Do you think smoking in restaurants should be banned even though they have exhaust fans?

Question

What do you really think about this???

Answer 1

No restaurant has good enough exhaust fans to totally prevent the risks of second-hand smoke. Frequently, the smoking and nonsmoking sections are not even separated.
Adults can assume the risks of eating in a place where others are smoking. However, children can not. They should not be subject to second-hand smoke ever.
One person's rights stop where they affect another person.

Answer 2

Because it is hurting other people. Why should I not go to my favorite bar and play pool and have a beer, because there is several someones over there smoking, hurting my lungs? I bartended for many years and dealt with that and now I have chronic asthma. Should I just send them the bill? I think that if they could get a filtration system and exhaust system that was affordable and worked 100% then great. I would still say they need to make a smoking area or lounge. I think it is a weird need to have smoke in your lungs to be happy. I don't think it is weird to want to be healthy and to enjoy a meal or a good time without smoke in my face. What if I just stood around and sprayed bug spray in a bar? It is my right. It might not kill you right away, but it might eventually .....

Answer 3

I don't smoke and I'm not a big fan of smoking, but I think that if people are going into a restaurant and paying to eat there then they have every right to smoke there as well...The exhaust fans suck the smoke up and they sit in a different section than nonsmokers, so I don't see a problem with it...I guess I consider it like a freedom that should be included in the Constitution. It's no different than people getting drunk and acting stupid at a restuarant bar...They annoy me worse than smokers...

EDIT: To all the people concerned with second hand smoke, did you know that living in big cities and breathing in the air in the cities is equivalent to smoking a pack of cigarettes a day?

Answer 4

Absolutely yes, it should be banned and has in most major cities, it's catching on throughout the world. And I've been a smoker for more years than you want to even think about, starting in the late 1940's.

The ban on smoking began many years ago on airplanes and has increasingly been applied to offices, buildings, restaurants or anywhere that smoke accumulates. It is offensive to non smokers and those of us who do smoke need to respect that.

Even with fans, filters and non-smoking sections, the only way to keep the air clean is to keep the bans 100% in place.

Obviously, for those of us who still smoke, it's inconvenient but that is our problem.

Answer 5

We have a smoking ban in my city and it makes going out MUCH more enjoyable for everyone. The first time the ban went around, the health dept. allowed the establishments construct smoking areas that were completely enclosed. That worked for a while, but the smokers complained that it was "too smoky" in there. (go figure)
Now, it is not acceptable for any businesses to have smoking inside. I've seen it both ways and there was a fair amount of smoke still whafting into the general seating area. I'm not sure that it worked. Having said that, I am an advocate of smoke-free public places.

Answer 6

Should be completely up to the business owner. If Big Brother wants to restrict what legal actions a business owner can allow on their own property, than Big Brother needs to pay the business owner's mortgage.

If a non-smoker does not like a smoking environment, they should (1) talk to the owner about their concern, not run to Big Brother like a child not getting their way so that a ban will be drafted and imposed on others, (2) not return to the establishment if the business owner chooses to allow smoking, and (3) open up their own establishment that does not allow smoking.

At the very least, Big Brother should not be able to impose such bans on establishments that only allow adults (such as a bar), as these adults are solely responsible for the choice of where they are going and can choose among the 3 alternatives aforementioned.

In the event my answer seems as though I'm attacking non-smokers or implying smokers should not respect non-smokers, it is certainly not my intent. I'm not necessary pro-smokers' rights, I am pro-business owners' rights. Also, it is imperative within a democracy of free choice to monitor the intervention of government - It is not a far stretch to say that, going along the line of thinking that supports the smoking ban, that a government may ban adults taking their children to McDonalds, as this will be the action's of one (the adult) affecting the health of another who has no choice (the child).

Answer 7

Yes, exhaust fans don't eliminate all second hand smoke. Smoking is a personal choice. In an enclosed room you don't have much of a choice of inhaling the smoke... exhaust fans or not.

Answer 8

We're all stupid about something, but most of us don't show it on our faces five minutes out of every thirty.

I live in a brush fire area (Southern California). I'd ban smoking altogether, if I had that power (the people who DO have that power are either bought and paid for, or are yellow bellied lily livered spineless cowards -- we call them Congressmen). Too many gits chucking their still-lit cigarette butts out the windows of their cars, cause a couple of big brush fires every year.

Answer 9

Yes. Smoking should be banned in all public places.

Answer 10

yes it should be banned or smoking sections should be added. Second hand smoke is dangerous.