Are there places where non-smoking bars could operate without legislation? Would patrons respect the non-smoking ban? I think they would, even if it required an occasional intervention from a bouncer.
Legislation should always be the last resort.
yes, back before bloomberg became an asshat, there were bars with non-smoking sections (probably not good enough, as i find most "smoke-nazis" hate the idea of smoke to be within a perimeter of them). i would think its rare that an establishment would voluntarily deny a large percent of their clientelle access to their facilities. even if most people aren't smokers, i tend to think that one or a few people per group are, and they would put the kibosh on attending a non-smoking bar. so i doubt that there are completely smoke free bars, without legislation, in a large enough area. BUT, if the demand is large enough, the market will create the supply.
HOM, if you are really hungerin for a smokey bar in the city, find a hookah bar. there are a few down town. they have legal permission around the law, since their whole business is built around smoking.
HOM, if you are really hungerin for a smokey bar in the city, find a hookah bar. there are a few down town. they have legal permission around the law, since their whole business is built around smoking.
Thanks for the offer. I usually go to Sahara East on 11th and 2nd. I've been going there for a few years, but if you know of some other places I am always looking for new establishments to try
Smoking (tabacco) and drinking have been around for several hundred years in western culture and are fairly intertwined.
I think that in most of the world, drinking coffee and smoking are even more intertwined. The only reason alcohol and smoking are seen together so much here is that they're both puritan vices. Heck, the classic Western saloon has smoking, drinking, and gambling all under one roof, with the naked women not far away. Is anyone whining about not being able to gamble in every bar in NYC? If you hate Bloomberg, hate him for the "no-bare-pussies" rule.
So you want to smoke while you drink. I want to NOT smoke while I drink. You say, find your own place, or stay home. I say, find your own place or stay home. You say, there shouldn't be laws about this. I say, this would never happen without laws. Whose rights are most right? Well, you put my health at risk, and everyone's around you. I don't have any effect on you, unless (to turn the name-calling around) you're such a pussy that you suffer severe emotional trauma if you go three hours without a drag. I guess that deserves a half-serious .
Edit: And don't try that "why not ban drinking too" garbage. The 0.08%BAC limit is only for driving. There is no "legal limit" for drinking. And we have a limit for driving because drinking and driving puts the health and lives of others directly at risk. Do what you want, as long as you aren't putting others at risk. Isn't that the argument for pot legalization? And for not banning smoking altogether?
I think that maybe you should stop watching Sliders and start paying attention to real matters like people losing their jobs.
What about real matters like people developing cancer and dying? I live in Delaware, the second state (before New York) to have smoke free bars and we have a great bar scene. It is very pleasant to be able to go out without choking and having to change clothes and take a shower after getting town.
I think that in most of the world, drinking coffee and smoking are even more intertwined. The only reason alcohol and smoking are seen together so much here is that they're both puritan vices. Heck, the classic Western saloon has smoking, drinking, and gambling all under one roof, with the naked women not far away. Is anyone whining about not being able to gamble in every bar in NYC? If you hate Bloomberg, hate him for the "no-bare-pussies" rule.
So you want to smoke while you drink. I want to NOT smoke while I drink. You say, find your own place, or stay home. I say, find your own place or stay home. You say, there shouldn't be laws about this. I say, this would never happen without laws. Whose rights are most right? Well, you put my health at risk, and everyone's around you. I don't have any effect on you, unless (to turn the name-calling around) you're such a pussy that you suffer severe emotional trauma if you go three hours without a drag. I guess that deserves a half-serious .
Edit: And don't try that "why not ban drinking too" garbage. The 0.08%BAC limit is only for driving. There is no "legal limit" for drinking. And we have a limit for driving because drinking and driving puts the health and lives of others directly at risk. Do what you want, as long as you aren't putting others at risk. Isn't that the argument for pot legalization? And for not banning smoking altogether?
Ouch, I don't recall using the "P" word. (I don't smoke (filthy habit) or frequent bars.)
But...
There are laws agianst PI (public inoxication). Try wandering from The Central to the ferry terminal after shutting the place down and you'll end up with chaffy wrists.
At any rate, binge use of alchohol is WAY worse than second-hand smoke on the body, and I don't understand sanctioning one behavior while calling the other "the Devil".
This is some strange political catharsis--and nothing more.
most bars and resturant here in michigan allow smoking though i'm working on changing that
you suck
hate these a$$holes getting rid of freedom of choice for the owners and customers..... and I dont smoke or drink, just beleive in FREEDOM, wich we lose more of each day in this world
There's a bar that I like to go to in Ann Arbor. It wasn't until I went to some other places that I realized it was smoke free and greatly added to my enjoyment.
I only started this thread to find out if there were smoke-free bars in your cities, not to start a big "smoking is bad campaign", but if we start to discuss "freedoms" then we're going to have to discuss how one person's smoke affects the freedom of another person's lungs. Basically, I'm telling the smokers to figure out a better argument because that one can be turned against you every time.
It's expensive to create a segregated restaurant or bar, and it never truly works. Non-smokers can always detect smoke from the smokers' area, unless the establishment is completely smoke-free is there clean air.
I see it as a potential business opportunity for entrepreneurs. If you build it they will come....if it's in the right area, the parking is easy, the crime is low, the prices are good, the food is good, the music isn't too loud, etc. It's still a venture, but it's a very good opportunity.
If I owned an established bar I would fight the smoking ban tooth and nail, my patrons would expect nothing less. But if I were looking to start a new bar and get a lot of attention I'd consider the smoke-free alternative. Turn the tables and let the smokers complain for awhile....fair's fair.
Last night I was up in Niagara Falls for New Years, and it was so nice to be able to smoke in a bar again. I completely understand why somebody would want to be able to go to the bar without having to be in a thick cloud of smoke, and coming home smelling so horrible. But, the fact that any bar or indoor concert I go to in New York I have to go outside to smoke really does suck. Last night I was at the Hard Rock Cafe most of the night, people were smoking at the bar, but the whole place didn't smell of smoke. It wasn't bad at all really. But then again, the HRC is a fairly big, open kinda place, unlike the small dingy places around here.
Places with the big air-handlers are much more tolerable than the dives with regular A/C ventilation and nothing more. Still, all it takes is one person sitting with ten feet of you to light up and BLAM it's stinko-city. A lot of my friends who smoke can't tell if a place is smoky or not. A non-smoker can almost always tell - especially the reformed-smokers. If you guys want to call people "smoke nazis" then you can apply that term to ex-smokers, they're almost always more vocal about cigarette smoke than lifelong non-smokers.
How many of you have smoke-free bars in your town? I just want to have the option of saving money on my dry-cleaning bills.
I have a pub in walking distance that has a large non-smoking section, and no smoking at the bar... it also has no music, or juke boxes, and silent slot machines (rather than the usual annoying beeping ones).
HOWEVER just when I think I've evaded cigarette stinking hell, my parents-in-law arrive at my house and chain smoke (they do over 100 a day between them - superstrength brand as well).
I have a pub in walking distance that has a large non-smoking section, and no smoking at the bar... it also has no music, or juke boxes, and silent slot machines (rather than the usual annoying beeping ones).
HOWEVER just when I think I've evaded cigarette stinking hell, my parents-in-law arrive at my house and chain smoke (they do over 100 a day between them - superstrength brand as well).
You let your parents stink up your house? I would send them outside. It is nasty and gross to let them stink up your house with their filthy habit. If they want to smoke at home, that is their problem, but don't let them ruin your own home.
Places with the big air-handlers are much more tolerable than the dives with regular A/C ventilation and nothing more. Still, all it takes is one person sitting with ten feet of you to light up and BLAM it's stinko-city. A lot of my friends who smoke can't tell if a place is smoky or not. A non-smoker can almost always tell - especially the reformed-smokers. If you guys want to call people "smoke nazis" then you can apply that term to ex-smokers, they're almost always more vocal about cigarette smoke than lifelong non-smokers.
btw, what a cool place to go for New Years!
I'm probably about as inpartial as you get (don't go to clubs & don't smoke), but had to chime in on the last comment. I have never smoked, but when I was growing up both of my parents smoked (both have long since quit). And for the first 4 or 5 years of our marriage, my husband smoked. I don't notice cigarette smoke. Don't smell it; doesn't phase me. My husband, however, can smell a cigarette 100 yards away in a closed car. My mother is even worse.
Like I said, I've never smoked so I don't understand the addiction. But I watched my older sister die from mouth cancer. She was a smoker and she still continued to smoke until they finally had to take her tongue, larynx, and bottom jaw--she breathed through a hole in her neck and ate through a hole in her stomach. That really sucks and I'm glad I never started. And that just took a turn I didn't intend, but I'm going to leave it in anyway.
hate these a$$holes getting rid of freedom of choice for the owners and customers..... and I dont smoke or drink, just beleive in FREEDOM, wich we lose more of each day in this world
you suck. hey i'm all for freedom but second hand smoke is a killer. people can't go to dinner without having to have a smoke? walk your lazy ass outside and spare the rest of us
You let your parents stink up your house? I would send them outside. It is nasty and gross to let them stink up your house with their filthy habit. If they want to smoke at home, that is their problem, but don't let them ruin your own home.
Nick
agreed. make them go outside. did they ask if was ok to smoke in the house?
Comments
Originally posted by drewprops
Are there places where non-smoking bars could operate without legislation? Would patrons respect the non-smoking ban? I think they would, even if it required an occasional intervention from a bouncer.
Legislation should always be the last resort.
yes, back before bloomberg became an asshat, there were bars with non-smoking sections (probably not good enough, as i find most "smoke-nazis" hate the idea of smoke to be within a perimeter of them). i would think its rare that an establishment would voluntarily deny a large percent of their clientelle access to their facilities. even if most people aren't smokers, i tend to think that one or a few people per group are, and they would put the kibosh on attending a non-smoking bar. so i doubt that there are completely smoke free bars, without legislation, in a large enough area. BUT, if the demand is large enough, the market will create the supply.
HOM, if you are really hungerin for a smokey bar in the city, find a hookah bar. there are a few down town. they have legal permission around the law, since their whole business is built around smoking.
Originally posted by thuh Freak
HOM, if you are really hungerin for a smokey bar in the city, find a hookah bar. there are a few down town. they have legal permission around the law, since their whole business is built around smoking.
Thanks for the offer. I usually go to Sahara East on 11th and 2nd. I've been going there for a few years, but if you know of some other places I am always looking for new establishments to try
Oh and if I didn't mention this before:
**** Bloomberg
Originally posted by dmz
Smoking (tabacco) and drinking have been around for several hundred years in western culture and are fairly intertwined.
I think that in most of the world, drinking coffee and smoking are even more intertwined. The only reason alcohol and smoking are seen together so much here is that they're both puritan vices. Heck, the classic Western saloon has smoking, drinking, and gambling all under one roof, with the naked women not far away. Is anyone whining about not being able to gamble in every bar in NYC? If you hate Bloomberg, hate him for the "no-bare-pussies" rule.
So you want to smoke while you drink. I want to NOT smoke while I drink. You say, find your own place, or stay home. I say, find your own place or stay home. You say, there shouldn't be laws about this. I say, this would never happen without laws. Whose rights are most right? Well, you put my health at risk, and everyone's around you. I don't have any effect on you, unless (to turn the name-calling around) you're such a pussy that you suffer severe emotional trauma if you go three hours without a drag. I guess that deserves a half-serious
Edit: And don't try that "why not ban drinking too" garbage. The 0.08%BAC limit is only for driving. There is no "legal limit" for drinking. And we have a limit for driving because drinking and driving puts the health and lives of others directly at risk. Do what you want, as long as you aren't putting others at risk. Isn't that the argument for pot legalization? And for not banning smoking altogether?
Originally posted by Towel
If you hate Bloomberg, hate him for the "no-bare-pussies" rule
No I hate Giuliani for that.
Originally posted by HOM
No I hate Giuliani for that.
Heh. My bad. Been away too long.
I think that maybe you should stop watching Sliders and start paying attention to real matters like people losing their jobs.
What about real matters like people developing cancer and dying? I live in Delaware, the second state (before New York) to have smoke free bars and we have a great bar scene. It is very pleasant to be able to go out without choking and having to change clothes and take a shower after getting town.
Originally posted by Towel
I think that in most of the world, drinking coffee and smoking are even more intertwined. The only reason alcohol and smoking are seen together so much here is that they're both puritan vices. Heck, the classic Western saloon has smoking, drinking, and gambling all under one roof, with the naked women not far away. Is anyone whining about not being able to gamble in every bar in NYC? If you hate Bloomberg, hate him for the "no-bare-pussies" rule.
So you want to smoke while you drink. I want to NOT smoke while I drink. You say, find your own place, or stay home. I say, find your own place or stay home. You say, there shouldn't be laws about this. I say, this would never happen without laws. Whose rights are most right? Well, you put my health at risk, and everyone's around you. I don't have any effect on you, unless (to turn the name-calling around) you're such a pussy that you suffer severe emotional trauma if you go three hours without a drag. I guess that deserves a half-serious
Edit: And don't try that "why not ban drinking too" garbage. The 0.08%BAC limit is only for driving. There is no "legal limit" for drinking. And we have a limit for driving because drinking and driving puts the health and lives of others directly at risk. Do what you want, as long as you aren't putting others at risk. Isn't that the argument for pot legalization? And for not banning smoking altogether?
Ouch, I don't recall using the "P" word. (I don't smoke (filthy habit) or frequent bars.)
But...
There are laws agianst PI (public inoxication). Try wandering from The Central to the ferry terminal after shutting the place down and you'll end up with chaffy wrists.
At any rate, binge use of alchohol is WAY worse than second-hand smoke on the body, and I don't understand sanctioning one behavior while calling the other "the Devil".
This is some strange political catharsis--and nothing more.
Originally posted by HOM
some estimates are that 1/3 bars have closed. Not only that but the smokers :
i heard restuarants are doing better
most bars and resturant here in michigan allow smoking though i'm working on changing that
Originally posted by burningwheel
i heard restuarants are doing better
most bars and resturant here in michigan allow smoking though i'm working on changing that
you suck
hate these a$$holes getting rid of freedom of choice for the owners and customers..... and I dont smoke or drink, just beleive in FREEDOM, wich we lose more of each day in this world
It's expensive to create a segregated restaurant or bar, and it never truly works. Non-smokers can always detect smoke from the smokers' area, unless the establishment is completely smoke-free is there clean air.
I see it as a potential business opportunity for entrepreneurs. If you build it they will come....if it's in the right area, the parking is easy, the crime is low, the prices are good, the food is good, the music isn't too loud, etc. It's still a venture, but it's a very good opportunity.
If I owned an established bar I would fight the smoking ban tooth and nail, my patrons would expect nothing less. But if I were looking to start a new bar and get a lot of attention I'd consider the smoke-free alternative. Turn the tables and let the smokers complain for awhile....fair's fair.
btw, what a cool place to go for New Years!
Originally posted by drewprops
How many of you have smoke-free bars in your town? I just want to have the option of saving money on my dry-cleaning bills.
I have a pub in walking distance that has a large non-smoking section, and no smoking at the bar... it also has no music, or juke boxes, and silent slot machines (rather than the usual annoying beeping ones).
HOWEVER just when I think I've evaded cigarette stinking hell, my parents-in-law arrive at my house and chain smoke (they do over 100 a day between them - superstrength brand as well).
Originally posted by Bygimis Turug VIII
I have a pub in walking distance that has a large non-smoking section, and no smoking at the bar... it also has no music, or juke boxes, and silent slot machines (rather than the usual annoying beeping ones).
HOWEVER just when I think I've evaded cigarette stinking hell, my parents-in-law arrive at my house and chain smoke (they do over 100 a day between them - superstrength brand as well).
You let your parents stink up your house? I would send them outside. It is nasty and gross to let them stink up your house with their filthy habit. If they want to smoke at home, that is their problem, but don't let them ruin your own home.
Nick
Originally posted by drewprops
Places with the big air-handlers are much more tolerable than the dives with regular A/C ventilation and nothing more. Still, all it takes is one person sitting with ten feet of you to light up and BLAM it's stinko-city. A lot of my friends who smoke can't tell if a place is smoky or not. A non-smoker can almost always tell - especially the reformed-smokers. If you guys want to call people "smoke nazis" then you can apply that term to ex-smokers, they're almost always more vocal about cigarette smoke than lifelong non-smokers.
btw, what a cool place to go for New Years!
I'm probably about as inpartial as you get (don't go to clubs & don't smoke), but had to chime in on the last comment. I have never smoked, but when I was growing up both of my parents smoked (both have long since quit). And for the first 4 or 5 years of our marriage, my husband smoked. I don't notice cigarette smoke. Don't smell it; doesn't phase me. My husband, however, can smell a cigarette 100 yards away in a closed car. My mother is even worse.
Like I said, I've never smoked so I don't understand the addiction. But I watched my older sister die from mouth cancer. She was a smoker and she still continued to smoke until they finally had to take her tongue, larynx, and bottom jaw--she breathed through a hole in her neck and ate through a hole in her stomach. That really sucks and I'm glad I never started. And that just took a turn I didn't intend, but I'm going to leave it in anyway.
Originally posted by The General
you suck
hate these a$$holes getting rid of freedom of choice for the owners and customers..... and I dont smoke or drink, just beleive in FREEDOM, wich we lose more of each day in this world
you suck. hey i'm all for freedom but second hand smoke is a killer. people can't go to dinner without having to have a smoke? walk your lazy ass outside and spare the rest of us
Originally posted by trumptman
You let your parents stink up your house? I would send them outside. It is nasty and gross to let them stink up your house with their filthy habit. If they want to smoke at home, that is their problem, but don't let them ruin your own home.
Nick
agreed. make them go outside. did they ask if was ok to smoke in the house?