Restaurant Smoking Ban

[Felonius]

Tommy - not sure if you're pulling my leg - but I'd have to agree. I think it's unreasonable that someone couldn't enjoy a cigar in the privacy of their office (barring any fire code restrictions of course).

Where was the outcry when that law was passed? Good point. I suspect it was in the same place as all the non-smoking bartenders who haven't exactly been on the front page pushing for new legislation. Complacency (often by a silent majority) often seems the norm in our society. How do you think we ended up with policies such as Prohibition, a drinking age of 21 (when an 18 year old can get married, have kids, sign a legal, will and get sent into harm's way to fight for his/her country, and can't even buy a beer), bankrupt Social Security programs, and income tax rates bordering on socialism?

Second hand smoke and bartenders aside, Big Brother's "good intentions" should be viewed with microscope by all before signing on the dotted line.

[Rail Paul]

...smoking in one's own office...

Our landlord has a prohibition against smoking anywhere in the facilities written into our lease, with monetary penalties for violations. My company's parent prohibits smoking in any company facility in the US. We just had a seminar on the seven deadly sins, of which smoking is one

I understand that NJ's smoking laws require a separate ventilation system for any interior areas where smoking is permitted, don't know about NY.

Way back when I was a new manager, one of my few pleasures in life was lighting up a cigar on Friday afternoon, and pouring a drink with my supervisors as we reviewed the week. That would be two separate deadly sins these days

[tommy]

Tommy - not sure if you're pulling my leg - but I'd have to agree.  I think it's unreasonable that someone couldn't enjoy a cigar in the privacy of their office (barring any fire code restrictions of course).  

indeed my post was littered with sarcasm.

it is important, i think, for any argument here to acknowledge that bars/restaurants are the last of the public places in NYC where one can smoke. at that point, you'd have to offer a very compelling argument explaining why bars/restaurants are different than any other public place, other than being places where you get fat and drunk and generally do other things that you normally don't.

ediot: splelgni.

[LaNiña]

Earlier in this thread I said something about hurrying up and eating chicken fat before it's criminalized...

lest we not give credit where credit is due.

That's not what I meant, dearest. I just wanted to add chicken fat to the "endangered species" list.

[mogsob]

The difference between smoking and other related bar activities is that the by-product necessarily affects others.

I hate tequila just about as much as I hate tobacco, but I don't have to taste and smell the tequila someone is drinking across the room. Moreover, my liver won't get pickled by the secondary effects of someone else's drinking.

After going to California for a few weeks last year, I can see no reason why smoking should be tolerated in public places given the health risks posed by secondary smoke.

Moreover, I find the manner in which most people smoke to be unbelievably rude. How many times has a smoker turned around to exhale -- to avoid the smoke blowing back in their face - so instead it goes right into yours. I know of no smoker who doesn't turn their head to exhale smoke in the face of an oncoming wind.

Finally, there should be no debate about banning smoking in restaurants -- particularly on this board. Smoke interferes with the taste of food like no other substance I know. Last year, I was dining at Pre Catalan, and the diners to my rear were smoking. The woman kept a cigarette lit throughout the meal, held it over her shoulder just so the smoke would waft over my table and not hers. When I asked her to put out the cigarette, she feigned ignorance of English, French, German and Italian (not to mention hand gestures -- she was Japanese). So completely rude, and the smoke practically ruined a 400 dollar meal.

[glenn]

The difference between smoking and other related bar activities is that the by-product necessarily affects others.

Why confine it to "bar activities"? To cite one of countless examples, the fumes from the car you drive probably has a more adverse affect than second hand tobacco.

Finally, there should be no debate about banning smoking in restaurants -- particularly on this board.  Smoke interferes with the taste of food like no other substance I know.

Well, there has been a legitimate discussion. You are free to eat at a place that suits your smoking preferences.

[tommy]

Why confine it to "bar activities"?  To cite one of countless examples, the fumes from the car you drive probably has a more adverse affect than second hand tobacco.

you can't drive your car through a bar or restaurant either.

[LaNiña]

The difference between smoking and other related bar activities is that the by-product necessarily affects others.

I hate tequila just about as much as I hate tobacco, but I don't have to taste and smell the tequila someone is drinking across the room.  Moreover, my liver won't get pickled by the secondary effects of someone else's drinking....

...Finally, there should be no debate about banning smoking in restaurants -- particularly on this board.  Smoke interferes with the taste of food like no other substance I know.

Perhaps we should have a law about the amount of perfume or cologne somebody can wear. The overuse of some of that stuff has ruined plenty of meals for me.

Your liver might not get pickled by the effects of someone else's drinking, but you might die in a car accident as a result of that person's drinking, or a woman you know might get harassed, or worse, by a man who has been drinking (sorry, but it's much more common in that direction), or maybe you'll have a brawl picked with you which will result in a broken nose, or worse, or perhaps you'll get to experience a street full of garbage and broken glass after the barcrawlers finish with it in the middle of the night, etc., etc.

It's absurd to continue to say that someone's drinking has no secondary effects on those around him/her.

[Bux]

It's absurd to continue to say that someone's drinking has no secondary effects on those around him/her.

No it's not. The drinker has to drive to cause an accident, He has to fight to cause you harm in a browl. All the smoker has to do is smoke. We all know that life as we know it is dependant upon some butterfly in the Amazon, but clearly the direct effect of drinking too much alcohol is not an automobile accident while the direct effect of smoking is msoke in the air all around the smoker. This is not an argument about the larger issue. It just disputes one point of your post.

[LaNiña]

Fair enough. But I find it quite unpleasant, most of the time, to be around excessively drunk people, of which there are plenty in many bars.

[cabrales]

Perhaps we should have a law about the amount of perfume or cologne somebody can wear.  The overuse of some of that stuff has ruined plenty of meals for me.

Nina -- Have you encountered an equally depressing problem from diners at adjacent tables -- that of B.O.?

[LaNiña]

Oh yes. Yuck.

[Miss J]

Why not just put the onus on the bars to get "smoking licenses?" That way it's highly likely that most bars will end up going smoke-free just to avoid the hassel, but a few places that REALLY want to offer a smoke-tolerant environment can do so.

[LaNiña]

That's a good idea. I've been in some of the better cigar stores in NYC and I'm always amazed at how clean and good the air is - those are some serious filtration systems at work, so it is possible.

[Wilfrid]

...other than being places where you get fat and drunk and generally do other things that you normally don't.

I don't?

[Matt Zito]

That's a good idea.  I've been in some of the better cigar stores in NYC and I'm always amazed at how clean and good the air is - those are some serious filtration systems at work, so it is possible.

Actually, there's a number of bars in NYC that already have that system in place. The few places I've actively noticed it have been in the upscale pub/neighborhood-type bars (two examples that come to mind, iirc, are Kevin St. John's in midtown and Chumley's). They have electrostatic collectors to draw the smoke out of the air, plus good air movement overall.

[Ron Johnson]

I'm throwing my vote in with Glenn and Adam Smith.   The government controls too much of my life already (hell I work six months a year for the government, just to pay my taxes).  

Thats one way to look at it. The other is that your boss pays you twice as much as you deserve because he knows that the government is going to take half. The market compensates for taxes.

I really don't understand the uproar about making smoking in public places illegal. The argument that its a bar and lots of other bad stuff is going doesn't make sense.

I used to know lots of guys who liked to get into bar fights, should they be pissed that assault is illegal? Well, I think they were, but should they have a legitimate beef? Of course not.

I am also baffled by the alleged secondary effects of drinking analogy. if you are in the middle of dinner and I sit at a table next you and drink a glass of wine, you may not ever notice me, but if I light up a cigarette chances are you will.

[LaNiña]

I"m not talking about a glass of wine. I'm talking about drunk people.

[Ron Johnson]

I"m not talking about a glass of wine.  I'm talking about drunk people.

Nina, that certainly makes more sense, but unfortunately it is impossible to make that kind of distinction with smoking.

In fact, if that is the analogy, then smoking should be banned because it is against the law for a bartender to serve someone who is drunk.

[Felonius]

The other is that your boss pays you twice as much as you deserve because he knows that the government is going to take half.  The market compensates for taxes.

Actually my employer pays more than that, because they also have to dole out payroll taxes on my behalf - another great "hidden tax" that the government has conjured up.

I, of course, think I deserve every penny my employer pays me - but I'm not exactly an unbiased observer so I'll leave that line of thought alone.

The market may "compensate" as you say, but that doesn't mean that all these taxes are an efficient distribution of wealth and productivity. Prior to my job in finance, I spent 8 years in the military. While I am proud to have served and believe in the integrity of our military, I can say first hand that the goverment is arguably the single worst custodian of funds/resources I have ever seen. Senators and congressmen spend our money like a teenager let loose with his parent's gold Amex card for the weekend. Ahh but those $750 toilet seats on the ship sure did feel nice........

[hollywood]

I'm kinda biased, but I think it's absolutely absurd to ban smoking in small places and bars.

top 5 or so...

Cigarettes & Coffee - Otis Redding

Tobacco Road - Blues Magoos

Smokin' 100s Alone - Bottle Rockets w/ the S. Plotzkie light show

Smokin' in the Boys Room - Motley Crue, Ramones

Cigarette Tricks - Guided by Voices

Tobacco's Last Stand - Guided by Voices

Smokin' Banana Peels - Dead Milkmen

Chew Tobacco Rag - Ray Campi

Smokin' in the United Nations - Wilson Pickett

If you listen closely to the end of "Swinging Party" by the Replacements, you can hear Paul flick his Bic.

[hollywood]

The President is concerned about our health and the cost of health care. He is concerned about homeland security. He is concerned about plaintiffs' lawyers and frivolous litigation. He frets about our economy and corporate responsibility. He wants to create jobs and avoid high unemployment. He and the USDA worry about the food we consume. The President has given up alcohol and would apparently be sympathetic to the goals of MADD. A solution is required.

Henceforth, all meals will be eaten out. Each of us will be assigned our own personal consumption assistant who will accompany us to all meals and nights on the town. Said valet will clear all food orders and veto high fat, high cholesterol choices, high sugar content desserts, excessive quantities, cut our food into small bite sized portions, monitor the number of chews per bite, and wipe our mouths when necessary. The assistant will monitor and limit alcohol and smoke intake, ceasing any such activities should they offend any other patrons or staff in our vicinity. At the conclusion of every repast, the assistant will use a government provided PDA to calculate the appropriate gratuity. This will be paid. No one will "walk the check."

Eating hours will be staggered so that each of us in turn can serve as the consumption assistant for another. No one will be the consumption assistant for any one serving as his consumption assistant. There will be no collusion and any violations will result in the death penalty.

We will have full employment and every one will be well fed with healthy meals.

William Jefferson Clinton will be an exception to these rules. Given his past eating transgressions, he will be assigned two (2) consumption monitors. That is all.

[Blondie]

top 5 or so...

Cigarettes and Chocolate Milk - Rufus Wainwright

[foodboy]

Seems to me that one of the main arguments here is that unhealthy work environments should not be legal.

Let's consider the following people who will be out of work if this logic prevails:

Anyone who experiences stress in the workplace

Boxers

Race car drivers

Restaurant critics (lots of unhealthy meals!)

Anyone who works irregular shifts (studies indicate this is unhealthy)

Commercial fishermen

Gas station attendants

Pizza delivery employees

Livery drivers

Stuntmen

etc, etc, etc

Notice, I didn't mention cops and firemen, since their work is critical to the safety of others.

The bottom line is I'm starting to wonder what country this is. Nobody forces anyone to go to a bar or work in one.

[tommy]

Perhaps we should have a law about the amount of perfume or cologne somebody can wear.

or how loudly they talk.