Should a proprietor be allowed to set the basic rules at his or her restaurant, bar, office etc.?

Question

for example, smoking or non smoking, shoes or no shoes, an all you can eat buffet: no one over 300lbs allowed? When does pc or other regulations become dictatorial and interfear with the freedom of the proprietor? Have we come to the point where one won't be able to leagally smoke in their home or car?

Answer 1

We have come to the point to where no one is allowed to smoke in their own vehicle. I heard about this, and several states have already enacted that law. I think it is a way to open the doors to government control over our life, even personal life. In Houston, Tx I hear they have enacted that law, also some other states. Also included , no one can be a foster parent if they smoke, anyone in their car with a minor inside, and the adult smoking, can be gave a citation and have to pay a heavy fine. I think this is carrying laws way to far. I think the proprietor should be allowed to set the basic rules at his or her restaurant, bar, office and etc. Really makes me mad that the government, I think right now it is at the state level, can tell a proprietor how to run his business and what his customers can and can not do. Maybe this is why the Government is building those concentration camps, not for illegals, but for Americans who will not comply to their demands for any reason. We better be very careful who we elect president this next time, and as we know, a couple of people already have that commie way of thinking. We need a President that will overturn all these stupid laws and let the Proprietor be in charge of his own business and the way he wants to run it. Guess this is a way to start putting the small business person out of business, so their beloved bigger business will thrive.

Answer 2

You have many good answers to choose from and the usual ramblings of a few. We have too long done nothing to stop the erosion of our liberty bought with the blood of our men and women. I still have the right to spend my money when and where I choose....today. Who knows when that will change. I say restaurants that do allow smoking, but no minors allowed, is the answer to the smoking issue. Our cars and homes having restrictions like that is a travesty. There goes the American Dream. You struggle to own your home because of the security, and not having to listen to the whims of a landlord. A business owner has always had the right to refuse service to anyone. There is a fine line between the rights of property owners and discrimination based on sex or race, which is at this time against our law. Paul, you have asked a very good question, now a little feedback on some reasonable solutions, please!

Answer 3

We are at that point now. Many apartments, at least where I live in California will not rent to a smoker. In Del Mar they have made laws that even smoking in your vehicle while driving within the city is illegal. However, at the Del Mar Fair, now called the San Diego Fair, has reinstated smoker's rights to smoke anywhere on the fairgrounds, when for the previous 2 years, they had designated areas. I suppose they had lost business, so changed the rule back.
There are some rules, that go beyond basics, and beyond human rights, like your example of a 300lb person not being allowed, for being obese. That kind of rule is out of the ordinary, and unacceptable in a free society. An obese person isn't causing harm, or causing a lack of patrons to enter an establishment. Smokers on the other hand, may be considered to be causing some kind of danger to others through second-hand smoke, and cause non-smokers to not want to patronize that establishment. I don't happen to agree with the second-hand smoke nonsense, since no one has ever died from it, and there are exhaust systems, as before they took away the smoking area's in restaurants. It's merely government control.
I am quite certain, though, if you're rich enough, and a proprietor, of any establishment, you can damn well do anything you please, since the government loves those with MONEY, more than those without it.

Answer 4

Non smoking and shoe wearing laws are determined by state statutes or local ordinances. Shoes may also be a liability insurance requirement

A body weight restriction such as under 300 lbs. at a buffet is determined by the law of profit. It's insulting since overweight people don't necessarily eat more but it shouldn't be discriminatory for a proprietor to have this rule. I think restaurant owners with such signs have been challenged on this, however.

There are already are no smoking rental cars and apartment buildings.

I agree, there are too many laws and regulations, and it's only getting worse. Just wait until we have CC cameras on every corner. They'll be used for behavior control and surveillance of ordinary citizens as well as crime prevention.

Answer 5

There are actually cases where a person could not smoke in their own home because the window was open and the smoke was smelled by others in the condo association.

I think business owners should be allowed to run their business but there are certainly limits. I think the smoking part should be left up to the owner. I used to smoke and recently quit but still think the owner has that right to determine who his customers will be.

The limits would be for extreme problems, like if a business man insisted everyone entering have a double shot of whiskey or something silly like that. ( Come to think of it, that idea might work out good for some locations)

It sounds a little crazy but it wouldn't surprise me if sometime in the near future, we all wore certain attire according to our job in life. Sound familiar?

We are losing ,incrementally, what took 231 years to gain. Everything is just as it shouldn't be.

Answer 6

By basic do you mean within the already existing laws? Or something unlawful?

Can a proprietor allow coke snorting in his restaurant? No. Allow prostitution in the back room? No.

Gotta follow the law. If you don't like the law - get it changed. If you can't change it there must be a good reason why.

If you don't like the laws of the land go move somewhere else. Love it or leave it!

Another option; smoke all you want but then you have to pay for your own health care. The taxpayers shouldn't have to pay for others stupidity.

Answer 7

Development needs to be plannedvery carefully within National Parks. For the most part,I believe that commerical development should be restricted to utside a park. Cafes can be found in any town in Australia. Why travel 80 kilometres to a national park just to have a cup of coffee and a piece of cake. Any development, whether it is commerical or not needs to be sympathetic and complimentary to the cultural and natural values of the park.

Answer 8

Well...my husband works for the Railroad and they have a strict no smoking policy. If you are caught in your car smoking while on break or while you are pulling out of the yard to go home, then you will be written up.

`

Answer 9

Unequivocally--yes! Otherwise its a communist state whereby they control everything. We need our freedoms on every level or else we are not free but rather controlled to someone else's liking.

No one has to go to a particular restaurant, they have the choice to eat elsewhere. The owner should have the right to run it as they see fit. I don't smoke and I still know that its one's decision to partake. I can cook or eat elsewhere!

Answer 10

There should be no ban on smoking and there should be no health code. If people don't like sitting next to a smoker they can eat somewhere else. If a customer gets sick, the owner gets sued, he loses patronage and goes out of business.