It's Black Wednesday in the Twin Cities...

[QUOTE=ireLocus]why don't you just lobby to get the cover in smoke free places lowered?

Wouldn't that be a solution everyone would like?

Banning smoking isn't the solution. Once the smokers move outside, are you gonna complain that the sidewalk is too smokey, too?[/QUOTE]

there are no smoke free places in jersey

and why would i complain if they were smokeing outside? it doesnt make me stink to be near smokers if theyre outside.

banning smoking inside is a solution...
especially when i go to a resturaunt and have to wait 45 minutes- pregnant, around fuckers practically blowing smoke in my face

what am i gonna say? "can you put that out?"
and the response i get is something like "this aint new york, girlie"

If anything, I think it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to pay bartenders more for the "risk" to their health in much the same way we pay some fisherman more when they assume such risks in search of, say, snow crab. That can be a very dangerous job indeed. They get paid accordingly. So do high-rise window washers. It's a work related risk that the employee was aware of before they applied for the job.

[QUOTE=TheJudasCow].... just to go to a smoke free club costs too forking much...[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=TheJudasCow]there are no smoke free places in jersey[/QUOTE]

Um... okay. so there are or there aren't?

[QUOTE=TheJudasCow]and why would i complain if they were smokeing outside? it doesnt make me stink to be near smokers if theyre outside.

banning smoking inside is a solution...
especially when i go to a resturaunt and have to wait 45 minutes- pregnant, around fuckers practically blowing smoke in my face

what am i gonna say? "can you put that out?"
and the response i get is something like "this aint new york, girlie"[/QUOTE]

You've ignored the majority of what I posted (the parts about being all for restaraunts and such being smoke free, just not bars) and decided to whine instead.

I have no pity for you.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Um... okay. so there are or there aren't?

You've ignored the majority of what I posted (the parts about being all for restaraunts and such being smoke free, just not bars) and decided to whine instead.

I have no pity for you.[/QUOTE]

smoke free= NEW YORK (tolls, gas... fuck the cover- im talking travel)
im in jersey, dude

and i didnt ask for yo damned pity

[QUOTE=TheJudasCow]smoke free= NEW YORK (tolls, gas... fuck the cover- im talking travel)
im in jersey, dude

and i didnt ask for yo damned pity[/QUOTE]
No reason to get all huffy, jeeze. Maybe be more clear when you post, like I'm trying so hard to be in spite of people like you.

Like I said, I'm all for some smoke free places, but not bars, cause that's what people in general go to bars to do while they drink.

Look, some people like to drink and smoke and eat all at the same time.

Some people like to drink and eat without smoke.

[I]There is room in this world for both of these type of establishments[/I]. It is not necessary to shove the smokers outside anymore than it is necessary to blow smoke in the faces of pregnant women.

Do you see? We CAN have it both ways.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]No reason to get all huffy, jeeze. Maybe be more clear when you post, like I'm trying so hard to be in spite of people like you.

Like I said, I'm all for some smoke free places, but not bars, cause that's what people in general go to bars to do while they drink.[/QUOTE]
im hardly huffy
and i said clubs
not bars

places i can dance

[QUOTE=TheJudasCow]im hardly huffy
and i said clubs
not bars

places i can dance[/QUOTE]
Not bars?

Then we had no argument to begin with.

I'm pissed about the impending smoking ban on all bars tomorrow in the Twin Cities here. That was the last step, and now there is nowhere to smoke while you enjoy your port or bourbon.

Man I want a bourbon about now.

[QUOTE=ireLocus]Actually here's another angle in favor of smoking in bars.

If you're not at the bar to smoke, you're still more than likely there to drink. Drinking isn't the healthiest habit either. So why take one unhealthy habit away from me so you can breath fresh air while you kill your kidneys?

If bar goers were really so health concious, they'd probably not be there so often in the first place. If that were the case, they couldn't be ingesting any dangerous amount of secondhand smoke, since secondhand smoke has to be pretty damn frequent to be harmful.

Good logic, no?[/QUOTE]

One major gigantic huge flaw with this angle:

One's drinking does not affect the health of others in the establishment
(unless the drunks start a brawl). When they are drinking, they arent hurting anyone else but themselves. Just like when you smoke in your own home or say in a cigar club, everyone is there to smoke so they cant complain.

But smoking can cause damage to others.The smoek you breateh out affects the health of those around you. Second hand smoke is a factor and you cant ignore it. It really pisses me off when people start lighting up at concerts. We came here to watch the band, maybe have a few drinks, not breathe in your shit and come home reeeking of what ever shit you decided to smoke. If you do it beforehand, great. If you are stoned, who cares? But i dont need to smell like a fucking addict on the train ride home.

And that angle itself is just a big joke.

I don't know about this. The main reason why I don't go to clubs is smoke. I have very sensitive eyes and they get highly irritated in smokey rooms. I combat this by just not going. I guess if there were a smokeless club/bar in my area I would be more inclined to go. I doubt it though because the second reason why I don't go to clubs is the bad music. It may just be Abilene Texas where I'm from, but the music in clubs sucks donkey balls.

Page three and no one has yet pointed out that smokey is a bear and smoky is an adjective . Dammit.

I'm sorry Irelocus but I think smoking is on it's way out. Cuba has outlawed smoking for fucks sake! Smoking is bad for the smoker and the people around the smoker and smoking related diseases are a burden on taxpayers.

And sure bars are still associated with smoking but so were movie theatres and restaurants not so long ago. Associations change.

And I lament the change. I love smoking and having a drink(s). But, I think in the long run it's a great thing. If it's too inconvenient to smoke, less peope will take up the habit.

[QUOTE=mirkah]Page three and no one has yet pointed out that smokey is a bear and smoky is an adjective . Dammit.

I'm sorry Irelocus but I think smoking is on it's way out. Cuba has outlawed smoking for fucks sake! Smoking is bad for the smoker and the people around the smoker and smoking related diseases are a burden on taxpayers.

And sure bars are still associated with smoking but so were movie theatres and restaurants not so long ago. Associations change.

And I lament the change. I love smoking and having a drink(s). But, I think in the long run it's a great thing. If it's too inconvenient to smoke, less peope will take up the habit.[/QUOTE]
First off, I wrote smoky in my first posts, but then it honeslty looked wrong to me so I changed it. It's nice to know that my first inclination was actually correct.

Secondly. Fuck. Cuba outlawed smoking. That can only mean the US is not far behind, because if you'll remember, when Cuba banned... wait.... um...

[B]The Very Good News[/B]
[b]I just found out that the county I live in is not completely smoke free, only Minneapolis proper and it's neighboring counties. My county, Ramsey county which is a part of Saint Paul, was [u]incorrecly reported[/u] as being smoke free as of tomorrow. Smoke free establishments there will be those who draw 39% of their total business or less from alchohol. If an establishment draws 40% or more of their business from alchohol, you can smoke there. * Happy Dance * [/b] Why the other areas didn't treat the new law in a similar way I just don't know. And there are some bars who have decided to still go ahead and be smoke free now that there will appear to be some worthwhile competition in that market. This seems, to me, like the best solution, because some bar owners now feel they can go smoke free and actually be competing in that market whereas before, they were worried about losing business.

And lastly, there's plenty of research on the negative effects of secondhand smoke. I know.

The problem is, there are fewer and fewer places where you can breath it (ie, more and more places where smoking is banned), meaning you have more and more options available to you that won't have the "dangers" of secondhand smoke. AND, this means that since you will likely be around secondhand smoke less, your chances of having ill effects are greatly reduced.

Why? Because you have to breath in a hell of a lot of second hand smoke to be in danger. I don't understand why people don't realize this. You will, more than likely, breath in more car exhaust fumes in your day to day ventures than you wil secondhand smoke unless you spend more than 3 hours in a bar every day. This reinforces my argument that secondhand smoke is mostly a work related risk, not a risk to someone who has a burger once or twice a month at a smoky (sp!) diner. Breathing second hand smoke even once a week for no longer than it takes to have a meal is unlikey to have any noticeable effect at all.

I'm not just making this up.

So, since no one's forcing you to breath it, and you have the ability to boycott places where there is still smoking allowed, please leave well enough alone.

Maybe your area has no smoke free places like this. Then yeah, you can bitch. But they needn't all be smoke free. I think the plan in my county is well founded, limiting smoking to bars and banning it in clubs and othe rtypes of places where it was previously still okay. It gives the balance I was referring to in earlier posts.

It's good to have the choice as a customer to go to a regular club or a smoke free club and still have a good variety of choices before you, unlike before when there were scarcely any smoke free places.