Stitch on 18/7/2006 at 16:00

---

Do the majority of the people really have a problem with it? I highly doubt it. If two smokers were ruining the bar for everyone else I guarantee you nonsmoking bars would pop up. People like bars in which one can smoke.

Red herring my ass. We are surrounded daily with elements that are detrimental to our health on some level, and yet we consider them acceptible. It's all a matter of scale, and we currently lack the results to determine the risk of infrequent passive smoking.

I certainly wouldn't claim that second hand smoke in moderate volumes is completely harmless--for one, there's too many qualifiers (how long is one exposed, how is the ventilation on the premises, etc.)--but in the end I think it's largely irrelevant. For good or bad drinking and smoking are culturally linked--by no means a permanenent association--and it's only the whiny few who take exception to this (I somewhat doubt smoking bans would have been voted through if only bar regulars were polled). And while I can understand a fundamental dislike of a possibly dangerous element present due solely to someone else's behavior, the fact of the matter is you're there to drink. Yes, damaging yourself is a far cry from someone else damaging you, but when a binge drinking boaster bitches about the secondhand smoke he inhaled along the way, I can't help but feel like a little perspective is needed.

Having said all that, everything Monkeysee has said in the past page or two basically applies to me. My libertarian principles are crumbling due to the fact that I don't smoke, I consider it a nasty habit, and the bars around here sure are nice now that the ban is in effect. But it's a matter of principle, and I already dropped my nuts in the ring so I might as few finish what I started.

Ghostly Apparition on 18/7/2006 at 18:27

---

Here in California, a ban on smoking in bars has been in effect for some time now.
There are a few local bars whose patrons that smoke are a majority and they just look the other way. (allow smoking inside and risk a fine if caught) The dance and nightclubs enforce the no smoking rule and there the patrons who smoke go outside for a quick smoke and then go back inside. It really doesn't seem to be the end of the world. The smokers can still smoke, they just have to step outside for a bit.

Stitch on 18/7/2006 at 18:56

---

I'm not talking about publicly confronting smokers, of course. My point is anti-smokers would be catered to if they truly made up the majority of the bar crowd. Unfortunately, the actual reality is people like smoking in bars: the smoking ban in Madison has been extremely bad for local businesses, and many bars are petitioning for the ban to be repealed.

Mo too, but I still maintain that the level of noise coming from anti-smokers is ridiculously disconnected from the actual reality of breathing in a bit of secondhand smoke at the local pub.

Stitch on 18/7/2006 at 19:30

---

But to what degree? All studies I've seen are conflicting at best and certainly seem inconclusive in regards to the effects passive smoking would have in moderate doses. Additionally, many of the studies are funded by biased sources on either side of the debate.

Anyway, I'm getting tired of this because (1) I don't smoke and (2) the debate is largely irrelevant because nonsmoking bars are the future, a reality I'm increasingly comfortable with.

Stitch on 18/7/2006 at 23:03

---

I have no opinion on the study you quoted. I didn't see your post before because I tend to tune out everything you say.

My basic research, if you can even call it that, revolved around looking some shit up in Wikipedia and then googling the results to get some additonal perspective. Not exactly exhaustive, but welcome to the internet.