Reply With Quote
thank you. you're in the small percentage of smokers who are considerate of other people. we need more like you lol
I'm sorry sir this bar is a fart friendly zone. The majority of my customers come here to fart and fart freely. We don't allow minors in my establishment because we feel its your ADULT right to choose if you want to smell my farts and the farts of others while socializing in my bar. Our farts won't affect our driving and won't affect the heath of others that are dining out at restaurants or shopping at the mall. our farts can even be banned on the side walks you travel on but right here in this bar you can fart freely because you're over 21 years old and no one is forcing you be here. The goods and services that are offered here are too be enjoyed with the comfort of all our collective farts and none of these goods and services are necessary to your well being or livelihood and they're purely by adult choice just like the porno shops, tobacco shops and head shops. If enough of my customers choose to leave my bar for the non farting bar down the street I'll consider changing my policy but as of right now business is thriving.
thank you. you're in the small percentage of smokers who are considerate of other people. we need more like you lol
Eh, they make their money selling alcohol and table time. That won't change.
The difference being that your choice to go and smoke in a bar, limits my choices as a non-smoker. Sure, I can choose to go sit in a smokey bar, or not. But whether that bar is smokey or not is dictated by your choice to either smoke or not. So your choice introduces an extra element and factor, that I as a non-smoker, have to consider when making my decision to either go out or not.
Conversely as a non-smoker, I add no extra element that you as a smoker have to consider when deciding whether or not to go out. So in effect, you're telling me that while I still have a choice, you should have a broader range of options and more choice than I do. And furthermore, that your decision to smoke should be allowed to impact and dictate the terms of my decision to enter an establishment. Why is that?
again ... your stupidity continues to show. I have already talked about that topic. please learn how to read and comprehend.
exactly. B2B has trouble understanding that.
there was a big uproar when this happened in austin a few years back. nothing really came of it, the bars/pool halls just built decks and everyone smoked outside. no business was really lost.
What about the choice of the owner?
Because business doesn't do better when you do that. When the business down the street allows you enter their bar and not be quarentined off.
I know second hand smoke is harmful. I've never once said it wasn't. If you don't want second hand smoke then don't go in to the ing bar. Go to the the non-smoking bar.
When enough people don't want smoke or second hand smoke then the business owners will decide to change policy.
Why as an adult are so incapable of choosing for yourself? Its not selfish if your peers have a choice to not enter.
The smokers aren't infringing on the rights of the non-smokers if the non-smoker chooses to socialize in a smoking bar.
This is like a Catholic being pissed off that he can't worship the way he wants to in a Hindu church. Hey Catholic go find your own Catholic church and worship your way there. Now if the Catholic chooses to enter and socialize while the others worship their god in their own way he has made a choice to do so under his own power and no one forced him to. That Hindu church wasn't spreading their propoganda at malls or grocery stores. They did it in their own little place where people who want to be subject to it are.
Lots of pool halls charge very little for table time. Booze yes. I don't consider Dave and Busters a pool hall. Its a social gather of sorts. Obviously my argument centers more around bars than anything. But pool halls usually profit off their bar aspects before anything else.
Or the people of the community will decide to change the policy through their elected officials.
Right, and that won't change.
LMAO .... please keep trying to defend it. your replies are priceless.
Now your comparing this to Catholics worshiping!? LMAO LMAO LMAO
What I'm saying is that its not my choice or yours its the choice of the bar owner who allows or doesn't allow smoking. If his business does well in an environment where smoking is allowed and is choosen legally by adults without influencing other forms of business or the general public outside his establishment then he has a right do so. If you don't like how his business is run choose another bar.
As an American adult I have the ability to exercise my own free will when it comes to choosing a bar to attend. If I don't like the establishments policies then I can just as easily choose to not enter.
Now the same rules don't apply across the board because minors going to dinner with their parents aren't afforded the same options.
That is the difference. Same thing with malls, grocery stores, sidewalks and building fronts.
Ban smoking in all public places except bars and pool halls seems very very reasonable. Ban smoking in pool halls that allow minors during the day. Seems reasonable as well.
If there's such a market for places without smoke, and if people hate it so much, why do they need government to enforce it? Why aren't there business opening up all over the place that forbid smoking on their own accord?
Good point.
Thanks for your contributions as always.
Like I said and this is where it get's personal. The United States doesn't give me the right to smoke marijuana in my own home. I've been arrested for it, taken away in handcuffs from my own home. So while I love the idea of private rights in general, I experience first-hand, every day, a governmental ban on something that I feel should be my own personal decision and right to use in the confines of my own private home.
But, the powers that be, say it's not my right... and if that's the case than I can only conclude that They can whimsically dictate whatever They want in regards to our personal rights.1And if that's the case, it only seems logical that They could and are reasonably dictating the parameters of our choice and rights in regard to cigarettes.
1Which brings the whole notion of what a "personal right" is, and whether personal rights even exist anyway, in to question. Which is a much scarier subject.
they can't choose the hours they are allowed to serve alcohol either.
Its a correlation to choice and it makes sense if you pull your ing head out of your ass.
I don't have to defend anything to you because you're possibly the most ignorant moron I've ever met.
You completely fail to defend your own right of choice with your life. You also completely fail to realize that I'm on the side of banning smokers in almost all public areas.
Stand alone in your own stupidity and stupidity of the few in this thread that think this is a debate about smoking when in fact its a debate about the right to run an adult establishment as the owner sees fit. This isn't a debate about smokers you blind ing koonass, I agree with you. Up to the point where they take fundamental rights away from adults who should make the decision on their own.
i understand what you're saying, more than a few of my friends think a pool hall isn't a pool hall without a smoke cloud. the bars won't lose any business, and some of them even ignore the ban. it's just not that big a deal when it actually happens. people go outside to smoke, and they get used to it. in Austin specifically, almost all of the bars in the Red River district tried to form some pro-smoking in bars coalition to fight the ban. all they did was waste their money and end up adding patios or decks for people to smoke on. everyone's pretty much moved on from feigning the death of the small bar and Austin music scene
The only thing these bans show is the that the majority of Americans feel they have a right to dictate their terms onto a business owner because they feel they have a right to go eat at Chilis or go have a drink at Billys pool hall and not smell like smoke. Sure, they could opt to simply not go and end up not smelling like smoke, but instead they use the fact that they represent a majority to override the rights of the business owner.
These are private establishments, and this is not public property. People use those terms incorrectly a ton here. Simply because a private establishment allows you in does not mean they are public.
But your alcohol consumption has the potential to affect people outside the bar.... on the roads, etc.
everyone should get their fatasses out of the way. i mean, seriously, when fat s sit next to me on the bus, their huge asses invade my space. the government should limit us to three meals a day and mandate no eating in public facilities.
I hear you. What that tells me isn't something thats new to me. We as a whole have allowed are rights and abilities as adult americans to be twisted, turned and destroyed for a long time now.
They fought and lost. I think its horrible the inability of compromise with our governments. If you're going to strip us of our rights then at least compromise.
the previous fart comments remind me of an old steve martin comedy bit:
He's sitting in a bar, and a woman next to him says: Pardon me, do you mind if I smoke?
Steve martin: Why no, do you mind if I fart?
I have to side with the opinion that bars/clubs should have smoking allowed, even though I don't smoke.
pretty soon I can see people calling the police on their neighbors, who are smoking in their own yard, but "bothering" the neighbor. In fact, I may have read about this happening already.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions