The Statewide Smoking Ban....

[Crow Bait]

Double negatory, good buddy. Private clubs are not exempt.

FANTASTIC!!! I'll get to enjoy the wings afterall!!!

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Ahh, the proverbial smoking argument once again. I have given up on this because it will soon be a law. I am a good citizen, will respect teh law and enjoy the comfort of my home more often now.

Again, I want to point out to some people. You do NOT have a right to go into a restaurant. You have a choice. You have the right to free speech, etc. Let's not confuse the issue. I just love how people feel their rights are violated by going into an establishment that does not meet their standards. Now, once the law becomes effective, you still have the choice (not right) of which restaurants you choose to enter.

Please someone provide me the scientific proof that second hand smoke causes health issues. I have heard all of the "stuff" about how it is bad for you and it MAY lead to health issues, but I have yet to have a person provide me the medical evidence in writing. The medical community has advertised second hand smoke as "harmful to your health, but will not explicitly say, it cause cancer, etc. If you listen to the medical community, walking down the street is hazardous to your health and MAY lead to health issues.

Vrail brings up a good point, whether you agree with it or not. If non-smoking establishments were truely successful, why are there not more of them? Why does it take the government to govern the private business owners on how to conduct their business. The issue is really bigger than "smoking vs non-smoking". But most people can't get below the surface of the somking/non-smoking of the real issue.

I as a smoker, do not want smoking on the airplanes, I do not desire smoke to be at my dinner table, etc. But those are not rights. Those are choices. But when the government tells a private business owner how to run his own business, I have issues with that.

On a different subject, the other day I was watching TV and finally realized how many diseases are now available to the general public. My gosh, it seems like every other TV ad was a medicine to help this disease or that disease. I thought, 10 years ago, it was beer, tobacco, etc. Now it is Celias, Lavetria, etc...uhmm, maybe it s because the medical community has now become the big powerhouse and most infulential lobbyist. Besides all that money spent on advertising, wouldn't it be better spent on finding the cure for cancer, leukemia, etc...

Let the red begin.

You nailed the issue on the head. The issue is property rights. The government and MOM in particular have decided there is no such thing as property rights. You may not use your property as you see fit, only as they see fit. Anti-choice Socialists at work.

 

[vraiblonde]

It was born out of public pressure that was in favor of it. If there was no public pressure or the public pressure was against smoking bans than it never would have been passed and signed into law.

We're supposed to have a system of government that will prevent the 4 wolves and 1 sheep from majority voting what to have for dinner.

Public pressure shouldn't allow the government to dictate to a privately owned business. If Applebee's was losing business/money because they allow smoking in the bar area, they would have gone non-smoking. You all should have voted with your dollar instead of the MD legislature deciding for everyone.

But alas, it's too late now and I'm okay with staying home instead of going out. :shrug:

 

[toppick08]

I'm guessing the VFW will still have smoking since it's a private club... all you ash-holes can go there.

Where you born/reared here?......

 

[Crow Bait]

Didn't know I had to present my papers to sit at the adult table...

 

[vraiblonde]

FANTASTIC!!! I'll get to enjoy the wings afterall!!!

Have at it

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

Didn't know I had to present my papers to sit at the adult table...

You do if you want to join the VFW.

 

[jackers]

We are not talking about outlawing bad language here. We are talking something that is harmful. Second hand smoke is not just inconvenient but HARMFUL.

It doesn't matter how you look at it. It endangers other people.

 

[Pete]

Have at it

Until all the small privately owned places that do not have a huge corporate backer go belly up and we are all standing in line to shuffle through Applebees to feed so we can rush out.

 

[Pete]

We are not talking about outlawing bad language here. We are talking something that is harmful. Second hand smoke is not just inconvenient but HARMFUL.

It doesn't matter how you look at it. It endangers other people.

Ron Paul wouldn't support the government interfering in a private business's business.

 

[vraiblonde]

It doesn't matter how you look at it. It endangers other people.

Only if they come around where smokers are. If they stay in non-smoking places where they belong, there's no problem.

Anyway, it doesn't matter because the law has already been passed and will go into effect Feb 1. Now the smoke whiners (and the bars that were too lazy to fight for their rights) can suffer the consequences. Because it's no sweat off me if I no longer spend money in bars and restaurants.

:shrug:

 

[jackers]

Funny you mention that Pete, I am actually trying to find his stance on it right now. I believe he would defer the decision up to the State. Interesting conundrum though.

 

[vraiblonde]

Until all the small privately owned places that do not have a huge corporate backer go belly up

That's their problem. They shouldn't have let the nannies take over their business. It would have been a very simple thing for them to band together, get legal representation and say, "Wait a minute - you cannot tell us what legal activity we can and cannot allow in OUR place of business."

They caved, so frig 'em. I hope they all go out of business.

 

[cattitude]

I don't have nobody to hang out with anymore.

 

[illfindu2]

Ahh, the proverbial smoking argument once again. I have given up on this because it will soon be a law. I am a good citizen, will respect teh law and enjoy the comfort of my home more often now.

Again, I want to point out to some people. You do NOT have a right to go into a restaurant. You have a choice. You have the right to free speech, etc. Let's not confuse the issue. I just love how people feel their rights are violated by going into an establishment that does not meet their standards. Now, once the law becomes effective, you still have the choice (not right) of which restaurants you choose to enter.

Please someone provide me the scientific proof that second hand smoke causes health issues. I have heard all of the "stuff" about how it is bad for you and it MAY lead to health issues, but I have yet to have a person provide me the medical evidence in writing. The medical community has advertised second hand smoke as "harmful to your health, but will not explicitly say, it cause cancer, etc. If you listen to the medical community, walking down the street is hazardous to your health and MAY lead to health issues.

Vrail brings up a good point, whether you agree with it or not. If non-smoking establishments were truely successful, why are there not more of them? Why does it take the government to govern the private business owners on how to conduct their business. The issue is really bigger than "smoking vs non-smoking". But most people can't get below the surface of the somking/non-smoking of the real issue.

I as a smoker, do not want smoking on the airplanes, I do not desire smoke to be at my dinner table, etc. But those are not rights. Those are choices. But when the government tells a private business owner how to run his own business, I have issues with that.

On a different subject, the other day I was watching TV and finally realized how many diseases are now available to the general public. My gosh, it seems like every other TV ad was a medicine to help this disease or that disease. I thought, 10 years ago, it was beer, tobacco, etc. Now it is Celias, Lavetria, etc...uhmm, maybe it s because the medical community has now become the big powerhouse and most infulential lobbyist. Besides all that money spent on advertising, wouldn't it be better spent on finding the cure for cancer, leukemia, etc...

Let the red begin.

It has been listed on the NIH List of Known Carcinogens since 2000. Where have you been. Here you go read this http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/eleventh/profiles/s176toba.pdf

 

[vraiblonde]

I don't have nobody to hang out with anymore.

Sure you do - all those non-smokers that will flock to the bars now that we're gone.

 

[cwo_ghwebb]

We are not talking about outlawing bad language here. We are talking something that is harmful. Second hand smoke is not just inconvenient but HARMFUL.

It doesn't matter how you look at it. It endangers other people.

Folks driving cars endangers other people, I don't see MOM outlawing driving.
You're basing your entire argument on the Harmful effects of second hand smoke. That is not the issue.

The issue is banning a legal activity on private property. Now that this activity has been banned what's next, banning peanuts from bars?

 

[popsicle]

[/QUOTE]
Vrail brings up a good point, whether you agree with it or not. If non-smoking establishments were truely successful, why are there not more of them? Why does it take the government to govern the private business owners on how to conduct their business. The issue is really bigger than "smoking vs non-smoking". But most people can't get below the surface of the somking/non-smoking of the real issue.
[/QUOTE]

Salsa's in Leonardtown has been non-smoking since it opened. Hasen't been detrimental to their business, I have had to wiat 20 -30 too get a table.

 

[vraiblonde]

The issue is banning a legal activity on private property. Now that this activity has been banned what's next, banning peanuts from bars?

THIS is the point that these folks gloss past.

If bars and restaurants want to go non-smoking, that's their prerogative. Their business is their business. But when the government starts banning things, we should all be concerned.

However, many people have no problem with the government running everything, so that's what they'll get and we'll see how they like it.

 

[BlueBird]

Only if they come around where smokers are. If they stay in non-smoking places where they belong, there's no problem.

Anyway, it doesn't matter because the law has already been passed and will go into effect Feb 1. Now the smoke whiners (and the bars that were too lazy to fight for their rights) can suffer the consequences. Because it's no sweat off me if I no longer spend money in bars and restaurants.

:shrug:

This is just ridiculous.

I've lived in three other states where smoking is banned in restaurants and bars. Guess what they are all doing extremely well and none that I frequented even came close to losing patrons or going out of business. If you dedicated die hard smokers want to boycott your favorite restaurant because you can't light up there anymore go ahead. You guys will be the ones losing out I guarantee it!

It's time to join the rest of the world SOMD. Smoking is no longer hip or cool or even fashionable. You can no longer smoke in bars and restaurants - get over it!

The Bluebird will enjoy flying into all the smoke free bars and restaurants. Thank you big brother!