I think drunk driving should be punished by losing one's license for good. That's what happens in Finland. Do Finns drink less because of the law? No, they drink more actually. But they do not drink and drive. The smallest of towns have taxis to drive drunks home.Originally posted by teacha:
Now I will REALLY open a can of worms:
How about greater restrictions on drinking? (Maybe just penalties for drunk driving, certain types of drunken behavior and underage drinking, perhaps?)
Brian, 20% of Americans smoke. 99.9% of restaurants and bars allow smoking if there are no anti smoking laws. Shouldn't only about 20% of restaurants and bars offer smoking? This issue wouldn't be an issue if even 50% of such places were non smoking. What you are saying to us 80% is stay home, we don't want you. I do stay home rather than eat in a smoking place. Smoke is deadly to my lungs.Originally posted by Brian:
Business owners reserve the right to run their businesses as they see fit, within the law, to make money. They, and only they, will decide if/where smoking (or any other legal activity) is allowed on their property and have a duty to make that known to all who enter. Then, if you KNOW that smoking is going on inside a building and you still choose to enter, you've lost your right to complain.
......By entering the establishment you've agreed to the house rules. Bottom line, if you don't want to be around smokers then don't put yourself in a place/situation where you will be exposed.
Nugget, there are actually a good number of considerate smokers in the world. By my estimation it's about 50/50.Originally posted by nugget:
I wll not change my opinion because there is ONE smoker in the world that is considerate of nonsmokers. If everyone who smoked was as condiderate as Abnerman claims to be, we would not even have this issue.
Good for you. That's voting with your pocketbook. Be sure to let the restaurant manager know that you won't patronize that establishment until it is smoke free. If enough people feel the same way you do (80% was the figure you quoted), then businesses will be jumping on your bandwagon voluntarily.I do stay home rather than eat in a smoking place.
Of course it is. The proposed ban, however, was not. You want to try to ban smoking in public areas, go ahead and have at it. You'd have a point there since we all have to share 'public' space. The big difference is in trying to carry that policy over to a private establishment. That's where your policy took a wrong turn.Smoking is a public health issue
You just said there was. Now you're saying, er... what? (*hint* - trust the pig farm analogy on this one. That IS what your policy looks like)The pig farm analogy isn't the same because there is no public health issue involved.
Actually Dave I've pointed out that many smokers are indeed very considerate.Originally posted by Dave:
It really does no good trying to talk to some folks. Once they presume that anyone who smokes must be an idiot.................... I am retiring to the deck to have another cigar.
Why? The fact that you have to ask kind of proves the point - if nonsmoking bars/restaurants are such wonderful ideas, why haven't they flourished? According to what some here have written, there must be an ENORMOUS untapped market of non-smokers just waiting for someone to open a clean air bar/restaurant. You can't lose. Pool your money and get one opened. You'll make a fortune! Right?I still would like to know if any Tomahawk restaurants and bars are voluntarily smoke free or ever have been.
Well Brian, I don't know the first thing about running a restaurant. Secondly, I'm a nurse in an urban school district so where would I get the money?Originally posted by Brian:
Why? Pool your money and get one opened. You'll make a fortune! Right?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], TurnitinBot [Bot] and 3 guests