|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Welcome to the brave new world ... no compromise, no sense of fairness ... go outside, and don't give us any lip.
Sieg heil.
If that's the way you see it...but at least you still have the option to smoke...but because the voters didn't want your nasty ass cigarette smell fumigating an establishment...now it's fascist! 
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
So your argument is that there isn't enough of a market for non-smoking bars so the government should step in and take away business owners rights? I thought you said you were liberal. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
So your argument is that there isn't enough of a market for non-smoking bars so the government should step in and take away business owners rights? I thought you said you were liberal.
Why is it hard for someone to smoke outside? No one is taking away a business owners rights. They still have the right to operate their business. It's not always going to be easy, and the smoking ban doesn't make it easy for bars...and like I said, I don't mind if they smoke in bars.
Truthfully, I could care less about bars...smoke away...may the cancer gods bless them all.
When it comes to restaurants, I'm very strict with it.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Quote:
If second hand smoke didn't cause cancer, I'm sure this wouldn't be a legal issue, but because it does, public health and safety is something that is dictated by govt regulation.
You cannot show me one study that establishes that second-hand smoke causes cancer, but I can show you one very large scientific study (not junk science - real science) done by the World Health Organization in 1998 that showed pretty conclusively that there is no link between second-hand smoke and cancer. Google it, if you care.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Yes, you are taking away the business owner's rights. That's the issue. This ban makes a LEGAL activity forbidden inside of an owner's establishment.
Why is it so hard for non-smokers to go to smoke free businesses? You keep putting on the smokers. Why does a non-smoker have to insist that EVERY BAR be smoke free on the chance they will visit it? That just makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
If second hand smoke didn't cause cancer, I'm sure this wouldn't be a legal issue, but because it does, public health and safety is something that is dictated by govt regulation.
Well, I think the crap that comes out of the tailpipe of a car is unhealthy and bad for the safety of me and my loved ones. Should we ban internal combustion engines? Not only would we be healthier, we'd be spending less money and the oil crisis would be non-existant.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
If second hand smoke didn't cause cancer, I'm sure this wouldn't be a legal issue, but because it does, public health and safety is something that is dictated by govt regulation.
You cannot show me one study that establishes that second-hand smoke causes cancer, but I can show you one very large scientific study (not junk science - real science) done by the World Health Organization in 1998 that showed pretty conclusively that there is no link between second-hand smoke and cancer. Google it, if you care.
I don't care...I simply do not like the smell of cigarettes while I'm trying to eat.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Yes, you are taking away the business owner's rights. That's the issue. This ban makes a LEGAL activity forbidden inside of an owner's establishment.
Why is it so hard for non-smokers to go to smoke free businesses? You keep putting on the smokers. Why does a non-smoker have to insist that EVERY BAR be smoke free on the chance they will visit it? That just makes no sense.
It's not hard for non smokers to find smoke free businesses...they're all smoke free 
Part of the problem, is the way the bill was worded when it was voted on...it was all or nothing. I don't think most non smokers have a problem with smoking in bars. But we have a definite problem with smoking in a workplace and restaurants. So don't blame all non smokers, blame the people who wrote the bill.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
If second hand smoke didn't cause cancer, I'm sure this wouldn't be a legal issue, but because it does, public health and safety is something that is dictated by govt regulation.
Well, I think the crap that comes out of the tailpipe of a car is unhealthy and bad for the safety of me and my loved ones. Should we ban internal combustion engines? Not only would we be healthier, we'd be spending less money and the oil crisis would be non-existant.
Okay! Or were you trying to be funny?
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805 |
Quote:
Smoking and Drinking go together.
Walk around the Muni lot before a Browns game,there are tens of thousands of people who drink but don't smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
I'm going to be honest N'du, this is a battle that you cannot win.
Trust me because i've tried to fight it before and they are relentless. Get out while you still can.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
That's because it's an unwinnable fight. You and ndutyme are promoting taking away the choice of the owner of businesses to allow a LEGAL activity to occur in their business. You are endorsing doing away with anyone's choice that disagrees with your preference. That's absurd. Neither of you have explained why it is a bad idea for the businesses to be allowed to choose and, in turn, the consumers be allowed to choose which type of business to go to.
Why are you so hung up on making YOUR preferences the law? Again, I'm a NONSMOKER that disagrees with the law. If I want to go out to eat and don't want to smell someone's smoke, I would simply choose a business that is smoke free. Why does EVERY business have to cater to me and ignore a very large client base? What makes me, and apparently you, so much better that we can dictate how someone runs their business?
This law and the defense of it is pure selfishness. It's sad.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
I'm going to be honest N'du, this is a battle that you cannot win.
Trust me because i've tried to fight it before and they are relentless. Get out while you still can.
I know...I've had my back up against that wall many, MANY times.
It's definitely an example of... 
But I'm bored...so why not get a brewhaha goin'
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
So what? I was given an option to vote for it...and I did. I won't apologize for it. If the law went away tomorrow, it wouldn't stop me from going to restaurants, but I feel so much better not having to smell that odor. An unwinnable fight...seems we've already won, and you and the smokers are fighting an uphill battle.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
But I imagine that once bars are allowed to have smokers inside, there won't be very many non-smoking bars.
And what would that tell us? That they do better business when they allow smoking?
Quote:
So there won't be much of a choice to make. So it is easier for smokers to go outside.
Maybe the non smokers should have to sit outside if they don't like smoky bars.
Quote:
If I was a bar owner, I'd put an awning up out back...and BOOM, smoking section. Or go smoke in your car!
Oh, that's very nice of you! What if I'm in the middle of watching a Browns game? A pool tournament? You don't have to answer me because I already know your stance on it. Just making the point that it's not always easy, fun, or convenient to go outside to smoke.
Quote:
If second hand smoke didn't cause cancer, I'm sure this wouldn't be a legal issue, but because it does, public health and safety is something that is dictated by govt regulation.
This isn't about cancer. This is about those who don't smoke trying to tell those that do where they can smoke. It's about the nannies who think they know how to live my life better than I do. That's all this is about.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
If the law went away tomorrow, it wouldn't stop me from going to restaurants, but I feel so much better not having to smell that odor.
I don't think this bill passing would affect restaurants. And, as I said earlier, I'm fine with them remaining smoke free.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
And exactly what am I supposed to tell you? I'm not the only one who voted for it...apparently, there were many people who didn't like the idea of smelling cigarette smoke in public places. Go bark up their tree. My tree is already full! As I've said MANY times, I don't have a problem with people smoking in bars...my beef is in restaurants. But the way the bill was worded, you couldn't have one without the other, and believe it or not, I didn't want to vote for it the way it was, but I definitely didn't want my kids around cigarette smoke when all we're trying to do is eat. They don't go to bars, so I'm not worried about bars.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Alrighty then. I just thought you came across as supporting non smoking in bars too -- guess not. Carry on.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
As you wish, my lady! SMOKERS SUCK!!!! Oh, I'm sorry, I got ahead of myself 
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Apparently, you haven't won yet. Otherwise, this thread wouldn't exist. You have temporarily taken away the business owners' rights, but that doesn't mean you have them permanently. I'm glad you admit you won't apologize for taking away the rights of others to run their businesses as they see fit. Is that part of your being liberal?  BTW, why is it banging your head against the wall? You're trying to convince people that their rights should be taken away so that you don't have to make a choice on where to go to eat or watch a game? Yep, I can see how trying to explain how you enjoying taking away others' rights to the businesses and their livelihoods so you don't have to decide which door to walk into to get a meal would be like since there is no good explanation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,711 |
Quote:
I don't see why smokers just can't go outside.
how about all the non-smokers go outside when we want to smoke?
since the bars aren't everflowing with non-smokers then smokers must have been in the majority...
Attitude is everything....FEAR THE ELF!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
I'm not trying to convince you of anything...I'm just throwing my 2 cents into the change jar!
Also, as I've stated before, which you seem to selectively neglect, I'm liberal on some issues, conservative on others.
You're obviously not reading everything and just picking out what you want.
You say I'm imposing my choice on others, I say smokers are imposing their smoke on me...
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Quote:
I don't see why smokers just can't go outside.
how about all the non-smokers go outside when we want to smoke?
since the bars aren't everflowing with non-smokers then smokers must have been in the majority...
I was, and always have been, referring to restaurants...reading is fundamental!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
So it doesn't matter what the OWNER OF THE BUSINESS wants. He doesn't have the right in your eyes to choose how to run his business and you can choose whether or not to frequent his business? I love how those demanding to get their way and infringe on the rights of others say their rights are being infringed upon. How is a business owner setting guidelines within HIS business infringing upon your rights? Do you really think you have a right to dictate how an owner runs his business? No, you don't. You only have the right to not do business with him if you don't like how he goes about running his business. That's the whole point that "you keep ignoring". Oh, and conservative means LESS government, not more 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
So it doesn't matter what the OWNER OF THE BUSINESS wants. He doesn't have the right in your eyes to choose how to run his business and you can choose whether or not to frequent his business?
I love how those demanding to get their way and infringe on the rights of others say their rights are being infringed upon. How is a business owner setting guidelines within HIS business infringing upon your rights? Do you really think you have a right to dictate how an owner runs his business? No, you don't. You only have the right to not do business with him if you don't like how he goes about running his business. That's the whole point that "you keep ignoring".
Oh, and conservative means LESS government, not more
And the whole point you are ignoring is that the owner can do what he wants...as long as it doesn't violate a law. Bar owners aren't these people that can do whatever they feel like. Some may be inclined to sell drugs in their bars, but they don't, because it's against the law.
Obviously some people think that this law isn't constitutional, and that fine, you can fight about it all you want. Just understand that most non smokers in Ohio are going to vote for a smoking ban.
Edit: Let me also say this. I have no problem with people smoking in bars, that's fine, and I think that is an terrible law.
But in the work place and resturants is where I draw the line as to where people can smoke. I would vote anything that prevents smoking in either of those places.
Last edited by Thebigbaddawg; 07/20/08 02:05 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Ahhh, comparing apples to oranges. Dealing drugs is ILLEGAL no matter where you do it. Nice try, though.
I'm a nonsmoker, as I've said a dozen times. However, I am not going to demand that my preferences are put over the rights of others. You can vote for it all you want, but that doesn't mean it's Constitutional. Do you realize how many laws have been put in place that have been found to be unconstitutional?
The bottom line is that too many people don't care about the rights of others. You, along with ndutyme or anyone else defending this law, have YET to show why it is a problem to have the owners of the business decide whether to be smoking or nonsmoking and then allowing the patrons to choose which type of business to frequent. Why is that so awful?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
So it doesn't matter what the OWNER OF THE BUSINESS wants. He doesn't have the right in your eyes to choose how to run his business and you can choose whether or not to frequent his business?
I love how those demanding to get their way and infringe on the rights of others say their rights are being infringed upon. How is a business owner setting guidelines within HIS business infringing upon your rights? Do you really think you have a right to dictate how an owner runs his business? No, you don't. You only have the right to not do business with him if you don't like how he goes about running his business. That's the whole point that "you keep ignoring".
I'm not ignoring anything. I was given an option, and chose to take it. Obviously the MAJORITY of this state felt that way, but yet you are trying to make it personal, which you always seem to do, as if I am the only person that doesn't want to smell cigarettes while eating. Business owners do not have free reign inside their businesses, contrary to what you seem to believe...If that was the case, we wouldn't have affirmative action.
I've supported lifting the ban in bars, because there is no child element...you keep ignoring that.
Quote:
Oh, and conservative means LESS government, not more
Not from what I say
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805 |
Quote:
You, along with ndutyme or anyone else defending this law, have YET to show why it is a problem to have the owners of the business decide whether to be smoking or nonsmoking and then allowing the patrons to choose which type of business to frequent.
What about an employee of that business,what if they don't want to smell others cigarette smoke ? What about a vendor who is bringing in either food or alcohol ? Just asking
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Quite simple, they work at a smoke free business.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
I will ask AGAIN, since you refuse to answer it. If you don't want to smell smoke while eating, why was it necessary to take away the rights of the owners to choose the option of smoking or nonsmoking businesses? Why couldn't YOU choose the option of seeing John Smith's Hot Dogs is a nonsmoking place and Joe Smith's is a smoking place and choose to go to John Smith's. That way, YOU wouldn't have to smell the smoke while you're eating. Is that really that difficult to comprehend?
I don't care if the majority wanted it or not. There was a time when the "majority" wanted to have the Jim Crow laws in place, too. Did that make it right?
It IS personal, because YOU stated that you personally chose to vote to take away the rights of the business owners. You can't get more personal than that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805 |
Quote:
I don't care if the majority wanted it or not.
Actually you do care or you wouldn't have 50% of the posts on this thread.
Quote:
Quite simple, they work at a smoke free business.
So every vendor of many companies that deal with the businesses needs to send a person who doesn't mind the smell of smoke ? Yeah that makes sense.
Quote:
If you don't want to smell smoke while eating, why was it necessary to take away the rights of the owners to choose the option of smoking or nonsmoking businesses? Why couldn't YOU choose the option of seeing John Smith's Hot Dogs is a nonsmoking place and Joe Smith's is a smoking place and choose to go to John Smith's. That way, YOU wouldn't have to smell the smoke while you're eating.
I can understand your point Coach...really I do. But in all seriousness this bill hasn't got much of a chance of passing and I think you know that. If it somehow comes to another vote,non smokers will vote the same way even if it exempts bars. If you or any other smoker doesn't like it then get the laws changed.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
but I'll be damned if I'm gonna pay a $35-40 restaurant/bar tab for a couple fish frys and a few beers and then go outside into single-digit cold for a smoke.
But as a non smoker I shouldnt be able to enjoy that same fish fry and a couple of beers that I am paying the same amount for as you are without your nasty smoke blowing in my face, because you dont want to be inconvenienced?
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
No King, in my world you would have the choice of going to a bar or restaurant that didn't allow smoking and I would have the choice of going to one that did.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
People should be able to have the choice of going where they want without you imposing your stank on them and your carginogens on their lungs.
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
You misinterpreted what I was saying. Ndu said he wasn't alone and the majority of people wanted it. My point was it doesn't matter if they did or didn't want it, that doesn't mean it's Constitutional or right. That's why I referenced that there was a time that the "majority" of people were in favor of the Jim Crow laws. Did that make it right or Constitutional?
Will the bill pass? It depends. It may if it is voted on in the state Congress. Even if it doesn't, sooner or later someone that is going under because of these laws is going to file suit and this will be overtruned, as it should be.
I do care about it because it's one more instance of taking away rights so that others feel an entitlement to tell others what they can and can't do when there's no need to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
No King, in my world you would have the choice of going to a bar or restaurant that didn't allow smoking and I would have the choice of going to one that did.
But then you're infringing upon the rights of those of us who don't smoke. What if I want to go to the place that is a smoking restaurant because they have better food? I also have asthma, so going into a smoking restaurant is not going to be good for me.
This issue isn't as black and white as some make it out to be. Either way, someone's rights are going to be infringed upon.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659
Poser
|
|
Poser
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,659 |
Business owners should have the right to run their business how they choose. Kingo, I absolutely DETEST the smell of Adidas cologne. Therefore, there should be a ban that no one be allowed to wear Adidas in restaurants or in bars because I have the right not to smell that nasty stuff.
I don't understand why you are saying that someone has the right to walk onto another person's property and demand that they dictate to said property owners how things will be.
You see, King, I would choose to simply go to a nonsmoking place, since I don't smoke. It's not an ALL or NOTHING proposition. Let the owners choose what goes on in THEIR business. Then we, as patrons, choose whether we want to smell the stinky smoke. Then we choose accordingly which place to do business with. No one is saying that EVERY bar and restaurant MUST allow smoking. They are saying leave it up to the owners. Why is that such a frightening concept?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Oh I see, you are only pro-choice when it comes to whatever your particular preference is. And just be clear on one thing, my "stank" (thanks for that, appreciate it) is only (possibly) carcinogenic to me. For you, smoke is just an annoyance, your desire to avoid it is a preference - no more and no less. But you don't think I should have the same rights as you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
I think what you are missing though COach is that that law was passed to protect people working at the bars/restaurants, not necessarily the the customers. Besides being a recreational place it is a workplace also. So are people supposed to be restricted on where they can work also. Should I (or anyone for that matter) not be able to go to work in a smoke free environment?
My personal preference is that all places be smoke free, thats my choice, the majority of people(who voted anyways) felt the same way. Others(smokers) have a different preference. If they become the majority then maybe the law will be overturned. Thats how democracy works right??
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 805 |
Quote:
I don't understand why you are saying that someone has the right to walk onto another person's property and demand that they dictate to said property owners how things will be.
Then would it be ok if a business owner says to a black or asian they can't come into their establishment because they don't like their kind ?
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Ohio Senate proposal to modify
Ohio smoking ban
|
|
