1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

[NYC] Mayor Seeks To Ban Smoking In All City Bars And Restaurants

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Ryan, Aug 9, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Aug 9, 2002 #1 of 22
    Ryan

    Ryan Icon

    622
    0
    Apr 24, 2002
    Mayor Seeks To Ban Smoking In All City Bars And Restaurants

    What do you think? I guess I'm in favor of severly limiting or prohibiting public smoking. It's a dangerous and disgusting habit.

    But there needs to be some give somewhere.

    And if they keep raising the prices and taxes, people will start growing their own tobacco. :eek2:
     
  2. Aug 9, 2002 #2 of 22
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Even aside from the second hand smoke problems, why should people who cannot tolerate cigarette smoke be prohibited from eating in small restaurants where a "smoking section" is not feasible? Why should smokers have the right to go to these places and not people who do not share their desire to kill themselves? It's about time non-smokers have some rights for a change. If the smokers just can't get along without feeding their addiction for an hour, maybe they can wear a diving helmet on their heads and keep all that wonderful smoke for themselves.
    I spent a great deal of time in a room with a man dying of lung cancer last week. Two of his "children" excused themselves regularly to "get a breath of fresh air." Right. Evidently the smoke kills brains cells along with lung cells.
     
  3. Aug 9, 2002 #3 of 22
    James_F

    James_F Damn you woman! DBSTalk Gold Club

    5,205
    1
    Apr 23, 2002
    When I moved from California to Arizona, I was surprised to see how much more people smoked. The City of Mesa, AZ and Tempe,AZ both have bans on smoking. I'm hoping that it will continue to Chandler, my city soon...
     
  4. Aug 9, 2002 #4 of 22
    RichW

    RichW Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,526
    0
    Mar 29, 2002
    "But there needs to be some give somewhere"

    Yep, I think the give is to allow smoking in some limited types of establishments like bars and taverns. This is essentially what the Oregon laws do. Since I eat many of my meals at restaurants, it has been much more enjoyable sinc ethe law was passed here.

    "And if they keep raising the prices and taxes, people will start growing their own tobacco"

    That might already be illegal in some areas due to crop laws.

    When I lived in Florida, my oldest daughter was told in school that "You can't grow cotton in Florida". Taking this as a challenge, she planted some cotton seeds and took the plants to school to show that it was indeed possible to grow cotton in Florida's climate. What she, the teacher, and the rest of the class found out from the county ag. agent was that it was illegal to plant cotton in Florida because there was a fear that the boll weavil could also destroy the citrus crop.
     
  5. Aug 9, 2002 #5 of 22
    gcutler

    gcutler Hall Of Fame

    3,434
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Wafflehouse is an example of a place I will no longer patronize. These is incredibly tiny resturants (if you haven't seen them before), so there isn't enough room to have a smoking section. So the entire resturant is a smoking section. Every time I have gone there I end up sitting at the counter next to some idiot who has to ruin the meal of everyone sitting around there so they can have a nicotine hit. Or the booth next the same thing. So since Wafflehouse has aligned themselves with "The Smokers" I will never go there again.

    I'm not unreasonable, If the resturant is big enough or has an outside area then a smoking section should be alotted. But if the resturant is below a certain size it should be forced to be non-smoking.
     
  6. Aug 9, 2002 #6 of 22
    jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    In the immortal words of Eddie Izzard, "Pretty soon no drinking and no talking!" And with the current hysterical scrutiny of our "unhealthy" American diet, can it be too far off when EATING will be prohibited in bars and restaurants also?:confused:

    I confess to smoking. I understand it is stupid, bad for my health and offensive to others. I'm sure a little of it is a big, fat, raised middle finger also. Nevertheless, I am very conscious of anyone who might be bothered by my habit and will immediately move or extinguish my smoke should I be made aware that it is infringing on a non-smoker's "personal space", even if the non-smoker moved into MY space after I had lit up. I understand the complaint regarding restaurants. I don't smoke as I eat nor enjoy a smoky environment while I'm eating.

    But what happened to freedom of choice? Many restaurants and some bars voluntarily ban smoking. This does not stop me from patronizing them. Smokers are a fast dwindling portion of the population anyway, about a half step below the status of lepers. Doesn't the free market pardigm apply here? What's to stop a non-smoking restaurant or bar from opening up accross the street and attracting customers away from an establishment that does allow smoking? Catering to a much larger segment of the population, they should blow them out of the water! If they don't, we can only assume there's something mysterious about smoke that produces better food and drinks and the ambiance in which to consume them.

    I don't see much protest here about the SUVs we and our neighbors drive back and forth to the grocery, or the diesel trucks and locomotives that bring in the fresh strawberries to the grocery, or the cargo jets delivering live, Maine lobsters to North Dakota and Texas. Most of us swim in, or at least occasionally drive through, the ocean of toxic soup that IS most urban, industrialized areas. And most of us willingly and gleefully contribute to the haze. In fact, it seems it is not beyond the pale to penalize anyone who doesn't. Harper's index this month reports that Oregon(which I thought was a pretty "green" state), mandates a $15 surcharge on hybrid gas/electric cars as compensation for lost gasoline taxes!

    Until we seriously address some of the other factors that are killing us and our planet, I have little sympathy for the restaurant patron who ostentatiously fans away the wisps of smoke of the few wretched, exiled smokers huddled in a cranny behind the palm tree, while waiting for the valet to retrieve his 400 horsepower Lincoln Navigator. It's just another example of our lazy desire for the government to protect us from ourselves, in spite of ourselves.
     
  7. Aug 9, 2002 #7 of 22
    Steve Mehs

    Steve Mehs Hall Of Fame

    11,498
    4
    Mar 21, 2002
    Now I hope we can see the same legislation sometime in the near future on the other side of the state...
     
  8. Aug 9, 2002 #8 of 22
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Jon, equating drinking or eating with smoking is a weak comparison, as I am sure you know. Unless you talk with your mouth full of food, spewing particles on those sitting around you, or do the same with a mouth of whatever, they don't compare.
    And even that 400 hp Lincoln Navigator is spewing out a fraction of the pollutants that an economy car of the 70's did. Fuel economy may suck, but pollution is not a serious problem. Those SUV's use a lot of natural resources, both in manufacturing, and in fuel burned, and they take up a lot of room, but pollution is not really one of their sins. Now the diesel truck or locomotive, or the cargo plane built 30 years ago is a different story.
    Anyway Jon, quit making excuses and knock off the nasty habit. I want to keep having these discussions with you for many more years, and I have lost enough friends lately.
     
  9. Aug 9, 2002 #9 of 22
    Steve Mehs

    Steve Mehs Hall Of Fame

    11,498
    4
    Mar 21, 2002
    Thank you Bogy! I wanted to type up a similar responce, but couldnt put it together in a nice manner. I cant stand when people speak negativly of SUVs. The Expedition/Navigator is one hell of an SUV, although I'd perfer the their bigger cousin, Excrusion.
     
  10. jrjcd

    jrjcd Arcane Movie Trivia King DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,806
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    i don't know why bloomberg cares, he walks under the smoke cloud anyway...
     
  11. James_F

    James_F Damn you woman! DBSTalk Gold Club

    5,205
    1
    Apr 23, 2002
  12. STXJim

    STXJim Legend in my own mind

    552
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    How about this one.
    Even the heaviest of all smokers wouldn't...
    FART in public.
    Why???????
    Because they wouldn't want anyone to know where that god-awful stench came from. :rolleyes:
    Hey...Get a clue; anything that stinks.......STINKS!>:eek:
    Wake up.
    HELLO? :eek:
     
  13. Steve Mehs

    Steve Mehs Hall Of Fame

    11,498
    4
    Mar 21, 2002
    I heard about that a few days ago James. I'm pretty bummed about it, but a liitle hopeful that It may continue on. Give the Suburban some real competition!
     
  14. James_F

    James_F Damn you woman! DBSTalk Gold Club

    5,205
    1
    Apr 23, 2002
    Nah, who needs something that big? Tahoe/Expedition is big enough... I have a Jeep Grand Wagoneer and its tough to park in todays new parking spaces. I can't imagine what they will be like tomorrow. :nono:

    I'm getting ready to trade it in on a Audi to go along with my Passat. I'm tired of trucks. :shrug:
     
  15. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    Well that about tears it. A discussion on smoking has turned into an exposition on the virtues of heavy Detroit steel(mostly plastic really). OK, I give up. SUVs are the penultimate, eco-friendly expression of the American Dream, wet dream I suppose. Everyone on Earth should have one. Unless of course the world's resources run out before Ford, GM and Chrysler can make it happen. So let's assure that at least every American is guaranteed one. Perhaps it might provide some shelter from acid rain when it comes, even though in order to drive it anywhere it'll be necessary to ferment potato peels. Road Warrior here we come.

    BTW-I can't overlook the Freudian "Excrusion". I assume the root is "excruciating"? Here's Webster's take. Even the example given is apropo:

    1 : causing great pain or anguish : AGONIZING *the nation's most excruciating dilemma— W. H. Ferry*
    2 : very intense : EXTREME *excruciating pain*

    I've no intention to defend tobacco, but despite it's well known and publicized negatives, it's just another diversion. We managed to cough our way to victory in WWII handing out a couple packs a day to every GI. It's not the downfall of the Republic. A few flag burning losers was the diversion to the far greater number of patriotic Americans opposed to Viet Nam. Granada was the diversion to the Marine barracks in Beirut. Panama was a diversion from the embarrassing CIA training and employment of Noriega. Communist oppression was the diversion from, and justification for, US oppression in the "free" world. And now Saddam is the diversion from the cold fact that after invading and conquering a sovereign nation, we still don't know if Osama, or al Qaida, is dead or alive. No more communism and relative peace in the nineties, hence tobacco became the whipping boy.

    Government and big business(and big religion), in concert with the "liberal" media, have become very adept at diversion. It's a convenient and necessary tool to prevent us citizens from asking the really important questions. So focus on the many ways those accursed, nasty smokers are the scourge of clean, freedom loving Americans whilst you cruise from one Chevron oasis to the next in your metal monster phallic symbol.
     
  16. Bob Haller

    Bob Haller Banned User

    3,068
    1
    Mar 24, 2002
    I absolutely will not patronize any business that allows smoking and cant keep me away from the toxic stinkingt smoke. Dave and busters has good food and fun activities but I dont want to stink when I leave, and told the manager that the last time I was there! And it was the last and final time....
     
  17. John Corn

    John Corn Hall Of Fame

    5,046
    0
    Mar 21, 2002
    I'm all for it. I've spent time in California and I love being able to go to restaurants and bars and not have to breathe cigarette smoke. Smokers adjust to it just like they did when workplaces started kicking people outside. The bars and restaurants are the workplaces for those employees so why shouldn't they get a smokefree workplace too.

    Ah, a smoke-free sports bar. Only in California. And hopefully soon, NY. And later, Chicago (I can only dream of it). Come on Ohio get with it.
     
  18. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,001
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    Bravo! And that's exactly the way to get them to ban smoking VOLUNTARILY without government regulation. Vote with your pocketbook. I assume you have found a viable alternative and they are now the one's swiping your MasterCard, not D&B's.
     
  19. jrjcd

    jrjcd Arcane Movie Trivia King DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,806
    0
    Apr 23, 2002
    actually, jon, when you have seven children loike i do, needing a van or an suv is a bit more than fuflfilling the american wet dream, as you put it...
     
  20. gcutler

    gcutler Hall Of Fame

    3,434
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Velcro the smaller children to the inside roof of the car and you can fit them all in a Honda Accord :D

    Velco wasn't as widely available when my father did that, he used Staples instead, OUCH!!!! :p
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page