Jump to content

Smoking ban in all MI bars and restaurants


OneSweetWorld

State Wide Smoking Ban  

94 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you be for or against a state-wide smoking ban in all Michigan bars and restaurants

    • Absolutely
      61
    • Absolutely Not
      23
    • I don't know
      5
    • I don't care
      5


Recommended Posts

what excatly was wrong with my point? All i am saying is that if restaurant owners start to see their guest counts decline they WILL go to non smoking. MONEY TALKS but as of right now i dont think enough people have a huge problem with it. I still dont see how you dont have a choice, all you have to do is take your kids to a restaurant that is non smoking, it will solve all of your problems. Im not really sure what having your kids drink paint thinner has to do with anything, but to each his own i guess.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I have never said or ever will say that restaurants SHOULD provide areas for smokers. My viewpoint is that the restaurants should be able to decide if they want to be smoking or not. If enough people are changing their dinning out habbits based on smoke then things will change, either more places will switch to non smoking, or new restaurants will open to cater to people who freak out about smoke. Why does the government need to make a law about this stuff? that just seems stupid to waste time and money on something that if it is a big enough issue will work it self out. by the way, i dont smoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never said or ever will say that restaurants SHOULD provide areas for smokers. My viewpoint is that the restaurants should be able to decide if they want to be smoking or not. If enough people are changing their dinning out habbits based on smoke then things will change, either more places will switch to non smoking, or new restaurants will open to cater to people who freak out about smoke. Why does the government need to make a law about this stuff? that just seems stupid to waste time and money on something that if it is a big enough issue will work it self out. by the way, i dont smoke.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
So are you advocating reduced choices for those of us who choose to live a healthy lifestyle and don't want to be around obnoxious and dangerous cigarette smoke? Relegate the non-smokers to the back of the pack, and let's all readjust our lives to accommodate people with bad habits like smoking? You're right, that line of thinking is so simple.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

This is an important topic and a ban would be great. Seems to me, more & more restaurants ARE smoke free. A dining experience is more enjoyable w/out smoke wafting by, but that is my opinion as a non-smoker.

The bar scene though, well that's another story. A bar is a place to go to relax, kick back and have fun. So you want to have a drink & a smoke . . . .if people are really going to throw a fuss about smoking in bars, I dare say the bigger issue is the drinking that goes on in bars!!!! I'm a tad more worried about the guy chugging back the beers and then getting in his car & driving home becoming an instant danger to my life and the lives of those I love. People still get served when they are intoxicated, despite it being illegal, I've seen it happen over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Makes me wonder if any state or municipality has any laws that limit the amount of drinks that can be served to help reduce that problem.

This is an important topic and a ban would be great. Seems to me, more & more restaurants ARE smoke free. A dining experience is more enjoyable w/out smoke wafting by, but that is my opinion as a non-smoker.

The bar scene though, well that's another story. A bar is a place to go to relax, kick back and have fun. So you want to have a drink & a smoke . . . .if people are really going to throw a fuss about smoking in bars, I dare say the bigger issue is the drinking that goes on in bars!!!! I'm a tad more worried about the guy chugging back the beers and then getting in his car & driving home becoming an instant danger to my life and the lives of those I love. People still get served when they are intoxicated, despite it being illegal, I've seen it happen over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

the smoking argument may be dead now but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents. I do not smoke. I HATE smoke in bars. BUT, I do not want smoking banned in establishments becuase I dont like it. Sure this time its something I agree with BUT next time what if they do ban drinking in bars, I'm sure some maybe many would agree but not me. A restaurant owner should have that decision, no one is forcing anyone to go to their establishments and if you cant handle the smoke go down the street. majority rule BUT minority rights

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the smoking argument may be dead now but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents. I do not smoke. I HATE smoke in bars. BUT, I do not want smoking banned in establishments becuase I dont like it. Sure this time its something I agree with BUT next time what if they do ban drinking in bars, I'm sure some maybe many would agree but not me. A restaurant owner should have that decision, no one is forcing anyone to go to their establishments and if you cant handle the smoke go down the street. majority rule BUT minority rights
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the smoking argument may be dead now but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents. I do not smoke. I HATE smoke in bars. BUT, I do not want smoking banned in establishments becuase I dont like it. Sure this time its something I agree with BUT next time what if they do ban drinking in bars, I'm sure some maybe many would agree but not me. A restaurant owner should have that decision, no one is forcing anyone to go to their establishments and if you cant handle the smoke go down the street. majority rule BUT minority rights
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Senate snuffs out smoking ban

"LANSING -- Efforts to ban smoking in Michigan bars, restaurants and other workplaces were snuffed out in the state Senate Tuesday...Republicans who control the chamber sent smoking-ban legislation to a committee where bills traditionally go to die...Efforts to pass the bill probably won't go away soon because backers believe a floor vote could be close."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about second hand smoke it's about personal property rights, right there in the US Constitution. If you don't want to be exposed to smoke, go to a non-smoking resturaunt. Infringing on peoples rights in the manner that the government has been increasingly doing is going to be the downfall of this country, with things like smoking bans we are inching closer and closer towards a socialist/communist state. I guess Marx's theory is proving right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about second hand smoke it's about personal property rights, right there in the US Constitution. If you don't want to be exposed to smoke, go to a non-smoking resturaunt. Infringing on peoples rights in the manner that the government has been increasingly doing is going to be the downfall of this country, with things like smoking bans we are inching closer and closer towards a socialist/communist state. I guess Marx's theory is proving right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I respectfully have to disagree. If we are going to say that people have the right to smoke in a public place like a restaurant despite the obvious health risk of second hand smoke to other people then we might as well say that people have a right crack open and guzzle down a bottle of Jack Daniels while driving down I-96 during rush hour. Second hand smoke is just as bad as smoking health wise if not worst. Getting info from a source like the American Heart and Lung Association will confirm this. At least to me the jest is that smokers can smoke all they want until their lungs shrivel up into beef jerky...as long as they do it at home were nobody has to breath their second hand smoke. Just as we should not expect sober drivers to not drive at all to accommodate drunk drivers, non-smokers should not be denied the choice of where they want to eat because of a few idiots that choose to literally smoke their lives away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think your really missing the point, resturaunts are not public, they are private entities open to the public, at the owners discretion. If you want to go to a smoke free resturaunt, there are plenty to choose from. If you open a resturaunt nothing says you have to allow smoking. This is strictly a property rights issue, not a public health issue. For instance you can't smoke in government buildings, schools, ect... those are public facilites, therefore, yes they should be smoke-free because there is no alternative.

BTW, your comparison about allowing people to drink and drive, theres a name for comparisons such as that, "reduction to absurdity," and it whenever you use something like that it tends to discredit your entire argument, no matter how valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed GRDad. In Michigan, as in most if not all States, one of the mandates for governmental operation is to protect public health. It is the States's (note not the Federal Government's) legal responsibility to protect the health of its citizens - this includes both those that patron and those that work in bars and restaurants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

lets see what else infringes on public health... automobiles (pollution), fast food joints, airplanes, trains, alcohol in general... the point is the government should have no right telling a private business how to run. DONT GO IF YOU DONT LIKE SMOKE!!! its that simple! I dont smoke. But, I choose to go to places where it is allowed because it doesnt bother me. I didnt know restaurants are "public" places (except maybe in the old USSR). BTW how did hood attack another member? The comparison was absurd and did make the argument "weaker".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No offense, but government tells private companies how to operate all the time and people who think otherwise have no idea what they're talking about.

Standards, regulations... etc. In it's absence you get things like the Chinese lead-toy scandal. If anything, the fact that you don't know about it, that you can go to a restaurant and feel safe about what your eating shows that it works and that's its necessary. It's about cost-benefit analysis, deciding when it's necessary to step in and regulate and when it's better, more ethical and more constitutional just leave things alone.

State governments, in fact, have a mandate to protect public heath. We (the people) will protect you, even from yourself sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.