PDA

View Full Version : From a non-smoker !! about billiards and smokers



genGOTCHA
02-07-2008, 08:50 PM
Since the old thread was so long I figured I would start a new one but with something not mentioned on non-smokers defence.

I am sure that many non-smokers know where I am coming from on this one. You go in to a billiards, your kickn butt, shooting high percentages, and man your just in the zone with perfect CB control. Hour's pass and your wins are racking up nice and good things seem great and your wishing this was in a tourney since your on fire. All a sudden your game starts dwindling, you seem like you cannot make a shot, but your concentration is there. Your eyes are now hurting you and it's near the end of the night when normally you should be almost at your peak assuming you have the "FUN AND DRIVE". Your eyes seem to be your problem taking your concentration off, and you stop for a second mad at your less accurate game and wow!
SMOKE from smokers is hovering near the ceiling of the place from hours of buildup , and no sufficient ventalation to exit the concentration killer. So every night you play and know when your eyes are burning and your game dwindles to go ahead and leave because your just asking to lose money on money games.
Other than that I could care less about smokers.. my dad died from smoking his whole life, so it will be less competition to deal with when their hackin up around the table at a tourney, and I am still going strong!

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

1Time
02-07-2008, 09:33 PM
As a non-smoker I determined long ago that smokers use smoke as a weapon in an attempt to negatively affect the pool play of others. My response to this strategy has always been to beat them anyway.

billiards89
02-07-2008, 10:25 PM
i wouldlove if a statewide smoking ban would pass in nebraska i no there trying to get it done

New2Pool
02-08-2008, 08:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote billiards89:</font><hr> i wouldlove if a statewide smoking ban would pass in nebraska i no there trying to get it done <hr /></blockquote>

So you believe it is your right to be able to tell a private business owner whether or not that business owner can smoke in his or her own business? As a nonsmoker why can't stand being around smoke I would love it if smoking was done away with. I just can't figure out what gives me the right to force my preference on what others do on their own property. Now if you want a smoking ban that applies to public areas or on government owned property, I am right there with you.

For those of you who favor smoking bans, can you explain why you are willing to give the government that power? Also, are you OK with bans on fast food, "junk food", sugary drinks, unprotected sex outside of marriage, and other things that could have a negative effect on the health of people who chose to be exposed to that activity?

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 10:26 AM
Our town just passed a new ordinance effective June 1st of this year banning smoking at all public places, including restaurants, bars, pool halls, bowling alleys, etc. One of the pool hall/bars I frequent was in an uproar last night and the owner is talking about moving the establishment outside the city limits. I quit smoking about 11 months ago and do not smoke, but I am against government interference with these businesses. I am sympathetic to the owners. But, when I got home last night I reeked of cigarette smoke and when I awoke this morning it is obvious my allergies had flared up. I will admit that a non-smoking ban has it's advantages and I will benefit. They told the owner of the place I frequent that his business should actually increase by about 30%. Hogwash! He will lose business. If business would be so great with non-smokers only, then the owners would ban smoking, or we would have at least 1 place in town for pool that prohibited smoking. We don't have one place in town that is currently non-smoking. You have a choice as to whether or not you want to go in to a place. You have the option of owning your own pool hall for non-smokers or at least buying your own table and putting it up at your residence, or finding a friend with one, etc. Tyler, my home town, is the 18th city in Texas that has enacted anti-smoking laws. We are becoming a little too "progressive" for my tastes.

DeadCrab
02-08-2008, 10:43 AM
The answer to your question is this:

Tobacco is America's number one public health menace.

All other drugs combined, even when you figure in the collateral violence, do not even approach the negative impact of smoking.

It is established that tobacco smoke has significant adverse effects on non-smokers. Smokers have no "right" to impose their habit on others.

Smokers do not pay their fair share for health care. They are parasites on the system. Not the only one, but by far the largest one.

In light of all this, it is reasonable for a society to discourage the use of tobacco. In particular, to limit its use in public places where non-users are involuntarily subjected to it's effects.

OSHA laws mandate a safe workplace. All working Americans have the right to work in an environment that is as safe as possible, including those who work in restaurants, bars, and even pool halls.

JoeW
02-08-2008, 11:02 AM
In defense of smokers – Tobacco has been identified as the number one health menace by some people.

In fact, about 30% of the population is now obese – That may be the number one health menace if you look into it further.

Smoking is an appetite suppressant.
Smoking is an anti-anxiety agent.
Over long periods of use it is also an anti-depressant.
It is (or was) a cheap form of self medication.

People who smoke live about 10 years less than those who don’t this may not be all bad as they place less imposition of the health care dollar. Smoking takes many years to kill those who do not carry genes that make one susceptible to cancer. I suspect that obesity kills more quickly. It certainly reduces the quality of life more quickly.

The government is not using sin tax dollars to improve health. They use this regressive tax in other ways that imposes more of a burden on poor people (smokers).

Beware of zealots, they start wars.

I am not an advocate for smoking; I do think that facts are important.

If you never start than you don’t have to quit.

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 11:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JoeW:</font><hr> In defense of smokers – Tobacco has been identified as the number one health menace by some people.

In fact, about 30% of the population is now obese – That may be the number one health menace if you look into it further.

Smoking is an appetite suppressant.
Smoking is an anti-anxiety agent.
Over long periods of use it is also an anti-depressant.
It is (or was) a cheap form of self medication.

People who smoke live about 10 years less than those who don’t this may not be all bad as they place less imposition of the health care dollar. Smoking takes many years to kill those who do not carry genes that make one susceptible to cancer. I suspect that obesity kills more quickly. It certainly reduces the quality of life more quickly.

The government is not using sin tax dollars to improve health. They use this regressive tax in other ways that imposes more of a burden on poor people (smokers).

Beware of zealots, they start wars.

I am not an advocate for smoking; I do think that facts are important.

If you never start than you don’t have to quit.
<hr /></blockquote>

I'll echo the sentiments of another poster on another thread....glad to have you on-board JoeW. Your posts are logical and reasonable, and you present your position in a civil and non-threatening way. Thanks. However, just remember this....after you psychoanalyze those of us who participate on here and you come to the conclusion that I'm absolutely nuts, my expressed postive opinion of you will become meaningless! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

JoeW
02-08-2008, 11:18 AM
Thank you, This is an emotional topic that generates much fire and little heat. I am glad to hear that you, at least, are willing to look at both side of the issue.

All things in moderation, even moderation, /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif which to me means you gotta get crazy every once in awhile.

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 11:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JoeW:</font><hr> Thank you, This is an emotional topic that generates much fire and little heat. I am glad to hear that you, at least, are willing to look at both side of the issue.

All things in moderation, even moderation, /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif which to me means you gotta get crazy every once in awhile. <hr /></blockquote>

Getting crazy once in a while is what helps us stay sane.

And, we do seem to have quite a few discussions on this forum that are difficult and emotional, especially on the NPR side. We have our "personalities" on here, but there are some good folks who participate here. Those who visit here that may have some of the older preconceived notions about pool players should be surprised at the cross-section we have represented here. I've been participating now for a few months and have really enjoyed the time. I've even had a chance to meet up with a couple of folks and play some pool. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

catscradle
02-08-2008, 11:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote billiards89:</font><hr>... For those of you who favor smoking bans, can you explain why you are willing to give the government that power?... <hr /></blockquote>
The government already has the right (or at least the power) to regulate what a business can and cannot do. The way I see it, if the government can't regulate smoking they can't regulate anything. Let the buyer beware. Those people who were burnt to death in Providence, RI when too many people were packed in a nightclub and a fire broke out... too bad it was the owners right; if he established unsafe conditions, the survivors can sue. If the local restaurant chooses not to clean their counters frequently, it is their right; if you get botulism, you can sue.
You can't have it both ways, either we grant the government the right to controll ALL such things, or we adopt a laissez-faire attitude and take our chances. The government has regulatory powers because the people want them to, there is no right and wrong of it. The rules and regulations the society functions within are just an arbitrary "social contract".

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 12:01 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote billiards89:</font><hr>... For those of you who favor smoking bans, can you explain why you are willing to give the government that power?... <hr /></blockquote>
The government already has the right (or at least the power) to regulate what a business can and cannot do. The way I see it, if the government can't regulate smoking they can't regulate anything. Let the buyer beware. Those people who were burnt to death in Providence, RI when too many people were packed in a nightclub and a fire broke out... too bad it was the owners right; if he established unsafe conditions, the survivors can sue. If the local restaurant chooses not to clean their counters frequently, it is their right; if you get botulism, you can sue.
You can't have it both ways, either we grant the government the right to controll ALL such things, or we adopt a laissez-faire attitude and take our chances. The government has regulatory powers because the people want them to, there is no right and wrong of it. The rules and regulations the society functions within are just an arbitrary "social contract". <hr /></blockquote>

You are right. The power the government wields is from the power we give them. They do need some power. The question is..."How much power are we willing to give?" The more power we give them, the less we have as individuals. It's a trade-off and there is benefit up to a point. At what point do you say "enough!" That's the real question... I have mixed feelings on the smoking thing. It's not the end of the world to ban smoking, but we need to be aware of the overall consequences and wonder what's next? It may be something that really affects you in a very negative way. I just prefer to give the government just enough power to only do their job. And that job and level of power should always be defined by the people. In our local situation, the city council enacted the ban. There was no city-wide vote by the people. In the end, if enough people don't like it, they can elect new city councilmen and a new mayor to retract the ban. But I bet that never happens...and I am OK with that.

1Time
02-08-2008, 12:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JoeW:</font><hr> All things in moderation, even moderation, /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif which to me means you gotta get crazy every once in awhile. <hr /></blockquote>

All behaviors are OK in moderation? That seems to be quite a radical and unpopular opinion, as it flies in the face of the Church, state, common sense, and modern civilization.

Deeman3
02-08-2008, 01:15 PM
Of course, everyone knows my moderate position of all smokers should be dragged out and shot immediately saving us and them selves the agony of a slower death and preventing them from procreating, poluting and killing the rest of the earth's population. After we are finished with them, we can go after the fat people. Keep your priorities straight.

catscradle
02-08-2008, 01:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 1Time:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote JoeW:</font><hr> All things in moderation, even moderation, /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif which to me means you gotta get crazy every once in awhile. <hr /></blockquote>

All behaviors are OK in moderation? That seems to be quite a radical and unpopular opinion, as it flies in the face of the Church, state, common sense, and modern civilization. <hr /></blockquote>

The problem as I see it is that smoking, especially in a tense situation such as competition, is not something that most people who do it at all do in moderation. If people did generally smoke in moderation and the establishments had kept their air filtration equipment in proper working order, there would never have been smoking bans in the first place. Smokers and cheap room/bar/restaurant owners really brought it upon themselves.

catscradle
02-08-2008, 01:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> ... And that job and level of power should always be defined by the people. In our local situation, the city council enacted the ban. There was no city-wide vote by the people. In the end, if enough people don't like it, they can elect new city councilmen and a new mayor to retract the ban. But I bet that never happens...and I am OK with that. <hr /></blockquote>

That brings to mind a point I've always maintained. Namely, if smokers believe the majority of people don't want smoking bans, they need only start a grass roots campaign and get a question on the ballot to repeal the ban. If they're right the question will pass; if not, it is the will of the people.

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 04:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Deeman3:</font><hr> Of course, everyone knows my moderate position of all smokers should be dragged out and shot immediately saving us and them selves the agony of a slower death and preventing them from procreating, poluting and killing the rest of the earth's population. After we are finished with them, we can go after the fat people. Keep your priorities straight. <hr /></blockquote>

I've quit smoking! Now, what's the weight requirement, and then what's next? I part my hair on the right side, while most men part their 's on the left side. Am I in trouble there also? I guess smoking nowadays is akin to being Jewish in Hitler's Germany.....Come to think of it, do blue-eyed people really have much value...well maybe as slaves....
I need help with my priorities also....just tell me what they are...
Funny thing....when I smoked I was ignorant, poor, and never paid my health-related bills and was sickly all the time, and a constant drain on society....now that I quit smoking...I haven't changed one bit!! Where's the free cheese and can I have some extra penicillan with that!

New2Pool
02-08-2008, 05:19 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr> ... And that job and level of power should always be defined by the people. In our local situation, the city council enacted the ban. There was no city-wide vote by the people. In the end, if enough people don't like it, they can elect new city councilmen and a new mayor to retract the ban. But I bet that never happens...and I am OK with that. <hr /></blockquote>

That brings to mind a point I've always maintained. Namely, if smokers believe the majority of people don't want smoking bans, they need only start a grass roots campaign and get a question on the ballot to repeal the ban. If they're right the question will pass; if not, it is the will of the people. <hr /></blockquote>

So your contention is that there is basically no such thing as individual rights? That is OK. I can respect that arguement even if I disagree with it.

My argument is that the individual has rights. As such, if you are walking down the street and 3 other people corner you and vote that you should give them your money then that is still robbery and thus an illegal act. It does not matter whether it is a gang or a city council the concept is still the same. Someone is taking something of yours with no compensation.

By the way, one flaw in my argument is that I actually prefer living in a town that is smoke free. It is very nice to be able to go to a restuarant or bar and not go home reeking of smoke. So while I am not willing to vote to deprive someone of their right to their own property I am not above enjoying the smoking ban. JoeW can figure out what that means. I am not sure.

SKennedy
02-08-2008, 05:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr> So while I am not willing to vote to deprive someone of their right to their own property I am not above enjoying the smoking ban. JoeW can figure out what that means. I am not sure. <hr /></blockquote>

I bet he'd tell you it means you are quite normal.

eg8r
02-08-2008, 07:37 PM
[ QUOTE ]
They told the owner of the place I frequent that his business should actually increase by about 30%. Hogwash! He will lose business. <hr /></blockquote> Hello Steve, as you know, I am a non-smoker but I am also on the business owners side and do not agree with the government interference. Now based on your quote...I completely disagree, in the long run. Maybe at first people will stop coming but when they notice it is smoke free everywhere else they will come back.

eg8r

Rich R.
02-08-2008, 08:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SKennedy:</font><hr>They told the owner of the place I frequent that his business should actually increase by about 30%. Hogwash! He will lose business. If business would be so great with non-smokers only, then the owners would ban smoking, or we would have at least 1 place in town for pool that prohibited smoking. We don't have one place in town that is currently non-smoking. You have a choice as to whether or not you want to go in to a place. You have the option of owning your own pool hall for non-smokers or at least buying your own table and putting it up at your residence, or finding a friend with one, etc. Tyler, my home town, is the 18th city in Texas that has enacted anti-smoking laws. We are becoming a little too "progressive" for my tastes. <hr /></blockquote>
Business will improve. At least it has in my area.
Smokers still have the right to smoke, they just have to go outside. If smokers truly like the establishment, they will continue to go there and just smoke outside. However, now that there is no smoking inside, the business will attract non-smokers, who would not enter before. This will increase business. Of course, if a smoker didn't truly like the establishment, he/she may drive to an area where there is no smoking ban.

No one is taking away a smokers right to smoke. Smokers are only being asked to step outside, so non-smokers do not suffer the ill effects of their smoke. I don't think that is too much to ask.

houseman
02-08-2008, 08:28 PM
As a 15 yr billiards room owner, I am going non-smoking March 1st, of my own doing, I quit smoking 5 years ago and I can`t take it any more.

My fathers side of the family is known for congestive heart failure and im 60 yrs old now.

Im hoping this doesn`t put me out of business but if it does oh well, maybe i`ll live longer while im broke and on welfare L.O.L.


Wish me luck
highrun55

mickey scott
D&amp;D Family Billiards
Thorndale Pa.

Rich R.
02-08-2008, 08:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote houseman:</font><hr>

As a 15 yr billiards room owner, I am going non-smoking March 1st, of my own doing, I quit smoking 5 years ago and I can`t take it any more.

My fathers side of the family is known for congestive heart failure and im 60 yrs old now.

Im hoping this doesn`t put me out of business but if it does oh well, maybe i`ll live longer while im broke and on welfare L.O.L.


Wish me luck
highrun55

mickey scott
D&amp;D Family Billiards
Thorndale Pa. <hr /></blockquote>
Mickey, are their any plans, in your area, for a legal smoking ban? If there were a ban, that would help your situation a lot.
Whatever the case is, I definitely hope the non-smoking players step up and support your decision.
BTW, I am a former multi-pack per day smoker. I quit a number of years ago. When I had some health issues, the doctors told be I would have been dead if I had not quit smoking earlier in my life. IMHO, your decision to go non-smoking is a good one and you will live longer, broke or not.
I wish you all of the luck in the world.

eg8r
02-08-2008, 08:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
As a 15 yr billiards room owner, I am going non-smoking March 1st, of my own doing, I quit smoking 5 years ago and I can`t take it any more.

My fathers side of the family is known for congestive heart failure and im 60 yrs old now.

Im hoping this doesn`t put me out of business but if it does oh well, maybe i`ll live longer while im broke and on welfare L.O.L.


Wish me luck
<hr /></blockquote> Good luck. This is a great decision. I love to see free enterprise do what is right in spite of the government.

eg8r

eg8r
02-08-2008, 08:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
However, now that there is no smoking inside, the business will attract non-smokers, who would not enter before. <hr /></blockquote> Hey Rich, I am not doubting your post but just curious do you know if there are any studies where non-smokers have started frequenting pool halls more often where the smoking bans are in place? I have always wondered if it was the smoke that kept them out, or there just are not that many people that care about playing pool regularly.

eg8r

eg8r
02-08-2008, 08:49 PM
Hey hold your horses there, no one near me has died from second-hand fat. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

Rich R.
02-08-2008, 08:54 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
However, now that there is no smoking inside, the business will attract non-smokers, who would not enter before. <hr /></blockquote> Hey Rich, I am not doubting your post but just curious do you know if there are any studies where non-smokers have started frequenting pool halls more often where the smoking bans are in place? I have always wondered if it was the smoke that kept them out, or there just are not that many people that care about playing pool regularly.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Ed, I don't know of any studies. My statement is based on my own observations in my area, where there are smoking bans and have been for some time. I have seen more non-smokers in the rooms where I play and a few have joined my league. I have also seen the smoking ban give some, including a couple of my teammates, the incentive to quit smoking.
A fair and unbiased study would be a great idea. However, I would like to wait for a few years to do one. I think it is still a little too early to get accurate results.

Rich R.
02-08-2008, 08:58 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Hey hold your horses there, no one near me has died from second-hand fat. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
I will confirm those results with my own, independent, study. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

eg8r
02-08-2008, 08:58 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Ed, I don't know of any studies. My statement is based on my own observations in my area, where there are smoking bans and have been for some time. I have seen more non-smokers in the rooms where I play and a few have joined my league. I have also seen the smoking ban give some, including a couple of my teammates, the incentive to quit smoking.
A fair and unbiased study would be a great idea. However, I would like to wait for a few years to do one. I think it is still a little too early to get accurate results. <hr /></blockquote> This is great news, even if it is a little too early to get excited. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

One thing that never made sense to me was when there was a pool hall that had split the smoking and non-smoking sections, the smoking section was always the busiest. There were plenty of non-smokers just breathing away in the smoking room. /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

eg8r

eg8r
02-08-2008, 09:00 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I will confirm those results with my own, independent, study. /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif <hr /></blockquote> Well, I hope nothing happens to you when you brave the fat people. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Good things are on the way in Alabama, they can turn away fat people just like when the bars are already busy they will sometimes turn away a drunk. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

houseman
02-08-2008, 09:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
As a 15 yr billiards room owner, I am going non-smoking March 1st, of my own doing, I quit smoking 5 years ago and I can`t take it any more.

My fathers side of the family is known for congestive heart failure and im 60 yrs old now.

Im hoping this doesn`t put me out of business but if it does oh well, maybe i`ll live longer while im broke and on welfare L.O.L.


Wish me luck
<hr /></blockquote> Good luck. This is a great decision. I love to see free enterprise do what is right in spite of the government.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>


Thank You, eg8r

Penna has past the law, they are still trying to decide who can and can not have smoking in their places.
I have received mostly good responses from my customers. So I think i`ll be ok

Mickey

mantis
02-09-2008, 12:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote billiards89:</font><hr> i wouldlove if a statewide smoking ban would pass in nebraska i no there trying to get it done <hr /></blockquote>

So you believe it is your right to be able to tell a private business owner whether or not that business owner can smoke in his or her own business? As a nonsmoker why can't stand being around smoke I would love it if smoking was done away with. I just can't figure out what gives me the right to force my preference on what others do on their own property. Now if you want a smoking ban that applies to public areas or on government owned property, I am right there with you.

For those of you who favor smoking bans, can you explain why you are willing to give the government that power? Also, are you OK with bans on fast food, "junk food", sugary drinks, unprotected sex outside of marriage, and other things that could have a negative effect on the health of people who chose to be exposed to that activity? <hr /></blockquote>

Actually, buisness owners are already told what type of sanitation they have to have, what age patrons must be to drink, whether or not they can sell alchohol, and many other things. When it is an issue that affects the health of the people that attend a buisness, then there is already a precedent set that local, state, federal government can, and often should (I do not want to eat in a roach filled restaurant)impose laws to protect those people. People can alway go outside to smoke for a few minutes.

Jal
02-09-2008, 02:49 AM
What I don't understand is why people are allowed to drive to bars, restaurants, sporting events, concerts and poolrooms in the first place? With 40,000 deaths and around 2 million permanent injuries from vehicular accidents each year, not to mention the tremendous waste of ever increasingly precious fuel supplies, a looming climate disaster with endless economic ramifications - if not the demise of anything we would call modernity - how is it that all of this non-essential motoring is still permitted? It is truly one of the real threats we face.

Smoking, obesity, lack of exercise, improper diet, etc., while they should all be proscribed and monitored, are mere trifles in the grand scheme of things.

Jim

1Time
02-09-2008, 03:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>... the grand scheme of things.<hr /></blockquote>

Sounds like an interesting topic. Perhaps even interesting enough for its own thread?

billiards89
02-09-2008, 08:10 AM
i think its pretty bad when u cant go play pool poker or do anything fun without risking your health and smelling like [censored]

catscradle
02-09-2008, 09:41 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote New2Pool:</font><hr> ...My argument is that the individual has rights. As such, if you are walking down the street and 3 other people corner you and vote that you should give them your money then that is still robbery and thus an illegal act. It does not matter whether it is a gang or a city council the concept is still the same. Someone is taking something of yours with no compensation.
... <hr /></blockquote>
The difference is that in the case of a robbery the larger majority of the society as a whole has deemed it unacceptable behaviour to rob so the "vote" of a gang of 3 does not outweigh the societial opinion. Whether one feels there are individual god given rights or not is a decision each of us makes on our own. If one does feel that way the should strive to get those "rights" incorporated in the "social contract". Personally, I'm not sure there are absolute rights in the first place, but, if there are absolute rights, smoking isn't one of them.

1Time
02-09-2008, 10:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote billiards89:</font><hr> i think its pretty bad when u cant go play pool poker or do anything fun without risking your health and smelling like [censored] <hr /></blockquote>
Yes, you're right. And it is that bad in many places. Welcome to the world created by smoking addicts.

New2Pool
02-10-2008, 03:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote houseman:</font><hr>

As a 15 yr billiards room owner, I am going non-smoking March 1st, of my own doing, I quit smoking 5 years ago and I can`t take it any more.

My fathers side of the family is known for congestive heart failure and im 60 yrs old now.

Im hoping this doesn`t put me out of business but if it does oh well, maybe i`ll live longer while im broke and on welfare L.O.L.


Wish me luck
highrun55

mickey scott
D&amp;D Family Billiards
Thorndale Pa. <hr /></blockquote>

Best of luck with your smoke free policy. I have seen studies that indicate the consumption of alcohol goes down when a smoking ban goes into effect but the consumption of food goes up. For businesses that have a high margin on drinks and don't sell much food that can be the difference between making a profit or not. The study mentioned was about Fayetteville AR., I don't have the paper handy but hopefully that will help you locate it if you are interested.

You can consider how you believe that change in consumption would affect your business.

In any event, I agree with the others who have said that we applaud your decision to chance and we hope that doing the right thing is the right thing to do financially as well!

CarolNYC
02-10-2008, 05:17 PM
Interesting!
[ QUOTE ]
, mere trifles in the grand scheme of things.
<hr /></blockquote>

The statistics on drunk-related accidents with deaths of children under 14 is pretty high! I think 38%????
Since they were able to BAN smoking,why stop there-for drunks on the road-
Every bar should have a breathalyzer machine-test patrons-take their keys away-
!
They've banned smoking in public areas .... Pass a law that smoking in your home requires an air cleaner-any child brought into hospitsls for respiratory,cardiovascular or SIDS, (also in 30% range,I'd have to look it up)
look at the parents,see if they smoke-go to their homes,see if they have air cleaners, if they dont,charge them with child abuse,negligence,endangering the welfare of a child

How about casinos where children are left "on the rug" while their parents gamble? Pass a law there!

Industries and cars pollute the air-the air alone isnt that great!

All the trouble to ban smoking-there is ALOT more they could've focused on-adults have the option to stay in or out of places that allow smoke,but, children are innocent!

Yeah, Im a sucker for children-
I feel they wasted time and money banning smoking-if your going to do something-go all the way!

Jal
02-11-2008, 12:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Interesting!
&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
, mere trifles in the grand scheme of things.
<hr /></blockquote>

The statistics on drunk-related accidents with deaths of children under 14 is pretty high! I think 38%????
Since they were able to BAN smoking,why stop there-for drunks on the road-
Every bar should have a breathalyzer machine-test patrons-take their keys away-
!
They've banned smoking in public areas .... Pass a law that smoking in your home requires an air cleaner-any child brought into hospitsls for respiratory,cardiovascular or SIDS, (also in 30% range,I'd have to look it up)
look at the parents,see if they smoke-go to their homes,see if they have air cleaners, if they dont,charge them with child abuse,negligence,endangering the welfare of a child

How about casinos where children are left "on the rug" while their parents gamble? Pass a law there!

Industries and cars pollute the air-the air alone isnt that great!

All the trouble to ban smoking-there is ALOT more they could've focused on-adults have the option to stay in or out of places that allow smoke,but, children are innocent!

Yeah, Im a sucker for children-
I feel they wasted time and money banning smoking-if your going to do something-go all the way! <hr /></blockquote>Carol,

I wasn't serious about the things I said. In fact, being a smoker, it was offered somewhat sarcastically to those who want to ban it.

There are usually good reasons for taking away our freedoms, but away they go. While I certainly agree that those who want to be in smoke free environs should have them available, taking all of the smoke filled rooms away is draconian. And above all, to dissociate smoking and pool is, well, a sin.

When they get around to regulating our diets, exercise regimes, how many times we brush our teeth, where and when we motor about, etc., all backed by seemingly inescapable logic, I hope none of those who now want to rid the world of this particular vice are silly enough to complain...but I'm not keeping my fingers crossed.

Jim

catscradle
02-11-2008, 07:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr>... There are usually good reasons for taking away our freedoms, but away they go...

Jim <hr /></blockquote>

The argument against smoking bans that they infringe upon individuals smokers' freedoms is a non-starter. The only argument that holds any water at all is that smoking bans infringe upon the freedom of the room owners to run their business the way they choose. That argument might be valid, but I guess you'd have to be a constitutional lawyer to say for sure and even then the courts might disagree.

CarolNYC
02-11-2008, 07:28 AM
Hey Jim,
I am also a smoker-but I was serious about homes-if they can stop a room owner,restaurant owner from allowing smoking, why not a home-owner!Thats what I meant by, "they should have went all the way" Why not? Because they cant!
(I have an aircleaner in my home because I'll do my best to protect my kids!)






[ QUOTE ]
When they get around to regulating our diets, exercise regimes, how many times we brush our teeth, where and when we motor about, etc., all backed by seemingly inescapable logic, I hope none of those who now want to rid the world of this particular vice are silly enough to complain...but I'm not keeping my fingers crossed <hr /></blockquote>

There it is-had they went all the way against homeowners,how many would've went for that ban /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gifTo me, this is just the START of regulating what people can do-
My daughters HS use to have a Pathmark in it for the kids to buy foods,etc..they took it out and replaced it with salads and water-parents went nuts,including me-"Who are you to tell me what my kid can eat for lunch?"
Its just the start of things to come!
Have a great day!
Carol

catscradle
02-11-2008, 10:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> ...-"Who are you to tell me what my kid can eat for lunch?"
Its just the start of things to come!
Have a great day!
Carol <hr /></blockquote>
They're not telling you what you're kid can eat, only what they (the people as represented by the government) will condone. When I was a kid, there was one lunch for everybody (they did make an exception when I got smashed in the mouth with a baseball and could only eat soup /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif), if you didn't want it for any reason, be it nutrition or religious reasons, you could brown bag it. Seemed like an easy enough solution to me.

CarolNYC
02-11-2008, 10:53 AM
Hi Steve,
[ QUOTE ]
When I was a kid, there was one lunch for everybody <hr /></blockquote>
I understand-of course,sloppy joe day,pizza day,etc...but there were DIFFERENT lunches everyday-you can brown bag or eat hot lunch-this is H.S.-there is NO CHOICE-salads only,my kid isnt a vegetarian-but,like you said "no problem-"walk to the deli a block away and get a sandwich!

catscradle
02-11-2008, 11:35 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Hi Steve,
&lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
When I was a kid, there was one lunch for everybody <hr /></blockquote>
I understand-of course,sloppy joe day,pizza day,etc...but there were DIFFERENT lunches everyday-you can brown bag or eat hot lunch-this is H.S.-there is NO CHOICE-salads only,my kid isnt a vegetarian-but,like you said "no problem-"walk to the deli a block away and get a sandwich! <hr /></blockquote>
They don't make a lunch (other than salad) of some type available at all in H.S. there? In that case, I understand the complaint. In this area school lunch availablity continues right through high school.

Jal
02-11-2008, 01:43 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Hey Jim,
I am also a smoker-but I was serious about homes-if they can stop a room owner,restaurant owner from allowing smoking, why not a home-owner!Thats what I meant by, "they should have went all the way" Why not? Because they cant!...<hr /></blockquote>Ah, so you were employing the same devastating technique that I was. It was so good you had me fooled, and riled up for hours! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Jim

Jal
02-11-2008, 01:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr>The argument against smoking bans that they infringe upon individuals smokers' freedoms is a non-starter.<hr /></blockquote>Why do you say this?

Jim

catscradle
02-11-2008, 02:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr>The argument against smoking bans that they infringe upon individuals smokers' freedoms is a non-starter.<hr /></blockquote>Why do you say this?

Jim <hr /></blockquote>
Let me preface this by saying I'm talking about bans in places not owned by the smoker in question. The only way I can see an argument for individual rights is if the somebody is telling a person that you cannot smoke on your own property. This argument I would consider appropriate if the government banned you (assuming you smoke) from smoking in your own house, but I don't see anyway an argument can be made that you have a "right" to smoke anywhere regardless of the owners opinion.
That still leaves open the debate about the rights under law of the room owner, this I am still of mixed minds about. In my opinion, individuals have the right to do anything they want including murder, robbery, rape, etc.; however, most of us don't feel those are proper behaviours and we establish laws restricting those and a whole bunch of other "rights". We would all agree that those behaviours are rightly restricted, the rub comes when you have to decide about borderline behaviors such as a room owner allowing or not allowing smoking. As I said, I'm of 2 minds here. There is no question in my mind that more people in a pool room don't smoke (at least in my area) and would rather not be subjected to the smoke of the minority. On the other hand ... well you see what I'm getting at. I don't know the answer to that question, but I know I sure enjoy going home from the room without watery red eyes, a sore throat, and stinky clothing. I know longer have to put my clothes on the back porch after playing pool, that is nice.

SKennedy
02-11-2008, 02:50 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Jal:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote catscradle:</font><hr>The argument against smoking bans that they infringe upon individuals smokers' freedoms is a non-starter.<hr /></blockquote>Why do you say this?

Jim <hr /></blockquote>
Let me preface this by saying I'm talking about bans in places not owned by the smoker in question. The only way I can see an argument for individual rights is if the somebody is telling a person that you cannot smoke on your own property. This argument I would consider appropriate if the government banned you (assuming you smoke) from smoking in your own house, but I don't see anyway an argument can be made that you have a "right" to smoke anywhere regardless of the owners opinion.
That still leaves open the debate about the rights under law of the room owner, this I am still of mixed minds about. In my opinion, individuals have the right to do anything they want including murder, robbery, rape, etc.; however, most of us don't feel those are proper behaviours and we establish laws restricting those and a whole bunch of other "rights". We would all agree that those behaviours are rightly restricted, the rub comes when you have to decide about borderline behaviors such as a room owner allowing or not allowing smoking. As I said, I'm of 2 minds here. There is no question in my mind that more people in a pool room don't smoke (at least in my area) and would rather not be subjected to the smoke of the minority. On the other hand ... well you see what I'm getting at. I don't know the answer to that question, but I know I sure enjoy going home from the room without watery red eyes, a sore throat, and stinky clothing. I know longer have to put my clothes on the back porch after playing pool, that is nice. <hr /></blockquote>

I agree with you. It's a tough issue. My town did pass the new anti-smoking law and it will be interesting to see the results, both short and long-term.

CarolNYC
02-11-2008, 03:36 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Let me preface this by saying I'm talking about bans in places not owned by the smoker in question. The only way I can see an argument for individual rights is if the somebody is telling a person that you cannot smoke on your own property. <hr /></blockquote>

The pool room owners and bar owners I know are smokers-they're being told they're NOT allowed to smoke in there on bar/poolroom /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Its a crazy topic and Im happy for the non-smokers, I really am ,cause I agree about the "smell of an ashtray"

Carol

wolfdancer
02-11-2008, 04:13 PM
why not a home-owner
Say, that is a good idea...I'll pass that along to my Congressman /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

wolfdancer
02-11-2008, 04:18 PM
Mickey, hope that works out for you. From experience, I worked in two rooms that were legislated into going non-smoking....business dropped off for the short term, and then returned. The outside smoking, became a social area for smokers.

catscradle
02-11-2008, 04:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Mickey, hope that works out for you. From experience, I worked in two rooms that were legislated into going non-smoking....business dropped off for the short term, and then returned. The outside smoking, became a social area for smokers. <hr /></blockquote>
The place I play opened a cigar shop in an area that was part of the room, never seen the cash register even opened, lol. That is where the smokers go in the bad weather. I don't know if it is really legal, but nobody is calling him on it so it works well for everybody, smokers and non-smokers alike. A little smoke sneaks out, but it isn't like the old days.

Rich R.
02-11-2008, 08:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr>The pool room owners and bar owners I know are smokers-they're being told they're NOT allowed to smoke in there on bar/poolroom /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Its a crazy topic and Im happy for the non-smokers, I really am ,cause I agree about the "smell of an ashtray"

Carol <hr /></blockquote>
Once you open the doors of your business to the public, you are subject to a whole list of regulations. If you sell food and drink, you are subject to health inspections. You are required to have emergency exits. More recently, in some areas, you are required to run a non-smoking room. It is no different from any other regulation and they are all meant to protect the majority of the public.
Would you want to eat in a restaraunt that was not subject to health inspections?
Would you want to be caught in a building, during a fire, with no emergency exits?
I don't think so, but I don't hear anyone complaining about those regulations.

CarolNYC
02-12-2008, 07:33 AM
Hey Rich,
[ QUOTE ]
Once you open the doors of your business to the public, you are subject to a whole list of regulations. <hr /></blockquote>
I understand that,Rich,what Im saying is ,they're still allowing the sales of cigarettes,but its illegal to smoke them-
heres a scenario,say your the owner of a family owned business for generations,you own the building,land and business-you smoke-always served smoking and nonsmoking-the Dept. of health proves that:

Second-hand smoke is hazardous to health.............
so,if you want a smoking establishment, install smoke-eaters,air cleaners,whatever and pay high electric bills and DECIDE FOR YOURSELF,whether you should resort to a nonsmoking establishment-the Dept. of health will have inspections to make sure your air system is functioning-(now sarcastically)"ya know what,we'll decide for you-no more smoking!
It really doesnt matter anymore-the law is the law and NY was one of the first! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif


Carol

Rich R.
02-12-2008, 08:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Hey Rich, I understand that,Rich,what Im saying is ,they're still allowing the sales of cigarettes,but its illegal to smoke them-

<font color="red">Carol, it is NOT illegal to smoke. All the law does is ask you to step outside so you don't affect others. </font color>

heres a scenario,say your the owner of a family owned business for generations,you own the building,land and business-you smoke-always served smoking and nonsmoking-the Dept. of health proves that:

<font color="red">As I said before, when someone opens their doors as a public business, they are subject to a whole list of regulations. The smoking ban is just the most recent. As a business owner, this person has to abide by all of the regulations. He can't pick and choose which ones he wants to follow. </font color>

Second-hand smoke is hazardous to health.............
so,if you want a smoking establishment, install smoke-eaters,air cleaners,whatever and pay high electric bills and DECIDE FOR YOURSELF,whether you should resort to a nonsmoking establishment-the Dept. of health will have inspections to make sure your air system is functioning-(now sarcastically)"ya know what,we'll decide for you-no more smoking!
It really doesnt matter anymore-the law is the law and NY was one of the first! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif <hr /></blockquote>
<font color="red">I have been in places with the smoke eaters. They work, to a certain extent, but they are not great. From my experience, owners usually don't install enough of them. Also, as we know, some owners never installed any of them. Business owners had many years to take steps to reduce the smoke in their establishments. Most didn't do anything. Now the law is forcing them to take action.

BTW, for those reading this, who do not know Carol, she is a long time smoker but, from my experience, she has always been more the courteous, about her smoking, when in the company of non-smokers.</font color>

CarolNYC
02-12-2008, 08:51 AM
[ QUOTE ]
All the law does is ask you to step outside so you don't affect others.
<hr /></blockquote>
And in some states, a certain amout of feet from a building /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Remember SBE 2 years ago, when you walked downstairs it was absolutely ridiculous-one big cloud of smoke-people were walking around with their families down there-
I was very happy and was included in that discussion to make it "no smoking"
I also dont like smoking in my car!
Always a pleasure Rich!
See ya soon! /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Carol

catscradle
02-12-2008, 09:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <font color="red">I have been in places with the smoke eaters. They work, to a certain extent, but they are not great. From my experience, owners usually don't install enough of them. Also, as we know, some owners never installed any of them. Business owners had many years to take steps to reduce the smoke in their establishments. Most didn't do anything. Now the law is forcing them to take action.

BTW, for those reading this, who do not know Carol, she is a long time smoker but, from my experience, she has always been more the courteous, about her smoking, when in the company of non-smokers.</font color> <hr /></blockquote>

You hit on the crux of the problem there Rich, if all room owners had put in sufficient smoke eaters, used them, and properly maintained them, I honestly believe smoking bans would never have been forthcoming. Unfortunately more chose to not maintain the environment inside their room than chose to maintain it.

I can only reiterate the kind things you said about Carol, she is a very nice and considerate person, I've never heard anyone speak otherwise of her. Though in honesty Carol, you should quit for the sake of your health.

JoeW
02-12-2008, 10:10 AM
I think the primary issue is the focus of society. The arguments for and against a public policy for smoking is fueled by different factions.

In general, I think that smoking offends some people and they have come up with many reasons (supported by some good and much tenuous realistic research) to make smoking a major issue. There are many issues that could be addressed by society and we currently focus on this one because it is related to personal preferences and the effect these preferences have on others.

Unfortunately, we (as a society) often do not consider the idea that decisions we make in one area have an effect on other areas of our society. From what I have been told there are now parks, beaches and similar places that are “smoke free.” It seems to me that the puritanical side of society has kicked in to make smokers pariahs and socially unacceptable addicts.

Our smoking bans have indeed lead to regressive forms of taxation and have taken this cheap form of self medication from those who are least able to afford it. Smoking is indeed dangerous and harmful, so are many other things. There is a need for tolerance; in its place we see many people jumping on a band wagon to beat down the unacceptable smoker. When I see people standing 50 feet from a building (Ohio Law) in sub zero weather smoking in groups of two or three I wonder about the lack of empathy of my fellow self righteous citizens.

wolfdancer
02-12-2008, 10:22 AM
Soon as we get this smoking issue to become a non-issue...then we can address another problem that bothers me...gum chewers!!
In Singapore you can't walk and chew gum...it's against the law...well, you can walk, but chewing gum, selling gum, is verboten.

catscradle
02-12-2008, 12:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JoeW:</font><hr> I think the primary issue is the focus of society. The arguments for and against a public policy for smoking is fueled by different factions.

In general, I think that smoking offends some people and they have come up with many reasons (supported by some good and much tenuous realistic research) to make smoking a major issue. There are many issues that could be addressed by society and we currently focus on this one because it is related to personal preferences and the effect these preferences have on others.

Unfortunately, we (as a society) often do not consider the idea that decisions we make in one area have an effect on other areas of our society. From what I have been told there are now parks, beaches and similar places that are “smoke free.” It seems to me that the puritanical side of society has kicked in to make smokers pariahs and socially unacceptable addicts.

Our smoking bans have indeed lead to regressive forms of taxation and have taken this cheap form of self medication from those who are least able to afford it. Smoking is indeed dangerous and harmful, so are many other things. There is a need for tolerance; in its place we see many people jumping on a band wagon to beat down the unacceptable smoker. When I see people standing 50 feet from a building (Ohio Law) in sub zero weather smoking in groups of two or three I wonder about the lack of empathy of my fellow self righteous citizens.
<hr /></blockquote>
I understand where you are coming from, but ...
People are not offended by smoking, they are offended by smoke which unfortunately is a side product of smoking.
I don't see this as a puritanical reaction to anything. I don't think anybody considers smokers pariahs or social outcasts, others just don't want to be around the smoke, the smokers themselves aren't thought badly of. Some smokers may understandably feel ostracized, but I think hardly any others feel ill towards the smoker persay.
As to self-medication, can't buy it. What they are self-medicating is an addiction to nicotine. The initial "calming" effect of smoking when somebody starts smoking is soon replaced by an anxious feeling when not smoking, thereby requiring smoking to return to an otherwise normal state. It could be as easily said a heroin user is self-medicating the side effect of heroin addiction.
I don't for a minute think anybody is jumping on bandwagons, they are just glad to be away from the smoke. Simple as that. Do I think 2nd hand smoke is a health risk, go me, don't know, don't care. Do I think my clothing smells better now, oh yeah. Do I think my eyes sting less now, that too. Do I think I have fewer sore throats now, without doubt. I think that is all non-smokers are worried about in this deal. The health effects of 2nd hand smoke seems intuitively true, but hardly proven I agree.
I quit smoking 39 years ago and never minded people smoking, just minded them smoking around me. I quit drink maybe 19 years ago and never minded people drinking around me unless they spilt their drink on me. By excercising a little dexterity a drinker can drink around me and not spill his drink on me, no matter what a smoker does he can't smoke around me and not get the smoke on me.

SKennedy
02-12-2008, 02:58 PM
By the way Carol.....Chantrix is great stuff! It helped me quit smoking and actually made it almost too easy to quit. I would recommend it for those trying to stop smoking. I'm glad I did.

CarolNYC
02-12-2008, 05:23 PM
Im glad you did ,too /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Thanks for the info,I;ll look into it-promise /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Carol

CarolNYC
02-12-2008, 05:25 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Though in honesty Carol, you should quit for the sake of your health. [/preach] <hr /></blockquote>
I hear you,Steve,I hear you-its so kind of you to care-thank you-
I'll let you know-now Im thinking of it /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Carol

Rich R.
02-13-2008, 08:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Remember SBE 2 years ago, when you walked downstairs it was absolutely ridiculous-one big cloud of smoke-people were walking around with their families down there-
I was very happy and was included in that discussion to make it "no smoking" <hr /></blockquote>
I can only thank you for helping to make that decision. The lower level was disgusting.

catscradle
02-13-2008, 10:50 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rich R.:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote CarolNYC:</font><hr> Remember SBE 2 years ago, when you walked downstairs it was absolutely ridiculous-one big cloud of smoke-people were walking around with their families down there-
I was very happy and was included in that discussion to make it "no smoking" <hr /></blockquote>
I can only thank you for helping to make that decision. The lower level was disgusting. <hr /></blockquote>

Especially considering it is where the food is prepared and served.

cue_z
02-25-2008, 03:20 PM
First off, I'm a non-smoker for 12 yrs. I personally don't like smoke in my face, but I respect smokers and non-smokers alike. I never blew smoke in a non-smokers face when I did smoke. I alway asked if anyone minds if I light-up. I think if smoking is allowed, sufficent smoke eaters should be running for the non-smoker. All customers, smokers and non-smokers should be equally important to the business they're playing pool at.
My only major issue is this: My GRANDKIDS won't come near me if they smell smoke on my presents. I think this would bother any grandparent. Am I right?? Bottom line everyone needs to respect everyone else. Treat people like you want to be treated. Remember that and IT'S ALL GOOD!!

shojingod
02-27-2008, 10:29 PM
Every person has there little bit of vise against them. One is smoking, others is not exercising enough or watching what they eat and I would not hold against anybody that does any of these things. The question people must ask is what is a business? Is a business like your home? Laws came in that stop smoking in business's. Many said that we violated the owners rights yet we would never say that the owner were ignorant of the reality of the dangers of cigarette smoke yet not many where willing to stop smoking in their establishment by themselves. Too me that saying in no short words :"I don't give a s%^T about you" it funny how this argument was said at the beginning of this century when city start inforcing health regulation of business serving food. The moment health regulation came into effect the nature of what is a business changed. A business in this day of age have to follow guidelines imposed by the city they live in. They have to have proper zoning, follow proper health codes and follow maximum people capacity. Therefore I think is pure ignorance to say that a business can do what they want. They can only do what they want in the context of their business.

The simple fact is that the smoking laws came into effect the same reason health laws for restaurant came into effect. There was a severe lack of initiative in the business community to clean up it's act on it's own.

I hear all the time smokers say that the owner has the right to run the business the way he wants. Ok, then he has the right to run a business with a rat infestation as well and sell food in that rat infested business because it his right to do what he wants and you are perfectly free to eat there or not. This is the argument used but changed slightly to show the pure error in it. The fact is proper business's are licensed

Here is a link for some
http://www.entrepreneur.com/encyclopedia/term/82288.html