After the fact - KC's smoking ban, three+ years later

[Bowser]

So, now that we have had time to adjust and absorb the smoking ban, how do you feel about it? Was it a good thing, a bad thing, still an unholy infringement on our "civil rights", or do you just not care one way or another?

Poll to come.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

He's got the MSM behind him so in his eyes you're ****ed on the argument.

Exactly. I'm wasting my breath trying to educate him on the facts. Screw it, I may just head to the bar!

[JASONSAUTO]

Originally Posted by OmahaChief

Love it. Going out to bars in KC is much more enjoyable now and now I don't stink like cig smoke when we head back to the hotel. We only come down about 6 to 7 times a year we have enjoyed it more when we are in town.

exactly this
Posted via Mobile Device

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by Turd Burglar

So, now that we have had time to adjust and absorb the smoking ban, how do you feel about it? Was it a good thing, a bad thing, still an unholy infringement on our "civil rights", or do you just not care one way or another?

Poll to come.

It is objectively an injustice inflicted on a fraction of business owners that makes life more convenient for the majority at the expense of a minority that will never grow large enough to exact any measure of revenge. That makes it an easy, if cowardly, political choice.

I don't smoke.

[KChiefer]

AustinChief: Messageboard M.D.

[mlyonsd]

Being locked up in a retirement home with Alzheimer's, dementia, and alone are way better than dying of lung cancer.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

AustinChief: Messageboard M.D.

Well since I have OSHA and FACTS behind me... and you have ... ummm... pretty much nothing... I think I am on much more solid ground.

It's funny that you think you know more about acceptable workplace air quality than OSHA does.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

It is objectively an injustice inflicted on a fraction of business owners that makes life more convenient for the majority at the expense of a minority that will never grow large enough to exact any measure of revenge. That makes it an easy, if cowardly, political choice.

I don't smoke.

Well said.

[KChiefer]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Well since I have OSHA and FACTS behind me... and you have ... ummm... pretty much nothing... I think I am on much more solid ground.

It's funny that you think you know more about acceptable workplace air quality than OSHA does.

And I think it's funny that you think you know more than the American Cancer Society.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by KChiefer

And I think it's funny that you think you know more than the American Cancer Society.

The American Cancer Society has an agenda to push which includes eradicating ALL smoking. Smoking bans help push that agenda. But seriously, don't let the FACTS get in the way of your opinions.

Please explain to all of us why OSHA standards for air quality should not be good enough for bars when they are for EVERY other workplace?

Oh, that's right, you can't.

It's simple. If workplace air quality is your excuse for the law than you need to look at OSHA standards. ETS doesn't violate those standards so the law fails on that issue. Period. Feel free to argue that OSHA standards are too lenient... if you feel that way... take it up with OSHA, don;t make an industry specific law that strips PRIVATE business owners of the rights to choose how to run their business.

[ClevelandBronco]

Here's one for the crowd that likes to impose their will upon business owners:

Colorado GOP gun bill puts onus on businesses that restrict carry

By Lynn Bartels, The Denver Post

The latest gun bill from Republican lawmakers would require business owners to allow concealed-carry permit holders to pack heat or else provide one security officer for every 50 customers and face increased liability....

Read more here: http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...usinesses-that

[KChiefer]

...ETS meets the criteria of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for classification as a potential occupational carcinogen [Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1990]. NIOSH therefore considers ETS to be a potential occupational carcinogen and recommends that exposures be reduced to the lowest feasible concentration. All available preventive measures should be used to minimize occupational exposure to ETS.

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/91-108/

[DJJasonp]

I was in California when they went through the vote and the ban........and all bar owners said the same thing KC bar owners said...."it's going to ruin my business....yada yada yada..."

and no one lost business.

People still need to drink
People still need to get laid.

End of story

On a side note....I was just having this discussion with my wife yesterday about this topic....and was wondering why Nevada (vegas, specifically) hasnt had a smoking ban law enacted.

In California, it was a class-action lawsuit by bartenders and waitresses that prompted the ban.

I'm shocked that casino employees havent tried the same in vegas.

Or maybe the "mob" influence is still there - and scaring people away from doing so???

[KC native]

Originally Posted by Turd Burglar

When this vote was going on, there was a ton of emotion about it around town. I remember being at a 54th Street Grill and Bar one afternoon, and I asked the bartender how she liked it. She was pissed about it, giving the whole civil rights angle. She was also absolutely convinced that establishments such as the one she worked at would suffer, some critically so. As it stands today, it would appear that MORE people go out to me, as these places are constantly packed.

There was a lot of hyperventilating in Dallas when they enacted a ban. The bar owners were saying it was going to kill their businesses.

They followed up between 6-12 months later, all of the bar owners that were bitching before loved it. All of them said they were selling more drinks because people were subbing more drinks for going outside to smoke.

[Bowser]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

It is objectively an injustice inflicted on a fraction of business owners that makes life more convenient for the majority at the expense of a minority that will never grow large enough to exact any measure of revenge. That makes it an easy, if cowardly, political choice.

I don't smoke.

But if nobody is suffering from the decision, is it an injustice?

[DementedLogic]

Originally Posted by Turd Burglar

But if nobody is suffering from the decision, is it an injustice?

Yes. it is a violation of private property rights. That is an injustice. I cannot stand being around smoke, but I understand that a private business owner should have the right to allow smoking at their establishment.