Clean Air or Banning Smoking

[coldweatherfan]

What is the intent of the anti-smoking group?

 

Is it to provide buildings with cleaner air?

 

Or, is it to ban smoking?

 

I will limit my argument to restaurants. It is my contention that I could easily operate a restaurant and maitain a smoke free environment in a designated portion (let's say 2/3 because there are more nonsmokers) through the use of seperate air handling systems and positive & negative air zones.

 

Yet there has been no attemt at cleaning up the air, only at banning smoking. It is my opinion that the intent is to ban smoking, and cleaner air is the excuse. (excuse is probably a bad word choice, but it's the only one I could think of at the moment)

[Theoldguy]

Clean air is my choice and an environment where I don't have to come home smelling like I have smoked four packs of cigarettes or having my throat raw from having to breathe the smoke of those who could care less that they are bothering others.

 

I have also never found a system (smoke eaters don't work well enough) to keep smoke from drifting from one area to another.

 

Funny but when my brother worked in reservations for a major airline (in the day's when you could smoke on a plane) he would tell me that those who smoked would ask for a smoking seat on flights of one or two hours, but those same people would ask for a non smoking seat on flights of longer than two hour or so.

 

I was a GM in the Hospitality Industry for many years, and I saw first hand the damage to hotel rooms that smokers make. Burnt carpeting, burnt holes in the linen, burn marks on the side of bath tubs, TV, phones etc etc. It didn't surprise me one bit when Marriott introduced it's smoke free policy. My guess is that they have saved a ton of money by going smoke free just in maintenance alone.

[coldweatherfan]

Clean air is my choice and an environment where I don't have to come home smelling like I have smoked four packs of cigarettes or having my throat raw from having to breathe the smoke of those who could care less that they are bothering others.

 

I have also never found a system (smoke eaters don't work well enough) to keep smoke from drifting from one area to another.

 

Funny but when my brother worked in reservations for a major airline (in the day's when you could smoke on a plane) he would tell me that those who smoked would ask for a smoking seat on flights of one or two hours, but those same people would ask for a non smoking seat on flights of longer than two hour or so.

 

I was a GM in the Hospitality Industry for many years, and I saw first hand the damage to hotel rooms that smokers make. Burnt carpeting, burnt holes in the linen, burn marks on the side of bath tubs, TV, phones etc etc. It didn't surprise me one bit when Marriott introduced it's smoke free policy. My guess is that they have saved a ton of money by going smoke free just in maintenance alone.

 

Not talking about smoke eaters. I'm talking seperate air handling systems.

 

So are you saying that if you could walk into a restaurant and not have to walk through or enter any area with smoke in it, that would be acceptable to you? So there would be no need for a smoking ban?

[AcesFull]

The intent of anti-smoking groups is to exercise power over another group of people. I do not smoke and have never smoked a single cigar or cigarette but as long as smoking is a legal activity I believe that businesses should be free to regulate it in their own establishments free from government regulation. If customers do not like the accommodations that business make for smokers then they should have two choices - get mad and leave or get made and stay.

[Theoldguy]

Not talking about smoke eaters. I'm talking separate air handling systems.

 

So are you saying that if you could walk into a restaurant and not have to walk through or enter any area with smoke in it, that would be acceptable to you? So there would be no need for a smoking ban?

 

Tell me where such a restaurant is located and let me try it before I say yes or no, fair enough!

 

Have seen some restaurants try air handlers etc. but traffic patterns of guests, doors opening and closing, size of crowds, number of smokers all play a part and I have just not visited such an animal where smoke doesn't drift from one area to another. Even smokers who could give a rats patooty about what it does to others will smoke on the way to the bathrooms (usually located in the non smoking areas) without giving it a thought at all.

 

I really truly feel sorry (honestly I do) for those who smoke and just can't stop from smoking for a hour or so through dinner/lunch/breakfast.

 

Two question for all of you smokers!

 

1) Do you wish you could quit?

2) Do you want your children to start smoking? BTW don't give me it's up to them, tell me if you want them to start or not!

Edited July 20, 2008 by rockmom

[coldweatherfan]

Tell me where such a restaurant is located and let me try it before I say yes or no, fair enough!

 

Have seen some restaurants try air handlers etc. but traffic patterns of guests, doors opening and closing, size of crowds, number of smokers all play a part and I have just not visited such an animal where smoke doesn't drift from one area to another. Even smokers who could give a rats patooty about what it does to others will smoke on the way to the bathrooms (usually located in the non smoking areas) without giving it a thought at all.

 

I really truly feel sorry (honestly I do) for those who smoke and just can't stop from smoking for a hour or so through dinner/lunch/breakfast.

 

Two question for all of you smokers!

 

1) Do you wish you could quit?

2) Do you want your children to start smoking? BTW don't give me it's up to them, tell me if you want them to start or not!

 

 

1) I don't smoke.

2) I don't want my children to smoke.

 

There has never been any attempt to my knowledge to put a clean-air standard in restaurants. I know for a fact it can be done. I spent most of my life in the restaurant business. Just like I can keep the smoke from my kitchen going into the dining area, I can keep smoke from moving into another area of the restaurant. At present, restaurants smoking and nonsmoking sections are done at courtesy. I agree with you that some folks are not courteous, but there is also nothing curently that says you can't walk through nonsmoking with a cigarette, it just says you can't sit there.

 

Still back to the original question. What's it about banning smoking or clean air?

Edited July 20, 2008 by rockmom

[ladiesbballcoach]

To make the air clean for those that are allergic to smoking and help prevent those that are smoking from making those who are allergic to smoking sick. Both sides should be able to go out and enjoy a meal without either getting sick.

[RowdyRedRam]

The intent of anti-smoking groups is to exercise power over another group of people. I do not smoke and have never smoked a single cigar or cigarette but as long as smoking is a legal activity I believe that businesses should be free to regulate it in their own establishments free from government regulation. If customers do not like the accommodations that business make for smokers then they should have two choices - get mad and leave or get made and stay.

Passing gas is a legal activity, yet people are usually respectful of others not to do it in front of them. Because smokers (in large) won't respect the comfort of other people, than they caused themselves to be regulated.

[ladiesbballcoach]

The intent of anti-smoking groups is to exercise power over another group of people. I do not smoke and have never smoked a single cigar or cigarette but as long as smoking is a legal activity I believe that businesses should be free to regulate it in their own establishments free from government regulation. If customers do not like the accommodations that business make for smokers then they should have two choices - get mad and leave or get made and stay.

 

Spitting is also a legal activity. Should I be able to go around and force my saliva on them like secondhand smoke is forced on me?

[Run To State]

The intent of anti-smoking groups is to exercise power over another group of people. I do not smoke and have never smoked a single cigar or cigarette but as long as smoking is a legal activity I believe that businesses should be free to regulate it in their own establishments free from government regulation. If customers do not like the accommodations that business make for smokers then they should have two choices - get mad and leave or get made and stay.

Agree 100%. I can't understand for the life of me why non-smokers have to have all restaurants smoke free other than greed or downright spitefulness.

I remind you all, I don't smoke.

[sweet16]

Agree 100%. I can't understand for the life of me why non-smokers have to have all restaurants smoke free other than greed or downright spitefulness.

 

It has nothing to do with either one of those. It has to everything to be able to go to a restaurant and not have to worry about second hand smoke and coming home smelling like a cigarette.

[Run To State]

Passing gas is a legal activity, yet people are usually respectful of others not to do it in front of them. Because smokers (in large) won't respect the comfort of other people, than they caused themselves to be regulated.

And I was told in another thread that I had a silly analogy. :lol:

How did smokers cause themselves to be regulated? By doing what is legal? Or was it upsetting the nannies by doing what was legal?

[Run To State]

It has nothing to do with either one of those. It has to everything to be able to go to a restaurant and not have to worry about second hand smoke and coming home smelling like a cigarette.

If they have to have ALL restaurants smoke free it has everything to with that. Non-smokers don't need to have it all their way.

[coldweatherfan]

To make the air clean for those that are allergic to smoking and help prevent those that are smoking from making those who are allergic to smoking sick. Both sides should be able to go out and enjoy a meal without either getting sick.

 

I'm saying it can be done.

 

Again is it about banning cigarettes or is it about clean air?

[sweet16]

If they have to have ALL restaurants smoke free it has everything to with that. Non-smokers don't need to have it all their way.

 

So an activity that can cause cancer (secondhand smoke) is okay as long as it is legal to do it.