Cigarette Smoking Bans & Ordinances

[TheNiche]

I'm not implying anything other than what I said. People have been smoking in bars forever, it goes along with the territory.

I have no problem with banning smoking in work places etc, simply because it makes sense in those environments. I do however have an issue with it being implemented in bars for the reason I stated above.

Just to play the devil's advocate, a bar is a place of work.

Seriously though, if an employer wants to allow smoking in their office, then I think that that ought to be legal as well. It is up to the employee to decide whether it is acceptable to them.

Edited October 6, 2006 by TheNiche

[Gary]

Just to play the devil's advocate, a bar is a place of work.

Seriously though, if an employer wants to allow smoking in their office, then I think that that ought to be legal as well. It is up to the employee to decide whether it is acceptable to them.

I understand that, I've been making money for years doing business with bars. The problem I have with this is what I initially stated. I do agree that any smoking ban should be determined by business owners and not the Legislature, but that's America.

[TJones]

Just to play the devil's advocate, a bar is a place of work.

Seriously though, if an employer wants to allow smoking in their office, then I think that that ought to be legal as well. It is up to the employee to decide whether it is acceptable to them.

This actually happened, but try the role reversal. The owner of the company made all his employees promise to quit smoking within 30 days and sign a contract to attest to it, or they would lose their jobs. No smoking outside, no smoking ever. The employees would be closely monitored also. There was a big stink, no pun intended, about this and lawsuits ensued. I think the owner actually won. The basis was that the owner would save money on the insurance if he had no smokers in his employment because they would eb considered healthier.

Imagine the next thing being that you had to be a certain weight to work at your office. This actually DOES happen in some jobs I believe, like modeling, cheerleading at the professional level, etc. IMO, it is small civil liberties being taken away, like the smoking ban, that lead to BIGGER ones, as they chip away at your rights, because THEY (Govt.) know what's best for you.

[westguy76]

This actually happened, but try the role reversal. The owner of the company made all his employees promise to quit smoking within 30 days and sign a contract to attest to it, or they would lose their jobs. No smoking outside, no smoking ever. The employees would be closely monitored also. There was a big stink, no pun intended, about this and lawsuits ensued. I think the owner actually won. The basis was that the owner would save money on the insurance if he had no smokers in his employment because they would eb considered healthier.

Imagine the next thing being that you had to be a certain weight to work at your office. This actually DOES happen in some jobs I believe, like modeling, cheerleading at the professional level, etc. IMO, it is small civil liberties being taken away, like the smoking ban, that lead to BIGGER ones, as they chip away at your rights, because THEY (Govt.) know what's best for you.

obesity is not a public health issue. The business I work at has about 60 employees, my premiums would surely be better if we fired the smokers! yeah! and the people with diabetes too! haha (proving your point)

I am not scared of the government they have done a damn fine job creating the best country in the world in just over 200 years.

I think we are getting off topic though.

[TheNiche]

obesity is not a public health issue.

Well fine, if you insist on getting entangled in this "public health issue" matter, lets take it to its furthest extent:

Ex. 1 Poor people in the United States have a higher propensity to eat an imbalanced diet and to become fat. As a result, they are more prone to develop diabetes. Many of them then are unable to afford treatment, and yet *somehow* they are treated. Does this mean that we should force people to eat particular diets, perscribed by the government?

Ex. 2 Communicable diseases including the common cold, the flu, and HIV/AIDs, among a multitude of others, cause billions of dollars in lost productivity and healthcare expenses every year. Does that mean that any time that somebody comes down with a cold and ventures into public that we ought to fine or arrest them? Or perhaps we should just charge sickies a toll for exposing themselves to the world beyond their bedroom?

Ex. 3 You'd never guess how frequently simple falls kill people! It is among the top causes of death in this country, and most occur within peoples' own homes. Should we require by law that everybody wear helmets during every waking moment, including in their own homes?

You get where I'm going? The world is a risky place. People have to make decisions for themselves as to whether or not they want to be exposed to various risks. To the extent that the government should take any action at all on the matter of "public health", it should be to educate and inform people as to those risks in a realistic and objective way. Beyond that, it is up to the individual.

[TJones]

Ex. 1 Poor people in the United States have a higher propensity to eat an imbalanced diet and to become fat. As a result, they are more prone to develop diabetes. Many of them then are unable to afford treatment, and yet *somehow* they are treated. Does this mean that we should force people to eat particular diets, perscribed by the government?

Hmmm....interesting, if said "poor" are living off the Government tit, then perhaps. That is a whole new can of worms though.

[TheNiche]

Hmmm....interesting, if said "poor" are living off the Government tit, then perhaps. That is a whole new can of worms though.

Do bear in mind, given the impossibility of knowing who is most susceptible to diabetes or who will 'abuse' their bodies, the diet controls would have to be broadly implemented throughout the population as a premptive measure. All for the "public health", right?

[RedScare]

Another fine example of the pussification of America. But, I do find it amusing to hear people complain that smoking makes it unhealthy for them when they go into a BAR!

[infinite_jim]

as an event promoter, houston is a tough crowd, take their smokes away at the bar and seriously consider just declaring the scene "dead" as a whole.

Besides, is houston not known for it's emphasis on business?

edit: I'd like to see a design compromise, where all new bars must accomodate "x" amount of HEPA filtration n ventilation. All established venues/bars can remain as is. Imagine the cotton exchange and not being able to get your heffner on a stoogie, lolz!

Edited October 7, 2006 by infinite_jim

[TJones]

Another fine example of the pussification of America. But, I do find it amusing to hear people complain that smoking makes it unhealthy for them when they go into a BAR!

"Lungs before Liver" I always say ! A healthy Bar, I know that is the first thing I look for in the Zagat's guide when choosing a place to get my drunk on !

[Guest Marty]

You lose your right to fresh air when you enter my bar. Its my property or are we living the life style of the CCCP AKA USSR. Wheres my Vodka?

Edited October 7, 2006 by Marty

[ricco67]

In Austin, butts on the ground outside of bars is now a huge problem. Come on people. Don't mess with Texas.

Butts on the ground is a common problem to begin with. Not only around bars, but around building entrances. It seems that smokers just don't seem to realize that there are usually trash cans nearby.

Am I living on Mars (don't answer that) or are we still talking about a smoking ban in bars? That's ludicrous. I've been playing in bars for 23 years and can't imagine one without people smoking, I means it's a bar for crying out loud.

The Mucky Duck will usually have two shows, one with smoking and one without. Depending on the acts, they're both usually sold out.

[ToolMan]

I think the bars will survive...they have in Austin and NYC too.

I'm looking forward to all of the new patios that will be built - there is nothing better than drinking a beer or margarita on a nice day on a patio. I talked with one of the bar owners downtown and he should have his patio built within a couple of weeks.

[musicman]

I talked with one of the bar owners downtown and he should have his patio built within a couple of weeks.

a REAL patio or just tables on the sidewalk? should help places like mkt square bar and grill since they already have a nice one.

[westguy76]

Well fine, if you insist on getting entangled in this "public health issue" matter, lets take it to its furthest extent:

Ex. 1 Poor people in the United States have a higher propensity to eat an imbalanced diet and to become fat. As a result, they are more prone to develop diabetes. Many of them then are unable to afford treatment, and yet *somehow* they are treated. Does this mean that we should force people to eat particular diets, perscribed by the government?

Ex. 2 Communicable diseases including the common cold, the flu, and HIV/AIDs, among a multitude of others, cause billions of dollars in lost productivity and healthcare expenses every year. Does that mean that any time that somebody comes down with a cold and ventures into public that we ought to fine or arrest them? Or perhaps we should just charge sickies a toll for exposing themselves to the world beyond their bedroom?

Ex. 3 You'd never guess how frequently simple falls kill people! It is among the top causes of death in this country, and most occur within peoples' own homes. Should we require by law that everybody wear helmets during every waking moment, including in their own homes?

You get where I'm going? The world is a risky place. People have to make decisions for themselves as to whether or not they want to be exposed to various risks. To the extent that the government should take any action at all on the matter of "public health", it should be to educate and inform people as to those risks in a realistic and objective way. Beyond that, it is up to the individual.

No you don't get it people have every right to make decisions for themselves the issue is unlike every other example you gave public smoking is forcing smoke on me its a by-product not an individual vice. So I believe, in my opinion, that smoking is an epidemic that affects more than just the people that partake in it, so it is the governments responsibility to ensure the health of the innocent is protected. Lest we all have to pay for it like we are now.(rising insurance costs)

now excuse me while i go light one up

Actually smoking is not even the 6th, 7th, or 10th thing i think about when i go into a bar but at the end of the night i think about it when i smell the stench and my eyes sting. I don't mind being called a puss on a message board either. I was just trying to make i thought a valid point people are overlooking about infringement of rights. I might not have verbalized it well enough but this issue is clearly different than falling off a ladder or drinking heavily or spreading the flu UNINTENTIONALLY.

Edited October 10, 2006 by westguy76

[TheNiche]

No you don't get it people have every right to make decisions for themselves the issue is unlike every other example you gave public smoking is forcing smoke on me its a by-product not an individual vice. So I believe, in my opinion, that smoking is an epidemic that affects more than just the people that partake in it, so it is the governments responsibility to ensure the health of the affected. Lest we all have to pay for it like we are now.(rising insurance costs)

Smoking is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to rising insurance costs, which are much more closely linked with insurance and tax policy as well as demographic shifts. In fact, the general decline in the percentage of the population that are smokers would likely indicate downward pressure on insurance costs...not that they couldn't admittedly be lower still.

My key point, though, is that you have a choice as to whether you want to expose yourself to second hand smoke. Nobody forces you into a smokey bar or a restaurant except yourself. Very simple.

Actually smoking is not even the 6th, 7th, or 10th thing i think about when i go into a bar but at the end of the night i think about it when i smell the stench and my eyes sting. I don't mind being called a puss on a message board either. I was just trying to make i thought a valid point people are overlooking about infringement of rights. I might not have verbalized it well enough but this issue is clearly different than falling off a ladder or drinking heavily or spreading the flu UNINTENTIONALLY.

If it is so low on your list of priorities, then why do you care? And if it stinks and stings so much, then why don't you care enough to think about it at the door? Is it the government's responsibility to protect you from your own forgetfulness?

And if you want to talk about infringement of rights, what about smokers' rights? What about proprietors' rights? What right have you to tell them what they can and cannot do?

[new major on the block]

How about just having the employees that smoke sign waivers so the insurance won't cover any smoking related illnesses. Therefore the insurance company is saving money and the smoker can smoke. Sounds simple enough to me. It seems that there are so many things that are getting out of hand in this country and the world for that matter. Perhaps the city council needs to focus more time on helping law enforcment catch crimminals, instead of worrying about someone smoking tobacco in a ventilated space.

Dear City Council, MYOGDFB!

sincerely, John Q. Public

P.S. Get a real job!!!!

They always want to take the fun out of life. A few years ago I used to hang out at the james coney island on westheimer on saturday nights. There was always a large gathering of motorcycles there. It was quite entertaining watching the exotic cars cruise by and watch the stunt riders bust tricks out on the street. Maybe there was some illegal activity going on and then again, maybe not. One saturday night some security guards tipped everyone off that the cops were on their way down to the james coney island to do a bust. We all took off and met up at the sonic. I ran over to the Kmart to use the restroom and when I came out all hell broke loose. The cops were everywhere, helicopters with their spotlights flying overhead, and teenagers running through the parking lot trying to avoid police. The infamous Kmart raid was because city council wanted to crack down on illegal street racing. Westheimer hasn't been the same since.

[Guest Marty]

^^^^ I here that ^^^^ I smoke at Bars but never at restaurants. Too many busybodies for my liking. So i drink and eat at home. So go fetch me a beer please.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Marty

[westguy76]

Smoking is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to rising insurance costs, which are much more closely linked with insurance and tax policy as well as demographic shifts. In fact, the general decline in the percentage of the population that are smokers would likely indicate downward pressure on insurance costs...not that they couldn't admittedly be lower still.

My key point, though, is that you have a choice as to whether you want to expose yourself to second hand smoke. Nobody forces you into a smokey bar or a restaurant except yourself. Very simple.

If it is so low on your list of priorities, then why do you care? And if it stinks and stings so much, then why don't you care enough to think about it at the door? Is it the government's responsibility to protect you from your own forgetfulness?

And if you want to talk about infringement of rights, what about smokers' rights? What about proprietors' rights? What right have you to tell them what they can and cannot do?

The whole point is I don't have a choice if I want to go to a public bar. Thats why they are trying to protect my freedom to do that with out being subject to harmful fumes.

what are smoker's rights I must have missed that one is it in the bill of rights or something. comeon!

[musicman]

according to today's chronicle sounds like the ban may not be successful.

[TJones]

The whole point is I don't have a choice if I want to go to a public bar. Thats why they are trying to protect my freedom to do that with out being subject to harmful fumes.

what are smoker's rights I must have missed that one is it in the bill of rights or something. comeon!

You do have a choice, find a bar that doesn't allow smoking as decided by the owner of the property, or why don't YOU go out on the patio and breathe in the fresh air, while all the people who aren't scared of secondhand smoke mingle inside.

[Brak]

I heard it eventually if you smoke in your car or home and children are present, you can be arrested for Child Endangerment........afterall, a child has no say in the matter..........

[Pumapayam]

. . .or why don't YOU go out on the patio and breathe in the fresh air, while all the people who aren't scared of secondhand smoke mingle inside.

Houston weather sometimes discourages patio mingling.

[TheNiche]

The whole point is I don't have a choice if I want to go to a public bar. Thats why they are trying to protect my freedom to do that with out being subject to harmful fumes.

what are smoker's rights I must have missed that one is it in the bill of rights or something. comeon!

Barring the possibility that some government entity somewhere has opened a bar, there is no such place as a public bar. I brought up the idea of smokers' rights only because it is absurd...I figured that you might then have an epiphany regarding the equally-absurd nature of non-smokers' rights, but I guess that I gave you too much credit.

[new major on the block]

I guess it comes back to the old "your rights end where my rights begin" statment. I never had a smoker force their cigerette smoke down my lungs but it sure seems that the nonsmoking entity is.

[escapee]

I heard it eventually if you smoke in your car or home and children are present, you can be arrested for Child Endangerment........afterall, a child has no say in the matter..........

Exposing children to smoke is child abuse. Smokers are addicts. As such, they are self-absorbed, selfish, and inconsiderate (a generality, I know. go ahead and kick me. you'll have to find me first!). Hence, butts on the ground. Anyone who HAS to feed his addiction ignores the needs and rights of others.

If smokers cared a damn about anyone but themselves, there would be no need for laws protecting others. Smokers' rights start where others' noses begin. Stay home and smoke and drink yourselves dead. Just hurry it up and don't make the taxpayers pay for your smoke/drink related illnesses.

There. That should stir things up some more.

[Saddleman]

/\/\/\ tru dat

[TJones]

Exposing children to smoke is child abuse. Smokers are addicts. As such, they are self-absorbed, selfish, and inconsiderate (a generality, I know. go ahead and kick me. you'll have to find me first!). Hence, butts on the ground. Anyone who HAS to feed his addiction ignores the needs and rights of others.

If smokers cared a damn about anyone but themselves, there would be no need for laws protecting others. Smokers' rights start where others' noses begin. Stay home and smoke and drink yourselves dead. Just hurry it up and don't make the taxpayers pay for your smoke/drink related illnesses.

There. That should stir things up some more.

So, I guess that means the Non-smokers only get to drink themselves dead ? Why not serve cookies and milk at these tar-lung free bars also ?

IT"S A FRIGGIN" BAR ! You don't go to a bar to be "healthy". I got it ! They can install a BAR at your local 24hr. fitness, and you can kick back with a Mai Tai, while you are on the treadmill trying to pick up the drunk broad next to you on the stairmaster, while her fat friend tries to run interference by jumping in between you two while doing her pilates.

[west20th]

So, I guess that means the Non-smokers only get to drink themselves dead ? Why not serve cookies and milk at these tar-lung free bars also ?

IT"S A FRIGGIN" BAR ! You don't go to a bar to be "healthy". I got it ! They can install a BAR at your local 24hr. fitness, and you can kick back with a Mai Tai, while you are on the treadmill trying to pick up the drunk broad next to you on the stairmaster, while her fat friend tries to run interference by jumping in between you two while doing her pilates.

Funny you should mention 24HR. Fitness (or any gym). Back in the day (I'm showing my age here) I remember people actually smoking in gyms. Do a set, have a smoke, repeat as necessary. Actually, even smoking at my desk at work seems so odd to me now. It's only been about 15 years since that went away.

[heights_yankee]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the employees in bars. After all, there are a lot of people (i.e. students) that need this kind of work schedule. Why should they be trying to do something as simple as put themselves through school and be subjected to smoke?