Should smoking be banned in restaurants and bars?

Why or why not?

We are currently debating this issue in Pittsburgh.
Answer:
If a business-owner decides to have a smoke-free work place, that is his right.

If his customers or employees petition for a smoke-free workplace and the business owner acquiesces, then that is ok, too.

But when do-gooders and politicians use the power of government to intrude into the operation of a private business and dictate whether smoking can occur there - that is tyranny. It is the antithesis of the liberty and freedom that are supposed to be our birthright.

---

No I don't think so.

Bars and restaurants could declare themselves Smoking or No Smoking and let the customers and employees decide where they want to go.

---

yes, definately

not fare that the damn smokers get to stink out an entire restaurant or bar, not to mention how it effects the health of the people who work in those places

---

Any time a government passes laws "for the good of the people" we lose a little liberty.

---

No. If the individual owner of a bar or restaurant wants to ban smoking that's a decision that he or she makes on their own. I do not smoke and I like to go to bars. I just find ones that don't allow smoking and go there.

---

Yes. They past a law in Colorado last year. I enjoy going into a restaurants, and bars and not have my family or I have to breathe in someone elses smoke.

---

Nope! I think the owner of each place should have the choice of non-smoking or smoking. Then any individual could decide for themselves if they want to go there!

---

Well, restaurants I can see how that would be bothersome to alot of people - I have no problem with banning smoking in restaurants

BUT

in bars, give me a break, bars are one of the few places left that we can smoke. Houston's bar smoking ban goes into effect September 1st of this year. Why cant we leave the decision of whether or not to allow smoking up to the bar owners, then they will be decided which clientel they will be going after. Right now there are already some bar owner who choose to ban smoking without a governmenr mandated ban. So there are plenty of places already for non-smokers to go if they choose.

I would also like to add that there are many non-smokers who are not bothered by people smoking around them.

There are also smokers, likie myself, who always ask when sitting next to strangers if they will be bothered if I smoke.

We all have to learn to live together.

---

no.
i think they should keep it the way it has been.
where they have different sections for smokers and non smokers.

---

I don't think there should be an all out ban. There should be a smoking and non-smoking section. Some of us can't even smoke in our own houses now, what's next? Smoking bans continue an assault on freedom.

The following paragraph wasn't written by me - so it may be a little faulty on text and punctuation.

"i will agree non smokers have had a rough deal but to ban smoking out right in pubs and clubs in totally unfair, every town, city etc should have both non smoking and smoking bars and clubs that is a fair way to go then there is a clear choice wether to go or not and wether to work there or not, why should non smokers dictate the leasure of all, people who dont drive dont get given a choice wether to inhale car fumes or not, its acceptable for a non smoking car driver to make non drivers inhale there waste from cars, try being a child in a buggy with pollution from cars while they are taking to shops etc, its okay for that but all manners of ban is being brought in for smokers, also who is going to make up the shortfall in tax loss to the government, no one wants to discuss that, one in four people smoke in this country and pay high taxes to do it, and most smoke more when out for a night so the tax loss will be great and dont be fooled into thinking the NHS will make a saving as that wont be the case the cost will stay the same and the revenure to pay towards it will be cut, so as i dont own a car i think the tax loss should be made up on cars, that would be fair, by putting petrol up by a pound a gallon and car tax up by 33% the government should be able to claw back the tax lost on cig sales, as somthing has to be taxed to make up the shortfall and since theres three times as many non smoking car drivers as smoking drivers i think thats a fair way to go, they wished the ban on the country they should foot the tax loss to the country. oh did the likes of ASH and the Government fail to mention the tax loss and the poor non smoker not think of it. As non smokers pollut as well, and lets face it you will be able to save if you reduce your car size and that stops people choking our streets with car pollution where our children play and walk down each day. and encourage more to use public transport." (link)

---

Smoking should be banned in bars. Regardless if there is a Non smoking section and a smoking section, this fake half a wall barrier does nothing. The smoke still diffuses through out the restaurant. Some people are super sensitive to cigarette smoke. My dad and I happen to be allergic to it. Here in missouri they banned smoking in public buildings which was a relief because now we can go out and eat dinner without being bothered or having to get up and leave, because of the smoke. Also smoking just doesn't cause damage to others peoples health but it is smelly....People who are non smokers do not want to smell like smoke. Sometimes I have to wash my clothes twice because of cigarette smoke from smokers.

---

Yes it should be banned. Not smoking does not ruin peoples health.

---

No, I do not smoke but I believe if a bar or restaurant can stay open with smoke in the air they deserve to be in buisness and obviously it is what their customers want or will tolerate. The wait staff should not be working in a bar or restaurant if they do not like smoke. There is constant need for waitstaff nationwide and many non smoking restaurants to work at. People at bars are obviously not overly concerned about their health.

---

I think it should be up to the owner of the restaurant/bar.

---

Yes, it should be banned.

My friend has asthma and even if a whiff goes by, she has an attack and can't breathe and has to go to emergency which is so severe and you want to know the bill to breathe?????

$$1000.00 dollars just breathe and get and chest x-ray
while the bastard who puffed gets off scott free.

These smokers don't give a crap if they affect someone elses health, and I believe they should be SUED big time because someone caused their health problem to exacerbate.

If a smoker was sued 2 or 3 times the dork would stop smoking and invest in his own health.

---

I think smokers should be allowed to smoke wherever they want, provided it is outside and away from non-smokers.

Nobody has the right to inflict health problems on anybody else.

---

I don't believe it should be banned by the government. I believe each restaurant/bar owner should be free to make that decision. Business owners know their customers.

I've actually recently quit smoking -- but there are restaurants that I have stopped patronizing in my area because they went smoke free. That's my decision -- as it is non-smokers decisions to not patronize smoking establishments.

The smoke in restaurants truly isn't that detrimental to the health of non-smoking patrons. A study was done in my area that showed at the worst sitting in a smoky restaurant (in the smoking section) for 3 hours was the equivalent of smoking 1 cigarette. That doesn't seem bad to me -- if you chronically dine out, stop sitting in the smoking section.

A big argument here has been everyone is entitled to a smoke-free workplace. If smoke bothers you -- choose to work in a non-smoking environment -- that seems obvious.

---

Yes, Smoking should be banned from Restaurants, Given the potential lethal consequences of prolonged use of any dangerous substance, second hand smoke is just as bad, especially when children are involved.

No, smoking should not be banned from Bars, alcohol is bad for ones Liver, why not kill ones lung in the process?

---

If this is not a law yet in your State I`m very sorry to say this will be one soon as it already is in Ohio and Fla. and a lot of other states also

I currently live in Fla and its been a law here for sometime

---

Sure.

Just to be on the safe side, ban eating and drinking too. People have to be protected from getting heart attacks and alcoholism.

%26lt;sigh%26gt;

---

The libertarian response is to leave it up to the restaurant owners. But we do not let restaurant owners refuse service to someone because he or she is Black, nor should we. Similarly, we should not allow restaurants to allow smoking in-doors. Just like racial discrimination, it is harmful and the government is permitted to regulate to prevent a harm from being done on its citizens. The "rights" argument gets you nowhere. Saying you have a right to smoke begs the question: why don't I have a right to clean air? We need policy analysis, and as I said, I think intervention in the market is warranted here because the government is acting to protect its citizens from a harm. Indeed, lung conditions-- asthma, cancer and many others-- are exacerbated by smoky bars and eateries. Not to mention the children, whose young lungs should not be exposed to such harmful substances. One might say, well, you don't have to go to a restaurant that allows smoking. If you don't like it don't go. But why should my actions or restaurant choices be limited by people who choose to smoke? In addition, no one seems to make this argument when it comes to health code violations, although one could. One could easily say that the government should not have health codes at restaurants because, if you want clean and safe food, just don't go to the restaurants that are not clean and whose food is not safe. But that doesn't seem right; we approve of health codes for restaurants because we think it is proper that the government prevent the harm that results from having dirty/unsafe restaurants. Why not allow the government to regulate so as to avoid the harm that results from in-door smoke? Finally, as it was pointed out, yes, every time the government regulates something, we do lose a little "liberty." But liberty to do what? In the health code scenario, it is the "liberty" to have a dirty restaurant. In the smoking context, it is the "freedom" to have a known carcinogen and asthma- exacerbator in the air. Are these really the kinds of "freedoms" we need to protect? I think not. Clearly, the benefits prevail.

---

Being a smoker for 13+ years, I DO believe smoking should be banned in all public places where there are children. It's one thing for bars to allow smoking, it's another to allow restaruants. I would not smoke in front of my children, nor would I take them into a place where others were smoking. Nothing ticks me off more then parents who show up at kids activites (ie baseball/football games and smoke).

---

Yes. A non-smoking person should be able to sit down in a restaurant and not inhale unhealthful smoke while they eat. My wife grew up in a house of smokers and now she has Bronchitis. This same principal applies here. If I go to a resturaunt for along period of time with smokers in the vicinty, I will get Bronchial %26 Lung problems. This is FACT!!. Is this right? F**K NO !!! If they want to smoke they can go outside or if the resuraunt is smart enough they would create a whole new room seperate from NON smokers. I live in Las Vegas and this is a huge problem out here right now. They just passed A Smoking ban in all Resturaunts. Overwelming in the polls. We have Gamming Bars out here that serve food These Gamming bars now have to get rid of the FOOD to keep smokers or get rid of smokers to sell food. Nevada has one of the largest amount of smokers in the U.S.. Guess what? The majority of these Gamming Bars are keeping the Food and kicking out the smokers and none of these establisments are hurting. In fact more people are now coming to these places (more than before). Most of the smokers I have talked too actually don't like smoking when they are eating. This says a million words right there.