Smoking ban in Philadelphia approved

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

I believe that is absolutely a decision that can and should be made by the owner of the building.

Most owners would choose not to allow it for many reasons, just like many restaurants are choosing not to allow it.  This is not a place where we need more government dollars spent.

[SunMo]

the best part about Cerevant's supposed crusade for the bartenders is that 97% of the people he's trying to protect with this ban are smoking right there with the people at the bar...it's one of the reasons they work there, they want to work at a job that they can smoke at.

[phattymatty]

I believe that is absolutely a decision that can and should be made by the owner of the building.

yes.

[Cerevant]

Most owners would choose not to allow it for many reasons, just like many restaurants are choosing not to allow it. 

Um, but isn't it a violation of civil liberties to restrict these things?

This is not a place where we need more government dollars spent.

I believe that the legislation of safety standards (whether OH&S or otherwise) benefits businesses by leveling the playing field.  If it was left to the business owner (which it is, in most cases) the business owner would have to evaluate if it was competitively to their advantage to implement the standard. 

[SunMo]

Um, but isn't it a violation of civil liberties to restrict these things?

it's obvious with a statement like this, you don't understand what civil liberties are, and how they apply

[Seabiscuit36]

i wish i could have slaves, damn Lincoln

[reese125]

As an ex-smoker, its ironic and hysterical at the same the time because the overall and always goal of a smoker is to quit...unless you want to die.  Yeah you guys like it after a meal, when you drink and after sex with small dogs now, but deep down in your subconscious it makes you sick and you want to quit.  Now there is a law put in place to try and help reduce the intake of cigarettes and keep you and others healthy, and the smokers are against it...yeah makes sense

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

Um, but isn't it a violation of civil liberties to restrict these things?

Nice try.  The private owner of the building expects the voluntary tenants to accept certain regulations as part of the legal agreement on tenancy.  If there were no difference between the government forcing the private sector to make unnecessary rules and the private sector making their own rules, there wouldn't be two sides of the aisle in the U.S. Congress.

I believe that the legislation of safety standards (whether OH&S or otherwise) benefits businesses by leveling the playing field.  If it was left to the business owner (which it is, in most cases) the business owner would have to evaluate if it was competitively to their advantage to implement the standard. 

So, by reducing the choices the business owner can make to grow their business, you are saving them what?  Time?  Culpability?  You're reaching.  The fewer choices private businesses make, the closer you get to authoritarian/totalitarian/communist government.

[SunMo]

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

i'm not a smoker and i'm against this because i hate the government telling us what to do.  seat belts even...i think you're dumb not to wear one...but i think it's farging retarded to have a law forcing you to wear one...personal choice, it's a beautiful thing

but you go ahead and be a good little sheep.

[rjs246]

As an ex-smoker, its ironic and hysterical at the same the time because the overall and always goal of a smoker is to quit...unless you want to die.  Yeah you guys like it after a meal, when you drink and after sex with small dogs now, but deep down in your subconscious it makes you sick and you want to quit.  Now there is a law put in place to try and help reduce the intake of cigarettes and keep you and others healthy, and the smokers are against it...yeah makes sense

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

Quitting never was and never will be my ultimate goal. Being left alone to do as I will is my ultimate goal. And the government IS trying to take over the world, whether I'm paranoid or not.

i'm not a smoker and i'm against this because i hate the government telling us what to do.  seat belts even...i think you're dumb not to wear one...but i think it's farging retarded to have a law forcing you to wear one...personal choice, it's a beautiful thing

but you go ahead and be a good little sheep.

Amen.

[reese125]

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

i'm not a smoker and i'm against this because i hate the government telling us what to do.  seat belts even...i think you're dumb not to wear one...but i think it's farging retarded to have a law forcing you to wear one...personal choice, it's a beautiful thing

but you go ahead and be a good little sheep.

I agree with the seat belt being retarded...and the fact Im fined for it is even more. Your not affecting anyone else's life but your own.

When it comes to smoking and you cant see the reasoning behind it, you got other issues to take care of? Hey, gov't is by far not perfect, but there comes a time when they need to step in and personal choice gets put to the side for various out-of-control reasons. If your going to be anti just to be anti..now whos' the sheep?

[SunMo]

i'm not being anti just to be anti...i just think that a privately owned business should be able to choose their own smoking policy

i go to many restaurants and that are non-smoking throughout, and they are always well attended, and i go to bars that allow smoking and there are both smokers and non-smokers that go there...it just doesn't seem to be that big of an issue if you left it up to the individual establishments

[ice grillin you]

i'm not a smoker and i'm against this because i hate the government telling us what to do.  seat belts even...i think you're dumb not to wear one...but i think it's farging retarded to have a law forcing you to wear one...personal choice, it's a beautiful thing

horrible analogy...not wearing a seat belt directly hurts no one but yourself....seat belt laws are indeed idiotic as are motorcycle helmet laws but neither have anything in common with smoking laws in restaurants/bars

and the govt is not telling anyone what to do in the case of smoking laws...its telling the people where they can do something...same as you cant openly drink alcohol anywhere you want or ride a bike wherever you want or build a fire wherever you want...


the key thing to remember here is that smokers ARE STILL ALLOWED TO SMOKE...youd think smokers would care more about things like the outrageous taxes that the govt puts on cigarettes instead of the fact that they have to walk ten feet outside a bar to smoke

[phattymatty]

i'm pretty sure the argument isn't with individuals being able to smoke, it's with restaurant/bar owners not being allowed to let their patrons smoke if they want to. 

[ice grillin you]

bars also arent allowed to serve alcohol whenever they want...or show porn on their tv's...they are also required to have their customers be clothed...food handlers are required to wash their hands after going to the bathroom...food in general is legaly required to be protected....there are tons of good sensible laws that public establishments must follow for the good of the population at large