MI Bar Owners Ban Lawmakers for Banning Smoking

Submitted by: hookskat 5 years ago in

...and other instances of the government taking away your freedoms. Land of the free, right?
There are 51 comments:
Male 3

However, in nearby Missouri, you can smoke anywhere. Any time.

Wrong.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]In a restaurant, I can understand...but banned in a bar? Geez...why don`t they ban liquor too?[/quote]

It`s possible to drink liquor without making everyone within a few yards drink it too.

You`re not allowed to crap on the floors wherever you feel like it. Is that also a ridiculous restriction on your freedom? If not, why not? Yes, it stinks and it`s disgusting and some poor sod will have to clean it up. So it`s just like smoking, only far less harmful.

Smoking has long had a massively privileged legal status. It is well past time that privilege is reduced. No other drug use has anything like the degree of privilege that smoking still has even after restrictions like this one.
0
Reply
Female 374
I live in Arkansas and you can`t smoke anywhere around here. Not in restaurants, not on college campuses, and not in most bars. I`ve only ever been to one bar where you could smoke inside.

As a nonsmoker, I love it. It means I can taste my food when I go into restaurants. A lot of cigarette smokers really have no idea how strong that smell is when you`re not around it all the time.

However, in nearby Missouri, you can smoke anywhere. Any time.
0
Reply
Male 48
They banned smoking in any public restaurent/bar (aka food provider) larger than 40 square emters (roughly 400 square feet) in Denmark years ago. People got up ina rms, but regardless of a fe wof the old-man hideouts, most of us (and I say that as a bartender) love it. It means work for my colleagues and I doesn`t involve second-hand smoke, people cans till smoke outside, and the inside of the bars and restaurents got so much better, resulting in new clientel.

In the end, this sin`t about your "rights" or "freedom" as a smoker. It`s about the health of everyone else around you.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
THey have already banned that in australia!
0
Reply
Male 625
Some people are genuinely allergic to cigarette smoke. So, yes, its capable of hurting some people. You also can`t (legally) hit someone in a bar. I don`t see anyone up in arms about that.

Btw, the people who are allergic to cigarette smoke are ecstatic that they can go to bars now.
0
Reply
Male 14,334
@8BitHero

Do you know who was one of the first people to launch an anti-tobacco campaign?? Here`s a hint look it up...
0
Reply
Male 1,744
@8bitHero
The fcuk? Europe? There`s more smokers in your $h!ttastik part of the world than here, and much less smoking laws! How you say "smokers don`t have the same rights as non-smokers"? You`re the kind of pig-fcuk $h!t licker that`s all for a police state aren`t you
0
Reply
Male 362
The fact that the government is ordering a lawful business to disallow smoking or face consequences is what`s at stake here. I don`t care what you`re views are on smoking, if a bar (or any business for that matter) wants to allow customers to smoke inside it, SO BE IT. Who are you to say they can`t?
0
Reply
Male 5,413
Ha! Anyone bothered by this is a douchebag and can eff off anyways. Smokers don`t have the same rights as non-smokers and that`s how it should be.
0
Reply
Male 639
Do what the Chinese do. I`m living in China at the moment and remember when they first imposed a national smoking ban. It`s illegal to smoke in any public places... which is why ashtrays are provided everywhere. I can even enjoy hospital care with the comfort of my own ashtray whilst slowly puffing away underneath the `no smoking` sign.
0
Reply
Male 621
As a guy who used to work in a bar, the burns, the fires, the fagends everywhere, the stink it leaves on clothes and hair and the simple disgusting amount of damage it does to people who don`t smoke. I think everyone moaning about bars banning it are stupid and selfish. Smoke outside or not at all. End of.
0
Reply
Male 390
In a restaurant, I can understand...but banned in a bar? Geez...why don`t they ban liquor too?
0
Reply
Male 2,737
I`d go to bars, If I could smoke inside. But since I can`t,.....screw it.
0
Reply
Male 44
As a smoker I can say I do miss having a smoke while drinking my pint of Guinness, but at the same time I understand the point Owertyuiop95 makes; sucks to be a non smoker surrounded by smoke. In the end IMO it really should be up to the owner of the establishment to decide if it`s a smoke free zone or not, it`s his business. What might be a good solution; introducing smoking licences, the same as alcohol licenses. Hopefully this would then create both smoking and none smoking establishments which then would give those who don`t smoke the choice of a nice smoke free place to wet your whistle. On a side note, to all the people that hate us smokers oh so much, ever wonder what would happen if our governments were to ban smoking, think of the loss of taxes? a few years ago a gentlemen who was an analyst for the federal government reported that if smoking were to be banned huge tax hikes would have to be implemented in order to offset the lost taxes from smokers.
0
Reply
Male 14,334


This government nanny s**t`s gotten way out of hand UMass you can`t even smoke on their property outside.
0
Reply
Female 4,039
I think it`s as good a form of a peaceful protest as any other - and like any other protest, it won`t result in anything changing.
0
Reply
Male 11
We should ban people from saying "Illinoise"
0
Reply
Male 1,365
Old Ollie, hate to tell ya` it was Republicans who did this. It was aimed at the "Cigar Bars" then they went nuts with it and applied it to every establishment(repubs felt like the cigar bars took money away from their lobbyist friends in Virginia). Look at the Michigan House, Republican controlled, has been since Engler first got into office back in 92.Now it`s complete Republican control with Snyder as gov. So, Republican or Democrat, they both suck, they both play on the same team. The losers are the ones who pick sides and vote against their interest. Illinois, where I am from is no different. Don`t confuse the city governments with the State, Chicago and Detroit are all Democrats, but the States are just the opposite.
0
Reply
Male 215
[i]What about being free not to breathe in smoke?

Also the person above me that will no doubt quote me and say "You don`t have to goto a bar", screw you, our argument fails on so many levels.[/i]

You don`t have to goto a bar.

Sorry, I just had to say it.
0
Reply
Male 1,249
Bring this to OREGON!
0
Reply
Male 127
American democracy: Everyone has the right to "MY" opinion.
0
Reply
Male 36
There are two kinds of people in the word: Those that think there are only 2 types of people in the world, and those that know better.
0
Reply
Male 15,832
There are two kinds of people in this world: those who just want to be left alone to make the best life they can for themselves and their families, and @$$holes who want to boss them around and take their stuff.

Democrats are @$$holes.
0
Reply
Female 7,867
Good, I gave up a few years ago then restarted because (at the time) smoking was permitted in pubs and I would light up when drinking. now I have given up again- and because there is no smoking inside now I find it really easy not to light up when pissed. I have no intention of starting again!
0
Reply
Male 17,512
I`m a non-smoker and even hate the nasty habit, but the smoking bans are pure crap. These smoking bans got the governments `foot in the door` and now the nanny state bureaucrats feel like they can ban, and tax to death, a lot of other stuff as well.

It`s time people got mad and be heard to oppose these bans before America turns into the USSR.
0
Reply
Male 1,164
Itsnotover, perhaps you just live in a pretty bad corner of Canada, because where I live it`s pretty much as Dead-Kittens says. Mind you, about 70% of my co-workers smoke and most of them started as kids, but they all acknowledge it`s a nasty habit and are all trying to kick it. They`re not whining about not being able to smoke in bars and resturants and forcing business owners to shut down.

And as far as I know my hospital isn`t crowded. Most of the wait comes from the 2-3 morons who take extra time because they don`t want to tell the doctor why they weren`t taking their damn medication.
0
Reply
Male 2,468
Glad to see most of you get it.

Don`t let your "civil rights" professor do your thinking for you....or any other professor for that matter.
0
Reply
Male 56
do you not live in canada*
0
Reply
Male 56
@Dead-Kittens Do you live in canada or are you just mentally retarded? im in highschool in canada and about 30% or more kids smoke, and our hospitals are very over crowded
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I don`t get why they can`t just have a non-smoking section. I have asthma, and I`m allergic to cigarette smoke, so being around smoke is painful, but smokers have just as much rights as non-smokers.[/quote]

Yes, but that doesn`t include the right to impose dangerous drug use on other people.

I`m sure there are some weirdoes who want to go around spraying a mist of urine on people. That`s far better than smoking, as its harmless and hardly even smells. So why is it illegal?
0
Reply
Male 1,252
By example Canadians have free healthcare (more or less)..they passed a law that says no smoking in public places and convenience stores are not allowed to advertise cigarettes, nor put them them on display. So instead of 75 pct of kids smoking htese days maybe a small 2 - 3 pct smoke, our streets are clean our hospitals arent over crowded, bars and restaurants dont smell like poo while your trying to enjoy a meal. Government has it right...eventually people will quit or cut down and start enjoying the night life again..its just going to be a while. besides if your stupid enough to smoke, doesnt mean everyone else should have to deal with your stupidity as well.
0
Reply
Male 38,494

Fun nazi`s at it again, but anti-smoking nazis are rediculous.

Smoking in San Diego, California...
Not in bars.
Not anywhere indoors {offeces, restaraunts etc}
Not within 30 feet of a building entrance {downtown}
Not on the beach... that`s right, not even outside on the beach.
Not in your car if children are in it. {not even if you open all the windors or if it`s a convertable.}

Now they are trying to pass a smoking ban on apartments & condo`s because the smoke goes through the floors and walls into other homes and those people suffer 2nd hand smoke.

The city council is the only bad thing about living in San Diego.
0
Reply
Male 2,604
good for them. you dont like, dont go there. if you really need BB telling you not to go to a bar filled with smoke, you`re pretty weak.
0
Reply
Female 150
"losing business so...ban more people from your bar? good logic."

I wouldn`t want to serve the pricks that are making my business go under. It is sound. Exclude the other side and see how it feels. It is a free country and bar owners can do what they feel is right. Its about time they start fighting back. This ban is stupid and i have seen many good bars go under because of it.
0
Reply
Male 44
I suggest if there are people that want smoke-free bars, they should spend their own money and open one. That is their constitutional right. The Michigan Government, as well as any other state with similar laws, have crossed the line on this one.
0
Reply
Male 3,463
Well, the problem with that, rikakittly, is that smoke and air don`t stay in said section. To effectively make two separate sections, you`d have to have two separate rooms, which means spending money to put up a wall, and spending money on employees to run both bars.

As my Civil Rights professor said "Your rights end at the tip of my nose." And as I said before, air has no boundaries. Your right to smoke infringes my right to breathe.
0
Reply
Female 683
I don`t get why they can`t just have a non-smoking section. I have asthma, and I`m allergic to cigarette smoke, so being around smoke is painful, but smokers have just as much rights as non-smokers. The issue is, your addiction affects all others around you, so.. just be considerate, that`s all. Why is it so difficult to just step outside, or to just stay in one area? I mean that towards both smokers and nonsmokers. People bitch too much, Jesus.
0
Reply
Male 2,422
If you own a bar you should be able to put up a sign that says "smoking bar, if you don`t like it take your business somewhere else, but you are not allowed to be a whiny bitch on the premises".
0
Reply
Male 354
Fu*ck yea
0
Reply
Male 978
losing business so...ban more people from your bar? good logic.
0
Reply
Male 1,399
Buiadh, you are correct. Your argument fails.You don`t have a "right" to go into a bar without smoke. They`re not discriminating against you because of race, religion, or other protected class.If you want to talk about private property, THEN we can use the word "rights." Otherwise, you`re making up your own definition of "rights."
0
Reply
Male 1,399
Buiadh, you are correct. Your argument fails.

You don`t have a "right" to go into a bar without smoke. They`re not discriminating against you because of race, religion, or other protected class.

If you want to talk about private property, THEN we can use the word "rights." Otherwise, you`re making up your own definition of "rights."
0
Reply
Male 1,646
@the windy
First off, this is Michigan; There are probably only a few people who enacted this law, it wouldn`t be hard to hang pictures up so the bartenders know who to not serve.

Second; This is America, if we want to smoke. IN A BAR we should be allowed to. I understand stupid bulls-hit like the grocery or a clothing store; But bars are made for people who want to drink and smoke.
Give me my bud back, and I`ll be ok with a public smoking ban; until then; BACK THE FU-CK OFF GOVERNMENT!
0
Reply
Male 2,468
Love it. And before anybody wants to start with "OMG smokin iz da bad!"...this isn`t about smoking. It`s about freedom. Freedom that has been slowly taken away from us by a bunch of government agencies and nanny state OMFG the sky is falling interest groups who think they know what`s best for everybody.
0
Reply
Male 6,737
What about being free not to breathe in smoke?

Also the person above me that will no doubt quote me and say "You don`t have to goto a bar", screw you, our argument fails on so many levels.
0
Reply
Male 290
@the_windy: True. Especially when it is more difficult for someone to prove their career than their carrier.
0
Reply
Female 167
All I hear is abloobloo
0
Reply
Male 68
Finally, business owners actually doing something useful.
Banning lawmakers is actually a smart decision. It might actually make the lawmakers think about the consequences of their dumb actions.
0
Reply
Female 1,589
How are they supposed to know if the person who comes into their bar is a lawmaker? You can`t force someone to prove their carrier to you. And if they are concerned with low business, I don`t think denying entrance to the bar to certain people is going to help them make money.
The no smoking law has been in effect here for at least a decade, so I see no problem with this. Sure people complained in the beginning, but they got over it.
0
Reply
Female 7
Link: MI Bar Owners Ban Lawmakers for Banning Smoking [Rate Link] - ...and other instances of the government taking away your freedoms. Land of the free, right?
0
Reply