh...I had no idea that that went down...I wonder if Griffith was doing that knowing full well that Kaine would rip it to shreds later on. Luckily we live in a state in tobacco country, so I don't see a ban on the horizon, as much as the busybodies would love it...after all, they want the government to do everything for them. Find a place that voluntarily prohibits smoking? That's too much work!

...but I was being a little bit hyperbolic when I said that. Sure, once in awhile, that "one in a million" politician (see: Ron Paul) will introduce libertypromoting measures, but rarely do they make it through the legislature to become law.

 

[Evan!]

I still don't believe some of these stories--I am sure their were extenuating circumstances that got these guys in trouble. You have to be acting drunk to get noticed by a cop. You have to be doing something out of the ordinary to get noticed. No cop is going to go through with a PI charge for someone near a .06 unless that person is being a dick or something. Just my .02.

These stories of predatory PI arrests outside (or inside) bars aren't just old wives tales. They're well-documented, and the cops won't deny what they've done. I know it sounds pretty crazy, but it happens more than we'd like to think it does. All a cop has to do is suspect drinking, and bam, you spend the night in jail and pay the jurisdiction a bunch of money.

 

[Dude]

I think the hold-up I'm having is that these seem to be isolated events. Possibly the rules are enforced mroe strictly in these areas because of prior problems. College towns, rednecks, etc. I don't know.

I'm sticking to my guns, their is always a second side to the story. You just don't get popped while you walk out of a bar with a ride to jail and a fine for having one beer. Something does not add up. Again, the only thing I can concur logically is that it may be from prior incidents in that city, repeat offenders, whatever.

One sip of alcohol and I can go to jail and get a fine? Sorry, I just don't see that standing up in court. I'd demand a blood test, and I'd take that evidence in front of a judge in a second.

I know for certain if I lived in Ada, OK, I'd be all over my congressman like white on rice. That is ridiculous, it goes as far as cruel and unusual punishment and a form of entrapment.

Just like sleeping in your car with your keys under the tire. That could be fought in court for illegal seizure or something. You had no ability to move the car, the cops couldn't prove otherwise. Unless there is strong evidence of a problem, a case like that would get dropped in court.

 

[Dude]

Further proof to my theory that their are always 2 sides to the story, the public intoxication law in TX states that the definition of "Public intoxication" is .08 or more. This took 10 seconds on a google search to find the law.

Something isn't adding up here guys.

 

[Ó Flannagáin]

I dunno about one beer, but my friend was in Alabama, piss drunk, and walking home... stumbling, when he got busted. It was the stumbling that made the cops questions him. When they saw he was drunk, they took him to jail. He did not attack anyone, curse at them, or anything against the law other than being drunk... in public.

 

[uglygoat]

and i've picked many of my friends up off the ground, in plain view of cops in cleveland oh, stuffed them in the car and drove off, with out them giving me a second glance. sometimes they'll ask, 'is he ok' to which i reply, 'yep, he's fine' and end of conversation. might be the local, might also be how many drunks stumble around cleveland oh, might be how you respond to the cops too...

 

[WortMonger]

The only prior incidents would be that they don't like drinking in this town and have a church on every corner (I am Christian just showing how much overly-so the town seems to be). The more they pop people the less business the bars get and they shut down. Then two more open up and they start on them. I don't know what the laws are literally in Oklahoma, but if the judges and lawyers all say the same thing, one would assume they are f*&ked up. I know they (cops) are never afraid to openly say they don't have to give you any type of test. If they know you have been drinking (no definition other than drinking) then they can take you to jail if you are in the public. You can fight them in court, but the judge I talked to even said, "It's their word against yours, and you have no idea what they put in their report." They will tell you it is "easier" and less trouble to just pay the fine and go on. They even go so far as to say it isn't right, I can't believe this from a district judge (who doesn't handle these anyway). Even my dad says, well cousin Eric was just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I asked where is the right place, and he said apparently nowhere but the private establishments. I am a country clubber (golf) and it is the only place I like to go drink, and bitch about stuff like this, lol. I just wanted to clarify the fact that these people didn't deserve it, but I have seen a few that did. They use those few as the excuse to bust a patty-wagon load every night and make this college town look unappealing to anyone coming to college or wanting to live here. I don't think the a-holes are smart enough to understand that these kids grow up and have to do business with these cops later in life. The cops (all bad ones anyway) know they are being dicks, they don't care. When the cop gets his third divorce (for being a dick at home too I guess) and they have to go find a lawyer, that is the only time I pray for them to get what they gave. Small town, they have to hire someone that they probably messed over, or messed someone over close to that person. Then the lawyer can "just be doing his job" when he messes up and the other attorney takes the cops ass to the cleaners. Funny how the world turns. There is one judge in my town notorious for giving cops and multiple divorce men the proverbial shaft when it comes to awards. I guess there is a little sense of justice out there. Then there is God (who I let handle all my vengeance ). You are right Dude, it is really messed up here on so many levels. I don't know why I ever moved back.

 

[Cheesefood]

I love how smoker's cite their "right to smoke" and don't consider my "right to be in a non-smoking facility". If you had a child in a wheel chair and took him to a restaurant that didn't have a wheel chair ramp, wouldn't you be upset? How about if your child has asthma? Now you're not upset because his right to breathe clean air isn't as important as someone's right to pollute?

How do you feel about this:

 

[WortMonger]

I hate pollution!!!!!!!!!!!!