Honestly, how did "bar" get roped into a "restaurant" law?

I mean, it's pretty simple to distinguish, isn't it? If a place does 80% of their business through liquor sales, let them smoke. I don't know where to draw the line but I can generally determine the difference between a "bar" and a "restaurant" from the parking lot and if that fails then I'll find out within 3 seconds of walking in the front door.

Oh, I care about that but the whole "private" property issue is kinda moot when you beg the general public to frequent your establishment. Weak argument.

Since this lighthearted thread devolved into this discussion anyway, let me just say:

I find this over-reaction simply stupid. Out here in Kalifornia it is illegal to smoke in all restaurants and bars (at least in San Diego for the bars) they are doing a thriving packed house business with covers needed on Fri and Sats in the Gaslamp to even get in. So tell me again how they are not going to survive without smoking being allowed?

Gee, and here I thought that your argument wasn't just weak but nonexistent. I stand corrected.

Was this a rebuttal or a shot?

In Atlanta you can't smoke in restaurants at all. There's one place that I know of called The Vortex that found a workaround. You have to be 18 to eat there. It's a burger joint (a really good one I hear) during the day, and a Swinging Richards or Manhole type of bar at night I hear.

I love eating out and not smelling like smoke. I love not getting sinus infections anymore because I'm in the non-smoking area, but the booth behind me is smoking.

And speaking of people complaining about not being able to smoke, are you pissed that you can't smoke on airplanes anymore?

Are you asking anyone in particular? I don't smoke, so I probably can't help you understand the smoker's perspective. I'm only interested in the rights of business owners.

Well, competition isn't a problem here because you can't smoke anywhere in the state, and few are going to drive at least an hour from Atlanta to go to Tennessee or Alabama. :D

So frankly they're all playing by the same rules.

Smoking bans have saved me money. I'm one of the guys that doesn't go anymore. Restaurants occasionally but I haven't been in a bar in over 8 months. It really benefits me financially, and health wise as I've pretty much just quit drinking. I just think it's bullshit that you are banning a perfectly legal activity in places it's most personally inconvenient. Don't go there. It's pretty pretentious to tell a property and business owner that they can't allow a LEGAL activity in their establishment. Make sure you go out to eat and drink more often non smokers. You OWE it to business owners.

Yeah dude. How dare you complain when John Q Public decides to bend you over and put his penis in your rectal cavity. You OWN that property. Smoking isn't against the law. So how can it be against the law on YOUR property, but not mine? It's unconstitutional. It's anti American. Get pissed, you should be.

That's right. Because Americans have the RIGHT to go to a restaurant. What's next? Are we going to pass laws on the menu? Oh shit........... :Lin:

If you really don't see the difference between smoking indoors, and smoking in a sphere 30,000 ft in the air, then you're kind of a dumbass.

I disagree. If an air carrier decides to offer flights that include smokers, the carrier should be allowed to do just that.

If the carrier decides that they can fill flights by offering nonsmoking fights, they should be encouraged to do that as well. It has nothing to do with enclosed areas; It has everything to do with the owner of the business offering what he chooses to offer.

The market gets to decide whether he guessed correctly.

Don't buy it if you don't like it.

Damn. Where did our balls go?

I agree with the principle. If that's a risk that John Q Consumer wants to take, why shouldn't he be allowed too if the company is willing to let him?

I'd respectfully ask you to get your mind back to the inherent right of the business owner to offer a service that thrives or fails. It's his (and often his stockholders') business. That's all that matters, IMO.