Where does eveyone stand on smoking bans?

[RNR]

I think it should be up to the owner, and would even be willing to have it up to the owner if you have to be 21 to enter. City wide is bullshit IMO

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Skip Towne

My mother made it to 89 but the last few years weren't really living. You go ahead to 100, I'll pass.

My great grandmother lived to 100.

She was a chain smoker.

She died while working in her yard.

[ChiefaRoo]

Originally Posted by Skip Towne

My mother made it to 89 but the last few years weren't really living. You go ahead to 100, I'll pass.

From G-pa on my mom's side is 88. He's not what he used to be at 78 but he still drives and still hangs with the family. He does have poor circulation in his legs. That being said he never worked out a day.

[jAZ]

I think it should be up to the community how to regulate the businesses and how to protect the employees.

That means the community should be allowed to ban smoking, even in bars if they choose.

That said, I think the community really should consider the economic impact on the businesses. By that I mean, region wide or state-wide smoking bans have the impact of creating a level playing field for all businesses.

However, in a city like KC where there is a wide array of cities in a close distance, banning smoking in one will simply push business down the street into the next town where smoking is allowed.

State wide or county wide bans are far better for this reason.

Arizona has a state-wide ban on smoking, and business hasn't been hurt at all. The threat that "people will just stay home" was bogus. In fact, I think more people are out now.

However, my dad is a smoker and a regular at a Lenexa bar. Lenexa banned smoking and the bar really has lost a lot of business because people will go down to Shawnee (?) to smoke and drink and socialize.

But that impact needs to be factored into the decision of the community. The community has a rightful role in regulating the safety of businesses.

[Hound333]

I guess I will chime in here. I am for bans anywhere kids might be going. I don't care if you allow it in bars or anyplace thats 18+ I just don't want my kids around it and I avoid any place that I smell it when with my kids.

[HonestChieffan]

as the numbers of smokers gets smaller and smaller the impact economically from a ban is of no consequence.

[Nzoner]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Businesses are making much ado about nothing IMO. They have only anecdotal evidence that this is going to harm them, but they're scared to death of change.

I was recently in Tennessee and upon entering a sports bar and grill noticed a sign on the door that read NO ONE UNDER 21 ALLOWED DUE TO SMOKING LAW.

Later that evening as I was enjoying the game, a drink and a smoke I asked the owner(whom I'd met earlier)what exactly did the sign mean.

He replied to me that under Tenn law any establishment serving food could not allow smoking unless all patrons were 21 or over and when the law passed he opted to not allow 20 and under in because he got more business from the over 21 crowd wanting to watch sports,drink and smoke and that those people who normally stayed entire days on Sundays would spend more on food as well.

Personally,I like the idea of letting the business decide then in turn the customer base can decide.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by jAZ

However, my dad is a smoker and a regular at a Lenexa bar. Lenexa banned smoking and the bar really has lost a lot of business because people will go down to Shawnee (?) to smoke and drink and socialize.

As of 13 days ago I think your dad and his buddies are looking for a new locale.

[Spott]

Originally Posted by jAZ

Arizona has a state-wide ban on smoking, and business hasn't been hurt at all. The threat that "people will just stay home" was bogus. In fact, I think more people are out now.

They did the same thing here in Florida about 5 years ago and restaurants are still just as packed as they were before. A couple of restaurants stopped serving food to accommodate smokers. The only thing that is going to keep people from going out to eat are real economic issues. As long as people have money, they will still go out to eat/drink.

Now maybe the restaurants in KC can try and figure out that sweet tea thing.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

As of 13 days ago I think your dad and his buddies are looking for a new locale.

His buddies already left. He's too lazy to go anywhere, and doesn' smoke that much anymore, so he's fine (but pissed).

But I guess a large group of people stopped going to the bar because they don't have to go far to be allowed to smoke.

It's hard on the bar owners.

To make it worse, I guess it wasn't a ballot initiative, but rather a city council vote. So "the people" didn't even directly approve it.

Which isn't the case in AZ. Ours was an landslide victory at the ballot box.

[Bowser]

I'm for the ban. Sorry, smokers. Don't yell the people who want the ban, yell at RJ Reynolds and related peoples for making that shit so damned addictive.

[Simplex3]

Originally Posted by jAZ

His buddies already left. He's too lazy to go anywhere, and doesn' smoke that much anymore, so he's fine (but pissed).

I'm 90% sure Shawnee banned smoking at the first of the year. At the rate the metro area is going your dad's buddies will be back in no time.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by Spott

They did the same thing here in Florida about 5 years ago and restaurants are still just as packed as they were before. A couple of restaurants stopped serving food to accommodate smokers. The only thing that is going to keep people from going out to eat are real economic issues. As long as people have money, they will still go out to eat/drink.

Now maybe the restaurants in KC can try and figure out that sweet tea thing.

They banned smoking in ALL public places (bars and resturants).

In fact, it was interesting, because the tobacco companies financed an intersting effort to impact the election.

I was sure that they were going to win with it.

The citizens groups put the first ballot iniative on that said ban all smoking in public places including bars.

The tobacco companies themselves then came in and sponsored a 2nd ballot initiative that put a legal in bars, but not resturants option on the ballot.

They were hoping to dilute the fist one with the 2nd one.

They were effectively giving up on resturaunts. I guess that wasn't a big deal at all for them.

I was sure that this was going to work, but it didn't.

I think both passed overwhelmingly (like 70+% each) and thus the stricter one took effect anyway (because it got more votes anyway).

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by Simplex3

I'm 90% sure Shawnee banned smoking at the first of the year. At the rate the metro area is going your dad's buddies will be back in no time.

Interesting. I'll tell him that.

[Mr. Laz]

oooh .... here comes the PC tough guys.

smoking ban = people are too soft and get offended too easily

pussification of America



until of course somebody says something they don't like ... then the PC tough guys turn crybaby bitch.

[RNR]

I am impressed with the tought put into many of the repleys. I understand both veiw points but still feel it should be left up to the owner.