English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Reading the answers to the questions I have posed, reflects people that read the first sentence then answer in all most a zealots way. While other read the question and attempt to read between the lines.
I understand there are places that have outlawed smoking. But don't those laws in some cases undercut the person that is paying for permits, Licenses, and contributing sales tax?? I was a piblic Heath Invetigator for 40 years. I agree that wmoking is very unhealthy. Economicss will dictate to the bar owner if smoking should be allowed. As the trends continue for decreased smoking they will eventually convert to non smoking.
Walls do not have to be built to seperate smoke, Positve Air pressure in non smoking areas in unison withnegative airflow is smoking areas exhausting the contaminated smoke ca be easily and economcally accomplished.

2006-12-19 03:09:59 · 12 answers · asked by Stephen C 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

12 answers

One would assume but apparently people don't like to have choices or freedom..... Too bad. And if you choose to go in that door I would assume that with all the media coverage for the past 2 decades you would know the risk you are taking but people still like to go to smoking places and complain about how my smoke is killing them?!?!? Well it sounds like another days hard work in my mission!! :) Chill out and go to a smoothie bar if you're gonna be a crab about the smoke in the bar!

2006-12-19 03:21:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Any adult can choose to enter or not ... that's their privilege! Smoking is outlawed in all public places and most businesses in New Jersey, where I live. Personally, as a non-smoker, I could care less if there's an area anywhere where smoking is still allowed. I have to laugh when a smoker complains that their right to choose to smoke is infringed upon, while disregarding that their alleged right causes co-mingling of their smoke with the air the nonsmokers have a right to breathe uncontaminated and clean and without being fouled cigarette smoke. I can't tell you how many times I've had the misfortune to walk thru an area of heavily concentrated cigarette smoke. It literally closes off the back of my throat and I can't breath or speak properly for several minutes. My clothes also stink after being in smoke filled rooms. You can shove the rights issue! Maybe if smokers were forced to smoke within some sort of capsule that kept 100% of their smoke in the space that only they occupy, might they understand how obnoxious the side-stream smoke actually is.

Bars in the state can continue to allow smoking when the bars core business is serving alcohol. There is some talk about allowing the casinos in A.C. to have smoking areas too.

Your comment is incorrect about air flow. The principle is right, but it does not work in application. There has never been a bar/restaurant without complete separation of smoking and non-smoking areas where an air wall or air extraction has done the job thoroughly. The smoke is too pervasive and the air flow far too low to be effective. For air extractor to function to their capacity, the speed of the blowers would have to be increased supstantially, which would raise the noise level to one that owners and patrons of a business allowing smoking would not tolerate. A great example of air walls that actually work are the ones at some open air stores, or stores that have the vinyl partitions separating warm and cold areas from each other, have been installed. They work as they're designed to, but the noise level at the location of the air wall is tremendous. That would never work in a smaller application ... it's just too much noise.

There's no real solution where the smoking and non-smoking public are together. One group will always try to impose their preference on the other!

2006-12-19 11:50:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I choose not to enter. Because there is not a positive air pressure and negative airflow set up that is 100% effective. Operating Rooms have this kind of system and they are tested quarterly. I use to run a OR in the late 90's. The reports are never 100% but they fall into an acceptable range of air exchanges in order to keep the OR open.

And even if the air exchanges are in the 80's to 90's percent there is always a lingering scent of smoke that I do not find appealing. And I really do not want to eat in a room with this scent. I kills my appetite.

2006-12-19 11:25:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Of course adults can choose to enter a door or not.
I myself am a non-smoker and if I don't want to enter a facility that smoking is permitted I won't, a fairly simple choice. Banning smoking in public places because a portion of the public does not want it there is extremley small minded.
Business owners should have the right to decide the clientel they wish to serve and the rules they wish to enforce. Government is getting too big. Thank you Democrats.

2006-12-19 11:10:54 · answer #4 · answered by ~Gate~ 5 · 1 1

Since the majority of people nowadays understand the downside of smoking, they naturally avoid smoked filled rooms. That means that it would be more economically advantageous for an owner to have a non-smoking establishment. Ventilation systems don't always work that well & air conditioning only recirculates the stale air.

2006-12-19 11:14:59 · answer #5 · answered by mstrywmn 7 · 0 1

if the only person a smoker was harming was himself, it wouldn't be an issue.. the problem is that smokers effect other people when they smoke in the same room as them.. assuming there are people smoking in the smoking section, sitting in the non-smoking section of a restaurant for one hour is about the same as smoking an entire cigarette yourself.. so therefore my 4 month old baby has already smoked several cigarettes when I've taken him out and sat in non-smoking.. personally I'm really glad they're doing away with smoking in public!

2006-12-19 11:20:36 · answer #6 · answered by Byakuya 7 · 0 0

Of course you can choose to go in. But since you were warned up front that smoking was permitted in that room, you have no license to get your knickers in a twist over smoke in the room.

2006-12-19 11:21:19 · answer #7 · answered by Navigator 7 · 1 0

well i know u can smoke in places that get over half there sales in alcahol.. in wisconsin. I dont want this bann. Its just the government gettin more involved in our lives. Are they gonna make smokes illegal too. Ill go on a ****** rampage if they ever try.

2006-12-19 11:12:48 · answer #8 · answered by silent_engage 2 · 2 0

Of course you can choose. Being a smoker, I tend to agree with your thinking on this situation... however, was there another question in there somewhere that you wanted answered or did I totally miss it?

2006-12-19 11:14:48 · answer #9 · answered by Wiked 5 · 0 0

I agree with you. It would be nice if they put in those ventilation systems you speak of so everyone could enjoy the establishment.

2006-12-19 11:13:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers