Virginia Smoking Ban

[antfarm612]

I read your entire post, actually, seeings as the part I replied to was at the end, it'd make sense I saw the beginning first, yeah? The irony was that you called someone an 'asshole' for wanting it to be okay for non-smokers, especially those with breathing conditions, to feel comfortable when they go out. Yet the person who's causing all the problems doesn't get bad-mouthed?



But the problem here is, a huge majority of pubs would simply go back to smoking being fine in their pub, because that's seen as the way to make money.

That's only a problem to you.

You wouldn't invite yourself into someone's house and tell them what they're going to have for dinner. You shouldn't go into someone else's bar and tell them how to run it. Again, if you don't want to go to a bar that allows smoking, then find one that doesn't. If most bars allow smoking, it's because most of the people in the bar want to smoke. If the majority of the people in the bar want to smoke, and a small minority don't want to smoke, which group of people is imposing themselves?

If the governemt can tell a bar owner when they have to stop selling alcohol (licencing hours) why shouldnt they be able to say that you cant smoke in bars? As I've said previously it doesnt take much effort to walk to the door, open it and stand outside to have a cigarette. Fuck it, if I could end up standing in front of a judge for a screw up, everybody else should be able to get a fine for something trivial.

I don't agree with that, either. If a bar wants to stay open all hours of the night, they should have the right to. I'm not a big fan of the government telling people what to do when it's none of their business.

but you guys are forgetting about ONE THING.... the fact that there are people who can't inhale the smoke from cigarettes... namely people with heart and lung conditions (I have a heart condition) so the smoking ban is a good thing

Once again, feel free, no, feel encouraged, to find a bar that chooses to ban smoking.

 

[HBK-aholic]

That's only a problem to you.

You wouldn't invite yourself into someone's house and tell them what they're going to have for dinner. You shouldn't go into someone else's bar and tell them how to run it. Again, if you don't want to go to a bar that allows smoking, then find one that doesn't. If most bars allow smoking, it's because most of the people in the bar want to smoke. If the majority of the people in the bar want to smoke, and a small minority don't want to smoke, which group of people is imposing themselves?

A 'majority' of the population don't smoke. So using your logic, it's the smokers of the population who are imposing themselves. I'm also not sure how a non-smoker can impose themselves; my not smoking doesn't affect anyone else in any way. Yet someone smoking does affect me. Yeah, smokers are definitely the imposition here.

I don't agree with that, either. If a bar wants to stay open all hours of the night, they should have the right to. I'm not a big fan of the government telling people what to do when it's none of their business.

Yay, more drunks.

 

[antfarm612]

A 'majority' of the population don't smoke. So using your logic, it's the smokers of the population who are imposing themselves. I'm also not sure how a non-smoker can impose themselves; my not smoking doesn't affect anyone else in any way. Yet someone smoking does affect me. Yeah, smokers are definitely the imposition here.

Yes, the majority of the population doesn't smoke. However, clearly the majority of the bar-goers smoke, because otherwise bar-owners wouldn't be fighting so hard against the smoking ban. If most of the people that went to the bars didn't smoke, and didn't want to be around smoke, bar-owners would voluntarily ban smoking.

And it's not you're not smoking that is imposing, it is your telling other people what to do that is imposing. And not just other smokers, but the bar-owners themselves. Again, you wouldn't invite yourself into someone's house and tell them what they're having for dinner, so what gives you the right (other than this stupid law) to walk into someone else's bar and tell them how to run their business?

 

[HBK-aholic]

Yes, the majority of the population doesn't smoke. However, clearly the majority of the bar-goers smoke, because otherwise bar-owners wouldn't be fighting so hard against the smoking ban. If most of the people that went to the bars didn't smoke, and didn't want to be around smoke, bar-owners would voluntarily ban smoking.

No, it's simply that non-smokers won't usually NOT go into a bar because it allows smoking, which has been proven by the years and years of smoking being legal in pubs. They're not losing business by allowing smoking.

And it's not you're not smoking that is imposing, it is your telling other people what to do that is imposing. And not just other smokers, but the bar-owners themselves. Again, you wouldn't invite yourself into someone's house and tell them what they're having for dinner, so what gives you the right (other than this stupid law) to walk into someone else's bar and tell them how to run their business?

If I'm paying for that dinner, like you pay to get into some bars, and pay to drink the alcohol, then I have every right to decide what I'm eating. The two are completely different.

 

[antfarm612]

No, it's simply that non-smokers won't usually NOT go into a bar because it allows smoking, which has been proven by the years and years of smoking being legal in pubs. They're not losing business by allowing smoking.



If I'm paying for that dinner, like you pay to get into some bars, and pay to drink the alcohol, then I have every right to decide what I'm eating. The two are completely different.

So, if the bar charges you to get in, and charges you for your drinks, you have every right to decide how they should run their business?