[X]
Feedburner count

1
Helpful
Votes

Restaurants with bars Informative - Smoking in restaurants

Review by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-12
EVERYWHERE -- I have seen several rants on this site about smoking in restaurants.

First of all, smoking should NOT be allowed in restaurants that do not have bars (i.e.: Cracker Barrel, Shoney's, Denny's, any fast food place). These should be where "families" go........and taking a quote from another post, kids with no supervision running around restaurants are far more annoying than anyone smoking.

Second, restaurants that sell alcoholic drinks should have a smoking section as well as a non smoking section. Most bar sections of restaurants where I live do allow smoking while the other 75% of the restaurant is non smoking. Most have a huge ventilation system in the bar and the most anyone can actually smell upon arrival is the spices of the food being prepared.

If there is ONE (1) person that can provide factual proof that anyone has died from second hand cigarette smoke I'd like to see it. Or, at least provide factual proof that someone had cancer that was caused by nothing but second hand cigarette smoke (and I mean a person that has never been around any type of automobile, factory, or anything BUT second hand cigarette smoke during the course of their entire life).

The fact of the matter is, several years ago, SOMEBODY with power in this country simply didn't like cigarette smoke and that got the ball rolling. They can come up with excuses for things like factories and automobiles because THOSE things make make a lot of non smokers' lives easier.

If America is so obsessed with getting rid of smoking, why not just stop all manufacturing of cigarettes and cigars? Oh, wait, the economy might collapse if we did that........

Non smokers should ask themselves this question...
Would I feel better in an enclosed garage with my car running or with a person smoking?

Another FACT is that the vast majority of Americans will believe ANYTHING told to them by the media. I have seen this first hand. I used to work in a gourmet type food store that sold quite a few "organic" products. All of a sudden one day people by the hundreds were asking for "rice pasta" (an item we carried but rarely sold). I was curious so I asked a customer if rice pasta actually tasted that good.......she replied, "I have never tried it but Oprah had a person on her show who informed "us" it was very healthy"............ironically, she purchased about 10 packs of the stuff.

I realize that has nothing to do with smoking in restaurants but it was just an example of how the TV leads Americans around by the nose.

One other FACT I need to add........you can drink 75 glasses of water per day (oh, I'm sorry, BOTTLES of water per day), eat nothing but grass and hay and run 10 miles a day and you will one day still die..........but my hats off to you if you complain about smoking and run or walk to work each day as opposed to driving......automobiles pollute too ya know......

I'm ready for the wise cracks now.......
Comments:36 Replies - Latest reply on 2006-05-19
Posted by Slimjim on 2006-05-12:
Posts on smoking usually do get good debates going. I agree with a policy of smoking only in restaurants with bars and in a smoking section. That way those who smoke and those who don't know exactly where they should patronize.
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-12:
I agree too slimjim.............that way, there could basically be nothing for non smokers to complain about. If they choose to enter a rastaurant with a bar, there would be doing so with first hand knowledge of smoking being allowed..........and if they still complained, it would be a complaint of a self choice THEY made, not a smoker choosing for them :)
Posted by Sparticus on 2006-05-12:
I think your comparison to auto emissions is right on. They don't allow cars to run in a enclosed room for a reason, the emissions in high density with limited ventilation are harmful. Same should be true for smoking. In an enclosed public room it should not be allowed. Your post reminds me of those cigarette executives commercials from the 1950's and 60's. They claimed smoking was actually healthy... Well we all know how right they were about that. One last story... I was in the Miami airport a few months back, saw the funniest thing I have seen in a while. They had a designated "smoking" area. It was a glassed-walled room in the middle of the atrium/waiting area. It had plants and trees and benches in it and the sun shined down into the room to light it up like an aquarium. The smokers huddled in the corners with the hot sun beating on them while folks walking by the room would stop and point and laugh like they were given a free show to watch the smokers all shamefully puffing away on a stick they will kill them someday. People were actually bringing their lunch to nearbye tables so they could watch the smokers while they ate.... It was quite entertaining.... For the non-smokers at least...=)
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-12:
"Your post reminds me of those cigarette executives commercials from the 1950's and 60's. They claimed smoking was actually healthy... Well we all know how right they were about that."

I never claimed cigarette smoking was healthy. The FACT of the matter is that if a restaurant with a bar allows smoking, YOU as a non smoker don't have a right to complain if said restaurant provides a non smoking section........and don't even go on about smoke "drifting over" because I know for a FACT that all chain restaurants are REQUIRED to have a ventilation system in their bar area (at least where I live) and there is always the threat of a careless cook burning food and putting smoke in the air. I mean, what's the difference between breathing smoke from burnt meat and smoke from burnt tobacco?

You story of the Miami airport was fun to read.......if people find smokers so hilarious, they must have never been exposed to real comedy...like the fact that non smokers die everyday.

Your "enclosed space" theory was interesting as well........but you left out a FACT so I will insert it here: If a person stood in an enclosed garage with a car running, they would eventually die from the fumes........if the same person stood in an enclosed garage with a person smoking a carton of cigarettes, they wouldn't die from the second hand smoke. That's a FACT.

nice try though.........
Posted by Sparticus on 2006-05-12:
Yes, you are right again. If I was to spend 3 hours in a garage with a smoker puffing through a carton I would not die. I would however have breathing problems and coughing fits due to my asthma being affected by the exposure to the smoke in the air. I couldn't make it 3 hours... I would leave after 5 minutes. Just an interesting aside.... Why do you see so many cigarette butts littered around the country? I must have missed the passing of the law that said littering is okay for smokers. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a smoker just fling a cigarette out their window regardless of where they are at. I've tried to pull up along side them and ask them if they realized they just littered on the street, but they can never see me through the yellow stained glass of their car windows.
Posted by lobo65 on 2006-05-12:
There was a barber in my home town who died from second hand smoke because he let people smoke in there for years. He never smoked a day in his life. There was a big lawsuit filed against big tobacco companies by his family after his death, but I don't remember the outcome. The second hand smoke DID kill him though.
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-12:
sparticus: Can't truly answer the littering question. I always thought thats what ashtrays were for.

lobo: Thats interesting about your barber friend. Did they perform an autopsy and proove it was secong hand cigarette smoke that killed him? Was he enever exposed to anything but second hand cigarette smoke his entire life? Not mocking the death of your friend just trying to make a statement that IF he was not exposed to ANYTHING other than cigarette smoke, there should be some type of report on it....
Also, since there was a big lawsuit against the tobacco company for his death, would I not be in the right to sue a gas company if fumes from filling my car made me ill (or worse, killed me)?

Wonder why that one hasn't surfaced.........
Posted by tander on 2006-05-12:
I don't mind people smoking in a restaurant where I dine,as long as it doesn't stink, if I happen to smell it, I can't eat my food it starts making me nauseas and I have to leave., I don't blame it on the smokers, it's the restaurants fault for allowing them to smoke.
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-12:
Smoking in an enclosed area, public or private is rude and inexcusable. I don't want to breathe your stink. It's dangerous, plain and simple for the user and those around them. Plain inconsiderate in my opinion, akin to farting repeatedly next to the people in the next booth. (tr)
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-12:
In an enclosed designated eating area it's fine. In a piano bar or tavern with pool and dart players, don't mind the smoker's either. Actually, it's fun to trip the smokers out in conversation and watch them (light up and blow up). Just through the clothes in the hamper when you get home. What's a (tr)? :0
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-13:
I really have a difficult time with the smoking issue. My husband is 62 years old and he is dying with COPD caused by his own smoking. He has developed the wasting syndrome that sometimes occures with COPD. His normal weight is 135#, he now weighs 97#. He never would have smoked if cigarettes were not manufactured & sold. SO, my golden years will be black ones because "big tobacco" rules!
Posted by lobo65 on 2006-05-13:
I don't know if it's against the rules of this forum, but if not here's a link to a story about the lawsuit. I knew the man, and he was very nice. It was sad that he died.

http://www.no-smoking.org/may99/05-13-99-5.html
Posted by lobo65 on 2006-05-13:
I forgot to add that he died, and his family continued the suit. They lost, however. Big tobacco won again.
Posted by les on 2006-05-13:
I'am a smoker, I also agree smoking should not be allowed in all public places...I quit smoking for 6 months and I could not believe how bad people smelled, I didn't like them to smoke around me because I didn't want to stink and thought to my self "I SMELLED THAT BAD" regardless I started smoking again, people are adicted to it and it is very hard not to smoke when your craving a cig. sometimes you don't think of others just getting that cig...but I also see why others would not want to smell or breath your smoke
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-13:
The original point of my posting was this - it boils down to the fact that some people dislike smoking and others don't. People can rationalize that driving a vehicle is not a choice (but it is). Automobiles put more pollutants in the air than cigarettes...and, if you argue that cars are driven outside and the discussion is smoking inside buildings, the fact of the matter is, with the ventilation systems most restaurants are required to have (where I live anyway), very little second hand smoke (if any) reaches the non smoking areas. There are, of course, some obnoxious people who actually bring their children into a smoking bar area while waiting for a table then complain about the smoke........first off, if you bring your children into a bar, that don't say a lot about you as a parent (just my opinion).

Another point is the lawsuits against the tobacco companies. First of all, when you knowingly and willingly put that first cigarette in your mouth, light it and suck on it...THAT IS YOUR FAULT, not the company that manufactured it. I'm ready for this argument ......"but tobacco compnaies put things in cigarettes to make them more addictive and didn't tell us"....OK, don't you think possibly humans have some type of in-born knowledge that by putting something in your mouth, lighting fire to it and inhaling the smoke, there is a risk of it hurting you REGUARDLESS of what's in it?

Since people who willingly started smoking are allowed to sue tobacco companies when and if they get cancer or other fatal diseases, shouldn't the entire population have the right to sue prescription drug companies if they become addicted (after all, doesn't the media tell us that addiction is a disease?). Shouldn't the entire population have the right to sue manufacturers of alcoholic beverages if a person becomes an alcoholic? Also, shouldn't we be allowed to sue anyone for anything if we please? After all, this whole smoking lawsuit deal is based on the fact that people in the US don't want to accept the consequences for their own actions.

Sorry..........I realize people have lost loved ones to horrible diseases like cancer and emphazyma........BUT, did the tobacco comapnies actually hold a gut to those people's heads and make them start smoking?
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-13:
rippedoffbybigbusinesses all I can say is ,Here,Here!
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-13:
You are very correct rippedofbybigbusinesses is much of what you have said. Cigarettes are addictive. As a-matter-of-fact the CDC reports that nicotine is more addictive than cocaine. It is true that we have freedom of choice in these matters, however, a large number of "addicted to nicotine" people started smoking before 1964 when the surgen general first called for warning labels on cig packages, my husband is in that group. He tried so many times to quit, but well...addictions are very difficult to overcome. One thing though..since the so-called "tobacco settlement of 1998" one can no longer sue the tobacco companies. Lawyers will not touch it. Probably because big tobacco has "paid" them not to sue. The following is from the Columbus Dispatch. I have communicated with Mr. Mayhood by phone.
Monday, Jan 10, 2005

TOBACCO LAWYERS NEAR DEAL
$145 million dispute in federal court here
By Kevin Mayhood
THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Lawyers who were awarded more than $14 billion from the tobacco
settlement between states and cigarette makers will be in U.S. District
Court in Columbus today to settle disputes over how to divide $145
million of this year's payment of the award.
After the tobacco companies filed a lawsuit to force a resolution, it
appears that Mississippi lawyer Richard Scruggs -- whose share of the
settlement reportedly is $1 billion -- has come up with a compromise
that other lawyers have OK'd.

The proposed solution won't increase any awards. Instead, money would
continue to flow as expected to more than 200 lawyers and law firms
involved in the original settlements.

In return, the lawyers won't sue cigarette makers again. Oh, and by "black years" I meant the years I should have with my husband in retirement but will not. Every moment is precious now as the end is drawing closer and after all, today is all we really have anyhow.
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-13:
One more thing...I hate cigarette smoke. I have a friend who is extremely alergic to cig smoke...so second hand smoke can be injurious to others.
The way I see this thing....a smokers rights stop at the end of my nose.
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-13:
Agreed. (tr)
Posted by InThe South on 2006-05-13:
Here in Georgia we just enacted a new law this year banning smoking in all public buildings. Only exception is if the smoking section is enclosed and has an air handleing system separate from the rest of the building. The 80% of us that don't smoke enjoy comming home and not reaking of smoke. As for the banning of cigarettes crashing the economy; I think the taxes paid on cigaretts falls far short of the cost put on the health care system by people committing slow suicide by smoking.
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-13:
This is from the CDC web site:

MMWR — Annual Smoking–Attributable Mortality, Years of Potential Life Lost, and Productivity Losses — United States, 1997–2001
MMWR Highlights
July 1, 2005 / Vol. 54 / No. 25

An estimated $92 billion (average for 1997–2001) in productivity losses occurs annually from deaths due to smoking. The economic costs of smoking are more than $167 billion, including an additional $75.5 billion in smoking-related medical expenditures.

Cigarette smoking caused an estimated 438,000 premature deaths annually (259,494 men and 178,408 women) from 1997 through 2001.

Among adults, the study estimates that most deaths were from lung cancer (123,836), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (90,582), and ischemic heart disease (86,801).

Smoking during pregnancy resulted in an estimated 523 male infant and 387 female infant deaths annually.

Smoking causes 3.3 million years of potential life lost for men and 2.2 million years for women. Smoking, on average, reduces adult life expectancy by approximately 14 years.

Posted by tander on 2006-05-13:
I also think 2nd hand smoking is just as bad as smoking, your inhaling the fumes, and I also believe that is why alot of children are sick, from inhaling in their parent(s) cigarette smoke.
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-13:
AMEN tander!
What is Secondhand Smoke?
Secondhand smoke (SHS), sometimes referred to as environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), is a mixture of the smoke given off by the burning ends of a cigarette, pipe, cigar, bidis, and kreteks (sidestream smoke) and the smoke emitted at the mouthpiece and exhaled from the lungs of smokers (mainstream smoke).1,2
Over the past two decades, medical science has shown that nonsmokers suffer many of the diseases of active smoking when they breathe secondhand smoke.

Environmental Tobacco Smoke contains at least 250 chemicals known to be toxic or cause cancer. Unfortunately, the general public’s exposure to secondhand smoke is much higher than most people realize
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-13:
For the smoker's that want to quit, very difficult but possible I recommend the Neuro-Linguistic Programming techniques. Eventually you must have the desire to stop.
http://www.nlpschedule.com/smoking.html
Good luck.
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-14:
While I agree smoking is a nasty habit, you have no proof what so ever that second hand smoke causes anything. The CDC can “estimate” anything they want, so can I. I estimate that between the feds, the blood sucking lawyers and the health care system that all the smokers in the world could have been put on an island with big houses and a fence around the whole thing to keep them in and you would still have BS reports. These reports are based on speculation. That is why you see words like, estimated, premature deaths, potential life lost but no proof. “Just give me more money for my guess-ta-mated report”. If you want facts, abortion is the biggest cause of death in this country today and it is all because people don’t want to be responsible for their actions. I estimate, The health care system, the drug companies, the government (feds’, state, and local) are killing more people simply by adding stress to their life’s. Smoking or second hand smoke will never be able to top that. I stopped after 36 years and a hart attack and the doctor told me it was not because of smoking (“but if you don’t quite, it will kill you”) it was a 90% blockage in the main artery in the hart. I quite the same time and I am glad I did but I hope I will never fall for the lies the blood sucking, money hungry people that do these phony law suites, raise tax’s and then put it in their pockets. Write a BS report because it is what “none smokers” want to here and at the same time keeps people blind-sided to real problems in this country to day.
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-14:
"The way I see this thing....a smokers rights stop at the end of my nose."

You are correct in this statement. You have a right to not be around smoking if you don't like it. However, there are basically 3 places left in the US where smoking is allowed: certain restaurants in certain states, night clubs where alcohol is served but not food and (I believe) casinos.

This country bends over bakwards to accomodate non smokers and, ironically, a lot of non smokers still complain.

The FACT of the matter is, cigarettes are a scapegoat in this country. The media is so severely biased in this country, I believe they are not allowed to report certain truths. If celebrity or similar well know person dies, you can bet they will tell you if they smoked. If they died without ever smoking a cigarette, that info will not be reported. The media wants the masses to think a certain way........and ironically, the masses do as they are told.

It appears to me non smokers have if very good in this country.

As I have stated before, if the US is really concerned about people's health and the dangers of smoking, why not just stop producing cigarettes?
Posted by Anonymous on 2006-05-14:
I believe they are called “sheepull”
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-15:
Our government is NOT concerned about smoking. "Big tobacco" contributes the $$$$$, and unfortunately in this country money talks and BS walks. Tobacco kills period! and that ain't BS
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-15:
"Tobacco kills period! and that ain't BS"

So do factories and emissions from automobiles........but you'll never hear anything about that from the media or non-smokers
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-15:
ripped...I can not for the life of me figure out why you hate auto's and factories? First of all....do you wear clothes, ride a bike, have furniture in your home, anything you own made of steel, etc?????? If so where do you think they came from...an egg? How is your food transported from supplier to the store where you buy? By truck...wanta stop all trucks from moving. Have you ever needed an ambulance, a hospital...lots of plactics used there. Do you own a gun?

I do agree that folks need to curtail unnecessary driving...but more importantly I think the entire world needs desperately to find new, clean sourses of energy. Air polution is a problem, not doubt about it.....however...it is not air polution that is killing my husband. He smoked and now he will die because of the cigarette somke PERIOD!
Posted by rippedoffbybigbusinesses on 2006-05-16:
batzion7: I don't hate factories or automobiles. I am NOT trying to soften the fact that your husband is dying. The point I am trying to make is that the media leads people to believe that people who do not smoke or have chosen to quit smoking are GUARNTEED to live a life that could stretch well into their 90s or even 100s with absolutely NO health problems. I have watched loved ones die in their 60s and 70s and they never smoked a cigarette in their lives, never allowed it in their home and was generally never around anyone who did smoke.

I assure you I'm not trying to soften the fact your husband is dying. I just believe there are several factors that contribute to peoples' bad health and the media misleads the younger generations into believing that smoking (and spcefically second hand smoke) is the basically the #1 cause of death. They also lead people to believe that smoking and second hand smoke is the cause of high medical costs.

I simply think the media should tell the whole story.......
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-16:
ripped...I do understand what you are saying....your beef is with the media.

The major media outlets have an agenda which is dictated by the powers that be, however, I have heard a couple of reporters talk about the air polution problems.

I am blessed, in that I live in a very rural area (in the boonies LOL) in a state that does not have a lot of factories. Our air, most of the time, is about as clean as air can be in this world.
Maybe, someday, a cleaner energy source will be found.
Posted by caa on 2006-05-17:
Personally, I would like to see restaurants with kid free sections so I don't have to listen to the screaming, or have other people's children running around the restaurant because parents are too lazy to watch their own kids.
Posted by beanbagbritches on 2006-05-18:
I'm not sure which side you're on...your argument seems for AND against smoking in restaurants. I smoked for 10 years and was glad to have places to smoke, but now that I don't smoke, I don't want to be around the smell. At least have a non-smoking section in every restaurant.
Posted by Doc J on 2006-05-19:
ALL-My sympathies and prayers for Bat's husband. I'm a non-smoking (smoked like a chimney while in the service tho) physician. My Dad, of Blessed memory, died of smoking related heart disease. My fa-in-law died of smoking related lung cancer. When both of them were dying, they vehemently stated they were dying by their own hands and would twist in their graves if family sued "big tobacco" over their deaths. Smoking is a voluntary act that results in a treatable addiction. Anti-smoking education has been around for over 40 years. Those who start do so in the face of decades-old overwhelming evidence of its harmful effects. One would have to be intellectually impaired to ignore all the education that's out there and willingly start or continue to stick a noxious weed in your mouth, ignite it, and deeply inhale the smoke, then seek to blame the maker of the legal substance for his/her stupidity when he/she becomes afflicted with a condition warned about in the educational materials. Those who fail to quit do so by voluntarily shunning treatment for their addiction. I've never seen a cigarette mug someone, insert itself in an unwilling mouth, and self-ignite. I have the option of not patronizing public venues where smoking is part of their allowed practices. The business is a private enterprise and can permit smoking if they like. We can vote with our feet by not going in. Parents who take children into a smoking establishment are, themselves, practicing child abuse. Employees of smoking establishments work there by choice. If they elected not to work there, and enough potential employees felt the same way, the business would change their smoking policy voluntarily. Government smoking and anti-smoking policies are tax-driven, period.
Posted by batzion7 on 2006-05-19:
Thanks Doc J. You are right, my husband, like everyone else, had a choice. He is very sorry now that he did not quit years ago. He to says that he abused his body and that this is his fault. He is a pharmacist...so...you know he DID know better for sure. "We do reap what we sow." Blessings

Your Name:
(displayed with your comment)
Your E-mail:
(required)

Your Experience/Advice:
Check spelling


By clicking submit you agree that you have read and accept the Terms of Service & Privacy Policy.


Note: All comments are reviewed by a moderator before being published. Please be sure to read our guidelines before commenting.