Smoke FREE NYC! how does everyone feel?

[Bux]

Hey, I don't know what the rule is for cigar bars.  Are they unaffected by this?

I believe existing cigar bars were grandfathered, but have some onerous regulations that may be phased in. There was an article in the Sunday NY Times about water pipe middle eastern cafe bars in Queens. There was an admission from city council members that they had been overlooked in the legislation. I trust they will be overlooked in the enforcement, but it's an example of a minority that is abused by the system. If only they had the money and clout of cigar smokers things might be different.

[macrosan]

Any health benefit to those who work in bars will be so small as to be unmeasurable.

Wilfrid,

Are you of the opinion that "second hand smoke" is not really causally related to non-smokers developing pulmonary disease?

I am asking in all seriousness, no sarcasm intended.

If your answer is in the affirmative, I would appreciate whatever details you can provide.

I can't give you refernces, Ron, but there has indeed been research into this. Trouble is that most of the research has been disseminated by the anti-smoking lobby, so it's not always reliable (the interpretation, that is, not the factual research).

From memory, the general consensus is that you would need to spend something like 2 hours locked in an unventilated room filled with cigarette smoke to get the same detrimental effect through toxic materials that a smoker gets from smoking one cigarette.

Of course breathing in air at all which contains the toxic materials in cigarette smoke is harmful; but no more or less harmful than walking in a New York street and inhaling the toxic exhaust fumes.

The dnagers from second-hand smoke are real, but I believe very much exaggerated by non-smokers and by lawyers representing clients who work in bars

[La Niña]

While I'm sure you're right, Martin - it doesn't change the fact that for me, smoke is a problem most of the time. My eyes burn, I cough, my food tastes different...

Still, I hate the *idea* of this law. I guess I wish that the law would ban smoking in restaurants, but that bars in which food isn't served would have the option (and would have to clearly indicate which type they were).

Interesting about the water pipes in Astoria...I do adore sharing a sheeshah with Ali after a meal there...for some reason, it doesn't bother me the way cigarette smoke does. Nor does cigar smoke (in moderate amounts)..

[Bond Girl]

As an avid cigar smoker, I am sadden by the law. I don't begrudge those who want a smoke free environemnt to eat in, but by the same token I don't want my right to enjoy a good cigar being infringed upon. I believe a good medium is when a restaurant have separate areas for smokers, but NYC has banned that as well. Looks like private clubs and cigar bars now will get a good amount of my business.

[La Niña]

I am an occasional cigar smoker, and my beau is a frequent cigar smoker. We go to the cigar bars - but now I'm concerned that they're going to be absolutely filled with cigarette smoke...

Bond Girl - which cigar bars do you like?

[Stone]

The problem with separate areas, of course, is that smoke doesn't respect the boundaries.

[dave88]

And now I always notice that my clothes smell like smoke when I put them on again the next morning.

Ummmmm...just out of curiousity...how many days in a row do you wear the same clothes?

That's what I was thinking

[NeroW]

There was an article in the Sunday NY Times about water pipe middle eastern cafe bars in Queens. There was an admission from city council members that they had been overlooked in the legislation. I trust they will be overlooked in the enforcement, but it's an example of a minority that is abused by the system. If only they had the money and clout of cigar smokers things might be different.

Word.

[mogsob]

A few points here:

1. Restaurants, legally, are public places. You would think everyone would have learned that from the civil rights era. The government has every right to regulate the conduct of that business. I'm sure you don't object to restaurants being subject to city, state, and federal health codes, do you?

2. Given the choice, 99% of restaurant owners and bars would permit smoking. Thus, without regulations, the choice for nonsmokers is either to endure second hand smoke or not to eat out. That is not a choice -- it is exclusionary conduct that the city has rightly condemned.

3. To be a cigar bar under the law, you must establish that a significant percentage of your income is derived from the sale of cigars. Few non-cigar bars will be able to make that showing.

This is a great law. One that was sorely overdue, and one that should be enacted everywhere without exception.

A question for the smokers who are opposed to the law -- what's so difficult about getting your fix at home before or after eating?

[La Niña]

Speaking for myself - I don't want to wait until I get home to have a cigar, when the urge strikes. What if I'm a half hour, or more, from home? And I know that lots of cigarette smokers like to have a cigarette right after a meal. It's not *only* a question of a "fix" - it's a question of the timing of the enjoyment of the smoke.

Edited February 26, 2003 by La Niña (log)

[Stone]

2.  Given the choice, 99% of restaurant owners and bars would permit smoking.  Thus, without regulations, the choice for nonsmokers is either to endure second hand smoke or not to eat out.  That is not a choice -- it is exclusionary conduct that the city has rightly condemned.

If this is true, and I don't doubt it, doesn't that mean that most of their customers want to be able to smoke in bars? Restaurants would start billing themselves voluntarily as smoke free, their business would increase to the detriment of other restaurants, and others would follow. If so, why is the state banning it? (I, like others above, don't buy the second-hand smoke argument.)

[macrosan]

Given the choice, 99% of restaurant owners and bars would permit smoking.

Now that is something I'd like to see you produce some evidence for.

[Basildog]

Given the choice, 99% of restaurant owners and bars would permit smoking.

Now that is something I'd like to see you produce some evidence for.

Well count me in the 1% then., and i smoke

[La Niña]

Stone, second-hand smoke isn't only about the health risks - it's about the unpleasantness of enduring the second-hand smoke in the moment that the smoking is taking place. I think that's part of what mogsob meant.'

We walked into an adorable, welcoming bar on Sunday night. I was immediately hit by a wave of putrid cigarette smoke, and we walked right out. And I was unhappy about not being able to stay and have a drink in there. It would have been so nice if there were a separate room for smokers (with proper ventilation and barriers, health risk to workers notwithstanding). I might even dash in there now and then for a cigar puff - but I'd be able to have somewhere else to linger that would be smoke-free...

[LESider]

I am an occasional cigar smoker, and my beau is a frequent cigar smoker.  We go to the cigar bars - but now I'm concerned that they're going to be absolutely filled with cigarette smoke...

Bond Girl - which cigar bars do you like?

The Macanudo Club on the Upper East Side is pretty nice place to smoke a stogie and have a cocktail

[La Niña]

Yeah I've been there many times. I like it, but it can be quite a scene sometimes...

[Ron Johnson]

I do adore sharing a sheeshah with Ali after a meal there...for some reason, it doesn't bother me the way cigarette smoke does.  Nor does cigar smoke (in moderate amounts)..

I also find cigar smoke, in moderate amounts and not blown directly in my face, less objectionable than cigarette smoke. It is more fragrant so its more tolerable in an ambient way.

Whats the diff between sheeshah and a hookah?

Hookah just the turkish word for it?

[La Niña]

Sheeshah is what the Egyptians call it. In usagae, means the same as hookah. I think sheeshah comes from hasheesh. Hooka refers to the pipe. Ali smokes honey-soaked tobacco. It's wonderful.

[Stone]

Stone, second-hand smoke isn't only about the health risks - it's about the unpleasantness of enduring the second-hand smoke in the moment that the smoking is taking place.  I think that's part of what mogsob meant.

I agree with you. But, to take a page from Plotz, if people really didn't want that, wouldn't the bar and restaurants owners follow their customers' desires?

You hate smoke; for the most part, I hate smoke; and many others hate smoke. Yet for some reason, restaurants don't think they would be better off by banning it.

[La Niña]

I think it's because the restaurant owners have had it both ways, when smoking has been allowed. Non-smokers have become conditioned to expect to have to tolerate it.

[=Mark]

Of course scientific evidence is often disregarded when the political process is in action. In the early 70s scientific studies funded by the Govt. determined that DDT was not toxic to mammals or birds, and that claims of it affecting the thickness of eggshels and was building up in the fatty tissues of mammals were also unfounded.

Result: EPA Chief ignored reports by it's own researchers and banned DDT.

Researchers in the early to mid 90s reviewing data concerning silicone breast implants determined that there was no evidence that silicone leaking from faulty implants was having measurable ill effects on womens health.

Result: EPA ignored research findings and banned further use of silicone implants. This ban was used by plaintiffs in civil cases that ultimately resulted in the bankruptcy of 2 major pharmaceutical firms.

The research into the effects of secondhand smoke is likewise inconclusive, but did not stop the political juggernaught. It is like polititians claiming to be anti-drug or anti-crime, how is anyone going to try to oppose them without appearing to be pro-drug or pro-crime? So Bloomburg is pro-health, how does anyone oppose that without looking bad?

I am glad about the ban, however. A recent trip to McSoreleys was initially tainted by having to endure some yuppie suits skanky cigar until we were able to move to our favorite table under the payphone next to the window.

[tommy]

And now I always notice that my clothes smell like smoke when I put them on again the next morning.

Ummmmm...just out of curiousity...how many days in a row do you wear the same clothes?

That's what I was thinking

i don't know many people who send their suits to the dry cleaner after wearing them just once. although men tend to rotate suits over a few days.

jackets and outerwear, however, can quite possibly be worn 2 days in a row. shocker?

[ngatti]

i don't know many people who send their suits to the dry cleaner after wearing them just once.  although men tend to rotate suits over a few days.

jackets and outerwear, however, can quite possibly be worn 2 days in a row.  shocker? 

Sure, Like you wear suits.

Yeah...riiight.

Nick

[Ron Johnson]

i don't know many people who send their suits to the dry cleaner after wearing them just once.  although men tend to rotate suits over a few days.

jackets and outerwear, however, can quite possibly be worn 2 days in a row.  shocker? 

No kidding, if I sent my suits to the cleaners after just one wearing, my dry cleaning bill would be! . . ., well I guess it would be higher.

But I would say suits are the only part of the man's wardrobe that can be worn more than once without a trip to the cleaners.\

and yes, I may wear the same overcoat two days in a row in the winter, and its not good if the thing reeks of smoke when I put it on in the morning.

[Wilfrid]

Mark's analysis is right. It was easier to push this regulation through on health grounds, because if it's just a debate about personal preference, then in bars, at least, the majority might well have preferred smoking.