OT Michigan Smoking Ban

If smoke-free establishments were so popular, I'd have thought that virtually all such establishments would voluntarily go smoke-free. But they haven't; some people want to smoke. The owners of some bars know that. Now, the legistlature wants to tell bar-owners and their customers who want to smoke, that they can't. Still, let's not avoid the obvious majority; as you say, the majority of the population does not smoke and does not want to be around smokers. The majority prefers a non-smoking environment. So, what do we have? First, we have laws requiring that all restaurants set aside non-smoking sections. And then on top of that, we have the wonderful world of the free market, and business owners who respond to their customers and employees. The association of Michigan bar and restaurant owners says that about a third of all establishments in Michigan are entirely non-smoking. So if there is any real dissatisfaction on the part of non-smokers like you, it is that you can't go EVERYWHERE you'd like to, and have it be a non-smoking environment for your comfort. I sense that one of the most powerful motivators for people supporting the new law is that, "Smoking is bad for you, and you shouldn't be doing it anyway. Also, your habit annoys me." Now back to my title for this comment... "Selfish."

at Kuhnhenn - but the service sucks and the prices are outrageous. But as far as smoke free establishments go they(micro breweries) are really the only game in town.

It's regrettable that the exemptions are in the legislation (although I think the exemption for tobacco stores is a fair one), but somewhat flawed legislation is better than none at all. The reason that this was endlessly delayed is that Mike Bishop (R) played many games in order to avoid allowing this to even see a vote. At the same time, the Detroit Dems bowed down to Chris Ilitch and the casino lobby. I believe blame for the delay can be divided equally between the parties.

Yesterday, I read the text of the statute at Legislature.mich.gov. It is pretty interesting. You should read the stautory definition for "cigar bar." (btw, tobacconist shops are also exempted.) A cigar bar has to be a separate building or a completely separate room, with ventiliation. It has to sell cigars, and have cigar sales be a % of total sales. It has to have a humidor for cigar storage. Etc., etc. I have the feeling that there will be a new crop of cigar bars in the state of Michigan. There is no requirement for separate licensing, although a cigar bar must be certified as such.

You might want to check out my lengthy post below. In short, bars/restaurants are endlessly regulated. You just don't realize that. Or...try to bring a 14 year-old into a bar and order a drink at 3am on Christmas. Then, you'll know.

I suspect that many of you realize that a full, complete, total smoking ban is now being considered by President Coleman and the Regents. The new ban would not just ban smoking in University buildings. It will ban smoking ANYWHERE on U-M property. You won't be able to smoke outside the MLB, or the Grad Library. You won't be able to smoke walking across the diag. You won't be able to smoke while walking in the Arboretum or the Matthei Botanical Gardens. Here's where it gets freaky, if you ask me: You won't be able to smoke a cigar while playing the back nine on the University of Michigan Golf Course. You won't be able to smoke in the Blue Lot after a football game. You won't be able to smoke next to Ferry Field after a hockey game. Somewhere in all of this, I am thinking, "What sort of resources is the Univeristy going to expend, to enforce a silly rule like this? It's a rule like that makes someone like me (who rarely smokes; sometimes a cigar after a football win, while in the Blue Lot, or while walking the golf course in summer months) want to say to the University: "I DARE you to enforce it! Tell me what you're going to do if I am smoking a cigar on the golf course!" Don't even tell me about "the dangers of second-hand smoke..." It has no application, when there is no one within a quarter-mile of me. Oh, and by the way, smoking is (rightly, I think) banned EVERYWHERE at Michigan Stadium. So any new rule/law doesn't change that status at all.

That's not cigarette smoke you're smelling, it's the smell of our defense being burned again.

There are some people that make retarded arguments claiming that smokers are being kept from "enjoying their habit". Smoking isn't banned. Smoking is just being moved outside. You can enjoy your smoke as much as you want. You just can't harm others while you smoke. Maybe, however, you enjoy the harming others part? That would make you an asshole. The only "freedom" involved is the freedom not to get ill from the laziness of a militant indoor smoker.

There are some people that like smoking, and a lot more that don't. The ones that do want to keep the non-smokers from fully enjoying anything at all when the smokers are around. Here's an idea. Ban all the smokers from the state. Have them box their stuff up, and ship them off to Cuba. That way they can be with their kind and happy, and the rest of the public here can keep their not-smoky air. See, I can play that game too.

In Ohio, the loss in business has been pretty steep in the two years since the ban was enacted The ban passed there in 2006, and (especially in Ohio) the economy hasn't exactly been on an upswing since then. In downturns, bars and restaurants lose business as people choose to stay home instead of going out; I'd be hesitant to credit that downturn solely to the smoking ban.

the loss in business in Ohio is not because you can't smoke in bars and restaurants - it is because the economy is down and people are cutting back on non-essential expenses. I bet if there was a stat for how much business has declined in Ohio over this span it would mirror the loss of business in the bar/restaurant business.

Banning cigarettes would most likely work to the benefit of gangs and organized crime. Better to just regulate the crap out of it until it practically disappears from view. The next step is to get it out of Hollywood films.