Smoking ban won't hurt bars, restaurtants

PicassoIII wrote:

Before anyone labels me bigoted, i came very close to marrying into a clan, so piss off.

One of the middle daughters, 6 kids total.

fun lovin life wrote:

<quoted text>
That's still not a very good reason to undermine the Constitution and our Civil Liberties..

Sure it is, what part of the Constitution are you referencing?
And by the way, there is no such animal as civil liberty in a Republic.

SassyVarmit wrote:

<quoted text>
I have seen the exact same thing happen in Colorado.
It amazes me, the amount of people that have listened to the lies the Anti smoking machine spews, and, because it suits their purposes, ignore the obvious financial consequences the business owners pay to make them more comfortable.
It is also clear, that it has nothing to do with health, or, the health of the workers... it is about power, and, abuse of that power. Just read the posts on this thread - that should be all the proof that anyone should need.(Non-smoker)

That is quite a mouth full coming from a non-smoker. Obviously you are in some way affiliated with a business that has been affected by the smoking ban. Your comment about the smoking ban having nothing to do with your health is so very far off from reality. Take a look at Wisconsin and their attempt to get a smoking ban. The Wisconsin Tavern League has used their power and only their power to cut the ban down in legislation. the tavern league didn't use their head nor did they consider the negative health affects smoking has on people. If you want to talk about power just look at the corrupt tavern leagues and you will see that you are completely incorrect. There should be no argument about a smoking ban. If businesses cannot adapt and bring back their so called "loyal customers" after a smoking ban, then they should hang it up and go out of business. If a state is completely smoke free, then where do the smokers go? They can't go to the bar down the road or to a bar in the next city. They either decide not to support your business and stay home and choke on their smoke or go to your bar/restaurant and provide you with the same service they had given you before the smoking ban. This is just getting completely out of hand and people like you are confirming that the United States is becoming dumber and dumber everyday.

fluteman greg wrote:

<quoted text>What you say doesn't mean sqaut, nazi. It's up to or should be up to the owner what the smoking policy is in the adult only establishment. Plus since you felt the need to butt in, my post was directed to AnnaLynn since she (also an anti) agrees that smoking bans aren't necessary in adult only establishments. Now go crawl back into your un-American hole.

Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
NO loss of business. I find that impossible to believe.

How many examples of bars closing in Canada do you need? Moron.

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

You're an idiot. New customers will be added. Helloooooo McFly..... record numbers of bar/pub owners are losing their business directly related to the smoking bans. New customers my a$$.

Since you're for smoking bans on private property, what time may we all stop by and place a few bans on your private property?

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

Spoken like a true "non-business owner". Tell me, what do you do for a living? Probably a dredge on society who relies on the big brother government to take care of him so he does not have to take care of himself.

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

I've avoided making any postings in these forums over the past several weeks because I found it impossible to reason with "antis". Your posting is so idiotic that it deserves no comment except to say the Fluteman Greg has more class in his little finger than you will ever hope to have in your entire life. From a non-smoker and a non-business owner.

I have an idea..let's just ban alcohol too. At all public places. This way ALL the bars will go out of business, the drunks will stay home and off the roads, and NO ONE will have to concern themselves with secondhand smoke AND I won't have to put up with second hand drunks. Sound fair?

Make the restaurants non-smoking. No problem. But as long as smoking cigarettes is legal, each bar owner should have the right to make that decision for themselves. If the bar publicly says it is a smoking friendly environment then if you don't want to be in that environment DON'T GO IN!

Terrible statistics have been added...)))) More interesting a question who from you smokes?) or more correctly to ask a question "does not smoke"?

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
That is quite a mouth full coming from a non-smoker. Obviously you are in some way affiliated with a business that has been affected by the smoking ban. affects smoking has on people. If you want to talk about power just look at the corrupt tavern leagues and you will see that you are completely incorrect. There should be no argument about a smoking ban. If businesses cannot adapt and bring back their so called "loyal customers" after a smoking ban, then they should hang it up and go out of business. If a state is completely smoke free, then where do the smokers go? They can't go to the bar down the road or to a bar in the next city. They either decide not to support your business and stay home and choke on their smoke or go to your bar/restaurant and provide you with the same service they had given you before the smoking ban. This is just getting completely out of hand and people like you are confirming that the United States is becoming dumber and dumber everyday.

I am a fellow Wisconsinite and I can tell you it has absolutely nothing to do with health. OSHA handles the health issues for workers and they have found that under normal circumstances it would not exceed their standards. When OSHA made that decision ASH threatened to sue them. The other anti-smoking groups got them do drop the suit because if they lost it would be the end of these bans, it is as simple as that.

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

I think that you are the one that should shut the hell up and get a clue. For one thing you are taking property rights away from the owner of the business. Smoke free has promised those new customers every where they passed a ban, Guess what they never appeared.
http://banthebanwisconsin.wordpress.com/2008/...
http://banthebanwisconsin.wordpress.com/2008/...
I was on Smoke Free Wisconsin’s blog and they, brag about the Success in Washington state. I have not found any information on Washington yet but I will keep looking, funny though, they claim success there but where it is failing they blame the economy ... Hmmmm. I will be gone for the 4th, but I wanted to review Smoke Free’s success stories:

While Mayor Bloomberg tries to make the world safe from greenhouse gases, his cigarette ban is going up in smoke.

Scores of trendy clubs and neighborhood pubs across the five boroughs have become smoking speakeasies, where bartenders and bouncers regularly ignore the prohibition launched in 2003.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05272007/ …

Landlords are fighting to keep their head above water faced with a choice between bending the rules or going out of business.

Before long the traditional community pub could be a thing of the past.
One landlord, who allows his customers to smoke after hours, says:“I would say at least half of pubs like this are doing what we do.

http://www.lep.co.uk/features/Landlords-ignor...

TAYLORVILLE, Ill.— The sign on the door of the American Tap warns patrons not to smoke. But sitting at the bar, customers merrily puff away, sharing cigarettes with the bartender and the owner while openly defying and mocking the state’s ban on indoor smoking.

“I told the health department weeks ago,’Go ahead and fine me,’” said owner Gary McWard, flicking an ash from his cigarette into an empty beer can on the bar top.“And I’m still waiting.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworl...

More than 6,000 pubs in the UK could close in the next five years if they do not deal with the impact of the smoking ban and the current squeeze on customer spending.

According to a report by consultancy PricewaterhouseCoopers, 2,000 pubs could cease trading in 2008 alone as the industry continues to struggle to adjust a year after the smoking ban was introduced throughout the UK.

http://www.caterersearch.com/Articles/2008/06... -…

Makes one wonder what exactly is the compliance rate in Washington? Do good laws make criminals out of honest, hard working businessmen?

IF TRUTH IS ON THEIR SIDE, WHY DO THEY LIE?

I have owned a bar for 8 years, the smoking ban has cost me 40% in sales and I am seriosly considering closing my doors. I am almost the only business left in my small town and if I close my community may not survive. I have tried many things to counter the effects of this ban but here in redneck country the good old boys will just go drink out on the back forty and smoke thier stoggies anyway!

Smoking Ban wrote:

<quoted text>
Welcome to INdiana, where like any other republican lead state, nothing good gets done. The problem with letting a decision like this up to the business owners is that they cannont handle something as powerful as this. They are too stupid to see the big picture and realize taht any loyal customers will return to your business even if a smoking ban is in place. Plus new customers will be added who wouldn't normally go to a place that is filled with smoking. Get a clue here and shut the hell up about something you obviously have no idea about what you are talking about.

Wgere did you ever get the impression that people patronized bars to 'support' them? People go to bars because it's a place for them to do those things that make it worth the trip for them - whether it's for food, drink, smoke, conversation, gathering and/or all of the above. No one gets going with the idea that they need to patronize an establishment because the owner needs the money!

Sorry --- but IF the intent is to go to a place and hang for a few hours with friends, have some refreshments, talk and LIGHT up (if it is a smoking establishment), then if the place is non-smoking, it's not the desired place to go for many. EVEN those who have been customers for a long time.

Smoking bans kill businesses.

Drew wrote:

<quoted text> I've avoided making any postings in these forums over the past several weeks because I found it impossible to reason with "antis". Your posting is so idiotic that it deserves no comment except to say the Fluteman Greg has more class in his little finger than you will ever hope to have in your entire life. From a non-smoker and a non-business owner.

Well put -- Thanks for that post.

Fred_Flynn-Stone wrote:

<quoted text>
Sure it is, what part of the Constitution are you referencing?
And by the way, there is no such animal as civil liberty in a Republic.

How about the part where it says that legislation is not allowed to create laws that place one type of establishment above another... interferring with legal commerce ???

Tanner's Bar and Grill, a long time favorite of mine at 10th and Broadway in downtown Kansas City, Missouri is one of the first to go down as a result of the government imposed smoking ban in the City. They have relocated however, in nearby Gladstone, MO where the rights of property owners are still respected. Smoking is allowed and I urge all smokers and non smokers who want to support such businesses to get out and partronize the new Tanner's on Antioch Road in Gladstone. It has everything you want in a good sports bar and grill.

Bans-dont-hurt wrote:

Lived in NYC, and now live in KCMO, and I can say from personal experience that the bar scene will remain alive and well -- and will likely increase to some extent -- following the ban.
The one segment that the ban will hurt is the tobacco industry, which is why they're funding so heavily the so-called "business rights" lobby.
I ain't crying for Phillip Morris.

I think it really depends on the area. im from rural minnesota and most of the bars in the area are either under or going under. when the ban happened people stopped going to the bars. plain and simple. it might have a positive impact in a big city but in small towns the numbers speak for themselves. now im not stupid i realize the health risks, but i can't see how its the governments resposibility to tell us what risks we can take. its up to the people. and if someone that went to a bar alot didn't like the smoking, then that person should start a smoke free bar. i guess what im getting at is that it should be at least up to the local governments, city or county, to decide what will work best for their area. im an ex smoker and i say that smoking bans infringe our rights , if not as individuals, then at the very least as smaller communitys, not everyone lives in a city of a half a million people. another thing that gets me going is people dying of lung cancer and blaming the tabacoo industry. i smoked a pack and a half for seven years and quit cold turkey, never relapsed and have not touched nicotine since. everyone needs to quit blaming everyone else for their own lack of will power. its not the tabacoo companys fault, everyone with half a brain knows that ciggarettes kill. i knew it when i had the first one and it still didnt stop me. i also knew they were highly addictive, so does everyone else. so how is it anyones fault but their own. sounds mean, too bad. think ive never experianced a tabbaco caused death, wrong. my own grandpa died of lung cancer. not because of advertisements. not because big tabacoo is to aggressive in their ads. but because he smoked a pack a day for 30 years. smoking is horrible, but not accepting resposibility for the risks you take is even worse.
for more conversation ar even a friendly, i repeat friendly debate. my email is pvt.kawlewski@yahoo.com
my name is jesse

CCLMM wrote:

<quoted text>
Spoken like a true "non-business owner". Tell me, what do you do for a living? Probably a dredge on society who relies on the big brother government to take care of him so he does not have to take care of himself.

thank you for saying exactly what i was going to say

Well I see now that so many bars and such have closed down, this lame thread did too. Proof..

Smoking bans are illegal and hurt commerce.