KC residents - How are you voting on the smoking ban in April?

[Bowser]

Let's get a definitive look on how the Planet feels about this. Poll on the way.

[bogey]

Originally Posted by memyselfI

I try to stay away. But in KC there are MANY restaurants where you have to walk through the smoking sections to get TO the non-smoking sections. Thus, we don't go to restaurants in KC and we would LOVE to do so.

I understand your challenge and feel for you. However, these laws are not being passed for this reason. I honestly know gal that can't walk through Macy's because of all the perfume floating through the air from the perfume ladies standing around hoping you'll stop by for a sample. It literally causes her to break out. She enters the mall from a different entrance.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by bogey

I understand your challenge and feel for you. However, these laws are not being passed for this reason. I honestly know gal that can't walk through Macy's because of all the perfume floating through the air from the perfume ladies standing around hoping you'll stop by for a sample. It literally causes her to break out. She enters the mall from a different entrance.

BAN PERFUME!!!!!

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by frazod

1. You aren't the person at whom this was directed.

2. I really wonder how much your wish of good luck will mean to Smitty if he loses his business and ends up stocking shelves at HyVee. Can he cash your luck in for food stamps?

I wish no ill will on Smitty or any other bar owner. All across America (and the world), smoking bans have been in effect for more than a decade. An overwhelming majority of these bars and restaurants saw no change economically.

As for Smitty (and I mean no disrespect), if his business model is based on an action that's being banned throughout the world, he should have foresight to adjust his model or prepare to change occupations.

Originally Posted by frazod

3. PLEASE, SOMEBODY explain to me why YOU GIVE A SHIT about people smoking in a bar YOU'LL NEVER SET FOOT IN? Seriously, who the hell are you to dictate to some bar owner in La Plata, Missouri whether or not he and his patrons can smoke? Were you recently elected Fuhrer? Did I miss something?

I don't care and I've stated that I frequented bars for years, regardless of the negative health issues (I'm asthmatic). But I'M not dictating anything. This is a vote by the American people.

Originally Posted by frazod

4. I think people squealing like stuck pigs over smoking bans are a JOKE. I think people stupid enough to buy into the notion that a wisp of secondhand smoke will strike them dead are a JOKE. I think people who mask their dislike for the smell of cigarettes behind overblown, ridiculous health concerns are a JOKE. And I don't really give a shit how "the World" feels about it. And by the way, when did you become spokesman for the "the World"? Gee, I keep missing these things.

Well, if you want to ignore the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, be my guest. MY experience has been far different and NEVER in my life have a been in a bar that allowed smoking, yet only ONE person was smoking (in reference to your "whisp" of smoke). I've been to plenty of bars in the KC Metro area that were completely FILLED with cigarette smoke. I had no choice but to either leave or inhale.

As far as your "Spokesman of the World" jab, I guess I'm more educated about the laws of other nations due to extensive travel.

Originally Posted by frazod

5. Perhaps the bar scene in LA Plata is a bit different than the bar scene in LA. I don't think anybody down at Smitty's is interested in downing $20 cosmopolitans, discussing their latest tummy-tuck, or rubbing shoulders with Don Henley. It's more likely that they want to drink cheap beer, smoke, relax with friends and watch the game on the big screen TV. Most of us (even rednecks from La Plata) have big TVs at home now. So if you take away the smoking thing, what's to keep these people from just buying a six pack and staying home? Apparently, NOTHING. Not a problem if you're some Hollywood hotshot. Big problem if you own a bar in Northeast Missouri.

I'm almost certain that the bar scene is different in LaPlata than it is in ANY major metropolitan area. If smoking is the only reason for people to frequent a bar and socialize, then it's apparent that a bar isn't necessary. And if the bar isn't necessary, it will go out of business. It's a sad reality for those bar owners but in those cases, the success of the bar wasn't predicated on drinking alcohol but on smoking.

Originally Posted by frazod

Again, I will point out that I don't smoke. As an ex-smoker, I don't like the smell of smoke. I went out to a bar Saturday night, and I had personally had no problem returning home not reeking of smoke. But if people had been smoking, and I did come home smelling of it, I COULD LIVE IT. It's not going to kill me or cause me to require therapy from some Kalifornia psykhiatrist. It would just have been the reasonable outcome of going to a place where people smoked. I know you think that is the end of the world, but I can assure you, it is not.

Thanks for the Kalifornia jab. I don't know why people on this forum can't see me as someone with a differing veiwpoint, especially considering I've stated time and time again that I spent the first 27 years of my life living in either Missouri or Kansas.

Secondly, as I've stated in this thread and the other thread from a few weeks back, smoke-filled bars never prevented me from going out to enjoy a few beers, see bands, play in bands in clubs, etc. I do FEEL better frequenting bars that have banned smoking (asthma, headaches, burnt-lungs, etc.) but it hasn't stopped me when visiting Kansas City. And I certainly don't get up on a soapbox and never will.

But if you think that working or hanging out in smoke-filled bars, night after night won't have an impact on a person's health, we're in disagreement.

Originally Posted by frazod

I argue for tolerance, reason and personal choice in situations that affect me. You argue for totalitarian imposition of policies that affect everybody. Smoke smell or not, my side stinks much less.

Reason IS my argument. I think that considering the fact that 82% of the American public doesn't smoke, I see no reason that the other 18% should be allowed to smoke in closed-in public areas that may affect my health.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by bogey

I think you and others are totally overreacting on this. I understand smoking is bad. Second hand smoke in restaurants is total BS.

Thanks, Doc!

[Adept Havelock]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Reason IS my argument. I think that considering the fact that 82% of the American public doesn't smoke, I see no reason that the other 18% should be allowed to smoke in closed-in public areas that may affect my health.

That's what you don't get. Bars and Restaurants are not "public areas". They are Privately owned areas, open to the public. That's why many have signs saying "We reserve the right to refuse service".

It's a subtle, but very important, distinction.

[memyselfI]

Originally Posted by bogey

I understand your challenge and feel for you. However, these laws are not being passed for this reason. I honestly know gal that can't walk through Macy's because of all the perfume floating through the air from the perfume ladies standing around hoping you'll stop by for a sample. It literally causes her to break out. She enters the mall from a different entrance.

I have the same problem except that I start wheezing so I can't wear perfume and have to avoid it if possibe. I literally have to read my women's magazines in a well ventilated area.

I understand my plight is not the reason to pass the law and I don't expect that it should be. I think it should be majority rules and the majority of the American people do not smoke. That makes smokers the minority.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Thanks for the Kalifornia jab. I don't know why people on this forum can't see me as someone with a differing veiwpoint, especially considering I've stated time and time again that I spent the first 27 years of my life living in either Missouri or Kansas.




Reason IS my argument. I think that considering the fact that 82% of the American public doesn't smoke, I see no reason that the other 18% should be allowed to smoke in closed-in public areas that may affect my health.

While we disagree on the subject, I personally respect your opinions and think they are well formulated. We've argued over them a few times, I don't want to do it again. However, you have one of the most logical arguments I've heard from that side of the fence.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Adept Havelock

That's what you don't get. Bars and Restaurants are not "public areas". They are Privately owned areas, open to the public. That's why many have signs saying "We reserve the right to refuse service".

It's a subtle, but very important, distinction.

Don't install a handicapped accessible toilet and/or entrance and see how far that argument gets you.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Adept Havelock

I clearly don't understand? GFY you self-righteous, sanctimonious, pus-sucking, festering, vile wedge of asscheese.

I've watched several family members die from it. I understand completely. It's why I quit.

Where we disagree, you fu*king ignorant and presumptuous busybody, is that it's the governments job to dictate what others should or should not be allowed to do with their property when it comes to a legal behavior. I prefer to leave choices to the individual, you want Nanny Sam to dictate your view to everyone.


Actually, It's a matter of property rights and manipulating government to prohibit behaviors you personally detest, but don't let that stop you from getting indignant and claiming otherwise.

Sorry, but your other rants have made it all to clear your main problem with it is that there would be places you would have to avoid going. Why? Because they would permit smoking and thus must be forced to change to accommodate you. It's too late to play the "think of the children" card, and expect anyone to buy it.

BTW- I'm still waiting for you to answer my question about who "Forced" you or your dumbass sidekick meme to go to an establishment that permitted smoking? Why didn't you file criminal charges against whoever "forced" you to go to these places? Right...because you CHOSE to go, and then CHOSE to whine about the behaviors the management permitted. And in your case, you CHOSE to stay at the Fox and Hound sucking down secondhand smoke. Brilliant!

Rant, rant, rant, rant, rant.

Thanks for the name-calling, too. You've convinced me!

You've convinced me that you're just another close-minded jerkoff that who can't see outside of the little box you've created for yourself.

Good luck with that.

[Adept Havelock]

Originally Posted by memyselfI

I understand my plight is not the reason to pass the law and I don't expect that it should be. I think it should be majority rules and the majority of the American people do not smoke. That makes smokers the minority.

You desperately need to read this essay by John Stuart Mill.

Pay close attention to the part about the "Tyranny of the Majority".

http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/jsmill.htm

[Adept Havelock]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Rant, rant, rant, rant, rant.

Thanks for the name-calling, too. You've convinced me!

You've convinced me that you're just another close-minded jerkoff that who can't see outside of the little box you've created for yourself.

Good luck with that.

So you're no longer arguing I don't get it? That's OK. You've made it abundantly clear you don't have a clue about something as simple as property rights.

As for the insults, get over it. You started flinging the "moron" label, so you can deal with the flood of primate-shit aimed at your Bonobo-esque "You don't get it" display. I get it, you're just so close-minded that you can't accept someone else might "get it" and come to a different conclusion.

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Don't install a handicapped accessible toilet and/or entrance and see how far that argument gets you.

That's part of the problem of allowing Government to dictate to private property. It's a slippery slope, and morons like Dane and meme are all to eager to push us right on down it.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Adept Havelock

That's what you don't get. Bars and Restaurants are not "public areas". They are Privately owned areas, open to the public. That's why many have signs saying "We reserve the right to refuse service".

It's a subtle, but very important, distinction.

No, they're not "Privately Owned Areas".

It's real estate that is ZONED for businesses. Zoning laws are different for businesses than they are for residences and in most cases, I highly doubt that business owner actually OWNS the building where his bar or restaurant operates.

Last time I checked, grocery stores, drug stores, clothing stores, ice cream shops and shopping malls don't allow smoking on their premises.

Why should bars and restaurants be excluded from the same laws that exist for other business owners in the same business zone?

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by memyselfI

I understand my plight is not the reason to pass the law and I don't expect that it should be. I think it should be majority rules and the majority of the American people do not smoke. That makes smokers the minority.

How about gay people. They are the minority, should we be allowed to not hire them based on their sexual orientation?

[penchief]

Originally Posted by Mr Flopnuts

How about gay people. They are the minority, should we be allowed to not hire them based on their sexual orientation?

What are gays doing to harm your long term health?

[bkkcoh]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Don't install a handicapped accessible toilet and/or entrance and see how far that argument gets you.

But the ironic thing is, ADA was enacted into law. Denying service to anyone else might not be against the law.