smoking ban

[CrossfireRadio]

What I don't get is what gives them the right to say who can and who can't smoke ( well over 18 of course) but referring to in bars n such...

If a bar owner says, I want smoking.... They decide, its not up to the owner, its up to them, and no one else has any say in it what-so-ever.

What was those things called again? umm Im sure I can remember what they are... Ohhh Yeah now I remember "Amendments". Whatever happen to those? Do they still exist?

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

So if we have that freedom of speech, why is it that a bar owner cant say "I want smoking in my bar".

Its their right to have smoking in their bar if they want to. Some bars that serve food, have it split.. No smoking in the dining area... but you can smoke at the bar area.... and some have certain hours set no smoking from this time to this time, but fill free to smoke after this time.. ( usually later in the evening after dinner hours.. when its party time)

The way this government is going these days... no one has a say or choice in anything thats being said or done.

Its more or less - do it or lose it... everyone "use" to say goto the USA its the greatest country you could ever live in...

It might have been back in 1805.... But its not anymore - no choices, no freedom, no nothing...

I wouldnt doubt it if they make smoking illegal, cant smoke in your house, in your car, in someone else's car... people will be going down into the sewers to smoke lol ( well maybe not, but who knows)

Its a really ridiculous law... Sure kids under 18 no smoking.... no drinking under 21... Those are reasonable laws, and are agreeable with...

But no smoking in bars? Half the people in congress/government(etc) smoke when they drink their $5,000 bottle of wine...

Its just getting to the point where all of our "supposedly" freedom we have, its getting stripped from us everyday, to where we wont be able to fart with out paying some kind of fine or going to jail for it.


Posted June 10, 2008 - 6:05pm
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/20 ... n-cle.html

[tornandfrayed]

I agree that bar owners should have the right to do what they want with their bars. I think it will be interesting to see how this actually effects the industry locally.

I also think that people who don't want to breathe smoke should go somewhere else. When I go to a bar to see a band, I don't smoke or drink, I always end up having to leave cause I stink and I want fresh air. But that does not mean that I would tell someone they can't do it.

Then you always have the truth about smoking and what it does to you. I doubt that anyone would argue that smoking is healthy for you in this day and age., but still people continue to do it. It was really hard for me to quit after 20 years but I did. I am hoping that it was not too little too late.

Just another sign of the times...

[lonewolf]

What I don't get is what gives them the right to say who can and who can't smoke ( well over 18 of course) but referring to in bars n such...

They don't have the right to say who can or can't smoke.

The only smoking ban laws that have held up to constitutional appeal are ones that protect the employees from second hand smoke. The legal logic is that smoking causes a health hazard to the employees, so you can't smoke where there are employees. Its an OSHA thing.

This particular law is so full of holes, exemptions and exceptions that it might easily get struck down in a superior court.

[moxham123]

I wouldn't mind the indoor smoking ban if it was fair. It really is discriminating against bars who already has to try to compete with private clubs. The private "non-profit" clubs already have many benefits that makes them a profitable entity such as gambling. They make huge amounts of money off of their small game of chances. We have several vets, several moose clubs, the Cro Club, the Morann Club, and more in our area (within 5 miles of us). These clubs will get our customers who smoke.

I agree with Lisa on this point. How can the bars, taverns, and restaurants compete with the private clubs when there is an unfair difference going to happen? The same laws should apply to all. In these neighboring states that border Pennsylvania, all have enacted smoke free laws that include all restaurants, bars, and private clubs with only a couple exclusions for clubs with no employees in Ohio and New York. Most clubs have to pay their bartenders, cooks, etc.; so, that really limits the clubs that are exempt.

• Ohio – All restaurants, bars and private clubs (exclusion for private clubs with no employees)
• New York - All restaurants, bars and private clubs (exclusion for membership organizations that have no compensated work staff)
• Maryland - All restaurants, bars and private clubs
• New Jersey - All restaurants, bars and private clubs
• Delaware - All restaurants, bars and private clubs

[JackANSI]

Why should non-smokers have to be second-hand smokers when they go to a bar?

I want my freedom from disease back!!



Throw another log on the fire...

[bfoust]

I'm on the anti-smoking-in-bars bandwagon. However, I feel it should be up to the bar owners.

I just won't frequent the bars that allow it... 4 dees much? I hate smelling like smoke.

P.S. Bars in MD are awesome.

[KyleMayket]

there are restraunts in johnstown that are smoke free... i flat out refuse to eat there (which is a bummer, cuz one is a sushi bar) but if i can't smoke, i don't go. End of story.

[HurricaneBob]

Im a smoker but i welcome the ban, i smoke when i play too much.

[Lisa]

Well, I welcome them too....I just wish that it was across the board.

[JackANSI]

What I don't get is what gives them the right to say who can and who can't smoke ( well over 18 of course) but referring to in bars n such...

If a bar owner says, I want smoking.... They decide, its not up to the owner, its up to them, and no one else has any say in it what-so-ever.

What was those things called again? umm Im sure I can remember what they are... Ohhh Yeah now I remember "Amendments". Whatever happen to those? Do they still exist?

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

So if we have that freedom of speech, why is it that a bar owner cant say "I want smoking in my bar".

Wow I must have skipped over this one... That is flat out wrong...

18 and over: So its ok for the government to tell you when in life you can smoke, but not where?

You're using our right to free speech to justify making others unhealthy because they choose to make healthy choices in their life? Smoking is unhealthy... period... Second hand smoke is unhealthy... period... Do I have a choice if you smoke? nope, I shouldn't. Do I have a right to go somewhere I want and not be harassed by unwanted, unhealthy smoke that I did not choose? Yes, I should.

They are doing what is right for the greater good of the majority. That is democracy in action. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonweal ... _States%29

They are not taking away a bar owners right to say "I want smoking in my bar". They can say that all they want... Its a protected freedom. The fact that they are in a binding contract with the state to be able to operate their establishment means they must follow the terms of the contract. They don't complain when its in their favor, so why should they get to complain when its not. I know, I know.. thats life, get used to it! Seems like the shoe is on the other foot now though, eh?

What they are saying is that people selfishly endanger others should think twice about where they do it. They are trying to force upon you a healthier lifestyle. Oh please, no... anything but that... Start caring enough about yourself and the others around you to make positive choices in your life and you'll see how selfish and just plain ignorant non-smokers view smokers.

If you want to have smoking, sell the license and switch to private club, its still a free world even if the air is cleaner...


I feel for the owners and operators that will be impacted by this. But you'll see there are just as many non-smoking alcoholics as there are smoking ones and the color of our money is still greenish-pinkish-blueish-with-neat-watermarks. If I was a bar owner I would gotten together with as many others as I could and traded this for the perks private clubs have before it got taken away. Its a two way street this democracy thing...


Just for the record, I'm against big government. I feel anyone should be allow to shoot, stab, poison, or drown themselves without being punished by laws. I also think alcohol, tobacco, pot shouldn't be regulated the way it is either.

I know I spend much more on alcohol when I don't have a headache from smoke. I'm also a bigger tipper when I don't have a headache.

[lonewolf]

What I don't get is what gives them the right to say who can and who can't smoke ( well over 18 of course) but referring to in bars n such...

If a bar owner says, I want smoking.... They decide, its not up to the owner, its up to them, and no one else has any say in it what-so-ever.

What was those things called again? umm Im sure I can remember what they are... Ohhh Yeah now I remember "Amendments". Whatever happen to those? Do they still exist?

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

So if we have that freedom of speech, why is it that a bar owner cant say "I want smoking in my bar".

Wow I must have skipped over this one... That is flat out wrong...

18 and over: So its ok for the government to tell you when in life you can smoke, but not where?

You're using our right to free speech to justify making others unhealthy because they choose to make healthy choices in their life? Smoking is unhealthy... period... Second hand smoke is unhealthy... period... Do I have a choice if you smoke? nope, I shouldn't. Do I have a right to go somewhere I want and not be harassed by unwanted, unhealthy smoke that I did not choose? Yes, I should.

They are doing what is right for the greater good of the majority. That is democracy in action. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonweal ... _States%29

They are not taking away a bar owners right to say "I want smoking in my bar". They can say that all they want... Its a protected freedom. The fact that they are in a binding contract with the state to be able to operate their establishment means they must follow the terms of the contract. They don't complain when its in their favor, so why should they get to complain when its not. I know, I know.. thats life, get used to it! Seems like the shoe is on the other foot now though, eh?

What they are saying is that people selfishly endanger others should think twice about where they do it. They are trying to force upon you a healthier lifestyle. Oh please, no... anything but that... Start caring enough about yourself and the others around you to make positive choices in your life and you'll see how selfish and just plain ignorant non-smokers view smokers.

If you want to have smoking, sell the license and switch to private club, its still a free world even if the air is cleaner...


I feel for the owners and operators that will be impacted by this. But you'll see there are just as many non-smoking alcoholics as there are smoking ones and the color of our money is still greenish-pinkish-blueish-with-neat-watermarks. If I was a bar owner I would gotten together with as many others as I could and traded this for the perks private clubs have before it got taken away. Its a two way street this democracy thing...


Just for the record, I'm against big government. I feel anyone should be allow to shoot, stab, poison, or drown themselves without being punished by laws. I also think alcohol, tobacco, pot shouldn't be regulated the way it is either.

I know I spend much more on alcohol when I don't have a headache from smoke. I'm also a bigger tipper when I don't have a headache.

Nicely written post, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the legality of smoking ban laws.. The only way the state can ban smoking is to protect the the health of the employees, period. The old OSHA angle idea trick.

If they worded the law any other way--like it to protect the health of non-smoking patrons--it would get thrown out on appeal. This is because on privately owned property, the property owner's rights supercede the rights of both smoking and non-smoking guests--either can come and go as they please.

Workers, however, do not have that choice and their rights supercede the owner's.

Its just a technicality, but a important one to understand. Private property rights are protected by the 4th, 5th, 9th, 10th and 14th amendments of the Constitution.

[JackANSI]

I'm trying to argue it similar to seat belts, safety standards for public areas, etc..

If people continue to hurt themselves and create a danger to others, the commonwealth should be able to step in. The smoking issue is a tough one even on that because most local codes included a bit about how much air movement is required for certain establishments and proper air handling can make a difference, in my opinion (but few bars have any interest in clearing smoke). but I believe those establishments build or setup prior to such coding are grandfathered out.

Is the smoking ban going in the books as a employee health issue or is it going to apply to liquor licensees?

[lonewolf]

Is the smoking ban going in the books as a employee health issue or is it going to apply to liquor licensees?

The law has absolutely nothing to do with the PLCB.

The law covers all buildings that have employees working in them with a few exceptions. This means anything from machine shops to tobacco stores to restaurants and bars. Bars will actually be in the minority of affected businesses.

One of the exceptions is: bars that do less than 20% food business will be permitted to allow smoking. This will be based on sales tax.

It looks like we will also get a little bit of unintended Blue Law thrown in...there won't be any public smoking bars open on Sunday.

[MeYatch]

The law covers all buildings that have employees working in them with a few exceptions. This means anything from machine shops to tobacco stores to restaurants and bars. Bars will actually be in the minority of affected businesses.

I'm pretty sure there's a specific excemption for tobacco shops.

[MeYatch]

so I have very little insight into bar sales. Approximately how much is 20%? (other than the obvious, "its 20%")

I would say The Hitching Post is probably out. Where does that leave say, 30 Something?

Are the only bars that are selling less than 20% food really crummy holes in the wall?

[bassist_25]

As I said to MeYatch last night the other night, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some interesting tax manuevers by some clubs now.

[VENTGtr]

It'd be interesting to see how the numbers for "private" clubs have moved
lately. I've spoken to a number of people who are joining them just because
they have lower beer prices.

[lonewolf]

The law covers all buildings that have employees working in them with a few exceptions. This means anything from machine shops to tobacco stores to restaurants and bars. Bars will actually be in the minority of affected businesses.

I'm pretty sure there's a specific excemption for tobacco shops.

Yep, you are right, along with "cigar bars"...whatever that is.

[JackANSI]

Thats an interesting point... I've been floored by the prices of beer at some of the places we play, like what I'm used to seeing in State College... I'm not surprised anymore to be charged for drafts and everything else when playing somewhere.

[Lisa]

Well, the law has provisions in that says that it had to be a 'cigar' bar before the bill is signed. That requires a special sales license for tobacco products and would need to have historical sales information. The law is really hard to follow as it is written.

Every bar that is applying for an exception has to have a lot of paperwork and proof given that it qualifies as an exception.

And, as for clubs and them being able to allow smoking when opened to the public for nights such as band nights...no smoking can be allowed on those nights. Not even with signage indicating that they have smoking. When you open to the 'public' its a non-smoking venue.

According to the law as written, every place will be required to have smoking and no smoking signs....wish I would have invested in the sign companies.

Saw on WTAJ News this morning a piece where one bar thought he was an exception because he doesn't hold a sunday license....I'm sure someone reported to him already that isn't true. Having a Sunday liquor license has nothing to do with this law. In fact, anyone can get a Sunday Sales license now....you don't need a certain level of food sales. We have a separate bar downstairs and were hoping that maybe we could open it since we do not sale food downstairs...but we don't think that it would work because its under the same liquor license. We'll have to check that one out.

I'm not sure how they are going to handle the exceptions...not sure where you would have to apply for such a thing. They don't say if it will be via the Department of Health and go along with the food license area. I assume it will be. Everyone has to submit either quarterly or monthly their sales tax and the revenue reporting.

I still say one way that the state could have made money off of all of this is to allow businesses to purchase an annual smoking license from the State. Could be handled via the Alcohol and Tobacco and Firearms area of the government.

Oh well, whatever will be will be.

[MeYatch]

As I said to MeYatch last night the other night, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some interesting tax manuevers by some clubs now.

Free wings with $8 beer!

[Lisa]

As I said to MeYatch last night the other night, I wouldn't be surprised if we see some interesting tax manuevers by some clubs now.

Free wings with $8 beer!

Aaaah, I like that one...I'll have to pass it on to management! lol

[Lisa]

Rendell is expected to sign the bill in about an hour...so 90 days from now it will go into effect.

Talk about crooked government though...Phila can keep their current tougher laws into place. However, no other county or local government can pass a stricker law (regarding mainly private clubs). They are trying to change the law to allow it though...we'll see. So, its all about Phila and those people that the Government chooses to protect.

[JackANSI]

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/366 ... ing13.html

"In fact, bars and taverns statewide have seen a greater increase in business than before the smoking ban's passage in 2005, according to a state Department of Revenue study released Tuesday. Watering holes saw 20 percent more revenue in 2007, compared with the 0.3 percent gain it saw in 2006, the first full year with the ban."


The biggest factor in whether I stay at a place and spend my money is whether or not I can breathe. Seems others find their spending stamina increased by lack of smoke

[Ron]

Rendell just signed the bill.

Smoke 'em if ya got 'em. It takes effect in 90 days.