Ban takes effect next September..... http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/4268416.html City Council expands indoor smoking ban to most bars By ALEXIS GRANT Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle The City Council voted today to extend Houston's indoor smoking ban to bars but to continue allowing smoking in outdoor patios and in bars that promote cigar smoking and derive significant revenue from tobacco sales. The 13-2 vote was a victory for Mayor Bill White, who wanted to extend the ban while leaving some locations available for public smoking. The only dissenters were council members Addie Wiseman and Michael Berry, who had said previously that they opposed any extension of the ban and that the decision on whether to allow smoking should be up to individual businesses. The council rejected several amendments that would have weakened the ordinance or extended its reach. The only amendment approved expands the band to include meetings of non-profit organizations at their own facilities. Such functions would have been exempt from the ban under White's original proposal. The new rules take effect next September. Houston's existing law prohibits smoking in dining areas of restaurants but allows it at bars. Customers can smoke at bars within restaurants so long as the smoke doesn't drift into the dining area. The Council had appeared divided on the issue since White proposed his ordinance to weeks ago, but united behind it after a week of lobbying and testimony from interests on both sides - notably anti-smoking activists and bar owners who feared a ban would hurt their businesses.
bunch of clean air loving pansies. In Austin they are just nutting up and taking the fines. The last time I was there the bartender cut me open an empty tallboy to use as an ashtray. It's a bar, stupid. Regards, Brock
Why should you be able to force me to inhale your smoke? I have a right to go anywhere and no be hindered by your smellyness, including a business that wants to allow it. I don't even know why there is a cigar exception. I ought to be able to go there too and not have to endure second hand smoke.
Why would you want to go to a cigar bar if you don't want to be around cigar smoke? You must be pretty dumb.
why should anyone legislate whether a business wants to allow smoking in their bar? If you don't like it, go somewhere else. Take a look at the nightlife in Austin these days and you will see that the smoking ban is killing off bars left and right. Most of the people who voted for the ban in Austin don't go to bars. No-one is forcing you to inhale it. You chose to go to a bar, stupid.
You can't smoke in bars? I vote for banning prayer in church. But anyway, I hope most bar owners are clever enough to put up a big cigarette display, or a humidor, and then say they get a significant amout of their income from tobacco sales.
Pansy. Let consumers decide. If you don't like the smoke, go spend your money somewhere else. The bar owners then can decide if your missing dollars are worth the smoke.
Smoking in bar was banned long time ago in Canada. Everyone has to smoke outside in the chilling Winter. That's how I quit smoking. Very effective
I have a right to be able to go anywhere without breathing your smelly smoke. Hopefully they'll soon outlaw it everywhere including your living rooms! That way if you invite me to dinner I won't have to die from your habit.
yeah and they shouldn't let people be buried with cigs, even if it's in their will, because someone might dig them up and be offended by the pack of decomposed reds in the coffin.
Why is bars italicized, and how is the analogy correct? It's called a bar because it's a countertop (bar) where drink (and food) is served. Some people may want to be able to go to numerous establishments and drink without having to inhale second hand smoke. I can see the argument of why not let the businesses decide, but then, why not let them decide if it is okay to sell crack? I don't think it makes sense to argue that all law/policy should be based on free market economic actions. Given the obvious dangers of smoking (to the smoker and others), I do think it makes more sense to ban smoking unless special exceptions/permits are acquried, such as in a cigar bar (or elsewhere as necessary), as oppossed to having no rules at all and letting the "market" decide.
then they should ban drinking in bars too. And fried food. And hot wings with ranch dressing. they should also ban hot waitresses as that could give me a heart attack. Who is banning the cars from the Houston roads that are probably doing more damage to your lungs than I am? While we are at it, we should ban the sun. that damn sun gives you skin cancer! It's a bar, stupid.
Cigs are legal..crack is not. Not allowing smoking in a place of business that wants it is bs. If you don't wanna smell smoke, don't go there. It's a BAR!!!! That's like me saying I don't wanna see strippers on the corner when I go to Vegas, or that I don't wanna see lil kids when I go to MJ's crib.
Exactly. Possession, distribution, production, and consumption of crack are illegal. Not so with cigarettes. Poor analogy.
Smoking is legal. Huge difference between that and your half-assed analogy. I do tend to think this law will be carried out about as well as the three-foot rule. A tavern owner should have every right to decide whether smoking is allowed. Much the same as business owners can state they only hire non-smokers, whether it is on their own time, or not. You can't have both, IMO.
It has nothing to do with smokers or non-smoker. It was to do with everyone having the right to safe working environment. We installed safe procedures for working in a coal mine and well as making other businesses have clean air for the their employees whose air quality is far less toxic than a smoky bar. The air quality of a smoky bar is worse than the Lincoln tunnel at rush hour. Please don't make the lame argument that people can don't have to work there if they don't want the health hazards. It hasn't worked for a long time. Everyone has the right to a safe work environment.
