First a rant: I am one of those "polite" smokers. I don't smoke in my own home or my camper. I make sure that if I am outdoors where people are gathered my smoke does not blow towards them, whether they smoke or not. I don't smoke near entrances to any buildings whether there are ashtrays there or not. If I am at Starbucks and sitting outside, if there are a lot of people around or the only table is near the entrance, I don't smoke. If I am walking down an busy street, I refrain from smoking. Since I work for a school district, I don't smoke all day, I wait until I get off work. Even though my step father tells me repeatedly that it is OK to smoke in his garage when we are working on something, I go outside. But, despite all this, some fucking smoking Nazi still has to come around and say something to me regarding my smoking habit. My response is fuck you and I blow some smoke into their face. There was NO reason for this asshole to say something. I go out of my way NOT to offend someone with my smoke and STILL someone has to say something. Which is one of my pet peeves, people who are easily offended for no reason other than they have a shallow pathetic life and this is their only outlet, to find things to bitch about. End of rant
And Ian is right. There are a few places in Ca that allow smoking. When I was up in Morrow Bay last July there was a pretty cool Karaoke bar (The Otter Bar or something like that) that allowed smoking inside. The place was packed with smokers and non-smokers alike, and everyone had a great time and no one complained about anything, even my terrible singing. The argument that if an establishment allows smoking is going to lose business because the non-smokers won't go there does not wash to me. This establishment did not have any problems keeping the tables and bar full of happy patrons willing to spend lots of money on booze and food. This is proof that compromise works. The non-smokers were forewarned that there was smoking allowed in side, so they came in under their own free will. Ian Skinner wrote: > "I still think a compromise is preferable an all-or-nothing approach. > > Cameron, what do you think of the idea of allowing certain, narrowly defined > businesses to remain as smoking establishments? Or is it unacceptable to > allow smokers ANY place to gather in a public location?" > > I just wanted to point out that the California ban is not "all or nothing". > There is a clause that an establishment can become a "smoking" establishment > just as long as all employees are informed of this status before hire. I > believe it is a little more convoluted to convert an existing non-smoking > establishment involving employee consensus. As well as the establishment > clearly indicates that it allows smoking at the entrance. > > Interesting to this argument is that few establishments have bothered with > doing this. > -- Throttle Jockey - Why golf courses should be motocross tracks ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:249545 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
