New at Reason

|11.16.05 @ 8:25AM|#

I don't smoke...tobacco.. and pretty much hate the smell of it (menthols especially).

I live in an apartment building, and the people below me smoke out on their deck. If my windows and door out to my deck are open, sometimes the smoke makes its way into my unit.

So it will only be a matter of time that smoking will be banned in apartment buildings.. maybe even condos.

And on another point.. liberals are pushing for tobacco bans, but at the same time supporting marijuana legalization. Assuming that mj gets decriminalized, how the fuck is anyone going to be able to smoke it?

Ed|11.16.05 @ 9:02AM|#

Agree with Senor Nice Guy except the part about not smoking. Only a matter of time before no-smoking clauses start showing up in apartment leases and condo commando rulings. And when it does, I'll light up my biggest, most fragrant Dominican, pour a Scotch (neat), go out on my patio and wait for the Stormtroopers to arrive.

|11.16.05 @ 9:21AM|#

Last night the Hennepin County (Minnesota) council held a meeting to review it's outright ban on smoking in bars and resteraunts. They had made the claim that it would actually help these businesses. Seventy of them have closed in the six months it's been in place.

|11.16.05 @ 9:22AM|#

Is that greek spam?

|11.16.05 @ 9:51AM|#

The average lifespan of a restaurant is what, 12 months? The fact that 70 have closed in a 6 month span tells us exactly nothing, unless we know how many there are total, how many opened, blah, blah, blah.

|11.16.05 @ 9:54AM|#

You know, I'm coming to the conclusion that discrimination is human nature. It's sad, but probably true. Antismoking campaigns give these folks something to hitch their wagon to. And I wonder -- seeing how this behavior is encouraged, and in fact praised -- where that leaves gay or fat people. If we can openly discriminate against the smoker and the fattie, we send a message that it is ok to continue discriminating against homosexuals. Of course, I may have just created a strawman: the constitutional amendments we've seen the past four years suggest that no one needs any encouragement to discriminate against gay people.

|11.16.05 @ 9:54AM|#

You know, I'm coming to the conclusion that discrimination is human nature. It's sad, but probably true. Antismoking campaigns give these folks something to hitch their wagon to. And I wonder -- seeing how this behavior is encouraged, and in fact praised -- where that leaves gay or fat people. If we can openly discriminate against the smoker and the fattie, we send a message that it is ok to continue discriminating against homosexuals. Of course, I may have just created a strawman: the constitutional amendments we've seen the past four years suggest that no one needs any encouragement to discriminate against gay people.

|11.16.05 @ 9:57AM|#

Having spoken to several owners I can tell you that their revenue is off by over 50% in a business with very tight margins. Having idiot, nanny politicians declare it illegal to smoke in a bar is killing them. But, hey, who cares? They have the moral high-ground, right?

|11.16.05 @ 10:13AM|#

Only a matter of time before no-smoking clauses start showing up in apartment leases and condo commando rulings.

So what? Isn't the libertarian solution not to sign a lease or buy a condo where such clauses exist? Surely if there's a demand for leases or covenants that allow smoking, the market will provide them.

Meanwhile, Mr. NG describes a real problem that smokers rarely seem to care much about: The right to smoke in your apartment does not include the right to smoke in my apartment, and yet, gee, my goddamned apartment smells like smoke. So forgive me if this is one of those topics I can't get too worked up about.

dhex|11.16.05 @ 10:21AM|#

i have a neighbor who insists on cooking fish. i fucking hate fish. i hate the way they smell. i hate the south street seaport. i don't even like watching the poseidon adventure.

|11.16.05 @ 10:24AM|#

FWIW, I have given up on this issue. I concede defeat, and offer my congratulations to those people who have promoted smoking bans and high taxes on tobacco. I am now living on the assumption that, eventually, smoking will be illegal or so highly restricted that it may as well be. And, to be fair, we will probably be better off as a society without the noxious weed. It can be very hard to defend something so deadly as tobacco, even on personal liberty and property rights grounds.

But, while I can sympathize with the desire to eliminate smoking from restaurants--even smokers don't usually like to breathe smoke while eating--I've always thought it very strange to oppose smoking in bars. I would humbly submit that alcohol is far more dangerous than tobacco, if for no other reason than that it impairs judgment. A person goes to a bar to take a legal, yet highly dangerous, drug. Really, that's what bars are for: a place to take drugs in the company of other people taking drugs. So why object to someone taking another drug (nicotine) while there?

Here's a weird take on the matter: smokers are doing non-smokers a favor by lighting up in bars because, by making the environment somewhat less pleasant, they are discouraging non-smokers from going to bars (and thus, from taking drugs).

Ah well, as I said, I've given up. I no longer smoke anyway, so the bans don't directly impact me any more. So, congrats, anti-smoking activists! You will soon win everywhere, I believe. May I suggest that, after your total victory, you join me in my efforts to make booze as socially unacceptable as smoke? Nothing ruins a nice evening at the bar like the vile smell of alcohol....

|11.16.05 @ 10:29AM|#

I miss my opportunity to become filthy rich bootlegging booze druing Prohibition by being born about 80 years too late. I refuse to miss my chance when Tobacco Prohibition rolls around. I plan to start stockpiling cartons of smokes ASAP.

|11.16.05 @ 10:31AM|#

Ian

Thinking of opening a "smoke-easy"?

|11.16.05 @ 10:31AM|#

No joke here: Aren't there terrorist groups that smuggle untaxed cigarettes?

I look forward to "Smoke Easies" run by Al Qaeda: Clubs where you can smoke indoors despite all the bans.

|11.16.05 @ 10:33AM|#

thoreau,

stop stealing my ideas!

|11.16.05 @ 10:33AM|#

JMoore beat me to the punch.

|11.16.05 @ 10:36AM|#

interesting we both thought of that

actually, I have heard some totally unsubstantiated rumors that some such clubs are already popping up in New York, although I have yet to see one myself

|11.16.05 @ 10:36AM|#

I always have to wonder why state governments are so eager to prevent the use of something they can tax outrageously.

|11.16.05 @ 10:38AM|#

HA a smoke easy ...there would be FBI holding press conferences to smash piles of negative ion generators

Wintermute|11.16.05 @ 10:41AM|#

I already sent that article to my oldest friend, the TN state senator who pushes anti-smoking legislation. It won't dissuade him at all, though. I spoke to this phenomenon in a previous thread. It's one of those things that makes me relieved I will not live forever.

|11.16.05 @ 10:42AM|#

No joke here: Aren't there terrorist groups that smuggle untaxed cigarettes?

Yes, there are.

But don't worry, anti-smoking activists: there's no way your laws will ever come back to bite you in the ass! The "right" to not smell your neighbor's cigarette smoke will never, ever morph into your neighbor's "right" to not smell your perfume or what you're cooking! No, no, no. . .once the anti-smokers get everything on their wish lists they'll give up, go home and stop trying to force their will on others. Honest. Really.

dhex|11.16.05 @ 10:42AM|#

many bars in brooklyn - after midnight or so on the weekends - don't pay attention to that whole smoking ban thing.

|11.16.05 @ 10:48AM|#

I was, of course, being a smart-ass (or dumb-ass) in my initial comment about banning alcohol. And I really have pretty much given up on opposing smoking bans.

But, seriously, am I the only one who thinks it a bit strange that bans in bars are essentially trying to make the experience of using a far more dangerous drug more enjoyable?

Let me clarify that I am anti-prohibition all around, but if I were going to target one drug, it would have to be alcohol. Is it simply because of the disaster of the 1920's that the drink gets a pass?

|11.16.05 @ 10:49AM|#

Don't forget to put a towel under the door and have pleanty of air freshener on hand.

|11.16.05 @ 10:50AM|#

Many of the people I know who smoke, even if it's just in social situations, voted for the Washington State ban to help them resist the temptation to light up. "Stop me before I smoke again."

This is only a problem for them in bars and music clubs, since as Jacob pointed out you can always sit at the bar of a restaurant if you want to avoid cigarette smoke. Yet they also love and crave the unique ambience of a bar or tavern which restaurant bars lack, largely because you can smoke in them!

This law is sure to lead to underground hangouts where people can drink and smoke in a social situation. Imagine illegal clubs being set up for people to indulge in LEGAL drugs!

It truly amazes me how almost everyone I know will gladly vote in favor of limiting their own choices.

|11.16.05 @ 10:51AM|#

Jennifer:

Yep. Sandy made a good point last Saturday at our smokeless t-fest.. it's great for us non-smokers to spend an evening out and not smell like a stale ashtray when we get home.. but ultimately, what are we going to pay for it? These fucking nannies will never, ever stop.

|11.16.05 @ 10:55AM|#

Jennifer, don't you not believe in slippery-slope arguments?

Also, is there some purpose in mischaracterizing "not wanting my apartment filled with smoke and my clothes and furniture to be laden with it" to "having the right not to smell it?"

|11.16.05 @ 10:58AM|#

is there some purpose in mischaracterizing "not wanting my apartment filled with smoke and my clothes and furniture to be laden with it" to "having the right not to smell it?"

Yes, there is: some places in the US have already said that the person in Apartment A has the right to not smell the faint smoke wafting out of Apartment B. Remember the H&R post from a few weeks/months back--the smokers evicted from their apartment because a bit of their smoke wafted through the faulty ventilation system and entered their neighbor's apartment?

|11.16.05 @ 10:59AM|#

PB:

Good to see you on the forum. Big fan of your strips, yada yada yada..

I also think people are very willing to buy into collective guilt. From talking with some smokers, they act like they're nailing Jesus on the cross with their filthy habit. Give me a break.

|11.16.05 @ 11:09AM|#

Note, people: originally the anti-smoke laws were based on health reasons (dubious ones, but nonetheless "health" was the excuse). Now it's changes from "health hazard" to "eeew, I don't like the way the smoke smells." So seriously--what legal barrier is there to prevent local governments from passing laws mandating that apartment dwellers may not cook with pungent spices? (I've made some Indian and Thai recipes whose spicy smells lingered in the air far longer than any burning cigarette scent could.) But that's okay, of course, because the Constitution doesn't give people the right to cook spicy food, huh? And my right to not smell curry powder and ground cumin is more important than your right to eat something with any particular flavor, I suppose.

Or maybe it's, "Your right to spicy food ends at the tip of my nose?"

|11.16.05 @ 11:14AM|#

Jennifer, it's funny you should mention curry. A few years ago, The Daily Show, America's finest broadcast journalists, did a report on really hot curry and made it look like it was an illicit drug.

|11.16.05 @ 11:16AM|#

Seperate but equal facilities for smokers and nonsmokers!

Seriously though, isn't freedom of contract a pretty important tennant of libertariansm? The proprietor of the apartment could simply terminate the contract of a renter who is causing problems for other renters through foul odors coming from their domicile, not unlike noise complaints etc. It gets a bit stickier in leases and more specifically condos, where you actually own the property. Is there a good solution (i.e. excluding lawmakers) to smokers in condos causing problems for other people around them, other than simply offering seperate sections of units for smokers and nonsmokers?

|11.16.05 @ 11:16AM|#

Illicit drugs are far less addictive than my curried soup.

|11.16.05 @ 11:18AM|#

Yes, there is: some places in the US have already said that the person in Apartment A has the right to not smell the faint smoke wafting out of Apartment B.

Ah -- got it. You're not actually talking about anything I was talking about. Noted, and moving on.

Still, since the Slippery Slope is nothing more than a logical fallacy, we have nothing to worry about.

|11.16.05 @ 11:20AM|#

The proprietor of the apartment could simply terminate the contract of a renter who is causing problems for other renters through foul odors coming from their domicile, not unlike noise complaints etc

Problem is, "foul odor" becomes "any odor." "Excessive noise" becomes "any noise." Smell, sight, sound--basically the law is evlving to say that these three senses may not in any way be stimulated by a person in another dwelling.

And apartment dwellers will not be able to cook anything except boiled pasta with melted butter sauce.

|11.16.05 @ 11:20AM|#

On 'smoke-easies': While I certainly can't (and wouldn't if I could) give specifics, I've heard from... people... that there are plenty of bars in Los Angeles where there are still ashtrays on the tables. And clearly posted 'no-smoking' signs, of course.

On Washington: 25 feet? Hah, fuck you WA. I will continue to smoke as I walk down the street. You can fucking prosecute.

|11.16.05 @ 11:21AM|#

There's a smoking lounge in Akihabara, Tokyo. The windows are tinted green, which doesn't make it look inviting. Of course, they have ashtrays by the urinals in parts of Japan.

|11.16.05 @ 11:23AM|#

jotun

If I own a house with a septic system which leaks into my neighbor's yard, I am responsible for (1) damage done and (2) preveting future damage. Having a septic system, however, is perfectly legal.

Why not apply the same principle to smoking in condos? If my smoke interfers with another condo owner's enjoyment of his property by leaking into his ventilation system, then it is up to me to pay to fix the ventilation and/or otherwise compensate him.

Although, this line of thinking could lead to a hell of a lot of litigation.

|11.16.05 @ 11:26AM|#

Jennifer,

At which point the proprietor must decide between the complaintant and the "perpetrator." If it turns out that the complaintant is being completely unreasonable, he can either be ignored or himself asked to leave if he causes too many problems. Simple enough. If odors/noises/etc become too much of a problem for consumers of housing, suppliers will meet their needs with special contracts to meet their needs. Seems like a victory for the market in the making with no lawms needed.

|11.16.05 @ 11:26AM|#

You're not actually talking about anything I was talking about.

Phil, how else am I to interpret this statement of yours: The right to smoke in your apartment does not include the right to smoke in my apartment, and yet, gee, my goddamned apartment smells like smoke.

Now, if you're talking about a situation where I've got fans set up so that almost every bit of particulate matter from a cigarette burning in my apartment somehow makes its way into yours, and your room has air that's blue from smoke, you certainly have cause for complaint.

But what about a hot summer day when we both have our windows open, and you can detect the smell of my smoke when the wind is just right?

Also, what do we do about sound on that hot day? I agree I should not play my music so loud that you can't hear your own TV or stereo, but suppose you are in the mood for absolute, complete quiet? Does this mean I should be legally required to wear headphones instead?

Where do you draw the line between "We shouldn't bother each other" and "Nonetheless, if we're in proximity we will on some level have to be aware of the other's existence?"

|11.16.05 @ 11:27AM|#

Illicit drugs are far less addictive than my curried soup.

I need to find a reason to travel to CT now...

|11.16.05 @ 11:27AM|#

Although, this line of thinking could lead to a hell of a lot of litigation.

I'd rather have that than spelled-out laws prohibiting x y z.

|11.16.05 @ 11:29AM|#

preveting = preventing

And Jennifer makes a good point. Where do we draw the line on what smells bad? It's getting bad in other areas besides smoking, too. Notice they don't serve peanuts on airplanes any more? I was on one flight where they asked us not to open any peanuts if we had our own because some wussy claimed to have an super-severe allergy. (I opened mine anyway, of course, and heard no complaints.) Most people will agree that smoke stinks, but what's next? Is it OK to pass gas in my apartment, or do I need to worry that the smell might leak into the common areas?

|11.16.05 @ 11:38AM|#

I was on one flight where they asked us not to open any peanuts if we had our own because some wussy claimed to have an super-severe allergy. (I opened mine anyway, of course, and heard no complaints.)

In a parallel universe somewhere it was me on that flight, not JMoore. My parallel-universe self didn't have any peanuts, but she lied and told No-Peanut Guy: "Oops! I already opened a can of peanuts and spread them throughout the cabin!" And No-Peanut Guy had such a bad allergic reaction that it proved fatal.

My parallel-universe self didn't feel bad about this at all. She's a lot bitchier than I am.

|11.16.05 @ 11:39AM|#

Well it appears they're about to pass a total ban on smoking indoors in Chicago.

Tried writing to my Alderman, but then learned he's one of the jerkweeds pushing the damn thing.

So a bunch of us are thinking about staging a smoke-in at city hall...

|11.16.05 @ 11:45AM|#

linguist

There's one proposed for New Jersey, too. I endured the taunts of my snotty Manhattanite friends to move across the Hudson because, for all its many many many flaws, at least Jersey City offered lower sales taxes, bars with smoke, and no city income tax. Now, one of Jersey's few charms is threatened.

Oh well, at least there's always Moscow.

Jennifer, I worship your parallel universe self.

|11.16.05 @ 11:46AM|#

So a bunch of us are thinking about staging a smoke-in at city hall...

I don't even smoke but I'd light up (figuratively!) in sympathy for you guys :)

|11.16.05 @ 11:46AM|#

Jennifer, what's in your curry soup?

|11.16.05 @ 11:48AM|#

JMoore,

Say it ain't so! Not NJ too! (I'm actually going to Cape May this weekend...don't ask!)

Moscow...or Mexico City...or Vegaas. Vegas may be the last bastion of smoking in the U.S.

Best part about the Chicago ban is they're not even trying to hide their hypocrisy. On the same day of the initial ban hearings, they announced a plan to hike cig taxes $.60 to balance the city budget. The reasoning? "Well the state balances the budget on cigarette taxes, so why shouldn't the city?"

I simply have no response to this logic.

|11.16.05 @ 11:51AM|#

yep, even NJ. Proposed, not yet passed. But it's only a matter of time. Funny, I no longer smoke, but bars just smell funny without smoke. It's not right, somehow...

|11.16.05 @ 11:51AM|#

Phil, how else am I to interpret this statement of yours: The right to smoke in your apartment does not include the right to smoke in my apartment, and yet, gee, my goddamned apartment smells like smoke.

Well, Jennifer, you have two options when confronted with that sentence, and because I'm the nice guy I am, I'll outline them for you:

1. Assume that I meant some variation of, "Oh no! I smell a whiff of smoke 15 feet away! Waaaaaaaaah!", then argue as if that's what I said, or

2. Ask me to illuminate, and I will.

You chose . . . poorly.

If we're going to discuss it further, though, can we decide if this is a day where slippery slopes don't exist, or one where not only do they exist, they're inevitable?

Many of these problems could be avoided altogether if people would re-learn some effing manners, and realize they don't live in the college dorms anymore. You want to smoke in your apartment? Great! You want to chain smoke on your patio for hours a day, such that furniture in my apartment that I bought new now smells like smoke? Not great! You want to listen to some party music? Great! You want to listen to it until 2am, at a volume where my floor is vibrating? Not great! (Actually, nobody in an apartment should ever listen to music at a volume where their neighbor's floor/wall is vibrating. Period.)

|11.16.05 @ 12:00PM|#

Isn't the libertarian solution not to sign a lease or buy a condo where such clauses exist? Surely if there's a demand for leases or covenants that allow smoking, the market will provide them.

Surely that situation would only be a brief interlude before smoking is banned in your own home, period.

So why object to someone taking another drug (nicotine) while there?

Because it was never, ever about the drug. It's only ever been about the smell.

|11.16.05 @ 12:07PM|#

Well it appears they're about to pass a total ban on smoking indoors in Chicago.

I spoke too soon - I guess we're just going to skip over any situation involving smoking/nonsmoking housing and go straight to outright bans. What a surprise.

|11.16.05 @ 12:26PM|#

liberals are pushing for tobacco bans, but at the same time supporting marijuana legalization.

1985: At parties my friends would sneak out to toke up a joint, then return and light up their Marlboro's.

2010: At parties my friends would sneak out to light up their Marlboro's, then return and toke up a joint.

|11.16.05 @ 12:29PM|#

You can smoke in some of the local Bronx bars too.

It seems to me that if the bartender smokes than smoking is OK and if not then not.

|11.16.05 @ 12:32PM|#

America has become a country full of people that need to learn to mind their own fucking business.

America the Offendable, indeed.

|11.16.05 @ 12:39PM|#

"Empty the cash drawer and make it snappy.
I have a cigar and I know how to use it!"

|11.16.05 @ 12:55PM|#

Phil--

You want to smoke in your apartment? Great! You want to chain smoke on your patio for hours a day, such that furniture in my apartment that I bought new now smells like smoke? Not great! You want to listen to some party music? Great! You want to listen to it until 2am, at a volume where my floor is vibrating? Not great! (Actually, nobody in an apartment should ever listen to music at a volume where their neighbor's floor/wall is vibrating. Period.)

Agreed; problem is, the laws that are getting passed tend to surpass these common-sense boundaries and go toward ridiculous absolutes. No smoking in your apartment if any smoke or scent indication escapes the air inside of it. And as JMoore pointed out, it's spreading beyond cigarette smoke to other "health hazards" too, like peanuts or food cooked in peanut oil.

I'm not giving up my peanutty Thai food.

Thoreau--
Right now the curry/bean soup is a work-in-progress; I've made it about seven times and each one was better than the previous, but while I've got it quite good it's still missing a certain elusive something that I have not yet pinned down.

|11.16.05 @ 12:57PM|#

yep, even NJ.

I would think cigarette smoke would help make the whole state of New Jersey smell better.

Next up, fines for taking a really smelly shit. (Probably after eating curried soup.)

|11.16.05 @ 1:02PM|#

Oh, yeah: beans or yellow split peas, cooked in a Crock-Pot until softened, add cooked spiced ham cubes, chicken bouillon cubes, curry powder, ground cumin, ground black, white and red pepper, italian seasoning and, for next time I'm thinking some turmeric, coriander and cardamom. Puree to preferred consistency.

I take careful notes for when I get the spices just right.

|11.16.05 @ 1:03PM|#

Whoops! I completely forgot about the garlic and onion you're supposed to add to the soup. Those two are non-negotiable.

|11.16.05 @ 1:21PM|#

Jennifer:

What about the coconut milk?

|11.16.05 @ 1:30PM|#

Mr. Nice Guy--

I hadn't tried that. But would that add richness or sweetness? I want to avoid the latter.

|11.16.05 @ 1:54PM|#

isildur,
"On Washington: 25 feet? Hah, fuck you WA. I will continue to smoke as I walk down the street. You can fucking prosecute."

I plan on having 911 on speed-dial in my cell phone. Every time I see someone smoking within 25' of a doorway (even if they're just passing by), I'm callin' the cops! If everyone did this, imagine the fun of the extra 2000 calls per day to the emergancy system. Of course, the smoker would be long gone by the time the cops showed up (like that would happen), but hey, we all have to do our part to uphold the law...

|11.16.05 @ 2:02PM|#

Not quite sure. I made red curry recently and the recipe called for about half a can of coconut milk. I don't remember it being particularly sweet, though you do get a nuance of coconut.

And man, that curry, along with IC.. it was goooooooood!

|11.16.05 @ 2:04PM|#

WSDave:

Brilliant, dude! And it would be cool if you coughed between words when you call 911, or talk through one of those throat-mike things..

|11.16.05 @ 3:00PM|#

Jacob Sullum usually get it right in his anti-anti-somking articles. But this one here -

"People who object to secondhand smoke are much more likely to be worried about the immediate smell and discomfort. But they feel that if they pretend to believe the smoke is not only bothering them but might be killing them, their complaint becomes a legally enforceable right."

Really ? So I should be all macho & shit and not complain if some idiot smoker gets the designer jacket all smelly ? I only have a case if i'm dying of asphyxiation or something ? I don't think so. And NO i don't any veneer of nobility think to defend my innocent clothes, thank you.

A little experiment here - what if someone got drunk at a nice restaurant and acted obnoxious without actually falling into tables & all the rest of it. I suspect most people here who are complaining about "ooh a little discomfort" would want his ass tossed.

That said, certainly this ban is taking things too far.

|11.16.05 @ 3:35PM|#

After some time to think, I think the absolute limit of legislative power in this arena should be to make proprieters post whether or not their place of business allows smoking, and if so, what parts of the premesis its allowed in. Don't want your designer jacket smelling like an ashtray? Don't go to places that will obviously smell like ashtrays.

|11.16.05 @ 3:59PM|#

SM:
That's the difference between owner-enforced and state-enforced bans.

I don't mind individual bars banning smoking (probably I wouldn't like the people going to these places anyway, they wear designer clothes and can't appreciate the fine smell of tobacco), but ALL bars banning smoking is a totally different thing.

As to your "thought experiment", people don't go to restaurants with an explicit will to act obnoxiously, they do go to bars to drink and smoke though.

|11.16.05 @ 4:02PM|#

"Don't want your designer jacket smelling like an ashtray? Don't go to places that will obviously smell like ashtrays."

Fair enough. But don't pretend it's just "oooooh the pansy-ass pansy is terribly distressed coz his jacket picked up a teensy weensy smell from someone smoking 20 feet away, you have no case", like some people have been doing. It's easy to be cavalier about stfuff that discomfits OTHER people.
I mean, where's the problem with this ban ? Just talk a short walk for around 50 feet away from the bar, smoke & come back to resume the terrific conversation. I see no problem. Waah waah i don't want to walk 25 feet. Anyone buying the argument ?

|11.16.05 @ 4:31PM|#

"As to your "thought experiment", people don't go to restaurants with an explicit will to act obnoxiously, they do go to bars to drink and smoke though."

First off - I don't agree with the ban. Second - I do go to smoking bars - this being the San Francisco Bay area that means the barkeep tolerates smoking - just wear expendable clothes & the smell doesn't matter after several drinks anyway.

With that behind, people go to restaurants to eat & socialize etc. People go to bars to drink & socialize etc. Actually, they go to these places for all kinds of reasons. In other words, smoking isn't the raison d'etre & is not the only consideration. So let's not pretend that a smokers' discomfiture is somehow logically beyond that of anyone else.

|11.16.05 @ 4:37PM|#

So let's not pretend that a smokers' discomfiture is somehow logically beyond that of anyone else.

Well then let's not pretend that smokers don't also have the smell of smoke in their clothes and have to deal with that. Similarly, sometimes they go out for an Indian curry and get THAT smell in their clothes.

Funny thing though, regular dry cleaning seems to ameliorate both problems.

|11.16.05 @ 4:45PM|#

Yeah, funny. Imagine the ignominy of paying for the mess you made. Any smokers willing to pick up the dry cleaning tab for non-smokers ?

|11.16.05 @ 5:01PM|#

SM:
I would agree with the "go outside and come back" logic for restaurants but not bars (the distinction seems to not be well understood sometimes).
In any case, the whole issue is choice: as long as there are enough people who don't want to take that trip outside and/or have smoking as a central part of their enjoyment routine, there should be enough bars to accommodate them.

All attempts to guide people as to what they should be doing for fun have not worked before and will not work in the future.

Hakluyt|11.16.05 @ 7:50PM|#

WSDave,

Heh. :)

_______________________________

From the perspective of a rule utilitarian, what are the merits of a smoking ban? I'll have to think about it.

|11.16.05 @ 9:14PM|#

"In any case, the whole issue is choice: as long as there are enough people who don't want to take that trip outside and/or have smoking as a central part of their enjoyment routine, there should be enough bars to accommodate them."

Certainly. BTW, I was positing the 50 ft walk as an argument only - i don't think it's fair to smokers.
Anyway, an anecdote, i was once in a smoking bar in Portland and someone brought up the issue of smoking bans, California etc, etc. The consensus was "it's coming & soon".

Hakluyt|11.17.05 @ 8:20AM|#

SM,

I wonder how they deal with cigar bars.

|11.17.05 @ 11:12AM|#

Who can I sue to get the stench of the homeless out of my clothes after my trip on the metro?

Can we make a law against stinking up commuter trains? I rather smell El Cubano Stinko than smelly unwashed and pissed on human.

|11.17.05 @ 12:01PM|#

Hakluyt,

Wear designer smoking jackets :-)
I've seen a couple of cigar bars in San Francisco though i've not been in one. Got the impression that they need special permits.

|11.17.05 @ 12:57PM|#

I wonder how they deal with cigar bars.

The ban here in Washington? The same way as hookah bars: shut 'em down.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/248479_nsecondary16.html

Matias Valenzuela, spokesman for Public Health --Seattle & King County, said the initiative has no exemptions for hookah bars, so they will be prohibited.

The qoute I like is by the woman who runs the hookah bar, but voted for the ban:

"A friend of mine called me a hypocrite last night," she said. "But I think it's different than smoking in a bar. It's cultural."

Reason.com

New at Reason

Ed|11.16.05 @ 9:02AM|#

dhex|11.16.05 @ 10:21AM|#

Wintermute|11.16.05 @ 10:41AM|#

dhex|11.16.05 @ 10:42AM|#

Hakluyt|11.16.05 @ 7:50PM|#

Hakluyt|11.17.05 @ 8:20AM|#

Leave a Comment

Most Popular Stories

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

Editorial & Production Offices: