Smoking in restaurants gone?

[Jack]

Personally, I don't see to agree with this. I think as along as they have a smoking and non-smoking section, people should be able to smoke in restaurants if they so choose. What's the big deal here? Why are we trying to force people to stop a habit they're entitled to keep if they so desire?

[Jack]

Guess that means you can't take one of these into any restaurant:

[Faith]

What's the big deal here? Why are we trying to force people to stop a habit they're entitled to keep if they so desire?

Because of the proven 2nd hand smoke risks to other people.

[Patrick]

I applaud the removal of smoking from public places.

[Midtowner]

A smoking section in a restaurant is like a peeing section in a pool.

[Patrick]

Pee doesn't cause the damage that smoke does.

[Faith]

A smoking section in a restaurant is like a peeing section in a pool.

I see your point. They both eventually make it into the entire section some way or another.

It would be helpful to band people with the flu and other contagious diseases from public places as well. There are too many people that aren't responsible with their germs, smoke, etc. that ends up effecting other people. But that is impossible to do.

[metro]

I agree, because smoking sections aren't effective, the smoke still drifts. There are numerous restaurants I won't patronize because of the heavy smoke. Clean air never hurt anyone, but okcgoddess is right, 2nd hand smoke has been proven in many cases to harm others. It's especially hard on those of us with asthma or allergies. Not to mention all the clothes I've had to dry clean just because I sat in the non-smoking section, it's not right. If someone can't wait 30 mins to an hour for a cigarette, I think they have bigger problems to worry about than not being able to smoke in a public setting.

[Faith]

People may be entitled to keep their smoking habits. But non-smokers should be entitled to be in a public place with an atmosphere free of the harmful smoke. My children have asthma and allergies very bad. A little smoke sparks up their complications. They shouldn't have to suffer because someone is entitled to smoke.

[Midtowner]

I see your point. They both eventually make it into the entire section some way or another.

It would be helpful to band people with the flu and other contagious diseases from public places as well. There are too many people that aren't responsible with their germs, smoke, etc. that ends up effecting other people. But that is impossible to do.

There are serious differences between smokers and sick people.

1) Being sick is not a choice
2) Identifying sick people requires more effort/expertise than identifying people who are smoking cigarettes.
3) There are different levels of sickness -- many are not contagious. Impossible to tell.

It's impossible to prevent sick people from transmitting their disease, it is possible to keep smoking people out of restaurants. See how your objection just doesn't work?

[Keith]

People may be entitled to keep their smoking habits. But non-smokers should be entitled to be in a public place with an atmosphere free of the harmful smoke. My children have asthma and allergies very bad. A little smoke sparks up their complications. They shouldn't have to suffer because someone is entitled to smoke.

Count me in as one that will not patronize any restaurant that has a smoking section. Thankfully, most restaurants are now smoke free, however, there are still a few that feel like they have to cater to smokers.

Sunday afternoon, a group of us from church went to Golden Corral to eat. I was under the impression that they were smoke free, but I was wrong. We had to walk by the smoking section in order to get to the desserts. I am considering e-mailing their corporate office and voicing my dissatisfaction over their smoking section.

I agree with metro. If they can't wait for 30 minutes to have a smoke, then they have a problem.

Second hand smoke is very dangerous, and I don't want to become a victim of it.

[Faith]

There are serious differences between smokers and sick people.

1) Being sick is not a choice
2) Identifying sick people requires more effort/expertise than identifying people who are smoking cigarettes.
3) There are different levels of sickness -- many are not contagious. Impossible to tell.

It's impossible to prevent sick people from transmitting their disease, it is possible to keep smoking people out of restaurants. See how your objection just doesn't work?

I definitely understand there are serious differences between smokers and sick people. I wasn't serious about banning "sick" people from restaurants. I understand it isn't a personal choice to be sick like it is to smoke. The point I would like to make though is I wish people were more respectful in public places who are sick. They may not know if they are contagious or not but why take the chance. If you are sick then you shouldn't go in a restaurant, (especially buffet) and cough and sneeze your sick germs all over the place. That is how the flu, colds, etc. gets transmitted all the time.