smoke gets in your eyes

[Deputy Nutz]

Smoking has been allowed in privately owned business for a very long time.

That's because at the time no one knew or would admit that the shit can KILL YOU!!! Now they know better and don't want the public exposed to it.

Wait a minute, you are telling me that people didn't realize that enhaling smoke was bad for them? Sucking on something that is burning just tells me it is probably going to be harmful to me. I knew smoking could kill you 20 some years ago but they still let you smoke in movies and on airplanes.

[MJZiggy]

apparently you should have shared your wisdom, because in the past it was believed (advertising sells, baby!!) that smoking was cool and fun and not bad for you at all. Even when evidence to the contrary was mounting, the tobacco industry failed to share what is common knowledge today. That's why they got their asses sued off...

[SkinBasket]

My attic insulation has benefits. Remind me of the benefits of smoke again?

You're right. We should outlaw everything that doesn't have a clear "benefit."

You ever see the movie demolition man?

[Deputy Nutz]

apparently you should have shared your wisdom, because in the past it was believed (advertising sells, baby!!) that smoking was cool and fun and not bad for you at all. Even when evidence to the contrary was mounting, the tobacco industry failed to share what is common knowledge today. That's why they got their asses sued off...

I don't know about you, but the advertising did work because peer pressure is a motherfucker, I don't think I would have ever touched a cigerette after I took one from my dad when I was 9. If it was so refreshing and cool, why did I gag all over myself? I knew right then that this really couldn't be good for someone when the hot burning smoke choked all the oxygen out of my lungs. Clean and refreshing? Better smoke menthol.

[Zool]

My attic insulation has benefits. Remind me of the benefits of smoke again?

You're right. We should outlaw everything that doesn't have a clear "benefit."

You ever see the movie demolition man?

Wesley Snipes looking like Dennis Rodman? Thats gold right there.

"In the future all restaurants are Taco Bell"

[HarveyWallbangers]

The system has been in place for a long time in CA, and bars there are far from hurting. I've stood outside in enough lines to know that much.

I still think private businesses should be free to allow legal activities. However, that would be the compromise. It's not what has happened in Minnesota though.

[MJZiggy]

The system has been in place for a long time in CA, and bars there are far from hurting. I've stood outside in enough lines to know that much.

I still think private businesses should be free to allow legal activities. However, that would be the compromise. It's not what has happened in Minnesota though.

Not washing your hands after using the bathroom is still legal....

[twoseven]

Whatever you do, make it statewide IMO. Keep the field level by making every location operate under the same rules. Allowing some with versus some without only re-directs the patrons away from where they might normally go because of the smoking rules not the service the establishment offers, not fair.

[BallHawk]

In a public restaurant it should be banned, without a question. It's been that way in Florida for ages (largely because of all the old people and tourists that populate the restaurants from December-May)

However, if it is a private place then that place should have the authority to decide whether smoking is allowed or not.

[Bretsky]

I'm for it; it's a bad thing. I'm also all about putting an obnoxious state tax on cigs and apply that toward the budget deficit as well

[MadtownPacker]

Fact: Nutz and Skinbitch are considerate smokers. I know this from when I met them last October at the PR get together.

Really that is what it comes down to, courtesy and common sense so I think I agree with the butt brothers. If bars want to allow it they should be able. I will either spend my time on the patio area like I did at the Stadium View in Green Bay or else go somewhere else.

Once it cost owners $$$ they will see the light anyways.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I still think private businesses should be free to allow legal activities.

Private organizations are allowed to do any legal activity. There are lots of private clubs that allow smoking. By "private business" you just mean privately owned, but they are still open to the public and regulated for lots of public interests. Businesses are subject to labor laws, health and safety laws, all kinds of shit that doesn't apply to how a person acts in their home or klan group.

Welcome to the post-1920 world!

[Harlan Huckleby]

"In the future all restaurants are Taco Bell"

That's a bright future, I love taco bell. And the best part about them isn't the bells, its the tacos. All their new concoctions like gorditos and spic-food-bell-grande are slop, just give me those hard shell tacos and keep um comin.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

All of you have no historical viewpoint on smoking bans.

Pope Urban VII's 13-day papal reign included the world's first known public smoking ban (1590), as he threatened to excommunicate anyone who "took tobacco in the porchway of or inside a church, whether it be by chewing it, smoking it with a pipe or sniffing it in powdered form through the nose".

Whole cities back then banned smoking. Interestingly enough, most were in germany/austria/bavaria....same stock that inhabits wisco.

The Nazis banned smoking as well. What is it with GERMANS!!!

Anyway, you have really two flavors or argument. The personal property/government intervention or the econ loss argument.

PP/Gov is based on Mill, but even mill said, "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient warrant."

Pretty much game over.

The econ..well, we have conflicting studies. I can give you studies that show no loss of revenue. And some that gained revenue. Overall, smoking bans are better for the economy. Better for job growth, better for cleanliness, better for decreased liability, and less fuel needs (less ventilation).

And better for our funny bones...is there nothing more humorous than smokers freezing their asses off outside because they can't control their addiction.

What is indisputable is that heart attacks in cities that enact smoking bans decrease.

Smoking bans are good.

Cept for crack. Let's not get crazy folks.

[SkinBasket]

With a smoking ban should come smoking specific bars. I guess coming from Cali, there were smoking bars all over the place. People would walk from a non-smoking bar, down to the smoking bar for a drink and a couple smokes, then migrate back.

If there is demand for non-smoking bars, then this is the way things should be without government regulation. Essentially it sounds like you're for the status quo - places where smoking is allowed and not allowed, only it feels much dirtier to be doing something that is "banned.'

As far as smoking outside of bars, it's almost nonexistent as is with little more than social pressure. It's pretty rare you see someone just standing around smoking anywhere near populated places anymore and I'm sure the passing nonsmokers will survive their brush with death even when there is an inconsiderate smoker they have to walk past.

It's become a pack mentality where there's only safety in numbers. Last time I smoked outside a bar was outside some shitty grocery store next to a pizza joint. During the time it took to smoke 1 fag, no fewer than 4 other people lit up outside the same store. Fact is, if smokers don't see someone else smoking somewhere in public that isn't the back corner of a parking ramp, they aren't likely to light up these days, which says to me that shit is just fine without Jim Doyle telling me where I can and can't smoke.