[Vision2020] More Banning?

[bear at moscow.com]

Ted,

What about something less draconian than a ban? What about a physical
separation with air exchangers? What do you think about the way Bucers has
their set up?

I can tell you that as a smoker, I am less inclined to compromise with
total bans and advocates of total bans when their interests are up for
consideration later. And I vote.  There has to be a middle ground
somewhere.

And you mention that  keeping bars smoke free is a benefit to the workers
in these businesses who need the jobs yet are exposed to second hand
smoke. In the case here in Moscow, I don't even think the employees were
even asked. Based on the tape I saw of the meeting before city council on
the 18th of May, it was an individual that is a bar customer, and from his
comments, I have to believe he was talking about Mingles. So, because he
doesn't like the smoky atmosphere in Mingles,  all of the bars in Moscow
have to ban smoking?

I just think much more research needs to be done to see IF there is a
problem before the Council passes a ban. The quick, knee jerk reaction,
the simple solution to the problem IF there is one, is to pass a ban.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> New York City has banned tobacco smoking in bars and restaurants.  There
> have been some negative consequences, but New York still has a night life
> for drinkers:
>
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-07-01-smoking-usat_x.htm
>
> From website above:
>
> New York City is still coming to terms with smoke-free night life three
> months after a ban went into effect outlawing smoking in virtually all
> workplaces, including restaurants and bars.
>
> Five states — New York, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine and California — have
> passed similar smoking restrictions that include bars and taverns. New
> York
> state's ban, which echoes the city's anti-smoking law, goes into effect
> July
> 24.
> ------------------------
> I am in favor of banning tobacco smoking in bars (and workplaces).
> Keeping
> bars smoke free is a benefit to the workers in these businesses who need
> the
> jobs yet are exposed to second hand smoke.  The workers in bars are not
> forced to drink the drinks the customers order; yet they must breathe the
> air polluted by customers smoking.  Furthermore, the damage to peoples
> lives
> and society from tobacco abuse/addiction (the single largest cause of
> premature death) is so huge that laws blocking smoking tobacco in what are
> publicly oriented businesses (even if privately owned) is reasonable, if
> practical.  I would not support criminalizing tobacco. Any adult wishing
> to
> smoke in their homes or on their property should be free to do so (but not
> to expose children to second hand smoke, of course).  But a ban on smoking
> in bars (and on all advertising) would limit encouragement of tobacco use.
> If someone wants to form a private smoking/drinking "club" on private
> property, they should be free to do so.  Just don't expect workers who
> need
> jobs to have to breathe second hand smoke for a paycheck.
>
> Ted Moffett
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Chasuk <chasuk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not surprised that those in the grip of the smoking addiction
>> would drive drunk.  There is no human behavior so pathetic that
>> someone won't indulge it.
>>
>> However, I am against outright smoking bans.  Yes, I should be able to
>> enjoy my evening without the stink of cigarettes, but the smoker
>> should be able to commit slow suicide if he or she chooses.
>>
>> There are plenty of places that I can publicly eat or socialize where
>> I will not be bothered by smokers.
>>
>> No more bans, please.
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>