• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should cigarette smoking be allowed in some bars & restaurants?

Should cigarette smoking be allowed in some bars & restaurants?

  • Total voters
    107
vesper said:
No one said you have to stand next to someone that smokes or sit in an establishment that would allow it. What makes you so morally superior that allows you the right to deny another the use of a legal substance in a restaurant or bar or deny a business owner the choice of offering a smoke free establishment or allow smoking?
Click to expand...

Well the general good of society due to the public health risk. No one should be able to opt out of a vaccine for the same reason, they are a goddamned public health risk.
 
TurtleDude said:
my second favorite waitress of all time at a TGIF was a former nurse (she waited tables after her husband got transferred to Cincinnati). She hated smoking but she always worked in the smoking section. I said-Jenny why do you work in that section-she said easy-smokers tip a lot better-especially 28 year old really gorgeous servers
Click to expand...

The bolded certainly seems to be true. Perhaps I should give up nursing, and wait tables. :lol:
 
Carjosse said:
Well the general good of society due to the public health risk. No one should be able to opt out of a vaccine for the same reason, they are a goddamned public health risk.
Click to expand...

You need to work on that collectivist mindset you are stuck in. You can do it. Individualism brings such liberties with it, and when you stand up for the liberties of others you protect your own. Cheers!
 
lizzie said:
The bolded certainly seems to be true. Perhaps I should give up nursing, and wait tables. :lol:
Click to expand...

she was maybe the prettiest female friend I ever had. quiet, brilliant, and really kind. But she got great tips for looking stunning in a short black skirt. and smokers tended to tip that far better than the families who were in the non smoking section.
 
lizzie said:
The bolded certainly seems to be true. Perhaps I should give up nursing, and wait tables. :lol:
Click to expand...

Don't do it. You'll be sorry! :lol:
 
vesper said:
You need to work on that collectivist mindset you are stuck in. You can do it. Individualism brings such liberties with it, and when you stand up for the liberties of others you protect your own. Cheers!
Click to expand...

It is the job of the government to pass legislation for the good of society and anti-smoking legislation is an example of that. It is a ****ing disgusting activity that damages pblic health.
 
TurtleDude said:
she was maybe the prettiest female friend I ever had. quiet, brilliant, and really kind. But she got great tips for looking stunning in a short black skirt. and smokers tended to tip that far better than the families who were in the non smoking section.
Click to expand...

I have found that smokers tend to be much better tippers, no matter what the waitress/waiter looked like, as long as service was good.
 
lizzie said:
I have found that smokers tend to be much better tippers, no matter what the waitress/waiter looked like, as long as service was good.
Click to expand...

that's true but being cute doesn't hurt!
 
lizzie said:
I have found that smokers tend to be much better tippers, no matter what the waitress/waiter looked like, as long as service was good.
Click to expand...
Based on my observations in working in and owning restaurants many years ago, I believe this is true. Many smokers view sitting around and smoking while eating & drinking as something of a relaxing and fun social event, and thus are more free with their gratitude.
 
Carjosse said:
It is the job of the government to pass legislation for the good of society and anti-smoking legislation is an example of that. It is a ****ing disgusting activity that damages pblic health.
Click to expand...
No you are wrong sugar. If a substance is deemed legal the federal government has no constitutional right to hinder a business owner in making decisions whether to allow smoking or not. State governments take such things to the vote of the people. They often forget it is a legal substance. If they are so damn against it why do they keep voting for all those increases in sin taxes? They as states actually have the right to ban the substance if they wish. But you don't see the hypocrites do that now do you? In fact most of those who vote for increases in the sin tax and bans on smoking in public are social conservatives or control freak liberals. And if you were to take a poll within their congregations who often frown on the use of tobacco and alcohol you would find a good portion of the congregations taking prescription drugs to ease their pain and anxieties. I call that hypocrites what about you?
 
Last edited:
I think it should be up to the owner, if they want it to be a smoking bar/restaurant then let them do so. Just put up a sign, if you're concerned about second hand smoke then don't go there, if you do want to smoke or it doesn't bother you then feel free to go. I hate smoking, it's unhealthy and terrible for your health. However, it's legal and smokers should be allowed to have establishments for them to smoke socially.
 
vesper said:
No you are wrong sugar. If a substance is deemed legal the federal government has no constitutional right to hinder a business owner in making decisions whether to allow smoking or not. State governments take such things to the vote of the people. They often forget it is a legal substance. If they are so damn against it why do they keep voting for all those increases in sin taxes? They as states actually have the right to ban the substance if they wish. But you don't see the hypocrites do that now do you? In fact most of those who vote for increases in the sin tax and bans on smoking in public are social conservatives. And if you were to take a poll within their congregations who often frown on the use of tobacco and alcohol you would find a good portion of the congregations taking prescription drugs to ease their pain and anxieties. I call that hypocrites what about you?
Click to expand...

We tax it to stop hope using it, for example I believe New Zealand is slowly increasing cigarette taxes to 100% in an effort to eradicate smoking. I don't knwo about where you live but smoking is frowned upon by almost every group on both sides of the political spectrum, except maybe the older generation (65+). I don't care if you smoke weed, weed is fine cigarettes are not.
 
Last edited:
Carjosse said:
We tax it to stop hope using it, for example I believe New Zealand is slowly increasing cigarette taxes to 100% in an effort to eradicate smoking. I don't knwo about where you live but smoking is frowned upon by almost every group on both sides of the political spectrum, except maybe the older generation (65+). I don't care if you smoke weed but if you smoke cigarettes most of society now frowns upon that.
Click to expand...
Well a lot of states here in the U.S. are doing the same. And there are many who do not apply the same standards to smoking weed to cigarettes which makes not a damn bit of sense. Cigarettes do not alter your ability to function. This is all due to a consorted effort by those who think they must charge forth and make the decisions for all what is best for them. It is the nanny state effect. If you are one of them, you need to be stopped because you rob people of their rights.
 
vesper said:
Well a lot of states here in the U.S. are doing the same. And there are many who do not apply the same standards to smoking weed to cigarettes which makes not a damn bit of sense. Cigarettes do not alter your ability to function. This is all due to a consorted effort by those who think they must charge forth and make the decisions for all what is best for them. It is the nanny state effect. If you are one of them, you need to be stopped because you rob people of their rights.
Click to expand...

I'm goign to get addicted and eventually get lung cancer form marijuana as marijuana is not a public health risk. The current restrictions should apply but it does not need to be regulated past that and I would allow that in bars (coffee shops) and the advertising ban on tobacco would not apply to weed either.
 
Carjosse said:
We tax it to stop hope using it, for example I believe New Zealand is slowly increasing cigarette taxes to 100% in an effort to eradicate smoking. I don't knwo about where you live but smoking is frowned upon by almost every group on both sides of the political spectrum, except maybe the older generation (65+). I don't care if you smoke weed, weed is fine cigarettes are not.
Click to expand...
That's what they say. Part of me believes that they actually believe it to some extent.

But... fact is they like the money, and have created and/or expanded government programs and bureaucracies... not all of which are smoking-related... that are funded by this tax money. If push comes to shove, they'd rather have their programs than healthy people not paying taxes.
 
digsbe said:
I think it should be up to the owner, if they want it to be a smoking bar/restaurant then let them do so. Just put up a sign, if you're concerned about second hand smoke then don't go there, if you do want to smoke or it doesn't bother you then feel free to go. I hate smoking, it's unhealthy and terrible for your health. However, it's legal and smokers should be allowed to have establishments for them to smoke socially.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that it should be up to the owner. But seeing as I simply can't stand the smell of cigarettes and have disdain for someone who can't go 60 minutes without a cigarette I really can't scrape together much sympathy for the smokers unable to light up in the cafe.
 
Oozlefinch said:
What about perfume? I have allergies, and perfumes set it off so I want a law passed that bans all perfumes, colognes, or other forms of "scent hazards".

That has just as much validity as your claims do.

And if you would notice what 90% of us are saying, it should be the choice of the business owner, not a "free for all with smoking allowed anywhere". If you do not smoke, simply pick a location that does not allow it.

See, it is that simple!

And if you think I am joking, I am not. Sausalito is already a "fragrance free zone", with no scents allowed in public venues. And many communities have laws of varying degrees, with New Hampshire trying to pass one now.

Businesses, governments ban scents to accommodate allergy sufferers

And these people can claim just as much of a right to ban scents as you do tobacco. So, do we just ban everything?
Click to expand...

If perfumes started sickening enough people then, yes, they should be banned too. Where I was raised, before the law, there were 0 resteraunts and bars that were smoke free.
 
vesper said:
No it doesn't make his argument invalid. You want a smoke free home then you have that choice. You want to eat in restaurants that are smoke free then you have that choice too. But what you don't have is the right to force on others your choices. When you cross that line you are violating their rights and their choices. If a business owner wants to allow smoking then there is no good reason for you to give a flying flip because you need not enter and give your business elsewhere. If workers are offended by an establishment that allows smoking they can move on and seek employment in a place that is smoke free. If parents smoke it is none of your damn business. Take care of your own business and keep your nose out of everyone else's.
Click to expand...

You have your opinion and I have mine. I would have no problem banning smoking in public period. I also think a parent has NO right to put their children at risk of life threatening illnesses.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL said:
If a restaurant owner wants his or her restaurant to be smoke free, then it really isn't an imposition.
Click to expand...

And if they want smokers in their restaurant? Then what? Screw them? My previous comment wasn't just about smoking and restaurants it was about other impositions as well. Tolerance is a TWO way street.
 
PirateMk1 said:
And if they want smokers in their restaurant? Then what? Screw them? My previous comment wasn't just about smoking and restaurants it was about other impositions as well. Tolerance is a TWO way street.
Click to expand...

No, if you read my posts you would see I said it should be up to the owner. I acknowledged that it could pose a problem for those restaurants that wished to remain nonsmoking though.
 
ChrisL said:
No, if you read my posts you would see I said it should be up to the owner. I acknowledged that it could pose a problem for those restaurants that wished to remain nonsmoking though.
Click to expand...
Why would it be a problem?
 
radcen said:
That's what they say. Part of me believes that they actually believe it to some extent.

But... fact is they like the money, and have created and/or expanded government programs and bureaucracies... not all of which are smoking-related... that are funded by this tax money. If push comes to shove, they'd rather have their programs than healthy people not paying taxes.
Click to expand...

I believe what you stated is truly the case and the non-smoker doesn't seem to mind that the smoker be the one to provide the extra cash. Better them than him. There are some food dictators who are seriously considering a junk food tax. Do they actually think a tax on potato chips is going to stop people from buying them? NO. But it sure is a creative way in which to generate more money to redistribute in the name of our loving government caring so deeply for our health.
 
I think it should be left up to the restaurant owner .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom