Friday, January 18, 2008
Dallas bars next on the smoking ban list
Email
|
Print
|
Tell us your story
|
Comments (59)
|
With the haze mostly cleared from the last battle, it’s time to wage yet a second offensive against what many people today consider to be the most annoying of pests — the public smoker.
When former Dallas Mayor Laura Miller pushed through the anti-smoking ordinance for restaurants and other public places in January 2003, she would have preferred that it included nightclubs, restaurant patios and pool halls. But she realized that component could torpedo her entire ordinance, so she decided to save that fight for another day or for another mayor’s agenda.
Fast-forward to 2008, and you have Miller’s successor, Mayor Tom Leppert, preparing to take up where she left off.
Leppert’s approach will be more likely to appease the business community, which rose up in protest against Miller’s plan. Business leaders warned the anti-smoking ordinance would lead to a loss of revenue for Dallas restaurants because smoking customers would quit patronizing them.
The current mayor advocates enlisting the support of cities throughout the region to adopt uniform anti-smoking ordinances that would eliminate the option of customers going to a nearby suburb to do their drinking.
It might make bar customers mad, but what are they going to do? Stay at home and drink? Quit drinking? Nah.
This one is in the bag.
Even City Council members Angela Hunt and Pauline Medrano, in whose districts nearly all of the gay and lesbian bars sit, have signaled they would likely support an ordinance banning smoking in Dallas’ nightclubs. That’s because they know most owners of Dallas’ gay nightclubs won’t mind smoke-free zones in their businesses, if it can be accomplished without enraging too many customers. That could be the tricky part.
When Miller proposed her anti-smoking ordinance in 2003, the mayor brought the wrath of old queens (some of whom had formerly supported her) down on her pretty head. It caused a near verbal riot in some daytime establishments as patrons sitting on bar stools angrily downed their drinks, stubbed their cigarettes into the ash trays and loudly called her a name that I can’t bring myself to write here.
Even after she backtracked and gave up on the idea of banning smoking in bars, they never forgave her. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if she continues to catch hell as the debate about the new ordinance unfolds.
But my hunch is that most bar owners will privately, if not publicly, back the more stringent ordinance. That’s because there’s something I’ve noticed about successful bar owners these days — and the key word is successful. They don’t drink and smoke the way their customers do. It’s a simple rule: The bar owners are there to make money; the customers are there to spend it, and many of them don’t like smoke.
If the more restrictive ordinance is passed, it is going to save the bar owners money in air conditioning and air filtration bills and cleaning and maintenance costs associated with smoking — not to mention the benefit to bar personnel who must suffer through eight hours or more of breathing second-hand smoke.
If you’ve ever walked into a bar in the morning before it’s been aired out and cleaned up, you know exactly what I mean.
Even if that weren’t the case, shrewd business people make sure they stay in step with consumer trends and the direction of political winds. We’re becoming a smoke-free society
So you may as well get used to drinking your favorite alcoholic beverage without a cigarette because the day is coming when you won’t have the choice inside a Dallas bar.
And that’s not so bad. You needed to cut down anyway.
Pegasus News content partner - Dallas Voice
The community newspaper for gay & lesbian Dallas.
See more stories in:
Find...
Latest Outbursts
- Today, the first ever **Restaurant Rivalries: Paint Ball Wars** was held at GatSplat in Lewisville. Local favorite restaurant staff, food & beverage supplier...
- If you aren't willing to give your land away for free, the Irving City Council thinks you're a big meanie and will whine about you in the press.
- Romanian Festival in Colleyville
- Jack Ruby's hat sold for $53,775
Today
Fall 2009 Dinner With Dialogue Series Eating "sustainably" -- without harming animals, farm workers, or the environment -- will be the topic at this dinner at Celebration restaurant, with author Pamela Walker plus Michael and Debby Sams of Full Quiver Farms from Kemp, Texas. More info
Latest comments
- bobmoz on Dallas Videofest 2009 - 72 Musicians: Hi Teresa. Thanks for writing about my film. I’m sorry you didn’t like it. At the risk of sounding l...
- BillBigD on Ocean Prime on Cedar Springs in Dallas to open November 12: I been to this place in Miami and the food is quite good. But they better get a clue on Happy Hour i...
- BillBigD on Chef Kenny Mills leaves Sullivan's for new steakhouse in downtown Dallas: I aslo like both of Mike’s places. Goodluck to him downtown...
- Donna Chen on Ethics of Food panel stirs it up on Friday at Dallas Institute of Humanities: I felt briefly guilty about ordering the short rib sandwich right after the discussion, but then I t...
Latest reviews
- jognmcdermott on India West Fine Dining & Lounge: This place has it all good food sweet service. I proposed to my fiance here it was perfect! we loved...
- Billusa99 on Pappas Bros. Steak House: Agent 99 and I had dinner here last week for our anniversary and it was stellar! The somm. we had re...
- Colby Walton on El Taco H (Grapevine): Tried this Grapevine strip center taqueria for the first time tonight, after seeing it mentioned in ...
Things you can't miss
Latest stories
- Michael Schneider plays Brahms' Piano Concerto with Lewisville Lake Symphony
- Concert preview: Mastodon and Deathlok at the House of Blues (November 11)
- Sampling food, drink, and culture at annual Romanian Food Festival in Colleyville
- Photo gallery: AIA Dallas Tour of Homes
- Ethics of Food panel stirs it up on Friday at Dallas Institute of Humanities
Comments
snowbird Anonymous
Smoking bans are the real hazard
The bandwagon of local smoking bans now steamrolling across the nation from sea to sea has nothing to do with protecting people from the supposed threat of second-hand smoke. The bans are symptoms of a far more grievous threat; a cancer that has been spreading for decades. This cancer is the only real hazard involved -- the cancer of unlimited government power. The issue is not whether second-hand smoke is a real danger or a phantom menace. The issue is: if it were harmful, what would be the proper reaction? Should anti-tobacco activists satisfy themselves with educating people about the potential danger and allowing them to make their own decisions, or should they seize the power of government and force people to make the "right" decision? Supporters of local tobacco bans have made their choice. Rather than attempting to protect people from an unwanted intrusion on their health, the tobacco bans are the unwanted intrusion. Loudly billed as measures that only affect "public places," they have actually targeted private places: restaurants, bars, nightclubs, shops, and offices -- places whose owners are free to set anti-smoking rules or whose customers are free to go elsewhere if they don't like the smoke. Some local bans even harass smokers in places where their effect on others is obviously negligible, such as outdoor public parks. The decision to smoke, or to avoid second-hand smoke, is a question to be answered by each individual based on his own values and his own assessment of the risks. This is the same kind of decision free people make regarding every aspect of their lives: how much to spend or invest, whom to befriend or sleep with, whether to go to college or get a job, whether to get married or divorced, and so on. All of these decisions involve risks; some have demonstrably harmful consequences; most are controversial and invite disapproval from the neighbours. But the individual must be free to make these decisions. He must be free, because his life belongs to him, not to his neighbours, and only his own judgment can guide him through it. Yet when it comes to smoking, this freedom is under attack. Cigarette smokers are a numerical minority, practising a habit considered annoying and unpleasant to the majority. So the majority has simply commandeered the power of government and used it to dictate their behaviour. That is why these bans are far more threatening than the prospect of inhaling a few stray whiffs of tobacco while waiting for a table at your favourite restaurant. The anti-tobacco crusaders point in exaggerated alarm at those wisps of smoke while they unleash the systematic and unlimited intrusion of government into our lives.
Smoke from tobacco is a statistically insignificant health risk
Thomas Laprade Thunder Bay, Ont. Ph. 807 3457258
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
This is so ridiculous, especially considering all of the other IMPORTANT things the city council could and should be addressing. Free choice works. People who don't like the smoke don't go to the bars. What is so wrong with that ? And if there aren't enough non-smoking bars for these folks, then some non-smokers need to open some non-smoking bars ! How effing hard is that ? FREE CHOICE !
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
skeechi Anonymous
This can't happen soon enough. If France, Ireland, and even shabby old Houston have already banned smoking in bars, why is Dallas so out to lunch on this issue? Its inevitable that its a matter of when, not if, all of America will be smoke free. I just got back from Europe, and Im not even sick this time due to comprehensive change there. Get it done now!
M. Reinhart Dallas
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
kelsic Anonymous
Another choice: the smokers could go outside to smoke.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
major Anonymous
Yes, the time has come for Dallas to catch up with most of the rest of the US, and most of the developed world and get tobacco smoke out of areas where non-smokers are present. Really the law should ban smoke from all workplaces, without exception. I kind of get a kick out of some posters who still hang onto old tobacco company lies about second hand smoke only smelling bad, but not having any health consequences. If you look at the web page of the world's largest tobacco company, you'll find acknowledgement that second hand smoke does harm non-smokers, and that smoking restrictions are justified. Smoking in public is not a right, and there are still many places to smoke, just not where it will possibly make others ill. I think that by now, most reasonable smokers realize that they should be smoking outside to keep the air clean for others.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
DC Anonymous
Here we go again.
I cannot imagine a more inane argument against a non smoking ordinance than "non smokers should open their own bars."
How about this: if you're sick, open your own hospital!! Don't like the goverment, make your own country!! FREE CHOICE!!!
In the end, I don't like smelling like a garbage dump after going out for the night. Smokers probably don't want strangers defecating on their faces, but for some reason think it's all right to make me smell like crap.
You're right, it's my free choice not to go to places that like people to smoke and that's why they're not getting my money. I'd spend a lot more in bars and lounges around here if it meant I wasn't going to stink so badly and I am sure there are plenty of other people who would as well.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
Inane or not, the facts are these : 1) smoking is LEGAL 2) under current law, anyone who wants to declare their "establishment" non-smoking, may do so
I don't understand why people who are averse to smoke assume they have the right to tell everyone else what to do. WHY DON'T you open a non-smoking bar, if that's what you're jonesin' for ?
If you don't like the way you smell when you come home, I suggest you re-evaluate YOUR activities - DO NOT tell everyone else what to do !
And by the way, regarding your comment - "Don't like the goverment, make your own country!!" - I believe that is THE PRINCIPLE ON WHICH THE GOOD OLE USA WAS FOUNDED !
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
stevehartwell Anonymous
There has never been a study proving that exposure to smoke kills or harms anyone. The global news industry is refusing to report that many researchers, scientists, even doctors and politicians, do NOT believe the anti-smoking claims about Second Hand Tobacco Smoke. Average smoker exhales less than 500 milligrams of Second Hand Smoke per day. Average car exhales more than 2.2 MILLION milligrams of Second Hand Smoke per day. It is Cars that need banning, not tobacco smokers. Smoking bans dramatically increase the dehumanization of smokers, increase the hatred of smokers, falsely convicts smokers as murderers without due process of law, violating constitutional rights, and unjustifiably undermines and destroys smokers' relationships with others. Steve Hartwell, Toronto, Canada. www.ventilatedsmokingrooms.ca
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Billusa99 Anonymous
Geeeeee... I'm totally wondering how the only two Canadian resident wackjobs groups that are FOR smoking ever found out about PegNews. This is too cool for school. I'm going to have to send an APB to my Canuck buds to see what they know about this. DC... something's up up there, no?
Tracy... please get with Rickie, over a Miller and a Marlboro, and channel your right-wing smoker's angst at the bubbas who frequent your bar and your bank balance. Nobody else cares about your preaching, 'cept Mark Davis and his cohorts. Channel the money you will save cleaning up their foul ashtrays to Doctors Without Borders and to Peoples With Empathy, then sit back and relax. Peace, love, dope, g'night!
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Pavel Lishin Verified
snowbird - christ, tl;dr. I read two sentences and got bored. Are all residents of America's Hat this wordy?
Tracy Yost: "Free choice works. People who don't like the smoke don't go to the bars." But we want to go to bars and not come home and have to dump our clothes into the washing machine. And by your argument, I'm also free to support a no-smoking ordinance. If it's passed, you're free to close down your establishment and move somewhere with more freedom! If this passes, I expect that we won't be hearing word one from you. Anything else would be hypocritical.
My view on things - I don't care about the threat of cancer from second hand smoke. My parents smoked when I was a child, and I'm still fine - and in any case, I'm more likely to die of liver failure anyway.
The reason I support banning of smoking in bars is that I don't want to smell like a hobo's nether regions after going out to have a good time.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
Pavel - Yes you are free to vote on an ordinance that would restrict my freedom. The problem I have is that you would do that, rather than just go somewhere where people don't smoke. To me it's no different than passing an ordinance that says we must book rap bands. (and no we won't move, I don't think a smoking ban would hurt our business that much - this is not about that)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Mike Orren Staff
And 2. :
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Scott Miller Verified
(cough)... Anybody got a light?
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Mike Orren Staff
Smoke 'em if you got 'em (NSFW):
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Scott Miller Verified
Equally NSFW...
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
mwernimont Anonymous
Just how "deadly" is secondhand smoke?
It's actually 2.6 to 25,000 times SAFER than Occupational Safety regulations......making the smoking ban justification "..to protect the health of workers..." a non-issue.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2...
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2...
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2...
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2...
Where is the smoking ban activists concern over workplace "health hazards" in the industrial workplace?
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2...
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
DC Anonymous
Why don't I open a non-smoking bar? Well, probably because it would mean a serious cut in my income, that's why. Sorry, but your neo-classical economical model doesn't work. I'd rather have my government arrange it for me.
Restricting smoking doesn't restrict anyone's freedoms any more than restricting facial defecation, purposeful infection with influenza virus or kicking someone else in the back. You're be free to do all of those things at home, but not to strangers.
As to why the Canadian whack jobs are posting their moronic ramblings here, one can only imagine it's a result of the sub zero temperatures and an ongoing nicotine addiction.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Scott Doyle Verified
Sometimes I park in handicapped spaces, while handicapped people make handicapped faces. -- Dennis Leary
Classic.
mwernimont, what the hell are you talking about? How is secondhand smoke less deadly than a law? All kidding aside, how about you actually state the OSHA regs you're referencing rather than simply linking to a biased blog.
Here's my POV: if you smoke, and you go to someone's house for the first time which doesn't smell like an ashtray, do you just light up in their living room and blow smoke in their face? Or do you politely ask if it's okay to smoke, and go outside when they say no? Imo, it's a decent mix of health concerns and people's general preference to not smell like ass.
For those who think second-hand smoke isn't a health risk - the EPA disagrees:
EPA estimates that secondhand smoke is responsible for about 3,000 lung cancer deaths each year among nonsmokers in the U.S.; of these, the estimate is 800 from exposure to secondhand smoke at home and 2,200 from exposure in work or social situations.
If you want to crytit about their findings, whine to them. They've passed much harsher reviews than yours.
Fact is that secondhand smoke has been classed by those crazy guys at the EPA as a known human carcinogen. For you canucks who might not be familiar with the term: carcinogen - any substance or agent that tends to produce a cancer.
Methinks it's not rude at all to ask smokers to take it outside. When your actions affect my health, it's my business (and thankfully my government's too).
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
"Children, children! What, are you twelve?"
This subject (to you sniveling little sand-box preachers) has nothing to do with the smoke in your clothes, or the second-hand smoke in your face- and you know it!
We are all very sorry you feel so helpless in your pathetic little lives, that only controlling the lives of others makes you feel- adult. I'm sorry that you cocky little bathroom monitors can't stand seeing other 'kids' getting away with something!
This subject always turns into an argument about choice- the choice you want to take from others? You're so special!
If you want to buy clothes, but don't want to wear women's clothes, don't shop at a women's clothing store.
If you want to buy a car, but don't want to buy Foreign-made, don't go to Toyota.
If you love to go to restaurants, but don't like sushi, don't go to a sushi restaurant.
If you want to go to a bar, but don't want to be around smokers- don't go to a smoking bar. Don't come to our bar, because for now, it's a smoking bar!
For well over a year I've openly, and as graciously as I could manage, invited you to come to my place of business- not asking anything of you other than to enjoy yourself. I'm sure that my open and friendly, adult environment, where YOU were asked to change nothing about yourself- will be rewarded by you forcing me to change the way my business operates. Thanks so much for that!
I know all that I'm saying here is not just falling on deaf ears- you've got your fingers in your ears and your humming as loud as you can. Please forgive me running on so, I'll be done soon and you can go back to ruling your world.
Back in the day of my grandfather, and my father, this was a country with much more freedom of choice than today. But through the years(and I gotta hand it to ya, you're good at what you do) you've managed to take America from being the land of the free for all Americans, to a land all for yourselves- and the rest of us, well, we're just in the way.
Thanks for the memories.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Pavel Lishin Verified
We can elevate this to lofty ideals about Freedom, America, and Founding Fathers, but I maintain that my only interest is not coming home smelling like crap. Maybe that's selfish? I don't know.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
Yes, Pavel, it is very selfish- but that's okay- we didn't really expect you to know that.
You can be as angst-mixed-with-sensitivity, and cool yuppie-like as you want, my young idiot... every freedom you are enjoying this very minute was at one time a lofty ideal- an American ideal. But I guess that's just not as cool as it used to be.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
self·ish /ˈsɛlfɪʃ/ Pronunciation Key - –adjective 1. devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.
Once again I see this as no different than if the city council decided they liked my bar ALOT, but really want me to have hip-hop music instead of jazz or blues, so they just pass an ordinance.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
Have you noticed that when you roll around on the ground in dog-poop, that when you go back inside, you smell like dog-poop? Maybe you should not do things, or go to places that make you smell bad.
You may have a real mental disconnect on the subject. Maybe instead of listing what restaurants and bars offer, they should just say whether you'll smell bad if you go there. Would that help?
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Chad Jones Verified
If I could know which restaurants feature patrons covered in dog crap, and which do not, that would be fantastic.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Scott Doyle Verified
Rick, you know I've been to your bar and will go again. I'm not crying about the secondhand smoke in there, my parents ruined my lungs for the first 17 years of my life to the point that I don't care about it. But I can understand why others would.
You point at us and call us children while making conspiracy theories? Yes, this is all a ploy for us to throw around our democratic power.
Obviously life is a series of choices - crap you buy only affects you, stuff you eat only affects you (save whatever gases you emit while digesting). When your choices negatively impact the health and hygiene of others, I don't think it's out of line for those people to question whether you should be able to make that call. To think this is a power move...you're paranoid.
Either way, nobody's taking away your option to smoke...just limiting where you smoke. Hell, I'm appeased with sectioning things - but I must not be hardcore. Never been to a bar that has a smoking and non-smoking section, though...probably never will.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Alex Bentley Staff
Since I handle content partner articles and put up this article, I probably should have put my two cents before this point, but here ya go:
I'm on both sides of this -- I'm a non-smoker who hates getting smoke blown in my face and coming home smelling like crap. However, like Tracy and others suggest, 99% of the time I don't patron places where I'll have to endure such behavior. Whether or not secondhand smoke is a carcinogen (hint -- it is) is mostly a non-issue in my world since I avoid it at all costs.
What I don't get is how you can keep defending an activity that will kill you. Since the majority of the smoking defenders here are articulate, I'm assuming that you're halfway intelligent and know that the sweet, sweet smoke you're inhaling is killing you puff by puff. I also don't understand why intelligent people would want to present themselves with yellowed teeth and rank clothing every day, since I assume you don't just smoke in bars. So if one of you could kindly inform me how such obviously intelligent people could continue to make such idiotic decisions that are detrimental to your health, appearance, and body odor, please enlighten me.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
MichaelJMcFadden Anonymous
Someone wrote that the ban "might make bar customers mad, but what are they going to do? Stay at home and drink? Quit drinking? Nah."
Want to bet on that? Check out the economic effect study I did a year or two ago with co-researcher Dave Kuneman at:
http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/econom...
and see just what smoking bans actually DO to the bar/hospitality industry. If you don't like our study, check out the links to others below it.
If you don't like statistics in general, check out what happened to over 300 bars/businesses just in NY State after their ban: real places, with real people, in their own real words:
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules...
Download and read the .pdf version of the "Generic Stiletto" there and you'll also get to see what sort of twists and turns and manglings are done to scientific studies in order to frighten people into supporting smoking bans.
Smoking bans are bad laws based on lies and as such they are not proper laws at all.
Michael J. McFadden Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" Mid-Atlantic Director, Citizens Freedom Alliance, Inc. Director, Pennsylvania Smokers' Action Network (PASAN) web page: http://pasan.thetruthisalie.com/ mailto: Cantiloper@aol.com
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
I think most of us realize it's not good for you, that's not the point. The point is, it is a LEGAL activity. And bars are not municipal buildings, everyone doesn't have to go there.
The law as it stands today is fine. There are actually some non-smoking bars starting to pop up here and there. (they're not nearly as cool as my bar but that might best be disussed in another thread ;-) If I wanted to declare my bar non-smoking as of tonight, I could do so. But I guess we're kind of "old school". A lot of our patrons actually enjoy having a place they can come and light up and have a cocktail and listen to some roots music. The law allows us to offer that. It also allows non-smoking bars. If there aren't enough of those to suit all of the non-smokers, I don't think that should be MY problem. (DC obviously disagrees - hey DC, I hear you can go to North Korea and they'll arrange your whole effing life for you!)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Chad Jones Verified
People should be allowed to smoke in the same way they should be allowed to let their doctor pull their plug; it's your life. But as far as legality goes, the reason cancer-causing asbestos is illegal and cancer-causing cigarettes are legal is, of course, that there is big money to be made in the consumption of the latter, so our laws reflect the tobacco industry's wishes.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
Chad - that's probably true. Not only is there money to be made, but I think prohibition taught us a few things about human nature that we haven't figured out how to overcome just yet. Digression - Alex - people have been doing things that are bad for them for thousands of years. I'm not a psychologist, and don't have any good answers for you. But surely you do SOMETHING that's not good for you, like, eat crap with high fructose corn syrup in it, or something ? Or go to McDonalds ? Are you fat ? Do you eat saccharin or other artificial sweeteners ? Do you drive too fast ?
Sometimes intelligent folk really do not give a rats ass what other people think about them......
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rawlins Gilliland Verified
I wasn’t going to post on this dead horse, but here goes. Everyone, including Doyle, Yost and Morren and Chad are correct, of course. However, here’s my two-cents one time back story:
I am one of the few ‘reformed’ smokers who does not claim to be allergic to smoke (that we once inhaled) and claim to gag and/or vomit after taking my clothes to the cleaners after having been exposed by others. However #2: As long as it has been legal, I have felt that I was supposed to play fair and square, meaning that if smoke bothered me, skip going where there is smoke. However #3: When I go to Lee Harvey’s, inevitably, when I eat my burger or drink my brew, I am sandwiched between minimum two fumigating chain smokers. (True most bars; The smoker to non-smoker ratio having leaped after smoking other places was eliminated a few years back, consolidating those who choose to puff away.)
Does this ruin my evening? No way. Am I sick of being around chain smoking lushes instead of simply good old fashioned drunks? You bet. Do I say a word? No way. It’s legal. But if they make smoking at the bar illegal, will I celebrate privately? Undoubtedly.
I recall when I used to biz-travel to L.A. constantly (circa mid/late 90s), and frequented the Latin nightclubs there. In the balcony of the DT L.A. Mayan nightclub (an old theatre circa 1920s), one could not even see the stage, the smoke was so thick, the price I paid to dive into my salsa dream world. Then, late 90s, L.A. passed a sweeping no-smoke ban. When I went to the Mayan again, there were just as many people if not more, I could see the stage like a HD Flat-screen lifesize, and was stunned at how much nicer the entire experience became.
Did I have anything to do with the No-Smoke ban? Of course not. Did I love the change? Indescribably improved.
The writing’s on the wall. Smoking is simply a habit (I smoked heavily 20 years) that has for whatever reasons become socially pariah-istic. Scream, cry, claw, fight, beg, steal, bark. The big ‘Mo’ is against you. The majority has ruled that the peripheral toxicity overrides the smoker’s ‘right’ to what they see as a private act. As a civil libertarian, I side with anyone angry about this tide that is rolling over the smoker’s den. But the train left the station decades ago (in San Fran mid 70s) and is world wide…most recently, for God’s sakes France.
So face reality and the writing on the mirror. It is no longer fun to smoke because it is impossible to find a place TO smoke. I had to help a friend across Hall Street to smoke when he was in Baylor Hospital recently (dying of cancer) and he could not smoke even in the open air parking lot.
It’s over. Don’t waste your breath. No pun (I promise) intended.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
You folks are really missing a serious point about freedom. In a world where you can't cut down a dying tree on your own property without a permit, can't operate a cell phone in your own car in certain areas, or ride a bicycle without a helmet, a smoking ban is just another in a long list of freedoms you seem anxious to just give away.
And just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get cha!
No, we're not discussing here my personal right to smoke- it's not illegal to smoke. But it won't be too long before I won't be able to smoke in my own home. If I lived in some of the new condos or apartment complexes, that would already be the case.
I never thought I'd be the one to say something like this but... you young folks need to pull yourselves away from the ball-games, your Ipods, and American Idol long enough to get hip to what is happening to your country- the demise of your personal freedoms, something that you are apparently so eager to see happen.
Are there any adults here who actually learned something from high-school history and civics class?
Take it from a paranoid old man, you will feel the sting of your foolishness one day.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rawlins Gilliland Verified
I didn't 'miss' any points 'about freedom', Rick. In fact, I reintegrated them all and a few of my own, including yours. But it's over. The ship sailed everywhere long ago, or yesterday. But it sailed. And good, bad, sad, happy...it is over. Yes, yes, yes, it raises a million questions and concerns. I agree. I even spoke against it the first time to back restaurateur Monica Greene whom I greatly respect.
But. It. Is. Over. And (crushed) out. There is ultimately nothing noble or sensible about fighting over a clearly lost cause; whether a dead horse should have been shot. The horse is dead. And so is this 'to smoke or not to smoke in public' debate. Right or wrong, the cause is lost. Dead. Over. The larger cause of individual rights must seek newer venues than tobacco. Because that cause lost no less than Lee's surrender. Right or wrong. I promise you. Dead. Over. Bury it.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
Rawlins...exactly what are you trying to say? (just kidding) And I'm sure you're right.
By the way, how much would it cost for you to mention my business like you do LH's in so many of your local postings...just askin'.
Cute little story about L.A.- I guess, didn't really see the relevance. And who doesn't know Monica? Why all the name-dropping?
Your celebrity may be far-reaching sir, more so than I'd thought considering your post..."Right or wrong. I promise you. Dead. Over. Bury it." Sheesh, I guess you really are the last word in Dallas.
Sorry, it just pisses me off to have you or anyone tell me I can't to do a certain something in my own business that isn't illegal. How would you feel? Aw, never mind. My fists are aching from beating on it now.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Alex Bentley Staff
Tracy, that's a little personal, don't you think?
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rawlins Gilliland Verified
Rick, read what I write rather than react to it. I sympathize. But, metaphorically, this specific 'civil cause celeb' body is decaying.
As for the 'name dropping', Im sure you're joking, but how can someone who goes all the way back to when Monica was Eduardo as host at Genaro's (now the Tipperary Inn) in the 80s be 'name dropping'? Greene lead the Anti-No Smoking ban very publicly the first time around, and never forgave Mayor Miller thereafter when she turned away from those who had supported her before. I was referring specifically to the hearings before the council.
I don't expect to have the 'final word'. But I know a 'civil liberties' corpse when I smell one. I just think you'd do well to recoup your energy to pound your fist and gavel on another day, with a cause you might hope to win. Because your points are justly well made. But this one is lost, my friend.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
John Meyer Staff
What's the problem? Bar patrons should just smoke Chesterfields. It says here they're mild and have no unpleasant aftertaste:
(Oh, and Alex: thanks to your photo post I'm swearing off of fatty foods for good.)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rawlins Gilliland Verified
Who could question Ronald Reagan's taste in cigarettes? Wonder what brand President Hillary Clinton will endorse.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Scott Doyle Verified
Just a disclaimer: my rant about the EPA and what not was in response to the freakin' canucks saying ridiculous crap like:
Smoke from tobacco is a statistically insignificant health risk
and
There has never been a study proving that exposure to smoke kills or harms anyone.
Not sure what kind of cigarettes they smoke in Canadia-land.
But anyways, Rick, I've never felt like I can do anything I want whenever I want. If I could, I honestly wouldn't want to live in that world. I realize things have probably changed a lot in your lifetime, unfortunately I've become used to this kind of thing...without paranoid old men around I'd have no clue what I'm being deprived of!
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Mike Orren Staff
Sigh. I know I post this every time, but I can't help it. Plus, I think we could all use an uptempo tune to lighten this convo:
This is nice too:
Of course, I grew up in the cigarette state:
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
oppose_bans Anonymous
Let me tell you how this is going to play out in Dallas because here’s what happened in Ohio:
• Ohio bars & restaurants are closing BY THE HUNDREDS!
• Anhueser Busch sales to 4 large Ohio cities are down 7.8% since the ban (draft beer down 8.1%) while sales to carry outs & drive-thrus are up 1.7%. People stay home (and DRINK and SMOKE at home). That’s a huge loss to the distributors and an even more devastating loss to Ohio business owners. Sales & Use Taxes for the last half of 2007 will prove to have dropped dramatically! • Ohio Job & Family Services posted a big loss of jobs in the hospitality & leisure industry instead of the even larger projected growth. • Ohio is leading the U.S. foreclosure rates (obviously not totally to blame on Ohio’s smoking ban)
All because of smoking bans based on lies and corruption. The propaganda SmokeFreeOhio, AKA the American Cancer Society, spewed to get voters to pass Issue 5 in Ohio was “Smoke-free policies do not harm business” THEY LIED!!
The real cancer is the smoking bans and it’s a nationwide disease. Moreover, we understand that the real cancer is the lies, deceit and corruption behind the bans. The real cancer is the hatred the antis have created towards the smokers. The real deaths are our businesses and jobs (and homes). The real statistics are the people who huddle outside in the freezing weather to smoke a legal product. The real statistics are the people who are beaten and/or robbed when the step outside of their safe place of employment. The real cancer is that our country’s policies are now made by lobbyists, pharmaceutical companies and “foundations” (AKA pharmaceutical companies). We have asked that the following areas be investigated:
We are requesting a Congressional Hearing into these lies and corruption. As American citizens and American business owners, we deserve an investigation to uncover the truth. Since this is a nationwide problem, we’ve initiated a nationwide petition. You can view all our supporting documentation at: http://opponentsofohiobans.com/online...
This is America. We are NOT going to be run by lobbyists or pharmaceutical companies! Nor will we be lied to or swindled out of our Constitution.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Wagner Verified
Instead of everyone screaming about the YES or the NO of smoking at bars.. Why didn't anyone with 1/2 a brain consider an area outdoors next to the entrace where people could go and have a butt and then enter the smoke-free place. Is it so darn hard to afford an outside ashtray and maybe a simple park bench? When the bench is full then the others can stand encouraging them not to get too comfortable.
Yes, I'm a smoker.. but at least I have enough common decency to go outside to smoke when visiting a friends home or riding in someone else's car. I would never force my addiction upon them nor would I expect them to be some kind of extremist over it either.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Clay213 Anonymous
So if I want to see a band in a place that allows smoking I either need to suck it up or not go?
How is that any more fair than places just not allowing smoking?
I really think the Yosts need to find another line of work.. because being in the service industry just seems to be making them bitter and angry.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
Clay - "So if I want to see a band in a place that allows smoking I either need to suck it up or not go?" - yes.
"How is that any more fair than places just not allowing smoking?" - life is not always "fair", and most establishments (including mine) reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason. Private business does not "owe" fairness to non-smokers. And besides, maybe a non-smoking venue will book the same band and you can go and see them without having to suck anything up.
I don't think anyone's angry or bitter, but I for one am very tired of trying to explain these very simple concepts. "Die, Horse !!"
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
whoisjohngalt Anonymous
Government Will Make Smokers, Children, Families, Sick
Government's that foster anti-smoking policies lead the real health epidemic, government interference. They are not using science as their competent guide into the future. Instead they use the deep festering envy of politicized environmentalists to revisit remnants of the Second World War. The profound statement of philosopher/novelist Ayn Rand echoes the truth that smothers us, "Today, we live in the age of envy."
I am a life-long non-smoker, who has lost the four most precious people in my life. Cancer was the effect, a consequence, but not the cause. Yet, I will not help to propagandize health into dictatorial policy through anti-smoking. I do not wish to repeat the 1930's, 1940's. Do you?
Exactly how can our government "create a healthier society for all" when they betray the smoker's sense of trust, demoralize their self-confidence, disrupt their employer-employee relationships, upheave their family life, and undermind their efficacy by alienating them from their own human nature?
This destructive mind/body dichotomy will subject smoker's to long-term emotional and mental disorders, thus leading to serious physical ailments. In reality, our government is making them sick.
A particularily foreboding feature of the mind/body dichotomy is the government's suffocating negative influence while aggressively restricting young people from making their own decisions. Government aggression will severely jeopardize each young person's struggle to form a necessary sense of self-confidence. This fragile process is usually a traumatic experience, especially when that negative influence is hidden under the misconception of government benevolence.
Good mental/emotional health promotes good physical health, not the reverse.
In reality, our government lacks the knowledge of the trigger mechanism that sets off most cancers or most other major diseases to then become a critical danger for human beings. It is not smoking, nor second-hand smoke.
In the words of Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace, "It doesn't matter what is true; it only matters what people believe is true. He is wrong.
We deserve truth, not distortion of the truth.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rawlins Gilliland Verified
Please, Mr. DJ, Play B14: "Shake Me, Wake Me When It's Over - (1966 hit single written and produced by Holland-Dozier-Holland and released as a single by The Four Tops)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Brett Hoerner Verified
"Sorry, it just pisses me off to have you or anyone tell me I can't to do a certain something in my own business that isn't illegal." - Rick Yost
Right, but it will be illegal. Problem solved, right?
I believe we're still legally allowed to fornicate in Texas, but I can't go out to a restaurant and do that (as far as I know)... where are the Freedom™ outcries on that one (and the many others)?
I'm mostly indifferent, can't say it's ever affected my choice on where to go, but I agree with Rawlins that it's as good as over. Think of the poor, poor dead horse
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
I agree with Rawlins too, eventually these non-smoking ordinances will become our reality. But until that day - "Smoke 'em if you got 'em!" (and apparently there are more folks who want to smoke in restaurants, than who would want to fornicate in restaurants ;-)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Clay213 Anonymous
Apparently Tracy Yost and others with her same tired boring argument really can't see the hypocrisy inherent with it.
You can't tell me this is about 'freedoms' without infringing on mine by allowing them.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Tracy Yost Verified
I give up. (eyes have rolled back in head, body twitching, got to get out of here while still can!)
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Chad Jones Verified
Aren't those the symptoms of emphysema?
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Rick Yost Verified
Rawlins- you're correct in that I am a reactionary- always have been. I couldn't possibly match your experience and knowledge of the Dallas club scene. I mean no disrespect my friend.
My experiences were of the darker, seedier, underbelly of Dallas. For half my life it was just myself, and my acoustic guitar on stage in the bars and smoky-clubs of this city. My lyrics, which back in my day were highly acclaimed and award winning, were inspired by my reacting this insane world. And although I wouldn't even recognize you sir if you stepped up and asked me for a light(:-o), I think some part of you just might agree that this is a truly insane world- always has been. The powers that be just figure out better ways to keep the masses from thinking about it. If that sounds paranoid, then so be it.
Through our impressive electronics, our childish amusements, and what today is called the entertainment industry, the public has relaxed back into snoozing the American dream- where we once again forget about Iraq, Katrina, and many other atrocities across this country and around the world. This, my friend, is what I react to.
I’ve always been a staunch individualist, it’s one of the best things about the American way of life I grew up in- the freedom to choose to be different.
Although I never achieved what most would call 'success' with my music, in a small way, I accomplished what I set out to do. I made my audience think. I made them question some things they'd not dared question before, and maybe in a small way, helped educate a little bit of the population about the world outside of the world they're meant to see. I created what I wanted, and presented it the way I wanted. That is being successful in my book.
So now relate this same individualist philosophy to opening our bar. My wife and I are both guitarists, we met in a bar where I was playing. We both have a deep love of live music- especially blues, and jazz.
When we set out to open our business, our original concept was a live music venue with a full bar- an adult bar. No jello shots, no pitchers of beer, definitely not a sports bar. Although we’ve had to make a few compromises, we’ve kept fairly close to the original idea.
The real point here is that we’re not a franchise- we’re an old-school, mom-&-pop business. We weren’t trying to appeal to the ‘masses’. We wanted to open a business where folks of our similar age and tastes could come and hear good music, enjoy a quality cocktail, and yes, even smoke. You don’t have to smoke to come in, but you may if you’d like.
Unfortunately, society today is so franchise-oriented, even the little night-spot down on the corner has to conform, cater-to, and accommodate the masses- or the masses will turn on you like a torch-carrying-mob hunting Frankenstein. Hence the inevitable smoking ban.
We didn’t set out to please everybody. In the American free-enterprise system I learned of in my younger days, you didn’t have to. But obviously things have changed.
I hope this explains a little about my point of view.
Peace
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Billusa99 Anonymous
Confucius say, smoker who run to parking lot to light up among cars quickly become exhausted.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Pavel Lishin Verified
Rick Yost: the dog poop analogy was a bad choice, since as I recall there is an ordinance prohibiting dogs from crapping where I might conceivably roll around - sidewalks, parks, the grassy areas in apartment complexes, etc. Or is prohibiting pets (and people?) from where they want exactly the same as forcing me to hold a rap concert in the privacy of my own home for the benefit of the homeless?
"If I lived in some of the new condos or apartment complexes, that would already be the case."
Hey, they just opened a non-smoking condo. Can't really complain about that too much. Freedom.
"you young folks need to pull yourselves away from the ball-games, your Ipods, and American Idol long enough to get hip to what is happening to your country- the demise of your personal freedoms, something that you are apparently so eager to see happen."
In a time of warrantless wiretaps and abuse of power from the office of the President down to the TSA, smoking bans are pretty much dead last on my list of things I'm scared of. It's just I haven't been illegally detained in the past year, but I have had to hang around smokers.
Alex Bentley - smoking actually has several health benefits in certain situations. For instance, if you're a high-stress person with a family history of heart attacks, smoking might actually extend your life span by keeping you from going tachychardic next time the intern at work spills coffee on some important files. Sure, you'll die of lung cancer in 20 years, but it beats dying of a heart attack in five. Obviously that is a pretty weak example, but hey. You're also more likely to die in a car crash than just about anything else, but I bet you drive to work every day.
Also, I skipped every post that had more than six paragraphs, or had lists in them. The latter I'm 100% certain are copied from some sort of brochure, and the former... well... can't tear myself away from that ipod.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Alex Bentley Staff
Pavel -- nice try. Obviously you haven't read my profile.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Billusa99 Anonymous
Let's face it, Pavel, he got ya there. No use trying to make sense with a *Master's* from UNT. Next time use stuff like Jessica's tryst with Romo instead of Patriot Act stuff.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Pavel Lishin Verified
You bastard, how dare you undermine me. :(
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
OpusthePoet Anonymous
opposebans, you mention the roughly 8% drop in alcohol sales through bars, but didn't mention the fact that Ohio is currently in economic recession and has been in decline since before the turn of the 21st century. What was the economic report on sit-down restaraunts that had previously banned smoking for the same period? I don't have access to that report at the moment.
1 year, 9 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
basilhoyl Anonymous
Dallas, come to a Smokin' Party on April 11 - No smoking ban in Hurst
Dallas Smokers: The Dallas Smoking ban takes effect today, April 10. Dallas no longer wants you, but we embrace you! Heck, it is a HOOKAH BAR! Onyx Hookah in Hurst has a great party on Saturday, April 11 (and April 25th). KAPOW! BYOB saves you money and with the best flavored hookah in the metroplex and with SEVEN, count 'em, SEVEN hot DJs, we have what you need when you need it!
431 W. Bedford Euless Rd., Hurst, TX 76053 8pm-4am 18+ BYOB $5 cover 8:00 Dj DFW 9:30 Dj D Nied 10:30 Dj Koi 11:30 Dj Yosh 12:30 Dj El Nino 1:45 Dj GQ 2:45 Dj Sneddy
Free Parking CD Giveaways GO GO Dancers Fire Dancers
7 months ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )
Post a comment