Should Bussiness owners decide if smoking it allowed?

[cpgrad08]

I strongly believe that if I own any kind of business be it be restaurant, bar, insurance company and etc. I should be the one that decides if smoking is allowed or not and not the government. For those who say employees should not be subjected to that they knew that it was smoking place and they still applied for the job.

 

[X Factor]

I agree with you CP. I live in a city that's banned smoking in all public establishments, but apparently just making smokers go outside is not enough. I hear where one city (forget where, probably in CA) wants to ban smokers from smoking within 150 ft (or something like that) of doorways. It's crazy.

 

[MaggieD]

I strongly believe that if I own any kind of business be it be restaurant, bar, insurance company and etc. I should be the one that decides if smoking is allowed or not and not the government. For those who say employees should not be subjected to that they knew that it was smoking place and they still applied for the job.

Illinois has banned smoking in all public buildings, within 15 feet of any entrance or exit.

I think that any free-standing public building should make their own decision about whether or not smoking is allowed. It should be clearly posted on the door that "This is a smoking establishment" and employees should be required to sign something that says they're aware it is a smoking establishment as a condition of hire.

Anything short of that is an infringement of property rights.

 

[cpgrad08]

Illinois has banned smoking in all public buildings, within 15 feet of any entrance or exit.

I think that any free-standing public building should make their own decision about whether or not smoking is allowed. It should be clearly posted on the door that "This is a smoking establishment" and employees should be required to sign something that says they're aware it is a smoking establishment as a condition of hire.

Anything short of that is an infringement of property rights.

U always seem to pleasantly surprise me Maggie.

 

[Jetboogieman]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

 

[X Factor]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

If you don't want to go to an establishment that allows smoking, don't go. What's the big deal?

 

[MaggieD]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

THAT I agree with.

The dollars-and-cents big deal is that it's hurt eating and drinking establishments. And Illinois casino revenue. Wherever shall the revenooers make that up??? In my case, my opinion strictly relates to the right of a property owner to do anything inside his own building that isn't illegal.

What's next? "No more music over X number of decibels"?

 

[cpgrad08]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

My bussiness my rules. If they don't deal with it they don't have to work for me.

 

[Psychoclown]

Smoking policy should absolutely be set by the owner. The dangers of second hand smoke have been so overblown and overhyped that some people on these forums act as if a single whiff of cigarette smoke is an open invitation for cancer. For the average person an occassional night out in a smokey bar or club will have absoutely no impact on their health. But I've found once you strip away the over the top exaggerations about the dangers of second hand smoke, most anti-smoking zealots will admit they support the law because they personally find cigarette smoke unpleasant. They just enjoy the fact that the law is being used to enforce their own personal preferences. The fact that it infringes on the rights of the property owner is completely irrelevant to them.

Which is fine, but then you should also support my proposals banning country music, chick flicks, teenage pop singers, reality TV, and ordering a steak well done. All are far more heinous than a little smoke here and there.

 

[spud_meister]

Which is fine, but then you should also support my proposals banning country music, chick flicks, teenage pop singers, reality TV, and ordering a steak well done. All are far more heinous than a little smoke here and there.

Except for the last one, you'd have my full support. :mrgreen:

I'm of two minds about this, I can't stand the smell of cigarettes, but I also think businesses should decide for themselves, so I'll go with as long as it's legal for me to fart in businesses, people should be allowed to smoke.

 

[American]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

Smoking is cool, and my youngest child smokes.....to my chagrin.

 

[Jetboogieman]

Well then if not for Health and Safety, for profit.

If you own a resteraunt or any indoor establishment which requires people to be inside for an extended period of time, and you allow people to smoke in there, you will lose customers. Or any store or business for that matter.

No one wants to sit in an enclosed space with horrible smoke everywhere.

If you allow smoking in your business, you do so at your own peril. Few people are gonna shop or do business there.

 

[Your Star]

That's all well and good if the business owner is the only person in their establishment, but that's not the case.

Smoke outside, what's the big deal?

Better for everyone that way. Smoking isn't cool anymore anyway :2razz:

Depends on what your smoking

But anyways I wouldn't shop, or eat at a place where they allow smoking, I'm on the brink of asthma to begin with, so I wouldn't risk it. Also I think it's okay for local governments to ban such activities, I don't think it would be okay for a federal mandate on such things.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Illinois has banned smoking in all public buildings, within 15 feet of any entrance or exit.

I think that any free-standing public building should make their own decision about whether or not smoking is allowed. It should be clearly posted on the door that "This is a smoking establishment" and employees should be required to sign something that says they're aware it is a smoking establishment as a condition of hire.

Anything short of that is an infringement of property rights.

I think this is a good approach. They should be required to clearly label known health hazards (similar to "this food was cooked in the presence of peanuts") and leave it at that.

Two other thoughts. They should ban my boss's bad breath and eff you psycho, I like my meat fully cooked :mrgreen:

 

[nonpareil]

I strongly believe that if I own any kind of business be it be restaurant, bar, insurance company and etc. I should be the one that decides if smoking is allowed or not and not the government. For those who say employees should not be subjected to that they knew that it was smoking place and they still applied for the job.

If this arguement is valid, then it's valid for all work place regulation, for example, protective gear against dangerous machinery and chemicals.

Ask yourself this: should we allow employers to decide on the level of exposure to asbestos their employees face?

I'm not saying second hand smoke is as dangerous as asbestos, but both have been shown to increase the risk of cancer.

 

[cpgrad08]

There is difference between smoking and the Feds regulating safety standards. Constant exposure to the Sun increase the risk of Cancer. Should we not allowed windows then?

 

[X Factor]

Depends on what your smoking

But anyways I wouldn't shop, or eat at a place where they allow smoking, I'm on the brink of asthma to begin with, so I wouldn't risk it. Also I think it's okay for local governments to ban such activities, I don't think it would be okay for a federal mandate on such things.

You think it's okay for local govts to ban such activities? So you think prostitutes and drugs should be legal but, naw, smoking inside, well that's just wrong.

 

[Your Star]

There is difference between smoking and the Feds regulating safety standards. Constant exposure to the Sun increase the risk of Cancer. Should we not allowed windows then?

One could argue that limiting smoking is regulating safety standards, the health risk of cigarettes, and second hand smoke are well documented.

 

[Your Star]

You think it's okay for local govts to ban such activities? So you think prostitutes and drugs should be legal but, naw, smoking inside, well that's just wrong.

Smoking in public buildings,and business yeah, I don't see the problem. It's not banning smoking altogether.

 

[cpgrad08]

One could argue that limiting smoking is regulating safety standards, the health risk of cigarettes, and second hand smoke are well documented.

Actually the basis for second hand smoke form a highly incarcerate EPA report. So should workers ban form eating fast food at work since the effects of High Fat foods is well documented? Also form your earlier comment are you saying smoking Tobacco inside is wrong but Mary Jane is find and dandy?

 

[X Factor]

One could argue that limiting smoking is regulating safety standards, the health risk of cigarettes, and second hand smoke are well documented.

And you don't think prostitution or drug use involve "safety standards" at all?

Smoking in public buildings,and business yeah, I don't see the problem. It's not banning smoking altogether.

Doesn't matter, that's just a matter of degrees of tolerance for govt intervention. You think it's okay for the government to ban smoking in privately owned businesses yet it's wrong to keep prostitution and drugs illegal. Hey, should someone be allowed to shoot up in a restaurant? After all, no second hand smoke.

 

[Redress]

First off, I think I should mention that I smoke. It's a dirty, nasty habit and I have been doing it close to 30 years now and am not going to stop(sorry aps). With that said, I have no problem with laws banning smoking in public places. It is a health risk to those around smokers, and it is one of those things that businesses have no profit motive to do, so won't.

 

[liblady]

First off, I think I should mention that I smoke. It's a dirty, nasty habit and I have been doing it close to 30 years now and am not going to stop(sorry aps). With that said, I have no problem with laws banning smoking in public places. It is a health risk to those around smokers, and it is one of those things that businesses have no profit motive to do, so won't.

1 word, chantix.

 

[Redress]

1 word, chantix.

I have quit drinking, I have quit drugs, I have cleaned up my lifestyle alot. I am not giving up my nicotine and caffeine, and you can't make me. eace

 

[liblady]

I have quit drinking, I have quit drugs, I have cleaned up my lifestyle alot. I am not giving up my nicotine and caffeine, and you can't make me. eace

just be sure to quit before it's too late. i get it....i smoked for the same amount of time.