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.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by SPchief

You also have the right to choose a place that doesn't allow smoking. You have the right to sit in the non-smoking section of places that do allow smoking.

I've said I'm Ok with an "opt out" type policy. If you want to declare your establishment a smoking place then that's fine. I just don't want it the other way around.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by smittysbar

This goes through and it will hurt and even close a lot of businesses. Just what the economy needs..........

I don't have any "proof" in the form of quantitative data, but I do know that a number of one-man-owner bars around here have shut down in the past couple years since the ban went through, and they frequently mention the ban as one of the causes. Whether that's the truth or whether they're just looking for someone to blame, I don't know.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Dartgod

Not a KCMO resident, but I would vote No if I were.

Same here.

I was a smoker for 13 years. Worked as a Respiratory Therapist for 9 years. I know a little about smoking and its effects on the human body. You want to die a slow and painful death its your choice But...............

I don't want to see personal freedom curtailed. Let the free market decide. If you want to run a no smoking establishment then do so. You want to set up smoking and non-smoking areas then do so. Let the public decide with their patronage.

I won't go to a smoke filled bar. I won't eat by smokers. But thats my decision. I don't want to force my beliefs or prefrences on others.

[DaFace]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Same here.

I was a smoker for 13 years. Worked as a Respiratory Therapist for 9 years. I know a little about smoking and its effects on the human body. You want to die a slow and painful death its your choice But...............

I don't want to see personal freedom curtailed. Let the free market decide. If you want to run a no smoking establishment then do so. You want to set up smoking and non-smoking areas then do so. Let the public decide with their patronage.

I won't go to a smoke filled bar. I won't eat by smokers. But thats my decision. I don't want to force my beliefs or prefrences on others.

Ditto.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

I don't want to see personal freedom curtailed. Let the free market decide. If you want to run a no smoking establishment then do so. You want to set up smoking and non-smoking areas then do so. Let the public decide with their patronage.

You need to flip that 180 degrees. As long as allowing smoking is the norm a huge percentage of business owners won't take the step to tell them no. If the law is no smoking they'll be more comfortable telling people to put it out. If an owner wants to proactively say "I'm going to allow smoking" then so be it.

Also, don't bullshit me with this "non-smoking section" crap. It doesn't work. Ever. The rest of us can still smell it. I can't count the number of times I've been on the other side of a 3.5 ft wall from the smoking section, no more than 4 feet from a guy smoking like a damned chimney.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

You need to flip that 180 degrees. As long as allowing smoking is the norm a huge percentage of business owners won't take the step to tell them no. If the law is no smoking they'll be more comfortable telling people to put it out. If an owner wants to proactively say "I'm going to allow smoking" then so be it.

Also, don't bullshit me with this "non-smoking section" crap. It doesn't work. Ever. The rest of us can still smell it. I can't count the number of times I've been on the other side of a 3.5 ft wall from the smoking section, no more than 4 feet from a guy smoking like a damned chimney.

Get take out, or eat somewhere else.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Get take out, or eat somewhere else.

So 82% of the population should just get out so 18% can offend freely? Sadly (for the 18%) it doesn't work that way.

[bkkcoh]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Get take out, or eat somewhere else.

Why should one's rights trample on someone else's rights?

Regardless of which side of the fence you are on.

I for one are on the side of non-smoking, but.... Since it is a legal item and is often used as it is designed... It should be legal to smoke at a said establishment.

If a owner wants to make it a non-smoking establishment, he should have that right. He is the one taking the chance of losing customers or not.

If the smoking population is about 20%, they shouldn't be able to dictate what an establishment does.

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Same here.

I was a smoker for 13 years. Worked as a Respiratory Therapist for 9 years. I know a little about smoking and its effects on the human body. You want to die a slow and painful death its your choice But...............

I don't want to see personal freedom curtailed. Let the free market decide. If you want to run a no smoking establishment then do so. You want to set up smoking and non-smoking areas then do so. Let the public decide with their patronage.

I won't go to a smoke filled bar. I won't eat by smokers. But thats my decision. I don't want to force my beliefs or prefrences on others.

I saw my grandpa die a slow death from smoking for years. It wasn't very appealing.

I can honestly say that I have never, ever smoked a cigarette.

[sd4chiefs]

Impact of a smoking ban on restuarant and bar revenues

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwR/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5307a2.htm

In El Paso Texas bar and restuarant revenues were not effected by the smoking ban.

[smittysbar]

this isn't Texas, and city's try to skew the numbers

[Dartgod]

Originally Posted by Demonpenz

my rugrats don't kill an estimated 10 million people a year.

Neither does second hand smoke.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

You need to flip that 180 degrees. As long as allowing smoking is the norm a huge percentage of business owners won't take the step to tell them no. If the law is no smoking they'll be more comfortable telling people to put it out. If an owner wants to proactively say "I'm going to allow smoking" then so be it.

Also, don't bullshit me with this "non-smoking section" crap. It doesn't work. Ever. The rest of us can still smell it. I can't count the number of times I've been on the other side of a 3.5 ft wall from the smoking section, no more than 4 feet from a guy smoking like a damned chimney.

I know its not fair. It sucks. There is no "fair" option. But you have a choice. Go to an establishment that doesn't allow smoking.

At a Planet get together last year we all went to a Pizzeria in Lee's Summit. Most were not aware that you couldn't smoke in the pizzeria. So Bob Dole and others spent a lot of time outside smoking and decided to move the party to BBW where they could smoke.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by TEX

Sometimes data is useless. For example - I don't need any to know you're an idiot.

And I don't need "data" to know that you're a complete Neanderthal.

Go ahead - smoke your freakin' brains out and enjoy your last days in a hospital gasping for air through a 1/4" tube.

Enjoy!

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And I don't need "data" to know that you're a complete Neanderthal.

Go ahead - smoke your freakin' brains out and enjoy your last days in a hospital gasping for air through a 1/4" tube.

Enjoy!

I would have to imagine that suffocating would suck. Doing it over several years probably sucks even worse. Having that happen because of a foolish and stupid habit you paid a fortune to keep would make that 100 times worse.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

If you had known it was an establishment that allowed smoking you wouldn't have gone there in the first place.

That's absolutely correct. And considering there we 10 people (one of the women was pregnant), the owners of that establishment would have lost out on a $1500 table.

Fortunately, that wasn't the case for us and hasn't been in California for over 10 years. NYC's ban has been intact for almost that long and the last time I was in Manhattan, it certainly had not affected its restaurant or bar scene (and the restaurants in Manhattan, IMO, are unparalled across the globe).

And considering previous "FACTS" stated in the other thread that only 18% of Americans smoke, it sure appears to me that the correct choice is to NOT alienate the non-smokers, regardless of the "scare tactics" used by the other side (Oh, we're losing our "Personal Liberties!").

B.F.S.