Smoking Bans??

[Makedde]

Again, it's all up to personal choice. The government doesn't need to legislate choices for everyone, you can't please everyone. That's why I say leave it up to the business owners. They know what's good for their business because they're personally invested in it. A pub/club/bar/restaurant/any business isn't there for everyone's benefit, it's there for the owners benefit. If the owner feels that banning smoking is driving away his business, then he should have the ability to allow people to smoke there. The opposite is also true. But in no way should it be the government's decision to tell someone how to run their business.

It may be a problem over there, but over here, there wasn't really that much of a protest. Most bar/pub owners have stated that the smoking bans have actually increased business, and the smokers are happy to go outside. They get a lot more business from non smokers who refused to dine there before the bans were in place.
Of course, there are those non smokers who whine about the smokers smoking outside, but you can't please everyone. Point is, it's worked well here, with minimal complaint.:thumbup

 

[Alien Allen]

We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them are Life, Liberty, and the Right to be STUPID!!


It's none of the government's damn business whether a private enterprise allows a legal activity to occur on its premises. It's different for government buildings, because everyone owns them and it's better to err for the nonsmoker. But a restauranteur is putting up his own hard-earned cash and deserves the right to make that decision for himself.

Aint it friggin amazing how they regulate a legal activity :willy_nilly:

If a bar or pub serves booze and at a certain time only adults can get in there then what the hell does the govt think it has the right to stop smoking in that place at that time. :willy_nilly:

 

[Accountable]

It may be a problem over there, but over here, there wasn't really that much of a protest. Most bar/pub owners have stated that the smoking bans have actually increased business, and the smokers are happy to go outside. They get a lot more business from non smokers who refused to dine there before the bans were in place.
Of course, there are those non smokers who whine about the smokers smoking outside, but you can't please everyone. Point is, it's worked well here, with minimal complaint.:thumbup

That's a shame when squeaky wheels get to decide what freedom is expendable.

 

[satinbutterfly]

That's a shame when squeaky wheels get to decide what freedom is expendable.

No shit. Repped. :nod:

 

[Alien Allen]

That's a shame when squeaky wheels get to decide what freedom is expendable.

No shit. Repped. :nod:

double repped :nod:

 

[Makedde]

That's a shame when squeaky wheels get to decide what freedom is expendable.

If your 'freedom' can infringe upon the rights of another, then it should be a freedom.

Do you believe it should be legal to smoke marijuana in the privacy of your own home? What about in public? One infringes on the rights of no one, the other does - yet in both cases, marijuana is illegal.

Obviously not the best comparison, but it's the best I could come up with.

 

[Accountable]

If your 'freedom' can infringe upon the rights of another, then it should[n't] be a freedom.

Do you believe it should be legal to smoke marijuana in the privacy of your own home? What about in public? One infringes on the rights of no one, the other does - yet in both cases, marijuana is illegal.

Obviously not the best comparison, but it's the best I could come up with.

We're talking about a private establishment. The owner decides whose rights are honored. Ever go to a cigar bar? Horrendous, nasty smelling ... AUGH!! :yuk:yuk I don't like to pass by the open door. Should I have the right to shut them down?

 

[Alien Allen]

If your 'freedom' can infringe upon the rights of another, then it should be a freedom.

Do you believe it should be legal to smoke marijuana in the privacy of your own home? What about in public? One infringes on the rights of no one, the other does - yet in both cases, marijuana is illegal.

Obviously not the best comparison, but it's the best I could come up with.

I am guessing the first part you meant to question should it be a freedom??

Non smokers have the freedom to not enter an establishment.

Where is the owners rights in all of this??

Why is a legal activity suddenly illegal in his place??

 

[Makedde]

We're talking about a private establishment. The owner decides whose rights are honored. Ever go to a cigar bar? Horrendous, nasty smelling ... AUGH!! :yuk:yuk I don't like to pass by the open door. Should I have the right to shut them down?

Of course not, but you should have the right to dine in that bar without risking your health. Everyone should. People can smoke at home, or outside. There is really no reason for people to smoke while eating or drinking.

 

[Makedde]

I am guessing the first part you meant to question should it be a freedom??

Non smokers have the freedom to not enter an establishment.

Where is the owners rights in all of this??

Why is a legal activity suddenly illegal in his place??

The legal activity is illlegal because it infringes upon the rights of others - not only customers, but the bar staff, who have the right to work in an environment which is dedicated to protecting their health.

Yes, non smokers don't have to enter, but is that really the point? The point is about the health of staff and customers being preserved. Smokers also have the freedom to smoke outside, you can agree. Why must they smoke inside?

It is not just non smokers complaining, the smokers are complaining that they are being banned from smoking on the beaches - and the vast majority of rubbish on our beaches are cigarrette butts. Do people need to smoke on the beach? Is it vital that they smoke on a beach? Of course not, just as it is not vital that they smoke in a bar or pub.

 

[Accountable]

Of course not, but you should have the right to dine in that bar without risking your health. Everyone should. People can smoke at home, or outside. There is really no reason for people to smoke while eating or drinking.

Why?? It's a cigar bar. Smoking is its draw, pardon the pun. You'd insist on a non-smoking cigar bar??? I guess everybody'd sit around chewing on cold stogies.

By insisting that you have the right to infringe on the owner's right to run his business as he chooses, you rob him of his livlihood. You steal his right to pursue his (completely legal) passion. Sure people can smoke at home ... you can go there and make yourself a vegemite sandwich, too.

 

[Alien Allen]

We're talking about a private establishment. The owner decides whose rights are honored. Ever go to a cigar bar? Horrendous, nasty smelling ... AUGH!! :yuk:yuk I don't like to pass by the open door. Should I have the right to shut them down?

eggzactly :thumbup

 

[Accountable]

The legal activity is illlegal because it infringes upon the rights of others - not only customers, but the bar staff, who have the right to work in an environment which is dedicated to protecting their health.

Yes, non smokers don't have to enter, but is that really the point? The point is about the health of staff and customers being preserved. Smokers also have the freedom to smoke outside, you can agree. Why must they smoke inside?

It is not just non smokers complaining, the smokers are complaining that they are being banned from smoking on the beaches - and the vast majority of rubbish on our beaches are cigarrette butts. Do people need to smoke on the beach? Is it vital that they smoke on a beach? Of course not, just as it is not vital that they smoke in a bar or pub.

Public or private beach?

 

[Makedde]

Why?? It's a cigar bar. Smoking is its draw, pardon the pun. You'd insist on a non-smoking cigar bar??? I guess everybody'd sit around chewing on cold stogies.

By insisting that you have the right to infringe on the owner's right to run his business as he chooses, you rob him of his livlihood. You steal his right to pursue his (completely legal) passion. Sure people can smoke at home ... you can go there and make yourself a vegemite sandwich, too.

Okay, a cigar bar. I didn't read that part. If the business is to 'promote' smoking, then I guess that would be fine, but with an ordinary bar or club, is it necessary that one smokes? I don't think so. Non smokers have the right to dine out without going home smelling like an ashtray, and smokers have the right to enjoy a cigarrette, which they can do, with just a few changes.
Smoking isn't completely banned in pubs and clubs, you know. They are allowed to smoke outside or in the gardens - which are owned by the business also. The government is only ruling that smoking is banned inside that establishment. The bans do not mention outside, as being outside, the smoke is blown away by the wind, which cannot infringe on anyone's rights.

 

[Makedde]

Public or private beach?

Public beaches. Some of the more popular. Smoking has been banned at a few...I think some in Sydney just because of the amount of rubbish created by smoking. Glass has also been banned because of the amount of bottles left lying in the sand.

 

[Alien Allen]

The legal activity is illlegal because it infringes upon the rights of others - not only customers, but the bar staff, who have the right to work in an environment which is dedicated to protecting their health.

Yes, non smokers don't have to enter, but is that really the point? The point is about the health of staff and customers being preserved. Smokers also have the freedom to smoke outside, you can agree. Why must they smoke inside?

It is not just non smokers complaining, the smokers are complaining that they are being banned from smoking on the beaches - and the vast majority of rubbish on our beaches are cigarrette butts. Do people need to smoke on the beach? Is it vital that they smoke on a beach? Of course not, just as it is not vital that they smoke in a bar or pub.

Bar staff hires knowing the atmosphere they will work in though.

I would agree if the law had been no smoking and now you can.

My company has a small office with at most a half dozen people that worked in it during the good times.

When one guy retired we asked a guy in the field if he wanted to come in and take the service manager position. The guy said yes but only if my brother would smoke outside. My brother agreed but had he not then this guy would have missed out on the job. It was a matter of choice. The govt does not want choice. They want to dictate.

 

[Alien Allen]

A bar should be able to say smoking only or shut up IMO

 

[Makedde]

Bar staff hires knowing the atmosphere they will work in though.

I would agree if the law had been no smoking and now you can.

My company has a small office with at most a half dozen people that worked in it during the good times.

When one guy retired we asked a guy in the field if he wanted to come in and take the service manager position. The guy said yes but only if my brother would smoke outside. My brother agreed but had he not then this guy would have missed out on the job. It was a matter of choice. The govt does not want choice. They want to dictate.

I think the government want to encourage people to quit smoking, and they believe that by banning smoking in certain establishments, they can protect the health of others, and also give smokers a push to quit.
I would be interested to find out how many people have actually quit smoking since these bans went into place.

 

[Accountable]

Okay, a cigar bar. I didn't read that part. If the business is to 'promote' smoking, then I guess that would be fine, but with an ordinary bar or club, is it necessary that one smokes? I don't think so. Non smokers have the right to dine out without going home smelling like an ashtray, and smokers have the right to enjoy a cigarrette, which they can do, with just a few changes.
Smoking isn't completely banned in pubs and clubs, you know. They are allowed to smoke outside or in the gardens - which are owned by the business also. The government is only ruling that smoking is banned inside that establishment. The bans do not mention outside, as being outside, the smoke is blown away by the wind, which cannot infringe on anyone's rights.

Why should you have a "right" to change the atmosphere of an establishment to fit your tastes?

I can never support restricting another citizen's right to do something legal simply because I wouldn't participate in that activity myself. How anyone can claim to justify such a thing (and still claim to support freedom) is beyond me.

 

[Accountable]

Public beaches. Some of the more popular. Smoking has been banned at a few...I think some in Sydney just because of the amount of rubbish created by smoking. Glass has also been banned because of the amount of bottles left lying in the sand.

Publicly-owned establishments are a different category, as I posted earlier. I wouldn't support banning smoking on a private beach.