Iowa smoking ban...

Iowa recently passed a smoking ban that will take effect July 1.
Naturally lots of people are against this ban, one group is our local
bar and restaurant association. Their whole argument is that smoking
or non-smoking is a decision that should be made my the business
owner.

The bar owners group is organizing a meeting to protest the ban. The
meeting has been scheduled at a large bar that has a large banquet
type room.

As you can imagine this whole topic is being discussed at length on
one of our local online forums. From those postings it would seem
there are a lot of non-smokers that oppose the ban because they
believe it should be a business owner's choice.

When the meeting was first announced a post on the forum asked if the
meeting would be non-smoking to accomodate everyone. (a non-smoking
opponent of the ban said, "Smokers can hold off smoking for a few
hours more easily than we non-smokers can hold our breath.")

The group's organizers first response was, "we'll wait until the
meeting starts, if there are non-smokers there that object to smoking
it will be a non-smoking meeting." After it was pointed out that by
the time the meeting starts it's too late to make it non-smoking.

There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.

They have, in that one post, I'm sure, alienated every non-smoker who
might have backed their "let it be the business owners choice"
position.

What are your thoughts? Personally I think smoking should be banned
anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully -
walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"

I've been willing to listen to opponents of the ban, but this decision
to make their "rally" a smoking one has convinced me their only
concern is their addiction to nicotine.
--
BessieBee
"Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

BessieBee wondered:
> There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.

Not a particularly smart or diplomatic move, IMO.

> What are your thoughts? *Personally I think smoking should be banned
> anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully -
> walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
> have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"

I personally against any type of ban on legal substances. I think the
government already has too much control as it is.

I believe that the business owner should be the one to determine
whether smoking is to be allowed in his/her establishment. If
nonsmokers choose not to patronize that particular business, then it
is their rperogative. If the business loses enough customers because
of the smoking policy, they'll change the policy.

Just my $0.02,
Rob
Democrat who believes in personal freedoms
Breathing free for three weeks, six days, 10 hours, 33 minutes and 12
seconds. That's 823 cigarettes I've not smoked, saving $164.64. Life
saved...oooh, puppies!

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:21:28 GMT, BessieBee
<BessieBee@fakeaddress.com> wrote:

>Iowa recently passed a smoking ban that will take effect July 1.
>Naturally lots of people are against this ban, one group is our local
>bar and restaurant association. Their whole argument is that smoking
>or non-smoking is a decision that should be made my the business
>owner.
>
>The bar owners group is organizing a meeting to protest the ban. The
>meeting has been scheduled at a large bar that has a large banquet
>type room.
>
>As you can imagine this whole topic is being discussed at length on
>one of our local online forums. From those postings it would seem
>there are a lot of non-smokers that oppose the ban because they
>believe it should be a business owner's choice.
>
>When the meeting was first announced a post on the forum asked if the
>meeting would be non-smoking to accomodate everyone. (a non-smoking
>opponent of the ban said, "Smokers can hold off smoking for a few
>hours more easily than we non-smokers can hold our breath.")
>
>The group's organizers first response was, "we'll wait until the
>meeting starts, if there are non-smokers there that object to smoking
>it will be a non-smoking meeting." After it was pointed out that by
>the time the meeting starts it's too late to make it non-smoking.
>
>There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
>the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
>is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
>They have, in that one post, I'm sure, alienated every non-smoker who
>might have backed their "let it be the business owners choice"
>position.
>
>What are your thoughts?

You already know what I think because I've said it before. I believe
it should be up to the bar/restaurant owners. I'm not gonna argue
about it. It's just my opinion and worth nada.

> Personally I think smoking should be banned
>anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully -
>walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
>have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"

In some supermarkets you may not be hearing "paper or plastic" any
longer either. Or, "that'll be 25 cents a bag, ma'am". As long as
they are available I'll take plastic but I'm glad to pay for them
because it will, in a way, help me financially. I donate them to the
Salvation Army food bank so I can use them as a charitable deduction
on my taxes. Always a silver lining.
Sue
Two years, one month, two days, 8 hours, 49 minutes and 7 seconds.
25224 cigarettes not smoked, saving $4,199.82. Life saved: 12 weeks, 3
days, 14 hours, 0 minutes.

If its up for a vote, I have to vote for FREEDOM - that thing we're so
proud of in the United States. The bar owners should be free to run
their business as they wish and I should be free to choose if I want
to go there or not.


---
Wayne Baker
Cold Turkey Quit Date: August 4, 2007
Nicotine Free: 8M 2w 4d 23h 44m
Not Smoked: 7,626
Money Better Spent: $1,258.29



BessieBee <BessieBee@fakeaddress.com> wrote in
news:tqcu04tipduetti60n4jb5370vdtt2hbn7@4ax.com:

> Iowa recently passed a smoking ban that will take effect July 1.
> Naturally lots of people are against this ban, one group is our
local
> bar and restaurant association. Their whole argument is that
smoking
> or non-smoking is a decision that should be made my the business
> owner.
>
> The bar owners group is organizing a meeting to protest the ban.
The
> meeting has been scheduled at a large bar that has a large banquet
> type room.
>
> As you can imagine this whole topic is being discussed at length on
> one of our local online forums. From those postings it would seem
> there are a lot of non-smokers that oppose the ban because they
> believe it should be a business owner's choice.
>
> When the meeting was first announced a post on the forum asked if
the
> meeting would be non-smoking to accomodate everyone. (a non-smoking
> opponent of the ban said, "Smokers can hold off smoking for a few
> hours more easily than we non-smokers can hold our breath.")
>
> The group's organizers first response was, "we'll wait until the
> meeting starts, if there are non-smokers there that object to
smoking
> it will be a non-smoking meeting." After it was pointed out that by
> the time the meeting starts it's too late to make it non-smoking.
>
> There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this
meeting
> is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> They have, in that one post, I'm sure, alienated every non-smoker
who
> might have backed their "let it be the business owners choice"
> position.
>
> What are your thoughts? Personally I think smoking should be banned
> anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully
-
> walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
> have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"
>
> I've been willing to listen to opponents of the ban, but this
decision
> to make their "rally" a smoking one has convinced me their only
> concern is their addiction to nicotine.

On Apr 23, 9:21*am, BessieBee <Bessie...@fakeaddress.com> wrote:
> Iowa recently passed a smoking ban that will take effect July 1.
> Naturally lots of people are against this ban, one group is our local
> bar and restaurant association. *Their whole argument is that smoking
> or non-smoking is a decision that should be made my the business
> owner. *
>
> The bar owners group is organizing a meeting to protest the ban. *The
> meeting has been scheduled at a large bar that has a large banquet
> type room.
>
> As you can imagine this whole topic is being discussed at length on
> one of our local online forums. *From those postings it would seem
> there are a lot of non-smokers that oppose the ban because they
> believe it should be a business owner's choice. *
>
> When the meeting was first announced a post on the forum asked if the
> meeting would be non-smoking to accomodate everyone. *(a non-smoking
> opponent of the ban said, "Smokers can hold off smoking for a few
> hours more easily than we non-smokers can hold our breath.") *
>
> The group's organizers first response was, "we'll wait until the
> meeting starts, if there are non-smokers there that object to smoking
> it will be a non-smoking meeting." *After it was pointed out that by
> the time the meeting starts it's too late to make it non-smoking.
>
> There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> They have, in that one post, I'm sure, alienated every non-smoker who
> might have backed their "let it be the business owners choice"
> position.
>
> What are your thoughts? *Personally I think smoking should be banned
> anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully -
> walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
> have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"
>
> I've been willing to listen to opponents of the ban, but this decision
> to make their "rally" a smoking one has convinced me their only
> concern is their addiction to nicotine.
> --
> BessieBee
> "Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

Fl,orida passed the same law (i think 2 or three years ago - There's
no smoking at all in restaurants and such - but there are still some
clubs that are not enforcing it - (When i asked How could this be?...I
was told : Who's gonna catch 'em? unless some Anti Smoking official
was present when someone lit up and was 'allowed' to continue."
But for the most part, Florida is No Smoking......except for your
Clubs ; like the Moose Lodge or something.

second hand smoke is just as bad - Wherever there is 'Public' AIR...
there should be no tabacco smoke in it.
I hate the shit when i smell it now !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Steve

I think the decision to make the meeting a 'smoking meeting' shows
where their heads are -- right up their collective asses. In a
perfect world I agree it would be best to leave the decision up to the
owner and there would be no reprecussion for having a smober
establishment. But since this is a real world with idiots who have no
idea their smoke is repulsive and deadly to others, smoking bans make
sense to me. If you are addicted, you can stand outside in the rain
and snow and suck up all the poison you can get!

FlatironMike
glad to be in smoke-free NYC!
One year, two months, one week, five days, 14 hours, 15 minutes and 54
seconds. 8751 cigarettes not smoked, saving $2,625.31. Life saved: 4
weeks, 2 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes.

Let give bar/restaurent owners sell "crack cocaine and morhhine and heroine"
!

ITS their decision !

Henry

>There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
>the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
>is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.

This is the part of my (way too wordy) post that I'd like opinions on.
I'm amazed that a group asking for support would make sure the
atmosphere at their rally was inhospitable to what appears to be a
significant number of (non-smoking) people.

I think a whole bunch of people complaining about losing "the freedom"
are just frightened at the prospect of losing one more place to smoke.
--
BessieBee
"Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

On Apr 23, 7:37*pm, BessieBee <Bessie...@fakeaddress.com> wrote:
> >There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> >the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> >is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> This is the part of my (way too wordy) post that I'd like opinions on.
> I'm amazed that a group asking for support would make sure the
> atmosphere at their rally was inhospitable to what appears to be a
> significant number of (non-smoking) people.
>
> I think a whole bunch of people complaining about losing "the freedom"
> are just frightened at the prospect of losing one more place to smoke.
> --
> BessieBee
> "Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

I think the government has too damn much control over everything in
our lives already. The owner of a business should have control of what
he does or does not deem acceptable. If he wants to accept smokers in
his establishment, non-smokers don't have to patronize his business.
This isn't rocket science. Go there, don't go there if you are
offended by the smokers. This is still America, I think.
Pam

On Apr 23, 7:37*pm, BessieBee <Bessie...@fakeaddress.com> wrote:
> >There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> >the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> >is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> This is the part of my (way too wordy) post that I'd like opinions on.
> I'm amazed that a group asking for support would make sure the
> atmosphere at their rally was inhospitable to what appears to be a
> significant number of (non-smoking) people.
>
> I think a whole bunch of people complaining about losing "the freedom"
> are just frightened at the prospect of losing one more place to smoke.
> --
> BessieBee
> "Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

Its a smoking world...in which there are only 4 people that DECIDE
everything...they just want to sugar coat it and make it seem like its
some kind of democracy that includes the thoughts and oppinions of Non
Smokers - (Man, thats really nice of them to make it a Choice,...and a
Meeting in which I can bring my thoughts and oppinion to the table and
it will be heard. NOT......yeah, you can bring your oppinion, but the
CHOICE is up to the 4 smoking people on the board...(Who have ALREADY
decided to make it a smoking meeting and had taken away your choice
they so advertise

On Apr 23, 9:48*pm, Pam <PFa...@fortune-johnson.com> wrote:
> On Apr 23, 7:37*pm, BessieBee <Bessie...@fakeaddress.com> wrote:
>
> > >There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> > >the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> > >is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> > This is the part of my (way too wordy) post that I'd like opinions on.
> > I'm amazed that a group asking for support would make sure the
> > atmosphere at their rally was inhospitable to what appears to be a
> > significant number of (non-smoking) people.
>
> > I think a whole bunch of people complaining about losing "the freedom"
> > are just frightened at the prospect of losing one more place to smoke.
> > --
> > BessieBee
> > "Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"
>
> I think the government has too damn much control over everything in
> our lives already. The owner of a business should have control of what
> he does or does not deem acceptable. If he wants to accept smokers in
> his establishment, non-smokers don't have to patronize his business.
> This isn't rocket science. Go there, don't go there if you are
> offended by the smokers. This is still America, I think.
> Pam

Pam - sweet - simple. I agree.
I have made that choice with certain establishments already....( I
aint missing much)

"SilentNight" wrote
>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....( I
> aint missing much)

Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of reasonable
accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that chooses smoking? Are
nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?

Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We have curbs
and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are compelled by
law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in recognition that not
everyone has the same ability to handle a a basic task like climbing stairs
or using a toilet. This is progress, yeah?

Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work; partitions and
effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible burden?

Jef: There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia. It
has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices.
It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.

I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. But there are
several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.

Its a matter of feedom of choice.


---
Wayne Baker
Quit Date: August 4, 2007
Nicotine Free: 8M 2w 5d 22h 30m
Not Smoked: 7,653
Money Better Spent: $1,262.75



"Jef." <jefo@BITEMEcomcast.net> wrote in
news:EK6dnemxnOe3tY3VnZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.com:

> "SilentNight" wrote
>>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....(
I
>> aint missing much)
>
> Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of
> reasonable accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that
> chooses smoking? Are nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?
>
> Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We
have
> curbs and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are
> compelled by law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in
> recognition that not everyone has the same ability to handle a a
basic
> task like climbing stairs or using a toilet. This is progress, yeah?
>
> Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work;
> partitions and effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible
> burden?
>
>
>

On Apr 23, 4:23 pm, "Henry" <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> Let give bar/restaurent owners sell "crack cocaine and morhhine and heroine"
> !
>
> ITS their decision !
>
> Henry

Henry,

Why don't you go back and bother the folks at alt.smokers. Also,
purchase a dictionary.

"Pam" <PFaust@fortune-johnson.com> wrote

I think the government has too damn much control over everything in
our lives already. The owner of a business should have control of what
he does or does not deem acceptable. If he wants to accept smokers in
his establishment, non-smokers don't have to patronize his business.
This isn't rocket science. Go there, don't go there if you are
offended by the smokers. This is still America, I think.
Pam

As the owner of a business, I agree, I should have control over what I deem
acceptable in my business. That said, the smoking ban is just a drop in the
bucket as far as rules, regs and laws that I must obey. For instance,
tonight, I must go in front of the building and zoning board for a
conditional-use permit so I may have live music. Nevermind that we have had
live music for over 20 years, now it is regulated. EVERYTHING is regulated.
I can only purchase liqour from 3 suppliers, all who price-fix. This is
law. Don't get me started. This is no longer America. This is a
socialistic, nanny country. Our forefathers are rolling over in their
graves.

On another note, we went smokefree on Jan 1 and I had the best Jan ever! by
thousands$!
Revenues are up. Is crazy considering that I would estimate over 90% of my
patrons to be smokers.
They step outside and smoke. Some even say they like it because they smoke
less.
Strange, this is a neighborhood tavern with die-hard smokers.

Personally? I love the clean air. I think this law was long overdue...but
then, I am a biased, nazi-type ex-smoker.


Luv yas,
Cat
---
2y 4m 1w 5d 1:32 smoke-free, 34,563 cigs not smoked, $6,912.60 saved, 3m 4w
1d 0:15 life saved
Ex-serial-quitter!

"Wayne" wrote
> Jef: There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia. It
> has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices.
> It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.
>
> I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. But there are
> several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.
>
> Its a matter of feedom of choice.

Well, of course it is. Yours, mine and the business owner's-- absolutely; no
argument. There must be thousands of such places, and everyone's making
adjustments, aren't they?
Maybe a lot of them are feeling the pinch because of enforced smoking bans.
Maybe a lot of them actually see increased revenue--like Cat's bar-- due to
some inverse attendance fluke.

I found myself wondering how many who *chose* to exercise their decision to
allow smoking would bother to go the extra distance to try and make some
accommodation for their non-smoking regulars. No-- they don't have to. Yes--
it would be decent of them to do it, though.

There are places I, too, liked that I no longer patronize because their
setup is such that you simply can't avoid the smoke. They have no provision
for making me any more comfortable, or doing anything thoughtful enough to
*keep* my business-- or that of people who don't want smoke intruding on
them.

There's a steakhouse nearby that I used to go to-- not expensive; it's one
of those chain places-- because they truly served a really good steak. I
can't even walk in the door any more because they're set up with their bar
right, smack in the middle of the place, and EVERYTHING reeks like an
ashtray from the moment you walk in the door. There's no place inside you
can escape from it. Sad, really.

Most bar owners are afraid that when smoking bans come into effect they
will lose and they hear stories how some bars go under and no wonder they
get scared, it's their bread and butter, but what they don't hear is how it
effects them positively how the smokers will take it outside and they will
get new clientele, less cleaning no more buying ashtrays etc and their
staff is less sick after having to breath in that toxin day after day.
it is a shame that a few bar owners feel that they should have special
rights and the way they are going about the meeting isn't helping their
cause any
--
Lynn VOF+ Leaper
"Everyone seems normal until you get to know them."



"BessieBee" <BessieBee@fakeaddress.com> wrote in message
news:tqcu04tipduetti60n4jb5370vdtt2hbn7@4ax.com...
> Iowa recently passed a smoking ban that will take effect July 1.
> Naturally lots of people are against this ban, one group is our local
> bar and restaurant association. Their whole argument is that smoking
> or non-smoking is a decision that should be made my the business
> owner.
>
> The bar owners group is organizing a meeting to protest the ban. The
> meeting has been scheduled at a large bar that has a large banquet
> type room.
>
> As you can imagine this whole topic is being discussed at length on
> one of our local online forums. From those postings it would seem
> there are a lot of non-smokers that oppose the ban because they
> believe it should be a business owner's choice.
>
> When the meeting was first announced a post on the forum asked if the
> meeting would be non-smoking to accomodate everyone. (a non-smoking
> opponent of the ban said, "Smokers can hold off smoking for a few
> hours more easily than we non-smokers can hold our breath.")
>
> The group's organizers first response was, "we'll wait until the
> meeting starts, if there are non-smokers there that object to smoking
> it will be a non-smoking meeting." After it was pointed out that by
> the time the meeting starts it's too late to make it non-smoking.
>
> There a post this morning from the bar owner group's president that
> the group's board, all 4 of them, have decided that since this meeting
> is all about choice they have chosen to make it a smoking meeting.
>
> They have, in that one post, I'm sure, alienated every non-smoker who
> might have backed their "let it be the business owners choice"
> position.
>
> What are your thoughts? Personally I think smoking should be banned
> anywhere there is air, and I'm very happy to know I can - hopefully -
> walk into any restaurant or bar in Iowa after July 1 and never again
> have to hear, "smoking or non-smoking?"
>
> I've been willing to listen to opponents of the ban, but this decision
> to make their "rally" a smoking one has convinced me their only
> concern is their addiction to nicotine.
> --
> BessieBee
> "Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:50:03 GMT, Wayne <nospamloansarranger@cox.net>
wrote:

>Jef: There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia. It
>has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices.
>It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.
>
>I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. But there are
>several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.
>
>Its a matter of feedom of choice.

Wayne, did you *tell* them that you aren't going there anymore because
of the smoke?
Sue

>
>
>---
>Wayne Baker
>Quit Date: August 4, 2007
>Nicotine Free: 8M 2w 5d 22h 30m
>Not Smoked: 7,653
>Money Better Spent: $1,262.75
>
>
>
>"Jef." <jefo@BITEMEcomcast.net> wrote in
>news:EK6dnemxnOe3tY3VnZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.com :
>
>> "SilentNight" wrote
>>>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....(
>I
>>> aint missing much)
>>
>> Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of
>> reasonable accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that
>> chooses smoking? Are nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?
>>
>> Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We
>have
>> curbs and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are
>> compelled by law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in
>> recognition that not everyone has the same ability to handle a a
>basic
>> task like climbing stairs or using a toilet. This is progress, yeah?
>>
>> Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work;
>> partitions and effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible
>> burden?
>>
>>
>>

On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 11:03:11 -0500, "CuckooCat" <silly@laughing.net>
wrote:

>
>"Pam" <PFaust@fortune-johnson.com> wrote
>
>I think the government has too damn much control over everything in
>our lives already. The owner of a business should have control of what
>he does or does not deem acceptable. If he wants to accept smokers in
>his establishment, non-smokers don't have to patronize his business.
>This isn't rocket science. Go there, don't go there if you are
>offended by the smokers. This is still America, I think.
>Pam
>
>As the owner of a business, I agree, I should have control over what I deem
>acceptable in my business. That said, the smoking ban is just a drop in the
>bucket as far as rules, regs and laws that I must obey. For instance,
>tonight, I must go in front of the building and zoning board for a
>conditional-use permit so I may have live music. Nevermind that we have had
>live music for over 20 years, now it is regulated. EVERYTHING is regulated.
>I can only purchase liqour from 3 suppliers, all who price-fix. This is
>law. Don't get me started. This is no longer America. This is a
>socialistic, nanny country. Our forefathers are rolling over in their
>graves.

That's the problem. There is always a group of people who like one
particular law (just as you like the smoking ban). Eventually, they
pile up. And, then all these people look around and wonder how we
ended up with the nanny state. Surely the *one* little law that you
(generic) find so right didn't make any difference.

>
>On another note, we went smokefree on Jan 1 and I had the best Jan ever! by
>thousands$!
>Revenues are up.

Then imagine how much you might have made before the ban went into
effect if your competitors still allowed smoking and you hadn't.

> Is crazy considering that I would estimate over 90% of my
>patrons to be smokers.
>They step outside and smoke. Some even say they like it because they smoke
>less.
>Strange, this is a neighborhood tavern with die-hard smokers.
>
>Personally? I love the clean air. I think this law was long overdue...but
>then, I am a biased, nazi-type ex-smoker.

Yes, you are, but I think you're terrific anyway. )
Sue

>
>
>Luv yas,
>Cat
>---
>2y 4m 1w 5d 1:32 smoke-free, 34,563 cigs not smoked, $6,912.60 saved, 3m 4w
>1d 0:15 life saved
>Ex-serial-quitter!

> it is a shame that a few bar owners feel that they should have special
>rights and the way they are going about the meeting isn't helping their
>cause any

I've been roundly criticized on our local online forums for objecting
to the meeting being a smoking one. If anyone out there (our local
forum) agrees with me they are keeping mighty quiet.

I feel like a lone voice in the wilderness, but that's never stopped
me before. ;-) According to local news this meeting tonight - should
be in full swing by now - is going to have news coverage that will
rival the Pope's recent visit. If this does make national or regional
news I sure hope they don't interview the village idiot. We've got a
few of them here and it always seems that big news coverage manages to
find the vocal moron with less than two active brain cells.

Ah well..... off to find something to eat and find something on the
boobtube to lull me to lala land.

--
BessieBee
"Why isn't the number 11 pronounced onety-one?"

I am glad to see your response, Cat! My parents had a tavern since
prohibition ended and I am well aware of all the BS you have to go
through to stay in business anymore. I do agree in a perfect world
having smoking would be up to the barowner, but since so few are
willing to gamble on a smoke-free place when all the others are laizze-
faire, the only way a place can be smoke free is by law. I think it
is an abhorance that we have to have yet another law to take away our
freedoms.

Still, I totally get your nazi-type ex-smoker persona too! <G>

FlatironMike
One year, two months, one week, six days, 23 hours, 38 minutes and 3
seconds. 8779 cigarettes not smoked, saving $2,633.66. Life saved: 4
weeks, 2 days, 11 hours, 35 minutes.

Nah....didn't find it important to tell them. We have lots of
delightful places to eat and drink in this area....most are smoke-
free, while a few cater to the smoking crowd. Seems like there's room
enough for all of us.

Wayne


Sue <sebrady@thegrid.net> wrote in
news:f7b214hr8svv7ocs8m80f1975uric9u6r4@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:50:03 GMT, Wayne
<nospamloansarranger@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Jef: There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia.
It
>>has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices.
>>It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.
>>
>>I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. But there
are
>>several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.
>>
>>Its a matter of feedom of choice.
>
> Wayne, did you *tell* them that you aren't going there anymore
because
> of the smoke?
> Sue
>
>>
>>
>>---
>>Wayne Baker
>>Quit Date: August 4, 2007
>>Nicotine Free: 8M 2w 5d 22h 30m
>>Not Smoked: 7,653
>>Money Better Spent: $1,262.75
>>
>>
>>
>>"Jef." <jefo@BITEMEcomcast.net> wrote in
>>news:EK6dnemxnOe3tY3VnZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.co m:
>>
>>> "SilentNight" wrote
>>>>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....
(
>>I
>>>> aint missing much)
>>>
>>> Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of
>>> reasonable accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that
>>> chooses smoking? Are nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?
>>>
>>> Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We
>>have
>>> curbs and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are
>>> compelled by law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in
>>> recognition that not everyone has the same ability to handle a a
>>basic
>>> task like climbing stairs or using a toilet. This is progress,
yeah?
>>>
>>> Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work;
>>> partitions and effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible
>>> burden?
>>>
>>>
>>>

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:14:09 GMT, Wayne <nospamloansarranger@cox.net>
wrote:

>Nah....didn't find it important to tell them. We have lots of
>delightful places to eat and drink in this area....most are smoke-
>free, while a few cater to the smoking crowd. Seems like there's room
>enough for all of us.

It pleases me to see that some of them went smoke free without being
legislated into it.
I stopped shopping at Target several years ago (not that I was a big
customer) because they disallowed the Salvation Army Bell Ringers at
Christmas (they may have reversed that policy). It was certainly
their right to do so but it was my right not to shop in their store.
Problem was I never told them. I should have. A Target is opening in
my town in a couple of months. I'll be watching to see if they still
have the policy and this time I'll tell them if they've continued and
I'm not going to shop there.
Sue

>
>Wayne
>
>
>Sue <sebrady@thegrid.net> wrote in
>news:f7b214hr8svv7ocs8m80f1975uric9u6r4@4ax.com :
>
>> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:50:03 GMT, Wayne
><nospamloansarranger@cox.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Jef: There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia.
>It
>>>has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices.
>>>It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.
>>>
>>>I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. But there
>are
>>>several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.
>>>
>>>Its a matter of feedom of choice.
>>
>> Wayne, did you *tell* them that you aren't going there anymore
>because
>> of the smoke?
>> Sue
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>---
>>>Wayne Baker
>>>Quit Date: August 4, 2007
>>>Nicotine Free: 8M 2w 5d 22h 30m
>>>Not Smoked: 7,653
>>>Money Better Spent: $1,262.75
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Jef." <jefo@BITEMEcomcast.net> wrote in
>>>news:EK6dnemxnOe3tY3VnZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.c om:
>>>
>>>> "SilentNight" wrote
>>>>>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....
>(
>>>I
>>>>> aint missing much)
>>>>
>>>> Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of
>>>> reasonable accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that
>>>> chooses smoking? Are nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?
>>>>
>>>> Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We
>>>have
>>>> curbs and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are
>>>> compelled by law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in
>>>> recognition that not everyone has the same ability to handle a a
>>>basic
>>>> task like climbing stairs or using a toilet. This is progress,
>yeah?
>>>>
>>>> Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work;
>>>> partitions and effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible
>>>> burden?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

On Apr 25, 10:16*am, Sue <sebr...@thegrid.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:14:09 GMT, Wayne <nospamloansarran...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Nah....didn't find it important to tell them. *We have lots of
> >delightful places to eat and drink in this area....most are smoke-
> >free, while a few cater to the smoking crowd. *Seems like there's room
> >enough for all of us.
>
> It pleases me to see that some of them went smoke free without being
> legislated into it.
> I stopped shopping at Target several years ago (not that I was a big
> customer) because they disallowed the Salvation Army Bell Ringers at
> Christmas (they may have reversed that policy). *It was certainly
> their right to do so but it was my right not to shop in their store.
> Problem was I never told them. *I should have. *A Target is opening in
> my town in a couple of months. *I'll be watching to see if they still
> have the policy and this time I'll tell them if they've continued and
> I'm not going to shop there.
> Sue
>
>
>
>
>
> >Wayne
>
> >Sue <sebr...@thegrid.net> wrote in
> >news:f7b214hr8svv7ocs8m80f1975uric9u6r4@4ax.com :
>
> >> On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 13:50:03 GMT, Wayne
> ><nospamloansarran...@cox.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>Jef: *There's a place called Baron's Pub in Portsmouth, Virginia. *
> >It
> >>>has a quaint little atmosphere with great food at reasonable prices. *
> >>>It was one of my favorites when I was a smoker.
>
> >>>I no longer go to Baron's Pub since I no longer smoke. *But there
> >are
> >>>several other delightful places in town that are smoke-free.
>
> >>>Its a matter of feedom of choice.
>
> >> Wayne, did you *tell* them that you aren't going there anymore
> >because
> >> of the smoke?
> >> Sue
>
> >>>---
> >>>Wayne *Baker
> >>>Quit Date: *August 4, 2007
> >>>Nicotine Free: *8M 2w 5d 22h 30m
> >>>Not Smoked: *7,653
> >>>Money Better Spent: *$1,262.75
>
> >>>"Jef." <j...@BITEMEcomcast.net> wrote in
> >>>news:EK6dnemxnOe3tY3VnZ2dnUVZ_tuonZ2d@comcast.c om:
>
> >>>> "SilentNight" wrote
> >>>>>...I have made that choice with certain establishments already....
> >(
> >>>I
> >>>>> aint missing much)
>
> >>>> Choice is good. Consideration is, too. What about the notion of
> >>>> reasonable accommodation for non-smokers in an establishment that
> >>>> chooses smoking? Are nonsmokers just shit out of luck, then?
>
> >>>> Is this an all-or-nothing deal? They can't just say "Fuck off! We
> >>>have
> >>>> curbs and steps!" to people in wheelchairs, for instance. They are
> >>>> compelled by law to have ramps and special bathrooms and so on, in
> >>>> recognition that not everyone has the same ability to handle a a
> >>>basic
> >>>> task like climbing stairs or using a toilet. This is progress,
> >yeah?
>
> >>>> Breathing is pretty basic stuff. Are -- whatever might work;
> >>>> partitions and effective vent fans, say-- really such a horrible
> >>>> burden?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Before you boycot Target, you should probably do some research into
their policy. The reason they banned the kettles was to be consistent
with their "no solicitation" policy. If they let the Salvation Army
solicit, it would open the door for any number of unwanted
solicitations--like those evil Girl Scouts :-)

This is from one of the articles I found:

MINNEAPOLIS (November 14, 2006) – Target and The Salvation Army kick-
off the 2006 Christmas season with a multi-faceted partnership,
including the launch of the Target/Salvation Army Angel Giving Tree,
an online version of The Salvation Army’s Angel Tree Program. Target
will donate $1,000,000 to support the launch of this new online
program, and invite its guests to give to The Salvation Army as well.