Surgeon general: No safe level of secondhand smoke

I see you have no answer, your arguments are done and you just think people should be able to smoke in bars and that is it, who cares how dangerous it is to the employees.

Sorry, I have not read one argument that would make want to risk someone’s health at their work place just to keep a smoker from having to go out side to smoke.


wnes; How did you know I use to smoke? BTW I actually support smoker’s rights to smoke but not at a cost of putting another human being at risk: and second hand smoke doesn't offend me,

 

your bar is outside, i don't think people really have an issue with anyone smoking outdoors.

 

Ding, ding, ding. we have a winner. Exactly the problem with our country nowadays.

 

There's a benefit to people with a deficiency of dopamine. My doctor told me the only other way to self-administer it is to develop a cocaine habit. And that just makes you smoke more.

I'm a singer and God knows quitting would probably add to the longevity of my voice, but if I didn't have reasons to smoke and drink and smokey bars to play in I wouldn't have any songs to write or anyone to hear them.

 

What's sort of funny is that this argument gets rehashed everywhere a smoking ban is proposed.

And once it's in....people adjust pretty quick.

I'd join the Fisher-Texx alliance, except that Texx guy's always been a little too PC for me.

 

I was referring to myself in that post. Shoulda put a "(me)" right next to "this former smoker" to avoid the ambiguity.

Well anyway, glad you quitted smoking , brah!

 

I feel like as a non smoker I should have the right to go enjoy myself somewhere without having to breathe smoke. Of course, the right of a smoker is much more important than a non smoker so why should we even try. It isn't like there are many, if any, non smoking bars. It is just common courtesy. I know I many say that it is about the workers or whatever but for me its just because I don't want to be around it. It is disgusting. I hate coming home after going out and completely stinking like smoke. I have to throw my clothes in the washer and take a freaking shower because you are just bathed in it.

I find it humorous that smokers get so bent out of shape over this. What is even more funny is that no matter how much smokers don't like it, they are going to have to deal with it. So go ahead and get all of your b****ing over with now.

 

There is a small cigar shop by my house. The owner is the only one who works there. People go there to try cigars etc. Under the fascist law this can not take place anymore. Welcome to the new regime.

People who smoke can work at smoking establishments. That is THE answer. Use your brain just a tiny bit please.

 

Usually under the ban, establishments that generate 50% or more (or some number) of their revenue from the sale of tobacco can still allow smoking.

 

I'm sorry but I have no answer you. You now wish to discriminate against people who don't smoke by not allowing then to work at certain establishments? Or if they do they have to risk there health.

BTW: in NYC you can smoke in few certain "cigar bars" and in tobacco shops.

 

But that's what the fascists ultimately want, smoking outlawed completely. It was been stated in this thread.

 

A complete ban of smoking is silly. A ban in restaurants and bars is not.

 

You risk you health at countless jobs. I'm not going to be doing construction on a skyscraper anytime soon.

Look, we just want a few places to have a smoke and drink. It is not asking too much.

 

no they don't! those "fascists" make big money taxing the stuff. they don't want it gone! they own stock in Reynolds....and then they tax the end user like crazy.

 

stop being silly. People who don't like smoke in bars aren't fascists anymore than people who oppose GWB are terrorists.

 

It is in the bars I go to.

 

I'm not presuming an efficient outcome. An efficient outcome would be for non-smokers who cared about smoking in bars to vote with their feet. The inefficient outcome is to ban the practice. That's my point. It is easier for nonsmokers to support a ban than it would be for them to stop going to their favorite restaurant or bar for a few weeks while letting the owner know that smoking was the reason. The BEST outcome would be for those opposed to smoking to vote with their feet - that would provide for both sides of this debate. It is incontrivertable that nonsmokers could affect the marketplace without legislating out the practice of smoking.