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 suzzer99

Yet they didn't in real life in the South. For decades. And there was no sign they were going to.

Which is why we have protected classes. Your analogy fails on many many levels. It's not even like bar owners are refusing to serve non-smokers. They simply say, "if you come to my bar, be prepared to put up with smoke" or Chiefs gear or loud music or live bands or pink walls or whatever environment they decide is ok. BUT NO that isn't good enough. You want to FORCE them to adopt the environment YOU find comfortable. That's bullshit. It makes you and those who support these laws... bullies. End of story.

[Cmd'r&Chief]

And **** smokers. I smoked for 8 years, that shit consumes too much money.I don't feel bad in the least about in-door smoking being banned. I hated going to the bar, and coming out smelling like an ash tray. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who choose to smoke. Why should I get dicked over?

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

And **** smokers. I smoked for 8 years, that shit consumes too much money.I don't feel bad in the least about in-door smoking being banned. I hated going to the bar, and coming out smelling like an ash tray. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who choose to smoke. Why should I get dicked over?

Hey dumbshit, you asked for it the very second you walked in the door knowing the rules of the establishment. You could've went somewhere that didn't allow it.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

And **** smokers. I smoked for 8 years, that shit consumes too much money.I don't feel bad in the least about in-door smoking being banned. I hated going to the bar, and coming out smelling like an ash tray. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who choose to smoke. Why should I get dicked over?

Again... it isn't about the SMOKERS.. it's about the guy who OWNS the bar and gets to CHOOSE what is ok in his bar as long as it is legal. You don;t like it, fine, go to another bar. It's like a smoker going to a non-smoking bar and bitching. It's ridiculous. How would you feel if the smokers got together and passed a law FORCING all bars to allow smoking? Pretty shitty right?
But that would be ok right? Majority rule and all. According to your position, if the smokers are the majority they get to pass laws forcing THEIR environment on others.

Either one is WRONG because they violate the right5s of the person that MATTERS... the private property owner.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

of course, so now non-smoker is a protected class? Don't be a ****ing moron.

I could just as easily say... "do you think it is ok for a majority racist, white town to pass a law saying bar owner's aren't allowed to serve blacks or mexicans." See the problem?

Smokers and non-smokers aren't protected in that way so it is idiotic to try to take the argument down that road.

Let's try to stay away from protected classes and instead look at optional behavior that could offend (ie smoking). As I pointed out before. Let's pretend you live in Texas and open a bar. The majority in town are Cowboys fans.. they find it offensive to be around fans of other teams. Is it ok for that majority to pass a law making it illegal for the bar in question to display Chiefs gear? What about not even displaying Chiefs gear but just ALLOWING patrons to wear Chiefs gear? It would be a RIDICULOUS law. The very idea that someone would be ok with that is ludicrous. That's the exact same situation with smoking bans except that smoking has been demonized to the point that people no longer feel any outrage when private property owner's get ****ed by laws like this.

Yes, you can argue... WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDRENZ!!! WHAT ABOUT THE WORKES HEALTH!!! As I have pointed out... if ETS levels get high enough to violate OSHA's workplace air quality standards then you'd have an argument. They don't, so you don't.

No one really cares about the workers. It's just an excuse to get their way, push their agenda and to bully private property owners. Period. They want non-smoky bars to go to and don;t want to let the MARKET decide. They'd much rather just FORCE private businesses to do what they want.

But what about the lowest common denominator concept? A majority of businesses in a given industry might want better workplace safety laws. But they're afraid they'll lose out in terms of profitability to companies who violate those laws. And don't give me the idea of the companies of violent those laws will go out of business – because it just doesn't work that way. Otherwise sweatshops would never exist. Most consumers don't give a crap where there are items comes from, they just look at the price.

So what happens is everybody gets together and decides on a base set of rules, and then the companies that do things right are punished.

Now extend this concept to the idea that a majority of citizens want to eat and hang out in a smoke-free environment. But all bar and restaurant owners are too scared to be the first to prohibit smoking. So years and years go by and nothing happens.

Also you have a whole cultural stigma where people can't imagine a bar without cigarette smoke. It seems like a fern bar or something really really lame. I thought the exact same way when the smoking bans when in CA. I thought they were stupid and were going to ruin some of my favorite bars. At first I kind of felt they did. But now I love them and enjoy going into these places so much more. And I really notice it when I go to state/country that allows smoking in restaurants or bars. The food and beer doesn't taste as good.

Sometimes people need a little nudging to get over cultural stigmas. Like not serving black people.

Fast-forward to today. We have smoking bans (for 15 years in CA). They haven't hurt anyone's business. If anything they've helped business by bringing out more people who wouldn't have set foot in a bar before the ban. There's a bar near me called Hermosa Saloon that still lets people smoke surreptitiously. Two or three of the girls in our group refuse to set foot in the place. So you can't tell me smoking bans have destroyed business in any way.

Therefore no one has really had their rights violated. So while I'll grant you that the theory part of your argument that property owners rights have been violated might hold some water, the harm part of your argument is complete horse pucky.

People have been claiming that the next right to lose is going to be the road to totalitarianism since the inception of this country. This country is orders of magnitude more socialistic now that was 100 years ago. And yet we've seen the greatest economic expansion the world is ever known, and everyday people's lives are by and large massively better than they were 100 years ago. When I go to Europe which is even more socialistic than us – I don't see a lot of unhappy people walking around in a gray Soviet hellscape. They seem ok.

So I guess I'm much more of a pragmatist than you are about these things.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by dmahurin

Ya 50 years ago, do you think that would fly today?

No, largely because of government action to put a stop to it. Study the Civil Rights Act and civil rights movement sometime.

[dmahurin]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

And **** smokers. I smoked for 8 years, that shit consumes too much money.I don't feel bad in the least about in-door smoking being banned. I hated going to the bar, and coming out smelling like an ash tray. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who choose to smoke. Why should I get dicked over?

And **** pork eaters. I ate pork for 8 years, that shit consumes to much money. I don't feel bad in the least about pork being banned in restaurants. I hated going to the restaurant, and coming out smelling like a pork chop. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who chose to eat pork. Why should I get dicked over?/ equally ridiculous statement

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

It wouldn't anymore though. The mass majority of America is over racism. For some reason we think we need to keep holding on to it though.

Yeah and in a few decades someone will say – "Man do you think anyone would actually open a bar or restaurant that allows smoking in this day and age?". And someone like you will say "Hell no! That's so silly why would they even have a law over it?"

[Cmd'r&Chief]

Originally Posted by Mr. Flopnuts

Hey dumbshit, you asked for it the very second you walked in the door knowing the rules of the establishment. You could've went somewhere that didn't allow it.

Do you seriously believe it's ok to inconvenience everybody else for your habits? Come on bro. Don't be an Ass Clown.

[suzzer99]

Originally Posted by dmahurin

And **** pork eaters. I ate pork for 8 years, that shit consumes to much money. I don't feel bad in the least about pork being banned in restaurants. I hated going to the restaurant, and coming out smelling like a pork chop. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who chose to eat pork. Why should I get dicked over?/ equally ridiculous statement

Come on man. Have you ever had your parents or wife complain about second-hand pork chop smell? One thing is real, and the other is a silly metaphor that makes no sense.

[Cmd'r&Chief]

Originally Posted by dmahurin

And **** pork eaters. I ate pork for 8 years, that shit consumes to much money. I don't feel bad in the least about pork being banned in restaurants. I hated going to the restaurant, and coming out smelling like a pork chop. I didn't ask for that shit. They're the ones who chose to eat pork. Why should I get dicked over?/ equally ridiculous statement

Yeah, yeah. I get it, your butt got hurt...my apologies.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

Do you seriously believe it's ok to inconvenience everybody else for your habits? Come on bro. Don't be an Ass Clown.

Bro, I'm not asking to come over to your home to do it. Don't be an asshole and tell me what to do on someone else's property that doesn't seem to mind...

[dmahurin]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

Do you seriously believe it's ok to inconvenience everybody else for your habits? Come on bro. Don't be an Ass Clown.

Do you believe it's ok to inconvenience everybody else for your lack of habits? Come on bro. Don't be an Ass Clown./ blind & oblivious

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

But what about the lowest common denominator concept? A majority of businesses in a given industry might want better workplace safety laws. But they're afraid they'll lose out in terms of profitability to companies who violate those laws. And don't give me the idea of the companies of violent those laws will go out of business – because it just doesn't work that way. Otherwise sweatshops would never exist. Most consumers don't give a crap where there are items comes from, they just look at the price.

So what happens is everybody gets together and decides on a base set of rules, and then the companies that do things right are punished.

Now extend this concept to the idea that a majority of citizens want to eat and hang out in a smoke-free environment. But all bar and restaurant owners are too scared to be the first to prohibit smoking. So years and years go by and nothing happens.

Also you have a whole cultural stigma where people can't imagine a bar without cigarette smoke. It seems like a fern bar or something really really lame. I thought the exact same way when the smoking bans when in CA. I thought they were stupid and were going to ruin some of my favorite bars. At first I kind of felt they did. But now I love them and enjoy going into these places so much more. And I really notice it when I go to state/country that allows smoking in restaurants or bars. The food and beer doesn't taste as good.

Sometimes people need a little nudging to get over cultural stigmas. Like not serving black people.

Fast-forward to today. We have smoking bans (for 15 years in CA). They haven't hurt anyone's business. If anything they've helped business by bringing out more people who wouldn't have set foot in a bar before the ban. There's a bar near me called Hermosa Saloon that still lets people smoke surreptitiously. Two or three of the girls in our group refuse to set foot in the place. So you can't tell me smoking bans have destroyed business in any way.

Therefore no one has really had their rights violated. So while I'll grant you that the theory part of your argument that property owners rights have been violated might hold some water, the harm part of your argument is complete horse pucky.

This is the first post you have made on the topic that makes sense. There is a good deal of validity to the idea that some bars WANTED a smoking ban but wouldn't act for fear of losing business. I know a number of owners who feel exactly that way. That does NOT however excuse the violation of the OTHER owner's property rights. Period. IF a majority of BAR OWNERS felt this way then a reasonable solution is the one mylonsd proposed. Make smoking bars get a license and limit the number of licenses so that everyone is happy. THAT is the TRUE pragmatic solution to this. I actually think a hybrid approach between his plan and mine (air quality standards based) would be the BEST solution. If you are truly a pragmatist on the topic than hopefully you'd be more inclined to support one of these solutions that still is a burden on private property owners but is not nearly as onerous.

(btw I left off the "slippery slope" part of your post because I agree, it isn't about the chipping away of FURTHER rights to me.. this is simply about THIS battle and why THIS is bad lawmaking.)

[dmahurin]

Originally Posted by Cmd'r&Chief

Yeah, yeah. I get it, your butt got hurt...my apologies.

Yeah, yeah. I get it, your butt gets hurt when people do things you don't like, my apologies.