I'm all for banning smoking in restaurants and for sure at the work place but a smoking ban in bars in my eyes is completely Frickin' retarded. If there would be such a large audience who wants to enjpoy a smokefree bar, why haven't there always been flourishing nightclubs and bars running a smokefree business on a voluntary basis? I mean please, if you want to live a long and healthy life, go to the gym or to the spa but steer clear from bars and nightclubs. I'm not really that bothered because I'm an old fart by now and have already had all the fun in bars and clubs to last me for two lifetimes but please, think of the young ones. Let them have their hedonistic, unhealthy and unrestricted fun. If you spend your twenties and maybe even a good part of your thirties smoking, drinking and whatnot you don't necessarily ruin your health. I never smoked inside my appartement and only smoked the two or three nights of the week when I went out or worked as a DJ. I despise this whole attitude of "thank god now I'm being forced to live a healthier life..." don't you people have any dignity? Can't you make your own decissions? I mean if you want to be smoke free and healthy, more power to you. Maybe it's time to give up on bars and clubs and look for another way to waste your time? My idea of a fun night out is being in an environment with as litle restrictions as possible. The vision of a smoke free club with a bunch of old folks who want to live healthy and forever is revolting. Thank god I'm not twenty today.
I'm all for banning smoking in restaurants and for sure at the work place but a smoking ban in bars in my eyes is completely Frickin' retarded. If there would be such a large audience who wants to enjpoy a smokefree bar, why haven't there always been flourishing nightclubs and bars running a smokefree business on a voluntary basis? I mean please, if you want to live a long and healthy life, go to the gym or to the spa but steer clear from bars and nightclubs. I'm not really that bothered because I'm an old fart by now and have already had all the fun in bars and clubs to last me for two lifetimes but please, think of the young ones. Let them have their hedonistic, unhealthy and unrestricted fun. If you spend your twenties and maybe even a good part of your thirties smoking, drinking and whatnot you don't necessarily ruin your health. I never smoked inside my appartement and only smoked the two or three nights of the week when I went out or worked as a DJ. I despise this whole attitude of "thank god now I'm being forced to live a healthier life..." don't you people have any dignity? Can't you make your own decissions? I mean if you want to be smoke free and healthy, more power to you. Maybe it's time to give up on bars and clubs and look for another way to waste your time? My idea of a fun night out is being in an environment with as litle restrictions as possible. The vision of a smoke free club with a bunch of old folks who want to live healthy and forever is revolting. Thank god I'm not twenty today.
What are they going to do next? Ban cocaine?
In Baltimore, for instance, many of the most popular bands and DJs would prefer to do their thing in a smoke-free environment, and many of the bartenders/bookers/promoters/etc of the most popular clubs and bars. If all those people just decided to take your advice and "give up on bars and clubs," night life in this city would be a lot worse for it.
Smoking Bans are Fleeting: This month's issue of The Atlantic brings us news that will be music to the ears of the District's disgruntled smokers. According to the magazine, smoking bans have a long and rich history -- and are usually overturned. Whether Pope Urban VIII's proclamation of a worldwide smoking ban in 1624 or Adolf Hitler's German experiment in 1942, few smoking bans have survived the passage of time. But don't get too excited just yet, smokers. The Vatican's ban lasted until 1779, while a prohibition imposed by Russia's Czar Michael in 1634 lasted 32 years. (It bears mentioning that Michael's ban was overturned after a two-year stint during which smokers faced the death penalty.) You may get to smoke again one day in District bars, but you may also be a little old to be frequenting those bars by then. You win some, you lose some, right?
Pope Urban VII's 13-day papal reign included the world's first known public smoking ban (1590), as he threatened to excommunicate anyone who "took tobacco in the porchway of or inside a church, whether it be by chewing it, smoking it with a pipe or sniffing it in powdered form through the nose".[19] The earliest citywide European smoking bans were enacted shortly thereafter. Such bans were enacted in Bavaria, Kursachsen, and certain parts of Austria in the late 1600s. Smoking was banned in Berlin in 1723, in K??nigsberg in 1742, and in Stettin in 1744. These bans were repealed in the revolutions of 1848.[20] The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under direct orders from Adolf Hitler himself.[21] Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.[/b]
Just curious.....how many of you anti-smoking folks support the legalization of marijuana??
I support the legalization of marijuana -- to be smoked outdoors, in the privacy of one's home, and in a limited # of clubs/bars issued marijuana licenses. Which is the same way I feel about tobacco, incidentally.
I also think marijuana is the less dangerous product, especially when we're talking about tobacco as processed by major corporations of dubious (to say the least) moral standing.
Just curious.....how many of you anti-smoking folks support the legalization of marijuana??
I support the legalization of marijuana -- to be smoked outdoors, in the privacy of one's home, and in a limited # of clubs/bars issued marijuana licenses. Which is the same way I feel about tobacco, incidentally.
I'm all for banning smoking in restaurants and for sure at the work place but a smoking ban in bars in my eyes is completely Frickin' retarded. If there would be such a large audience who wants to enjpoy a smokefree bar, why haven't there always been flourishing nightclubs and bars running a smokefree business on a voluntary basis? I mean please, if you want to live a long and healthy life, go to the gym or to the spa but steer clear from bars and nightclubs. I'm not really that bothered because I'm an old fart by now and have already had all the fun in bars and clubs to last me for two lifetimes but please, think of the young ones. Let them have their hedonistic, unhealthy and unrestricted fun. If you spend your twenties and maybe even a good part of your thirties smoking, drinking and whatnot you don't necessarily ruin your health. I never smoked inside my appartement and only smoked the two or three nights of the week when I went out or worked as a DJ. I despise this whole attitude of "thank god now I'm being forced to live a healthier life..." don't you people have any dignity? Can't you make your own decissions? I mean if you want to be smoke free and healthy, more power to you. Maybe it's time to give up on bars and clubs and look for another way to waste your time? My idea of a fun night out is being in an environment with as litle restrictions as possible. The vision of a smoke free club with a bunch of old folks who want to live healthy and forever is revolting. Thank god I'm not twenty today.
What are they going to do next? Ban cocaine?
In Baltimore, for instance, many of the most popular bands and DJs would prefer to do their thing in a smoke-free environment, and many of the bartenders/bookers/promoters/etc of the most popular clubs and bars. If all those people just decided to take your advice and "give up on bars and clubs," night life in this city would be a lot worse for it.
Why not promote a no-smoke party where smoking is banned by the promoter and the people who run the place? I've heard your argument over and over and it's as tired as it is fictional. I've made a living of promoting club nights for over 4 years in NYC and for 5 years in Berlin. I've seen a couple of attempts at the above mentioned concept of parties for non-smokers. All of them were... well, they weren't smoking, that's for sure and they all didn't last for more than 1 or 2 times.
The market always provides what people want, if there would be any need for smoke-free clubs or bars, they would already be there.
I think that Nightlife should be as unrestricted as possible. Nothing fun and nothing of any cultural relevance ever happened in a sanatized environment.
I'm all for banning smoking in restaurants and for sure at the work place but a smoking ban in bars in my eyes is completely Frickin' retarded. If there would be such a large audience who wants to enjpoy a smokefree bar, why haven't there always been flourishing nightclubs and bars running a smokefree business on a voluntary basis? I mean please, if you want to live a long and healthy life, go to the gym or to the spa but steer clear from bars and nightclubs. I'm not really that bothered because I'm an old fart by now and have already had all the fun in bars and clubs to last me for two lifetimes but please, think of the young ones. Let them have their hedonistic, unhealthy and unrestricted fun. If you spend your twenties and maybe even a good part of your thirties smoking, drinking and whatnot you don't necessarily ruin your health. I never smoked inside my appartement and only smoked the two or three nights of the week when I went out or worked as a DJ. I despise this whole attitude of "thank god now I'm being forced to live a healthier life..." don't you people have any dignity? Can't you make your own decissions? I mean if you want to be smoke free and healthy, more power to you. Maybe it's time to give up on bars and clubs and look for another way to waste your time? My idea of a fun night out is being in an environment with as litle restrictions as possible. The vision of a smoke free club with a bunch of old folks who want to live healthy and forever is revolting. Thank god I'm not twenty today.
What are they going to do next? Ban cocaine?
In Baltimore, for instance, many of the most popular bands and DJs would prefer to do their thing in a smoke-free environment, and many of the bartenders/bookers/promoters/etc of the most popular clubs and bars. If all those people just decided to take your advice and "give up on bars and clubs," night life in this city would be a lot worse for it.
Why not promote a no-smoke party where smoking is banned by the promoter and the people who run the place?
Beacause promoting a party as "smoke free" is about as exciting as "water available" -- both are good things, but not selling points.
I honestly can't believe so many of are supporting this issue. A few have hit on good points including Frank and Rock. The ban in Chicago that goes into effect in the new year is much more strict than in most places so I think it's hitting here a little harder. The way this ban works, if I choose to throw a party in my house, that can be proven to be ???open to the public??? I can't smoke in my home. My very well ventilated bathroom even. This is purely a governmental issue for me. They do not have the right to control peoples property like this. You don't have the right to control my property like this. In Illinois a business must show that 80% of it's revenue comes from tobacco for it to allow smoking. This rules out most forms of hookah bars and cigar bars that do any substantial amount of business in anything else, like alcohol or coffee. I encourage smoke free bars, promoters, an bar owners. I am sure I would frequent their events. But this should not be a law. Ever. I have no problem with someone personally asking me to smoke somewhere else, in most cases you have every right to. Passing these laws is some underhanded and slimy shit.
I honestly can't believe so many of are supporting this issue. A few have hit on good points including Frank and Rock. The ban in Chicago that goes into effect in the new year is much more strict than in most places so I think it's hitting here a little harder. The way this ban works, if I choose to throw a party in my house, that can be proven to be ???open to the public??? I can't smoke in my home. My very well ventilated bathroom even. This is purely a governmental issue for me. They do not have the right to control peoples property like this. You don't have the right to control my property like this.
Seriously, what are the odds of you EVER being busted for this? You think the city has the resources to patrol people's individual homes, waiting to nail someone for a smoking violation?
I'm hardly someone who trusts in the good graces of governmental enforcement but I'm no libertarian who thinks that the gov't has no role to regulate anything. There may be communities where you would see this level of micro-prosecution but my speculation is that, in such a neighborhood, worrying about the smoking police is the least of your worries. But you're trying to tell me, in Chicago, the police are going to make going after smoking in private parties a top priority? I don't buy it. How often do private homes get treated like public spaces?
I honestly can't believe so many of are supporting this issue. A few have hit on good points including Frank and Rock. The ban in Chicago that goes into effect in the new year is much more strict than in most places so I think it's hitting here a little harder. The way this ban works, if I choose to throw a party in my house, that can be proven to be ???open to the public??? I can't smoke in my home. My very well ventilated bathroom even. This is purely a governmental issue for me. They do not have the right to control peoples property like this. You don't have the right to control my property like this.
Seriously, what are the odds of you EVER being busted for this? You think the city has the resources to patrol people's individual homes, waiting to nail someone for a smoking violation?
I'm hardly someone who trusts in the good graces of governmental enforcement but I'm no libertarian who thinks that the gov't has no role to regulate anything. There may be communities where you would see this level of micro-prosecution but my speculation is that, in such a neighborhood, worrying about the smoking police is the least of your worries. But you're trying to tell me, in Chicago, the police are going to make going after smoking in private parties a top priority? I don't buy it. How often do private homes get treated like public spaces?
Of course tthey won't enforce it strictly......but the first time they decide to press charges against some poor schlub people will be screaming discrimination or somesuch......likely the very people that seem to have no problem with the law today.
You think the city has the resources to patrol people's individual homes, waiting to nail someone for a smoking violation?
Please don't make me dig out the proposed budgets for financing all of this in the city. You don't think these bans take a chunk of resources that should be put to much better use? I mean, clean smelling clothes is important and all but do we need a "Department of Keeping Jonny Paychecks Fresh & Clean?" How much has been wasted already in planning and debating these issues when there are much better things for our government to do?
I smoke like a motherfucker (FOR SHAME) and I have no problem with the indoor smoking ban. It took a minute to get used to, but when you're forced to go outside you end up talking to the other dregs of humanity and bonding in your socially unacceptable behavior. I think banning it in cars with children is a 100% good idea too. I never smoke anywhere near my kids or in my home, and I think it's fucked to put that on someone who has no choice. It's funny to think how different attitudes about smoking has changed. In the late 70's/early 80's no one thought twice about it. I would be laying on my mom's stomach as a baby while she was chilling, watching TV with a cig in her mouth. Shit is crazy.
How do you feel about banning smoking within "X" amount of feet from a public entrance? They've been doing that out here. I'm not too sold on that one.
I smoke like a motherfucker (FOR SHAME) and I have no problem with the indoor smoking ban. It took a minute to get used to, but when you're forced to go outside you end up talking to the other dregs of humanity and bonding in your socially unacceptable behavior. I think banning it in cars with children is a 100% good idea too. I never smoke anywhere near my kids or in my home, and I think it's fucked to put that on someone who has no choice. It's funny to think how different attitudes about smoking has changed. In the late 70's/early 80's no one thought twice about it. I would be laying on my mom's stomach as a baby while she was chilling, watching TV with a cig in her mouth. Shit is crazy.
How do you feel about banning smoking within "X" amount of feet from a public entrance? They've been doing that out here. I'm not too sold on that one.
I have worked in bars that are non-smoking and bars that allow smoking, and the non-smoking bars sucked for late night business. I don't smoke anymore so the impending smoking ban in Oregon will probably be pleasant for me, but I have mixed feelings about it.
You think the city has the resources to patrol people's individual homes, waiting to nail someone for a smoking violation?
Please don't make me dig out the proposed budgets for financing all of this in the city. You don't think these bans take a chunk of resources that should be put to much better use? I mean, clean smelling clothes is important and all but do we need a "Department of Keeping Jonny Paychecks Fresh & Clean?" How much has been wasted already in planning and debating these issues when there are much better things for our government to do?
And here I was thinking that the smoking ban had to do with protecting people from the health hazards of second hand smoke. Pretty sure this wasn't a consequence of the "fresh and clean" lobby but keep on toting that "they're infringing on my constitutional rights to light on in my house!" line.
I'm sure there's a special black helicopter the gov't has just for the task.
Both Odub and Jonny have made comments to the effect that these bans/laws aren't rally going to be enforced......so someone please explain the logic of passing a law if there is no intent on enforcing it??
Louisville just suspended its smoking ordinance because a judge found it to be unconstitutional after the city council passed an ordinance to "NOT" ban smoking at Churchill Downs. Churchill Downs was given an exemption because of its nature and venue. Thats what the judge found wrong. So we are back to smoking for a few weeks until a special council meets to stop smoking again.
I've been convinced of the public health benefits, but whenever this stuff is put up to a public vote, it really irritates me. This is probably because that people who have voted for it 99 times outta 100 cared more about the inconvenience of smelling like smoke. It really undermines the whole "this is for the public health" line. Legislation should just be passed on a federal level and be done with it.
For what it's worth, I know of a few places that shut down in Florida because of the ban. They were places some of my aunts frequented, old pub and divey kind of places with an established group of 40 year old + regulars and little-to-no foot traffic.
Both Odub and Jonny have made comments to the effect that these bans/laws aren't rally going to be enforced......so someone please explain the logic of passing a law if there is no intent on enforcing it??
Scare tactics??
Eh, there was alot of talk like this around me in Massachusetts when the deadline was approaching, but the ban is in full effect as far as I can see. I assume that out in the burbs or in the city at bars where cops drink or won't go people are still smoking, but clubs, downtown and greater urban area bars are all smoke-free.
Also, the "terrace" has become essential for bars that want to pack them in. It's funny that an area that in concept should be where you go to get fresh air is actually the most toxic spot in the place.
That's exactly what I mean. Can you go into the average bar in the city at 9pm and light up? Absolutely not. Do people, with some regularity, light up in quiet pockets, late at night, when it's empty, or near closing? Absolutely.
The idea that this even COULD be logistically administered on a blanket basis is ridiculous. But I still smoke pot in the open so what do I know.
rumours spread that their will be a ban on alcohol in coffeshops. Hashbars with a liquor license need to choose if they be a bar or coffeeshop. personal i enyoi some hash with my vodka. so ill be fucked if this law will pass. i recon ill stay home from now on. wich is
Being in minneapolis I have seen the smoking ban implemented, enforced, legally challenged and eventually (now) we have a full state roll out of the ban. Many clubs and bars suffered horribly and still do, i see a marked decrease in nightlife related activities. People are staying home more, going to private parties or flying to vegas.
As far as enforcement, a little dive down the street from me (u otter stop inn) was known around town as being the underground smoking bar. After i would get too hammered to want to go outside to smoke (the propane heaters, windblocks and heatlamps do help alot, when they are working) i would roll up into the otter stop and smoke away. they got cold busted after 1 month. huge ass fine, almost went under. so sooner or later the enforcement gets to you.
Re: lighting up in clubs late night, i have seen a dude literally dragged on his face for lighting a cigarette (super drunk). they fricked him up!!! At one other major establishment downtown you can see lots of cigarettes, but this is also in a room filled with bluntsmoke and hella incense resins. The bouncers seem to shrug, probably cuz they are getting smoked out.
My major gripe with the whole deal?
Lighting a lid will never be the same[/b]
Get called out in a second! Not being able to puff puts a serious cramp in nightlife style and smoking outside the club is just straight dumb. We have all sorts of mounted police and riot cops downtown now, just looking to knock skulls.
I eat kind food all the time and bring it to the club, but it takes a half hour to kick in and people who are not regulars get laid out.
Ha - this is true, I was saying at a reggae show I went to recently, when you were able to smoke butts in clubs, it was pretty easy in a crowded show to have a quick puff from a joint in the middle of the floor - now you can't even think about it ...
in europe i was told that the people are trying to reverse the ban, cuz now all you can smell is peoples farts and body odor...which to them are worse! go figure.
Comments
If there would be such a large audience who wants to enjpoy a smokefree bar, why haven't there always been flourishing nightclubs and bars running a smokefree business on a voluntary basis?
I mean please, if you want to live a long and healthy life, go to the gym or to the spa but steer clear from bars and nightclubs.
I'm not really that bothered because I'm an old fart by now and have already had all the fun in bars and clubs to last me for two lifetimes but please, think of the young ones. Let them have their hedonistic, unhealthy and unrestricted fun.
If you spend your twenties and maybe even a good part of your thirties smoking, drinking and whatnot you don't necessarily ruin your health. I never smoked inside my appartement and only smoked the two or three nights of the week when I went out or worked as a DJ.
I despise this whole attitude of "thank god now I'm being forced to live a healthier life..." don't you people have any dignity? Can't you make your own decissions?
I mean if you want to be smoke free and healthy, more power to you. Maybe it's time to give up on bars and clubs and look for another way to waste your time? My idea of a fun night out is being in an environment with as litle restrictions as possible. The vision of a smoke free club with a bunch of old folks who want to live healthy and forever is revolting. Thank god I'm not twenty today.
What are they going to do next? Ban cocaine?
In Baltimore, for instance, many of the most popular bands and DJs would prefer to do their thing in a smoke-free environment, and many of the bartenders/bookers/promoters/etc of the most popular clubs and bars. If all those people just decided to take your advice and "give up on bars and clubs," night life in this city would be a lot worse for it.
Interesting history behind tobacco and smoking going back 500 years....
__________________________________________________________________________________
http://dcist.com/2007/01/16/smoking_ban_rou.php
Smoking Bans are Fleeting: This month's issue of The Atlantic brings us news that will be music to the ears of the District's disgruntled smokers. According to the magazine, smoking bans have a long and rich history -- and are usually overturned. Whether Pope Urban VIII's proclamation of a worldwide smoking ban in 1624 or Adolf Hitler's German experiment in 1942, few smoking bans have survived the passage of time. But don't get too excited just yet, smokers. The Vatican's ban lasted until 1779, while a prohibition imposed by Russia's Czar Michael in 1634 lasted 32 years. (It bears mentioning that Michael's ban was overturned after a two-year stint during which smokers faced the death penalty.) You may get to smoke again one day in District bars, but you may also be a little old to be frequenting those bars by then. You win some, you lose some, right?
__________________________________________________________________________________
Pope Urban VII's 13-day papal reign included the world's first known public smoking ban (1590), as he threatened to excommunicate anyone who "took tobacco in the porchway of or inside a church, whether it be by chewing it, smoking it with a pipe or sniffing it in powdered form through the nose".[19] The earliest citywide European smoking bans were enacted shortly thereafter. Such bans were enacted in Bavaria, Kursachsen, and certain parts of Austria in the late 1600s. Smoking was banned in Berlin in 1723, in K??nigsberg in 1742, and in Stettin in 1744. These bans were repealed in the revolutions of 1848.[20] The first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party in every German university, post office, military hospital and Nazi Party office, under the auspices of Karl Astel's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research, created in 1941 under direct orders from Adolf Hitler himself.[21] Major anti-tobacco campaigns were widely broadcast by the Nazis until the demise of the regime in 1945.[/b]
I support the legalization of marijuana -- to be smoked outdoors, in the privacy of one's home, and in a limited # of clubs/bars issued marijuana licenses. Which is the same way I feel about tobacco, incidentally.
I also think marijuana is the less dangerous product, especially when we're talking about tobacco as processed by major corporations of dubious (to say the least) moral standing.
Why not promote a no-smoke party where smoking is banned by the promoter and the people who run the place?
I've heard your argument over and over and it's as tired as it is fictional.
I've made a living of promoting club nights for over 4 years in NYC and for 5 years in Berlin. I've seen a couple of attempts at the above mentioned concept of parties for non-smokers. All of them were... well, they weren't smoking, that's for sure and they all didn't last for more than 1 or 2 times.
The market always provides what people want, if there would be any need for smoke-free clubs or bars, they would already be there.
I think that Nightlife should be as unrestricted as possible.
Nothing fun and nothing of any cultural relevance ever happened in a sanatized environment.
Beacause promoting a party as "smoke free" is about as exciting as "water available" -- both are good things, but not selling points.
Seriously, what are the odds of you EVER being busted for this? You think the city has the resources to patrol people's individual homes, waiting to nail someone for a smoking violation?
I'm hardly someone who trusts in the good graces of governmental enforcement but I'm no libertarian who thinks that the gov't has no role to regulate anything. There may be communities where you would see this level of micro-prosecution but my speculation is that, in such a neighborhood, worrying about the smoking police is the least of your worries. But you're trying to tell me, in Chicago, the police are going to make going after smoking in private parties a top priority? I don't buy it. How often do private homes get treated like public spaces?
Of course tthey won't enforce it strictly......but the first time they decide to press charges against some poor schlub people will be screaming discrimination or somesuch......likely the very people that seem to have no problem with the law today.
That is actually the quote hanging over the entrance of my rusty-nails-on-the-floor bar.
Please don't make me dig out the proposed budgets for financing all of this in the city. You don't think these bans take a chunk of resources that should be put to much better use? I mean, clean smelling clothes is important and all but do we need a "Department of Keeping Jonny Paychecks Fresh & Clean?" How much has been wasted already in planning and debating these issues when there are much better things for our government to do?
I think banning it in cars with children is a 100% good idea too. I never smoke anywhere near my kids or in my home, and I think it's fucked to put that on someone who has no choice.
It's funny to think how different attitudes about smoking has changed. In the late 70's/early 80's no one thought twice about it. I would be laying on my mom's stomach as a baby while she was chilling, watching TV with a cig in her mouth. Shit is crazy.
How do you feel about banning smoking within "X" amount of feet from a public entrance? They've been doing that out here. I'm not too sold on that one.
the long road to serfdom begins with public health legislation!
same here...huge
Mom would send me in the store to buy her cigarettes for her...That's when they were like $1 a pack
And here I was thinking that the smoking ban had to do with protecting people from the health hazards of second hand smoke. Pretty sure this wasn't a consequence of the "fresh and clean" lobby but keep on toting that "they're infringing on my constitutional rights to light on in my house!" line.
I'm sure there's a special black helicopter the gov't has just for the task.
I'm still waiting for my "faces of second hand smoke" jpeg from the acs.
Mr. Fundemental Reading.....where did I "compare" any such thing??
I simply went to the "History of Smoking Bans" and cut and pasted.
The fact is that the Nazi's DID ban smoking.
Look it up.
Scare tactics??
Louisville just suspended its smoking ordinance because a judge found it to be unconstitutional after the city council passed an ordinance to "NOT" ban smoking at Churchill Downs. Churchill Downs was given an exemption because of its nature and venue. Thats what the judge found wrong. So we are back to smoking for a few weeks until a special council meets to stop smoking again.
For what it's worth, I know of a few places that shut down in Florida because of the ban. They were places some of my aunts frequented, old pub and divey kind of places with an established group of 40 year old + regulars and little-to-no foot traffic.
Eh, there was alot of talk like this around me in Massachusetts
when the deadline was approaching, but the ban is in full effect
as far as I can see. I assume that out in the burbs or in the city
at bars where cops drink or won't go people are still smoking, but
clubs, downtown and greater urban area bars are all smoke-free.
Also, the "terrace" has become essential for bars that want to pack
them in. It's funny that an area that in concept should be where you go
to get fresh air is actually the most toxic spot in the place.
The idea that this even COULD be logistically administered on a blanket basis is ridiculous. But I still smoke pot in the open so what do I know.
Hashbars with a liquor license need to choose if they be a bar or coffeeshop.
personal i enyoi some hash with my vodka. so ill be fucked if this law will pass.
i recon ill stay home from now on.
wich is
As far as enforcement, a little dive down the street from me (u otter stop inn) was known around town as being the underground smoking bar. After i would get too hammered to want to go outside to smoke (the propane heaters, windblocks and heatlamps do help alot, when they are working) i would roll up into the otter stop and smoke away. they got cold busted after 1 month. huge ass fine, almost went under. so sooner or later the enforcement gets to you.
Re: lighting up in clubs late night, i have seen a dude literally dragged on his face for lighting a cigarette (super drunk). they fricked him up!!! At one other major establishment downtown you can see lots of cigarettes, but this is also in a room filled with bluntsmoke and hella incense resins. The bouncers seem to shrug, probably cuz they are getting smoked out.
My major gripe with the whole deal?
Lighting a lid will never be the same[/b]
Get called out in a second! Not being able to puff puts a serious cramp in nightlife style and smoking outside the club is just straight dumb. We have all sorts of mounted police and riot cops downtown now, just looking to knock skulls.
I eat kind food all the time and bring it to the club, but it takes a half hour to kick in and people who are not regulars get laid out.
The smoking ban is a problem.
Legalize
Ha - this is true, I was saying at a reggae show I
went to recently, when you were able to smoke butts
in clubs, it was pretty easy in a crowded show to have
a quick puff from a joint in the middle of the floor -
now you can't even think about it ...