its so weird to go into a bar now and not see any smoking going on. everyones lined up outside in 20 degree weather smoking instead.

although, i went to a bar last night that didnt enforce this smoking ban. i felt like the Feds were going to bust down the door any minute and haul off all the smokers.

im sure this has been debated on here already. any other states have this?

All the progressive states and provinces have already done this (long ago in some places). It's wonderful...

Windsor, Ont does. The tourist business has dropped signifigantly.

We just had this enacted in Ontario this summer. On one hand it's so nice to go out for an evening and be able to wear the clothes again, on the other hand I'd much rather that the establishment owners were able to assert their property rights.

quote Originally posted by Gokart Mozart: Windsor, Ont does. The tourist business has dropped signifigantly.

I guess they're coming out west to Vancouver then because our strict anti-smoking laws haven't put a dent in tourism at all.

quote Originally posted by AntiKev: on the other hand I'd much rather that the establishment owners were able to assert their property rights.

i agree. i would be very angry if i were a business owner.

quote Originally posted by Mike OHIO: i agree. i would be very angry if i were a business owner.

Yes, it's awful when your establishment becomes packed with non-smokers who are so happy so go clubing, eating, whatever and not have to breathe some other person's stinking smoke.

In Florida if an establishment makes more than 50% of its money from food, its non-smoking. Although I quit smoking 7 yrs ago, I still think smokers have rights. If I don't want to be around smoke, I don't go places where smoking is allowed. My favorite bar is a smoking bar, but I still go there.
------------------
86 SE 2.8 4-Speed

Edited to answer Patrick:

A majority of the restaurants here have shown a decrease in customers since the smoking ban was instituted. Seems like the non-smokers were coming despite the smokers, but now the non-smokers aren't. Who loses from that? Just the business owner.

[This message has been edited by Mike Marden (edited 12-09-2006).]

Also part of the Ohio State- Michigan game

quote Originally posted by Patrick: All the progressive states and provinces have already done this (long ago in some places). It's wonderful...

Doesn't make it right. Most progressive states and provinces banned capital punishment. What’s your point?

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Yes, it's awful when your establishment becomes packed with non-smokers who are so happy so go clubing, eating, whatever and not have to breathe some other person's stinking smoke.

Your money is better than a smoker’s money? I’d say the clubs are less packed than they were before.

quote Originally posted by aceman: What’s your point?

If you don't already get it, I can't explain it.

quote Originally posted by aceman: Your money is better than a smoker’s money?

Yes. While I'm spending my money in a restaurant or a club, I'm not forcing anybody else to breathe any crap. I'm also not turning every surface area in the place a pukey yellow color.

quote Originally posted by aceman: I’d say the clubs are less packed than they were before.

Any clubs or restaurants that are doing worse after a smoking ban are just looking for an excuse for their own failure to adapt.

I'm a former smoker that thinks this kind of gov interference in our personal/business lives is BS (and probably unconstitutional). If they can get away with this, then they can do anything they want.

There's parts of this regulation that impacts interstate commerce that may have some truckers finding a way to by pass/boycott Ohio. i.e. the way it is written, if you drive a "company" truck or are an owner operator leased to a company that does business in Ohio, then you can't smoke in your "OWN" truck anywhere!!!!! Also those of you that smoke and need to rent a vehicle..... You can't smoke in them in Ohio.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Any clubs or restaurants that are doing worse after a smoking ban are just looking for an excuse for their own failure to adapt.

No its because people aren't going because they can't smoke. When the neibouring county outlawed smoking my county saw a restuante boom while they saw less buisness. I lve on county lines so the close proximity had a bit to do with it.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Yes. While I'm spending my money in a restaurant or a club, I'm not forcing anybody else to breathe any crap. I'm also not turning every surface area in the place a pukey yellow color.

No one was forcing you to eat in a smoking friendly establishment either now were they? You had a choice to not go if you didn't like it.

I dont smoke, never have and never will. I think the smoking ban is BS. Smokers have rights too.

well in ny they made a ventilation law to vent any place of business that offered smoking sections... then after about two months they banned smoking in public places all together... no $ back for the businesses that put in those systems... only loss of customers. well at least in dutchess county 8 businesses went out because of the ban. 3 were bars.

I have been working in bars before and after the smoking ban here. Did business slow down after the smoking ban? Yes a little but not because smokers quit going to the bars, instead it is because you have to go outside to smoke, can't bring a drink out to smoke in most places, so the sales slow down a little bit. The 5-6 minutes that the smoker is away from a drink actually slows drink sales to a very noticable point. You can't really blame the smoking ban here completly on the government because it was voted on by the entire state. The majority of the poeple in Colorado didn't want smoking in public places, it's that simple.
G.

quote Originally posted by Phranc: No one was forcing you to eat in a smoking friendly establishment either now were they? You had a choice to not go if you didn't like it.

At one time, you couldn't go to ANY kind of a public place without being forced to breathe in all that sh!t.

I'm so happy that the pendulum has swung the other way.

Everytime I see smokers huddled by the entrance/exit of a building I can't help but smile. Gawd, they look so pathetic standing there sucking and blowing, especially when it's pouring rain...

quote Originally posted by FieroMaster88: I dont smoke, never have and never will. I think the smoking ban is BS. Smokers have rights too.

you have the right to smoke in your home or outside, i have a right to breathe clean air

quote Originally posted by $Rich$: you have the right to smoke in your home or outside, i have a right to breathe clean air

Rich, you have the right to breathe clean air in your house and outside.

Now folks.......Show me that clear cut documentation that links secondhand smoke to cancer. Let's see clear cut evidence that secondhand smoke is more harmful to you than the car exhaust you suck in in the fresh outdoor air everyday.

quote Originally posted by Mike Marden: Edited to answer Patrick: A majority of the restaurants here have shown a decrease in customers since the smoking ban was instituted. Seems like the non-smokers were coming despite the smokers, but now the non-smokers aren't. Who loses from that? Just the business owner.

(Mike, I suspect you meant to post, "...but now the smokers aren't".)

You mean to say that all of a sudden smokers don't eat anymore? Hmmm.... choosing starvation over cancer now, are they?

quote Originally posted by Patrick: At one time, you couldn't go to ANY kind of a public place without being forced to breathe in all that sh!t.

No one forced you to eat out now did they? No one forced you to go to any public place at any time did they? You had a choice to not to right? If you didn't like it you didn't have to deal with it.

Now choice is being taken away from people by the state.

While I agree that smoking bans are a good thing, the strictness of Ohio's is a bit unfair. I like the idea of a 50% of business comes from food then it's smoke free, that would allow bars to continue to be smoke friendly and truckers shuld be allowed to do it in the truck as long as the company that owns the truck is O.K. with it.

Smokers do have rights, but that right is to go outside away from me and smoke your cigarette. I choose not to smoke and find it annoying to try and choke down my dinner in a restaurant (in the non smoking section) while the smoke from the smoking area floats over to my booth, believe me it does change the taste of my food. Another complaint comes when I go bowling, there seems to be no such thing as a smoke free bowling alley. The minute I get home from league I'm in the shower trying to get the stench off of me and usually have to either wash my coat or leave it outside overnight to try and refreshen it.

I'm usually quite tolerant, but I find it interesting that someone can't wait 45" to an hour to finish dinner then go out for a smoke, it seems simple to me but then I don't smoke so I don't quite get it I guess.

Now for my other view point......Smokers please smoke away, heck have a pack while your at it as it keeps me employed...I'm a Respiratory Therapist and see my share of smokers everyday...most of them wishing they'd never done it.

This rant is just my $.02,

Dan

quote Originally posted by Phranc: No one forced you to eat out now did they? No one forced you to go to any public place at any time did they? You had a choice to not to right? If you didn't like it you didn't have to deal with it.

Is that the best you can come up with?

quote Originally posted by aceman: Now folks.......Show me that clear cut documentation that links secondhand smoke to cancer.

The link:
http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422

The info: (feel free to contact the sources list below for actual study information)


Secondhand Smoke Fact Sheet

August 2006

Secondhand smoke, also know as environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), is a mixture of the smoke given off by the burning end of a cigarette, pipe or cigar and the smoke exhaled from the lungs of smokers. It is involuntarily inhaled by nonsmokers, lingers in the air hours after cigarettes have been extinguished and can cause or exacerbate a wide range of adverse health effects, including cancer, respiratory infections, and asthma.1

*
Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen).2
*
Secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke. Secondhand smoke contains hundreds of chemicals known to be toxic or carcinogenic, including formaldehyde, benzene, vinyl chloride, arsenic ammonia and hydrogen cyanide.3
*
Secondhand smoke causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 22,700-69,600 heart disease deaths in adult nonsmokers in the United States each year.4
*
A study found that nonsmokers exposed to environmental smoke were 25 percent more likely to have coronary heart diseases compared to nonsmokers not exposed to smoke.5
*
Nonsmokers exposed to secondhand smoke at work are at increased risk for adverse health effects. Levels of ETS in restaurants and bars were found to be 2 to 5 times higher than in residences with smokers and 2 to 6 times higher than in office workplaces.6
*
Since 1999, 70 percent of the U.S. workforce worked under a smoke-free policy, ranging from 83.9 percent in Utah to 48.7 percent in Nevada.7 Workplace productivity was increased and absenteeism was decreased among former smokers compared with current smokers.8
*
Currently, 14 states including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, have already passed strong smoke-free air laws.9
*
As of 2005, nine smoke-free states prohibit smoking in almost all workplaces, including restaurants and bars (CA, CT, DE, ME, MA, NY, RI, VT and WA).10
*
Secondhand smoke is especially harmful to young children. Secondhand smoke is responsible for between 150,000 and 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year, and causes 1,900 to 2,700 sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) deaths in the United States annually.11
*
Secondhand smoke exposure may cause buildup of fluid in the middle ear, resulting in 700,000 to 1.6 million physician office visits per year.12 Secondhand smoke can also aggravate symptoms in 400,000 to 1,000,000 children with asthma.13
*
In the United States, 21 million, or 35 percent of, children live in homes where residents or visitors smoke in the home on a regular basis.14 Approximately 50-75 percent of children in the United States have detectable levels of cotinine, the breakdown product of nicotine in the blood.15
*
New research indicates that private research conducted by cigarette company Philip Morris in the 1980s showed that secondhand smoke was highly toxic, yet the company suppressed the finding during the next two decades.16
*
The current Surgeon General's Report concluded that scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to second hand smoke. Short exposures to second hand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack.17

For more information on secondhand smoke, please review the Tobacco Morbidity and Mortality Trend Report as well as our Lung Disease Data publication in the Data and Statistics section of our website, or call the American Lung Association at 1-800-LUNG-USA (1-800-586-4872).

Sources:
1. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. June 2005.
2. Ibid.
3. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: 6 Major Conclusions of the Surgeon General Report. A Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006; Available at: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet6.html: Accessed on 7/7/06.
4. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. June 2005.
5. He, J.; Vupputuri, S.; Allen, K.; et al. Passive Smoking and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease-A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiologic Studies. New England Journal of Medicine 1999; 340: 920-6.
6. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Report on Carcinogens, Tenth Edition 2002. National Toxicology Program.
7. Shopland, D. Smoke-Free Workplace Coverage. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2001; 43(8): 680-686.
8. Halpern, M.T.; Shikiar, R.; Rentz, A.M.; Khan, Z.M. Impact of Smoking Status on Workplace Absenteeism and Productivity. Tobacco Control 2001; 10: 233-238.
9. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: Secondhand Smoke Exposure in the Workplace. A Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006; Available at: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet5.html: Accessed on 7/7/06.
10. American Lung Association, State of Tobacco Control: 2005.
11. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. June 2005.
12. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. September 1997.
13. California Environmental Protection Agency. Health Effects of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. June 2005.
14. Schuster, MA, Franke T, Pham CB. Smoking Patterns of Household Members and Visitors in Homes with Children in United States. Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. Vol. 156, 2002: 1094-1100.
15. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. America's Children and the Environment: Measures of Contaminants, Body Burdens, and Illnesses. Second Edition. February 2003
16. Diethelm PA, Rielle JC, McKee M. The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth? The Research Philip Morris Did Not Want You to See. Lancet. Vol. 364 No. 9446, 2004.
17. The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: 6 Major Conclusions of the Surgeon General Report. A Report of the Surgeon General, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2006; Available at: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet6.html: Accessed on 7/7/06.

*Racial and ethnic minority terminology reflects those terms used by the Centers For Disease Control.

View American Lung Association Nationwide Research Awardees for 2005-2006

[This message has been edited by DanFiero (edited 12-09-2006).]

quote Originally posted by aceman: Show me that clear cut documentation that links secondhand smoke to cancer.

You've spouted this nonsense in previous threads. All the evidence that's needed is out there for anyone who really wishes to know. You just refuse to acknowledge it.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Is that the best you can come up with?

Its quess unless your laughing at "pethetic" people its not good enough for you. Its actualy areally good argument. You had a choice now no one does. I hope the stae takes away a choice of yours that makes it so you have to to stand out in the rain and look "pathetic" so I can laugh at you.

Smoking bans in public places or around people who don't are fine with me.

But let business owners decided in bars. If non-smokers want to go to drink, there are plenty of places that advertise non-smoking bars.

I find that allowing bar, restaurant, or hotel owners decide on smoking a very progressive agenda. Governments that ban it are not progressive, but rather strict consevatives in my mind.

I'm glad I live in a progessive state and city. Liquor by the drink, you can smoke in restaurants and bars. Hell, we are so progressive that we even have Restaurants that every table is smoking and they proudly advertise it. Their parking lot is packed all the time.

Living progressive means living in liberty. Living in liberty is a freedom to presue your own self determination and living with that consequences and not relying on a dependent government for your well being. AHHH! I love the smell of freedom, either that be fresh air or tobacco smoke.

That's why I couldn't live in Canada or Vancouver for that matter. Too Right-wing conservative Bushie style of governmental control and fear.

I live progressive!

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Governments that ban it are not progressive, but rather strict consevatives in my mind.

Wichita, you had the perfect opportunity to blame those nasty "leftist liberals" again. You're slipping!

quote Originally posted by Wichita: That's why I couldn't live in Canada or Vancouver for that matter. Too Right-wing conservative Bushie style of governmental control and fear.

That's really funny! You're joking, right?

i'm a smoker and honestly it got me mad when they put the ban up in ny. when they put in the vent around where i live i used to sit in the non-smoking section with my friends. when you were in the non-smoking sections you couldn't smell the smoke from the smoking sections. that's not from me, that is from a non-smoker friend of mine. now, the vents were a good compromise. before the vents, it sucked eating smoke in the non smoking sections. just one more right stripped away from a minority where the larger voice prevails. as for bars... lol... you think bar you think smoking and drinking. If you didn't like it. don't go! they should have just put the vent systems in the bars as well.

I smoked for 28 years until I quit 9 months ago. But fot the last 7 years or so, I never smoked anywhere inside. Not in my house, not in anyone else's house, not in a restaurant, not in a bar. Why? Well, even though it was my choice to smoke, it wasn't the choice of the people around me to have to inhale my cigarette smoke. It also wasn't their choice to have their clothes stinked up by my cigarette. And because for me, there really wasn't much difference between me smoking and annoying other people with my cigarette smoke, and that annoying kid in his F&F look alike car with the volume of his stereo set to max driving by my house all the time in the middle of the night. Or that really annoying guy who kept talking throughout the movie in the movie theatre.

quote Originally posted by Gokart Mozart: Windsor, Ont does. The tourist business has dropped signifigantly.

We did it here in indy, and our tourist count increased last year according to the news. Not that i think it was related, but the ban didnt hurt business much apparently.

Another town south of us did it 2 years ago, and business increased for them overall. ( but it is a college town, different sort of clientel )

i see two differ. parts of this. I used to smoke and now i live with three all the time smokers: 1) I agree that its not cool to go to a restraurant or such and breathe someone elses dumb move. However, if you sit in the NON SMOKING section then the amount of smoke is greatly reduced. 2) If I go to a bar... I better be able to smoke and drink. That is what a bar is= a place to smoke and drink (and watch sports maybe). 3) If the government can tell us to smoke or not then what else can we do or not do. Next, it will be freedom of speech and drinking laws.

quote Originally posted by 2farnorth: I'm a former smoker that thinks this kind of gov interference in our personal/business lives is BS (and probably unconstitutional). If they can get away with this, then they can do anything they want. There's parts of this regulation that impacts interstate commerce that may have some truckers finding a way to by pass/boycott Ohio. i.e. the way it is written, if you drive a "company" truck or are an owner operator leased to a company that does business in Ohio, then you can't smoke in your "OWN" truck anywhere!!!!! Also those of you that smoke and need to rent a vehicle..... You can't smoke in them in Ohio.

Or indiana. Cant boycott the entire midwest if you are a trucker, if you want to keep working.


The problem with the smoking issue is its not a simple 'personal issue', it really is a public health issue, created by a legal activity.

Im not going to get in the middle of the debate ( arguement ), just pointing it out that its not as black and white as most people want to think ( on either side ).

quote Originally posted by Finally_Mine_86_GT: ...the vents were a good compromise.

Vents and smoking/non-smoking sections in restaurants/bars work about as well as non-peeing sections in pools.

quote Originally posted by Finally_Mine_86_GT: as for bars... lol... you think bar you think smoking and drinking. If you didn't like it. don't go!

I don't think "smoking and drinking" when I think "bar".

Hey, I've got a better idea. If smokers don't like it, THEY don't have to go to the bar anymore. Maybe they can find a nice large doorway to drink and smoke in. Must be pretty bad though to be so controlled by a substance (nicotine) that one has to radically alter their lifestyle.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Yes, it's awful when your establishment becomes packed with non-smokers who are so happy so go clubing, eating, whatever and not have to breathe some other person's stinking smoke.

Tell that to Casino Windsor, they've seen a 33% DROP in visitors since the ban.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: That's really funny! You're joking, right?

Nope! You accuse Bush of stomping on personal liberties right?

Look at yourself! Facist punk leftist pratice what they preach against.

Look in the mirror biatch!

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Nope! You accuse Bush of stomping on personal liberties right? Look at yourself! Facist punk leftist pratice what they preach against. Look in the mirror biatch!

Wichita,

This ban was enacted by the Liberals in power in Ontario. It's not a right-wing move, it's an environmentalist/leftist "government knows best" move. The right-wing move would be to let people make the choice who they want to serve, where they want to go and where they want to smoke.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: Nope! You accuse Bush of stomping on personal liberties right? Look at yourself! Facist punk leftist pratice what they preach against. Look in the mirror biatch!

Wichita, I'm afraid you've been inhaling a little too deeply again.

Who cares if second hand smoke causes cancer? That's not really the point.

I used to smoke about 12 years ago for about 6 years. Now I can't stand the smell of that smoke. It gives me headaches and burns my eyes.

My cousin smokes (and drinks coffee) and I have to say his breath has the nastiest smell on earth. He's also younger than me, but looks older. His skin is this ugly brown color an his skin seems to hang on his face.

Of course I am all for the smoking ban indoors. Smoke all you want outside.

Should people that chew tobacco be allowed to spit on smokers?