Bars, Clubs and Taverns closing at 2:00 a.m. is really troubling...

[SkyWestOKC]

You have the right to choose where you work, if you want to take the risk of working where you could have a side effect, then no one should stop you or others from taking that risk. Same thing for many jobs, there is the the potential to die, you accept that risk by taking the paycheck and doing the work.

[Bunty]

Then why didn't the state of California think so when it banned smoking in bars?

[SkyWestOKC]

One word, the government of California (and many other states) thinks it needs to decide what is best for people, instead of letting people decide for themselves. Personal responsibility.

[rcjunkie]

As a cigar afficianodo, I am not in favor of a ban on smoking in public places. My favorite places are cigar friendly. And quite frankly I don't care whether or not anyone else is offended by it. When you go to a bar, you expect to have to smell smoke. Personally I hate the smell of cigarrettes, but I don't care about it so much when I go out.

I'm tired of the "pleasure police" and beta males and others who probably don't even frequent bars and other establishments where smoking is a permitted privilege but would deny others of the same. It's one thing if you're in an airplane, office building, in the company of children or in a restaurant where people are eating. But bars and other public places? Come on!

And I think there are a lot of bar owners in NYC and Chicago that will beg to differ with you about business going up.

That's why they don't go, because smoking is permitted.

[Paseofreak]

This is not a black and white issue. Yet. I am a smoker, and HUGE believer in personal responsibility. However, an employer is obligated to provide a safe work place for their employees. And I'm sure most of us are protected by employer provided safeguards against injury that we take for granted as a matter of course. If we are thinking people and work in OSHA compliant workplaces, we likely couldn't imagine going without these protections. So, I'm thinking that this has in some places and ultimately will across the nation come down to a matter of classification of second hand smoke as a hazardous substance.

[rcjunkie]

I'm gonna respectfully disagree. Bars are not public places. They are private businesses and have the right to serve what is lawful. This is not the place for the government. And as for your question as to whether or not you can expect to be exposed to smoke in such places - the answer is unequivocably YES. And another thing - if you don't want to smell smoke in a bar, you have the right to choose not to go to that bar.

If you're against smoking in bars, yet the bar owner permits and even profits by it by selling cigars and cigarrettes, then who are you to suggest to him that he shouldn't do it simply because you're offended by it? He's taken his risk, his shot at something. And along comes these people who have the choice not to frequent his establishment and tell him how to do business!

This is exactly the same argument that people make when they don't want to listen to a particularly annoying radio personality or watch a TV program that is offensive to them. They want to ban the program rather than do the simple thing and choose not to listen or watch it.

This topic really angers me! Can you tell?

Are you serious, this is part of your argument against outlawing smoking in bars. I read several medical articles and magizines, I've yet to find anyone that reported a death that resulted from second hand radio listening or TV watching.

[Larry OKC]

I'm gonna respectfully disagree. Bars are not public places. They are private businesses and have the right to serve what is lawful. This is not the place for the government. And as for your question as to whether or not you can expect to be exposed to smoke in such places - the answer is unequivocably YES. And another thing - if you don't want to smell smoke in a bar, you have the right to choose not to go to that bar.

If you're against smoking in bars, yet the bar owner permits and even profits by it by selling cigars and cigarrettes, then who are you to suggest to him that he shouldn't do it simply because you're offended by it? He's taken his risk, his shot at something. And along comes these people who have the choice not to frequent his establishment and tell him how to do business!

This is exactly the same argument that people make when they don't want to listen to a particularly annoying radio personality or watch a TV program that is offensive to them. They want to ban the program rather than do the simple thing and choose not to listen or watch it.


This topic really angers me! Can you tell?

I understand what you are saying but they are public places in the since that the public is openly invited to patronize the establishment (they are not a private, "members only" type of club). I agree they have a limited right to sell what is lawful (but they are trying to change the law, make it unlawful, then that "right" goes away). They might even still be able to sell the product but the product can't be used on the premises. Not that much different than being able to buy beer etc at the grocery store. But you aren't allowed to pop the top and drink it there. You can by alcohol at bars but aren't allowed to leave the premises with it.

I can see both sides. I am a non-smoker but both of my parents smoke and even they frequent places that have gone smoke free. At first they chose to go to places that had the specially ventilated smoking rooms but found they missed the other places. No one is banning them from smoking. They can still smoke in their car on the way to/from the restaurant. They can chain smoke to their hearts content (not withstanding the health issues, so that may be a bad choice of words) in their home. There is a right time and place for just about any "adult" behavior.

[ljbab728]

Are you serious, this is part of your argument against outlawing smoking in bars. I read several medical articles and magizines, I've yet to find anyone that reported a death that resulted from second hand radio listening or TV watching.

Maybe you never watched "The Bachelor". LOL

[Larry OKC]

Hmmm, didn't President Clinton make that connection more than once (and even recently)? Course that may have been 1st hand and not 2nd hand.

[OKC Heel]

if you can ban smoking in bars in North Carolina - the land that tobacco built, there's no place that will be immune from the "no smoke" crowd.

I can't stand smoke - hate being around it and smelling like it, but i choose to go places where smoking occurs. I could just as easily choose to avoid those places. Life is really simple that way, but for whatever stupid reason we now have this idea that if we don't like something then others shouldnt be allowed to do it either.

[gen70]

I'm gonna respectfully disagree. Bars are not public places. They are private businesses and have the right to serve what is lawful. This is not the place for the government. And as for your question as to whether or not you can expect to be exposed to smoke in such places - the answer is unequivocably YES. And another thing - if you don't want to smell smoke in a bar, you have the right to choose not to go to that bar.

If you're against smoking in bars, yet the bar owner permits and even profits by it by selling cigars and cigarrettes, then who are you to suggest to him that he shouldn't do it simply because you're offended by it? He's taken his risk, his shot at something. And along comes these people who have the choice not to frequent his establishment and tell him how to do business!

This is exactly the same argument that people make when they don't want to listen to a particularly annoying radio personality or watch a TV program that is offensive to them. They want to ban the program rather than do the simple thing and choose not to listen or watch it.


This topic really angers me! Can you tell?

Agreed...

[OKCMallen]

It's my experience that most bars set their clocks forward and they WANT to get out of there early. Rarely is a bar actually open at 1:59am. At least the ones I frequent.

[td25er]

I'm gonna respectfully disagree. Bars are not public places. They are private businesses and have the right to serve what is lawful. This is not the place for the government. And as for your question as to whether or not you can expect to be exposed to smoke in such places - the answer is unequivocably YES. And another thing - if you don't want to smell smoke in a bar, you have the right to choose not to go to that bar.

If you're against smoking in bars, yet the bar owner permits and even profits by it by selling cigars and cigarrettes, then who are you to suggest to him that he shouldn't do it simply because you're offended by it? He's taken his risk, his shot at something. And along comes these people who have the choice not to frequent his establishment and tell him how to do business!

This is exactly the same argument that people make when they don't want to listen to a particularly annoying radio personality or watch a TV program that is offensive to them. They want to ban the program rather than do the simple thing and choose not to listen or watch it.


This topic really angers me! Can you tell?

This angers me too. You are slowly killing yourself and don't care that you're killing other people too. I bet you're obese.

[Downtowner405]

You have the right to choose where you work, if you want to take the risk of working where you could have a side effect, then no one should stop you or others from taking that risk. Same thing for many jobs, there is the the potential to die, you accept that risk by taking the paycheck and doing the work.

THANK YOU! It's all about choices. You don't like it? Who do you think you are to tell other people they can't engage in smoking or sales of smoking products? You have the choice not to go in that establishment, whether it is to patronize or work for that establishment.

Who are you or the government to tell private entrepreneurs and their patrons what they can and can't do? Don't we have enough government intruding in our business and personal lives already?

Oh BTW..I know this topic got hijacked. Originally it was about bars closing at 2am which is way too early! I'm from Florida where the bars close at 4am. and you can smoke.

[mugofbeer]

It's been years since I've kept those kinds of hours but in Denver they have a large Bricktown type of area called LODO. The bar owners banded together to try to get the 2AM curfew removed because they were finding that patrons were drinking like fish the last 1/2 hour and then all being pushed out on common streets at 2AM. They were finding, and the police concurred, that numerous fights were ensuing, public stuff happened because bathrooms couldn't be found, vandlism increased and other crimes were happening preying on drunks stumbling around trying to find their ways home. I'm not sure if they removed the curfew, but I know the city was giving it serious consideration because of what was essentially dumping of drunk people on the street in large numbers on weekends.

[mark]

i saw bad company at the button south in hallandale, fl in the mid 90s. the singer (brian howe?) thought it was cool that the club didn't close till 8am.