[Vision2020] More Banning?

[bear at moscow.com]

Joe,

I appreciate your reasoned comments and agree that there are two sides to
this issue.
I do have to ask this one though about the motivation for going
"smokeless" without more legislation.  What about letting the market place
decide that itself? IF there was such a strong demand for a non-smoking
bar/pool parlor, wouldn't  have someone opened one? There are plenty of
places where you can go drink and don't have to put up with cigarette
smoke, but once this legislation is passed, where can I go and get a cup
of coffee and a cigarette LEGALLY?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bear,
>
> Parks did say that some of his employees had worked as bartenders in
> local bars, so presumably he was trying to speak to their concerns.
> Still I agree with you that other solutions may be available, like the
> Bucers solution. It is not clear that the Bucers solution would work
> for the Alley, though. And what would motivate the Alley to adopt such
> a costly solution without the threat of sanctions of some kind? They
> do a great business as it is. I'm not taking a stand, one way or the
> other, but I agree that laws should be avoided whenever possible. I
> just think there are strong considerations on both sides.
>
> Joe Campbell
>
> On Jun 19, 2009, at 4:21 PM, bear at moscow.com wrote:
>
>>
>> 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 Californi
>>> a — 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
>>>> =======================================================
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> 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
>> =======================================================
>