Smoke-Free Charlotte?

[Andyc545]

I find it irrelevant of the history of tobacco to what I have stated as to doing with public smoking in bars. I acknowledge its history and its importance to the state, region, and country and am not even against it, just choose not to do. History aside, there are solutions to what some would call as a problem, a discomfort, whatever it may be, and that is evident in what many other states have chosen to do: in public restaurants smoking sections are separately enclosed from non-smoking. If you choose to smoke, you do it in smoking and entertain your party in smoking, if you don't choose to, then you will not be affected. Whatever a solution it may be for Rock Hill, it'll be interesting to what effect this has on NC legislation.

[dubone]

I absolutely agree with you Andy, but the point is that it requires the state legislature to authorize the localities to make such a rule and when it had a shot recently, it was voted down decidedly. North Carolina, due to its current and historic ties to tobacco, will not lead the country on this, it will lag, just as with cigarette taxes.

I think it makes perfect sense to allow Charlotte to do that, as Charlotte was a cotton and textile region, not tobacco. But the fact is that there is a majority of the state with legislators who will refuse to allow such action anywhere in the state.

[Neo]

Well said. People drink alcohol in non smoking bars, and will on occasion drive drunk and injure or kill an innocent person. Should we next ban alcohol from bars? Maybe we should have alcohol free smoking bars??

The issue is about personal choice vs. the nanny state making decisions for you and others. Be careful what you wish for, the incremental erosion of personal rights will not stop at smoking. There are plenty of people who think you should have no right to drink alcohol, eat fatty foods, or own a gun, for example.

You have to draw the line somewhere and let adults make personal lifestyle decisions.

I've never understood how banning smoking is like banning drinking alcohol. Second hand alcohol (vapors?) is not harmful to health, second hand smoke (and third hand smoke that's now being reported) is most definitely a health issue and has been proven time and time again.

Drinking and driving is illegal so I don't understand how anyone could say it is the same. My wife and I now only go to restaurants that are smoke-free, but we would also love to go to many restaurants that do have smoking, but since they allow it we choose to stay away. We view it has extremely inconsiderate of smokers to feel the need to light up during a meal. If you can't go an hour without a cigarette for the sake of the health of everyone else in the room then I really feel for you.

I've been over this in other threads countless times so I'm not going to reiterate all of my points, but I really hope that NC joins the current 28 states that have laws on the books against smoking.

[monsoon]

......

I think it makes perfect sense to allow Charlotte to do that, as Charlotte was a cotton and textile region, not tobacco. But the fact is that there is a majority of the state with legislators who will refuse to allow such action anywhere in the state.

[swh1972]

I was having dinner at Flemings at EpiCentre on Friday, and we sat in the bar area, and the server noted that the bar was non-smoking, and I assume that the dining room was as well. Can anyone confirm that Flemings is entirely Smoke Free?

[kewlaidkiddd]

Febreeze works wonders - And this is not adding expense to only non smokers - because Smokers could benefit from febreezing their outfits as well.

I like how people have noted that smoking is more detrimental to others than alcohol - I don't remember a time I was in a fight or pulled over on the road for excessive smoking.

[nonillogical]

i don't see whats wrong with establishments that have both smoking and non sections. this has worked pretty well i thought for years. i'm also a big dive bar type of person, and even though i don't smoke, i think it would be absolutely ridiculous to not be able to in such places. fancier bars, clubs and restaurants, whatever i kind of expect it.

you're just going to have a bunch of smokers perpetually gathered around the doorway outside, and i don't think thats good for business.

[Neo]

I like how people have noted that smoking is more detrimental to others than alcohol - I don't remember a time I was in a fight or pulled over on the road for excessive smoking.

You can't be serious? Drinking is not a hazard to others unless you choose to disobey the law and get behind the wheel when you've had a little too much (alcohol related domestic disputes aside). Second hand smoke has proven time and time again that it is a health hazard to individuals of all ages.

Smoking sections in restaurants and bars are almost never completely closed off from non-smoking sections so in reality the smokers have the higher ground so they can get their nicotine fix for the hour or two that they're at the establishment.

I'm all for letting someone be unhealthy if that's the way they choose to live but pardon me for wanting to maintain my good health by having smoking barred in public places. If you want to know the results of second hand smoke then you are more than welcome to do an Internet search on the matter as their are countless studies on the issue. If you still have a question about the hazards of second hand smoke then you are welcome to ask your doctor.

[monsoon]

Febreeze works wonders - And this is not adding expense to only non smokers - because Smokers could benefit from febreezing their outfits as well. .....

[Andyc545]

On the issue of second hand smoke. In the early 90s my workplace decided to relegate smokers to special break rooms they built just for them. These rooms had their own exhaust fans that vented the air from these rooms directly to the outside. What was interesting about these rooms is they were partially glassed in so you could see into them from the hall. The non-smoking break room would be next to it. Initially they looked like exact twins. However after a few months it was fairly easy to determine which room was used by the smokers. The walls in the smoking break room had turned a dingy color of yellow that had a garish glow under the florescent lights. Worse, the grill where the exhaust fan sucked out the air was black from the cigarette tar that had collected around it. This tar is sticky and would attract the dust and other particles in the air and eventually would get clogged forcing replacement.

[Neo]

Yeah- CIC still has these rooms, although I'm not sure if they are still being used or not. Like I said, I'm not against smoking (I have friends that do) and people are entitled to the choices they make, and I'm also not against segregating smokers from certain establishments. That's why I propose smoking sections/rooms that are cut off by a barrier of glass or a wall that only allow smoke inside this room and vented outdoors. This is what other states do.

I would be for this if the sections were truly separate. A study was just published that links third hand smoke (what gets on clothes for example) to health risks in infants and small children. Considering this I wouldn't want my waitress going between the heavy smoke area and the non-smoking area.

I would be ok with allowing bars and other adult related venues to continue to allow smoking since adults can obviously make the decision to put their health at risk or not. The issue I have is putting children's health at risk when they have no choice on the matter. Yes, parents made the choice but I have seen time and time again where parents make this decision for their children who obviously have no choice. It is obvious the effects of second hand smoke so I think it only appropriate to have laws protecting the health of minors. Isn't that why we have a minimum smoking age?

[sleightofhand]

Does anyone know the results of the vote in Rock Hill Monday night?

[sleightofhand]

I was having dinner at Flemings at EpiCentre on Friday, and we sat in the bar area, and the server noted that the bar was non-smoking, and I assume that the dining room was as well. Can anyone confirm that Flemings is entirely Smoke Free?

[Temeteron]

I do not know of any non-smoking bars in Charlotte. I will go to the bar and sometimes will not drink. I will go to socialize with friends. I do rather HATE how no matter what bar I seem to go to, I ALWAYS end up coming home smelling like smoke.

[Temeteron]

While tobacco is grown in SC, that crop has never been as important to that state as it has been in NC. The tobacco industry is one of the big 3 traditional industries here and the money from it pretty much made a lot of things possible in NC when the rest of the South wasn't doing that well. The banking industry in NC also made a lot of money bankrolling tobacco. We don't see it as much here in western NC, but in the East it is almost sacred. This is slowly changing but right now there is still political resistance to putting many controls on it due to the political control the East has on the Legislature.

[Spartan]

There are many cities in SC that have banned smoking. You can read more about that in this thread, in the South Carolina section.

i don't see whats wrong with establishments that have both smoking and non sections. this has worked pretty well i thought for years. i'm also a big dive bar type of person, and even though i don't smoke, i think it would be absolutely ridiculous to not be able to in such places. fancier bars, clubs and restaurants, whatever i kind of expect it.

you're just going to have a bunch of smokers perpetually gathered around the doorway outside, and i don't think thats good for business.

[sleightofhand]

I didn't realize Charleston was smoke free! Dadgummit Charlotte is way behind the times!

[sleightofhand]

Below is the Observer's latest article on the smoking ban.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/232/story/503096.html

[InitialD]

I'm not a smoker, but I can't say I agree with the nanny state telling property owners what they can and can't do on private property. So much for the myth of freedom and liberty. If anything, we need to ban religion in all public places - it hurts many more people than smoking ever has.

Ban smoking in PUBLIC places - government property, etc. - that's fine. I have to side with property owners though. Nobody is making you go to a smoking restaurant or bar. I could agree with a requirement forcing employees to be notified that they will be working in a smoking establishment and have them sign a waver. If you don't approve of alcohol, don't go to a restaurant that serves alcohol. Don't approve of smoking, boycott bars/restaurants that allow smoking. I guess the argument comes down to government intrusion vs property rights.

As a compromise, allow bars and nighclubs to operate as "private clubs." Since they are not public, they are not included in any smoking ban. I remember many clubs had (still do?) to do this do because of archaic liquor laws.

[Charlotteman]

For decades I wanted to vacation in Europe, but the thought of breathing toxic smoke everywhere was a huge barrier. Until recently, Europe was the capital of tobacco. Europe finally woke up. Now people can go to France without fearing for their health

One whiff of cigarette smoke gives me a headache, and a feeling of nausea. So I always visited Europe in the armchair fashion. Europe missed out on my vacation money......

Does everyone not realize Charlotte suffers the same curse as France did? People from non-smoking states come to Charlotte and almost any public venue is smothered in sickening second-hand smoke. Do ya'll really think they'll come back to the Queen City? I wouldn't.

My sister lives in Charlotte and I would love to visit, but the idea of going to restaurants and bars, and getting deathly sick, keeps me at a distance

Doesn't every non-smoking state or city report increased sales in restaurants and bars, after their bans took effect?

WAKE UP CHARLOTTE!

[PlazaMidwoodGuy]

I think many of you are under the impression that the lack of a smoking ban in public places/bars/restaurants in Charlotte has something to do with Charlotte. It does not. The state of NC has a law that says no local smoking ordinances can be more restrictive than the state's. This, of course, is a by-product of the sway that the tobacco and cigarette industry has traditionally had in NC, although not as much these days as it once had. Mecklenburg County has tried, on at least two occasions that I'm aware of, to get the legislature in Raleigh to let us enact a local ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. Needless to say, it was denied, and was seen by the Down East politicians who control state govt. as yet another example of the Great State of Mecklenburg being out of touch with the rest of NC.

Don't blame Charlotte or Mecklenburg County for the lack of a smoking ban here, point your fingers at our state government.

[PlazaMidwoodGuy]

If you don't approve of alcohol, don't go to a restaurant that serves alcohol. Don't approve of smoking, boycott bars/restaurants that allow smoking. I guess the argument comes down to government intrusion vs property rights.

[Charlotteman]

Washington State is smoke-free in public spaces, public buildings, offices, restaurants, bars, you name it. It's also illegal to smoke outside, within 25 feet of a public entrance.

This glorious law wasn't passed by the Washington legislature. As in other states, Washington legislators have no guts. The law was passed by the people of Washington, by referendum.

No one hates public referendums more than me. It smacks of mob rule to me.....but in the case of public health, when spineless legislators peter out, perhaps it's the only route to outlawing public cigarette smoking.

[PlazaMidwoodGuy]

^^

I think what Washington state did is awesome...especially the part about not smoking within 25 feet of a public entrance. Walking through a nasty cloud of cigarette smoke outside of any sort of building is disgusting.

[caterpillar2]

The government established a constitution to protect its citizens. The safety and welfare of citizens of the U.S. are to be protected by the govenrment if local municipalities fail to do so. Smoking is harmful. Now that it is out, third degree smoke has been proven to be just as harmful as first or second hand smoke. There is a responsibility to protect the public from exposure to dangerous smoke. This protection is not only for patrons but for employees. The government has an obligation to protect us from smoke in bars, restaurants, buildings or any other place open to the public. If smoking isn't banned, the government has let us down. The government has to step in when the citizenry doesn't care about the general health of others. Using government interference is a silly, ignorant excuse to keep the ban out of the picture.