Duluth Smoking Ban

[Guest]

Now they want to ban smoking in bars?? LOL!
I quit smoking over 2 yrs ago, and yes I enjoy being smoke free, and yes it's nice to go out to eat and not have a ton of smoke. However this bar and workplace ban is going way to far. How are they going to designate the work place? What about all the people that work outside for the city and construction comapanies? What about the workers at the smoke shops? And my favorite? Them poor poeple that are living the American dream and working from home.. I always thought through histroy that Americans were against dictatorships?
This is going to have a serious effect on Duluth's economy,and put the drunks more on the roads to other towns that are still free, do we need this?
If asked to sign the petition? Do like we tell kids about drugs.
"Just Say NO!!

[JAR JAR]

Yes Frozen that is crazy. I am a smoker but I don't smoke in restraunts because I don't like smoke with my food but if I go out for a few and relax that is a different story because part of my relaxing is smoking. Duluth was complaning about how they were losing money to Superior because how late the bars stayed open over here and they tried to fix that but now that they want to ban smoking in the bars over there they are just going to shoot themselves in the foot again and send the business back over to Superior. Next thing you know you won't be able to walk down the street over there with a smoke.

Jar Jar

[Deep_Sinker]

I think that the smoking ban in restaurants is great. It is so nice to go out to eat and not have sit and smell the smoke of others while I eat. I do think that the bars would be a little overboard as most people enjoy a smoke with the beverage of choice; however I definitely enjoy smoke free bars like Sneakers and the Sports Garden more because the haze of smoke doesn't choke you when you are there. I really think that the smoke makes me more hung over in the mornings after some cocktails. So, I guess I wouldn't support the "total ban" either but they still have my support for restaurants.

-Just my two cents

[bottomfeeder]

I think the city council should just let the market dictate. If there is that much of an outcry for smoke-free bars, then more bars would be smoke-free to attract all those customers.

Problem is, the whole smoking ban is organized by citizens on the East side of town. They are well organized and come out in droves to vote for the ban. However, the businesses and owners most affected, are on the west side of town.

So while these east enders sit at home sipping their single malt scotches, never intending to set foot in a Terrys Bar or T-Bones, these busineeses are forced to close their restuarent operations because of the actions of the minority.

I'm a none-smoker BTW.

[BD110]

I have to agree I think a total smoking ban for the city is a bad idea. I still like the idea of a business owner taking care of their own business and serving their customers how they see fit. But here's the shocker!! I'm from the East end. I did not take the comment to heart but that was a far reaching statement
Take care,
Thomas (BD110)

[Northlander]

Isnt it funny there are no bars or liquor stores in the east end? It could have been changed many times but for some reason a bunch of powerfull $ people over there dont want it. Hmmmm. Could they be the same ones trying to tell people where to smoke and where not to? Are they going to try to tell me where I can chew next?
No smoking in a resturaunt makes sense to me. No smoking in work places does to because there are non smokers who have to be there to do their jobs. No smoking in bars I dont get. As Jar Jar stated the bars in Duluth are open later now to save bussiness but if they snuff out smoking in the bars you will see that gained bussinesss gone and then some.
Ive seen Al at Mr.D's spend thousands of dollars trying to make the city happy on this smoking ban deal. Now he finally has a resturaunt inside the bar with doors seperating it from the bar. Lots of $ that could have been better spent was shot. Smaller bussinesses without the $ would have just had to close their grills/deli's.
Im a non smoker but Im with BD110 on this one. Let the owners decide what there customers want. If they are non smokers go non smoking. If they smoke let them but please put in a exhaust fan in for any non smokers who may work there.

[bdavid1157]

I think they should ban smoking in cars too!!! Every time I pull up to intersection I get sick of looking at the butts. To bad smokers don't have ashtrays in thier cars.

[bwtrout]

smokers leave butts on the floor of my boat and smell.

[Guest]

I love the people who think taking this right away is okay because it doesn't affect them. What about the PETA freaks trying to ban hunting (and yes fishing). Didn't you know "hooks hurt"? Why not outlaw old gas leaking, oil burning, and smoke polluting outboards? That affects us all and is unhealthy. Only new clean burning motors should be allowed. They need to outlaw all of the fast food restaurants because they kill more people a year than cigarettes. All of the fatty, greasy food leads to obesity, diabetes, clogged arteries, heart attacks, etc. How about your neighbor (or Chemlawn for that matter) who sprays their yard with smelly toxic weed killers on a windy day when the spray comes wafting over to your home (and your air). Should we outlaw that. Half of the laws these morons pass are backwards anyway. Abortion is legal (even to the point of "half birthing" a live child and then killing them. That's the "partial birth abortion). But if a preganant woman is murdered, the murderer is charged with a double murder. In pne case the child is considered human, in the other case it's just a bunch of worthless cells (all according to the genuises we elect). They make car drivers wear a seat belt, yet allow a motorcycle driver to drive without a helmet. The whole point is, the idiots making these laws are just that and the fewer rights they take away from us, the better!!! Everyday they keep making laws saying what was legal yesterday is now illegal. If you don't like the smoke, go to a restaraunt that "voluntarily" has chosen not to allow smoking. I don't like falling off of cliffs, therefore I don't rock climb. One respondent said let the market dictate the law. I say just the opposite. If nobody wants smoking in restaurants, the owners will make their own rules not allowing it. We don't need the government to tell us when it's okay to smoke.

P.S. I quit smoking in january of 1998. I haven't said the above for self serving purposes. I'm just tired of losing basic freedoms everyday.

[Tom Linderholm]

Wow where does one start. Smoker here, all for a smoking ban in restaurants if left to the proprieters of the business. There are places where it does not belong and there are places where it does. As far as hurting business goes do we still hold the bowling tournaments every year that we did in the past. If not theres 100's of thousands of dollar's lost from gas to room revenue to restaurants and then the bowling allies and tourist attractions? I for one know that Pickwick lost thousands of dollars compared to previous years for the same time period. Many Superior restaurants noted that sales were up 30% in direct reflection to the Ban when it started. There are countless other restaurants that suffered as well and spent tens of thousands of dollar's to make a attempt to comply even with the ever changing guidlines of the ban with the efforts to become futile as it progresses. Bars need not suffer the same punishment in which the restaurants did. Its bad enough they are now handing out liquor licence's (another subject) for 1/100th of what previous owners paid and mortgaged their bars against. How are the small guy's gonna pull through revamping. Then the east end comment, that hurt, WTF is that all about. If only you saw where my entertainment dollars are spent. Easily 70% is in west duluth or superior the rest being in country establishments. If I don't like the atmosphere of a certain place I don't go there. Let it be up to the owner's who have put year's of sweat equity into the business and lively hood of there business and home. As far as the littering, that has nothing to do with the smoking more so to do with people that have no respect for themselves or the recources of the planet.
Enough said!
Tom

[This message has been edited by Cheffrey (edited 05-06-2004).]

[Guest]

Some bars such as Grandmas and other "Sports bars" may benefit from it due to most of their clientelle are non smokers.

What I find more offending is trying to eat my meal while smelling someones cheap perfume. Or? eating at 1 of these sports bars and trying to stomach someone spitting in a cup or beer can at the bar. This is disgusting in itself, I was a chewer and a smoker and I took much more flack for chewing than smoking for being gross.

Of all the money wasted in Duluth possibly they could give out grants to the bars to put in better ventalation.

First they take away the ten commandments and now this whats next? Der Furah Bergson and his staff of SS (Smoke Squad) shall visit your home and inspect. If they smell smoke? you are to be shot in the street for your neighbors to see??.
Heil Herbie

There are a lot of bars that have taken a big hit in the bank from the first smoking ban and it cannot go on any further, or they are cooked and done. I say let the owners pole their clients and see what they say many bars will lose major dollrs from this. If this does by some dumb a$$ reason pass? Come to Hermantown we can use your tax dollars more that soup town!

And this thing about the workplace? In an enclosed office ok. a garage where everyone is ok with it? Then let it be. Customers don't go in the shop.
I thought we were a democratic society that believed in the vote of ALL the people not a group.

How about no Bar B'Qing outdoors it may offend the vegitarians? .LOL

[jlm]

I agree, there are places where smoking is ok like in a shop or wherever, as long as all agree that it is ok. However, it should be banned from any public place in my opinion. Smoking and second hand smoke is toxic and has long lasting effects on people. If someone is bringing in something harmful to the environment, it should be he who is restricted, not the others in that environment. Just my 2 cents.

[Northlander]

Nicely put!

[Guest]

repeat from last post... oops

[This message has been edited by frozenminnow (edited 05-06-2004).]

[Guest]

jlm your quote
If someone is bringing in something harmful to the environment, it should be he who is restricted, not the others in that environment. Just my 2 cents.
so we agree with the non lead tackle issue?

[scifisher]

Smoking is a personal choice that is akin to putting a gun in your mouth and pulling the trigger...only it takes about 30 years give or take for the bullet to whack its way through the skull. If people want to make that decision, fine. Suicide is legal...oh wait, no it isn't. And smoking is more akin to putting a hand grenade in your mouth and pulling the pin (well maybe not that bad, but this is melodrama at its best so bare with me ). Truthfully, though, a smoker not only hurts themselves, but they hurt others around them. With rising health care costs all around, doesn't banning smoking in public places just make sense for the general public good? Yes, smoking is a choice an individual can make, but its a **** stupid one. And I think we legislate against stupidity all of the time...

aka drinking and driving, taking a whiz in public, disorderly conduct, ect...none of them kill as many people as smoking by the way.

[Viking]

I have been trying to lay low on this topic. I am a smoker that has been trying to quit since I recently found out I was a diabetic. I hate to see the cigarette butts, at the corners, I learned to field strip them in the servie. I don't throw butts in the lakes. I agree with all of your points. But shouldn't the people that want to complain wear a mask every time they go outside, Every time a car goes by them. Or is it just there selective prejuices that turn them against smokers. I enjoy eating in a smoke free environment. I work 10 hours a day, without smoking. But it bothers me, when I get behind , the SCHOOL BUS, or the semi, hurdling thick clouds of black smoke out behind them. Legislators have tried in the cities, to curb emissions, but, was it just a shot in the dark ? Think about it , the next time you turn the key, in your viechle, boat, snowmobile, 4 wheeler.
Pull the rope on you lawn mower, chain saw, Light the heater in your fish house. Smile when your furnace kicks on when it's 30 below outside. I know plenty of people that have gotten cancer, and never smoked a cigarette. But as long as the government needs the car to get to work, talk on the phone all the way there!
I think people need to look at the much bigger picture. I agree you must start somewhere. But where is that ? This is one of those topics, like talking politics, religion, there is no start , there is no end. Living in the USA is about freedom. Isn't it ?
just my current thoughts
everybody have a good day.

[Animal]

With smokers comprising only 20% of the adult population of Minnesota it is inevitable that smoking in any public place is on the way out. St. Paul is now considering the same ban that Duluth and several other Minnesota cities have. I think that Minneapolis will soon follow. When that happens the Minnesota Legislature will surly give the matter more serious consideration and probably ban smoking in public buildings statewide. The result will be another tradition of going to the corner bar and having a few cold ones and puffing a cigars or a pack of cigs will fall into history.

[jlm]

I seriously doubt that a smoking ban will effect business that much. We have heard that complaint before with other cities and they came out just fine. Besides, when I go to a bar, its not to smoke, its to drink. I smoke from time to time. However, I think that smoking around others is intrusive to them. I prefer to smoke outside, even while I am in a bar that allows it. Like it or not, smoke is toxic. I would support a total ban within buildings. However, I feel folks should be able to light up outside where it will not effect others. Smoking in public is going to be a thing of the past in a few years. There will be a few unhappy people for sure!

[muskybuck]

I am all for no smoking in bars. However, if you have have seen a good smoke eater at work that is just about as good. Trouble is a lot of the places do not have one. Some are so old they don't work. And a lot of bar owners refuse to turn the ones on they have unless you beg them too. I would be happy with a law that says no smoking unless you have a quality smoke eater. I stop in my local pub for a beer after work and with in the time it takes to have a quick one you come out smelling like an old pipe.

[Mudcutter]

I usually stay outta matters like this on the forums because I think the forums are supposed to be about Mn Fishing etc. But this one takes the cake.
This is not a matter about smoking or not smoking. It's about letting the government decide what is right and what is wrong and making those decsions for us. I hate that. I don't smoke and it's unpleasant sitting next to Joe Camel at the bar with the breeze blowing smoke in my direction. But I can leave, or move, or go outside, or start smoking myself. When government starts taking such trivial rights away imagine what they can do in the future with guns, hunting, etc... It's just a matter of time. Examples include , Europe and Aussie land.
Soon they will tell us that we have to have a receipt in the boat to prove we got leeches in Canada while fishing in Canada. Oh yeah-- that's reality. Soon they will tell us one more thing that leads to another thing that makes the first thing seem like--- it never happened and that's scary.
Keep your line tight

[scifisher]

Guys, the last thing I want is more government in my life making decisions for me. I agree that there are some personal freedoms at risk. Yet, I force myself to weigh the one right in question (the right to smoke) versus the general health of the public.

And that is truly all that is at stake. There is no conspiracy and there is no slippery slope with this smoking ban. People are not going to stand for too much curbing of their rights, so its no use getting yourself whipped into some libertarian frenzy.

From a public health point of view, smoking is absolutely deadly. To the smoker and to those who breath second hand smoke. It is more deadly then many major industrial pollutants that are far more heavily regulated. It is so deadly that it drives up health care costs across the country. We spend billions of dollars trying to save people who are exercises this particulary personal freedom. Therefore indirectly, smoking (and smokers) are responsible for thousands of people losing their jobs and livlihoods across the country. One of the reasons we are in this economic slump is because of these health care costs. Smoking is the number one killer in the United States (with obesity racing up at number two, but that is another story).

There is another side to this debate. Everybody knows that smoking is deadly. The education is out there, but the advertising is so strong it seems to still be overpowering people's reason. Education makes a difference. Among college grads and professionals, the rates of smoking are lowest. Among the rank and file, where smoking is still a strong part of the culture despite the efforts of millions, smoking continues...and so do the horrible consequences. Something has got to be done. Someone has got to say enough is enough. The smoking ban sends a message to smokers that their personal choice is just that. Personal. No longer will you be allowed to share that choice with those around you. And it is my hope that this government mandated ostrazization will get a few more people to quit.

My grandfather has emphesyma and has to have fluid drained out of his lungs monthly so he can continue to breath. He tells me and my brothers that the worse thing he ever did was start smoking. Two of my brothers smoke and I am baffled that such a poignant example has gone unnoticed. With that in mind, I think that IN THIS CASE government interference is warrented. People are not making good decisions despite the education and everybody in this country is being hurt by this Personal Decision. (either by the economics or by the actual effects)

scifisher

------------------
Entropy makes life interesting.

[jlm]

I agree, I do not like or want big government either. However, I think in this case, government is acting on the opinions of the majority of its constituants and is trying to act on it. Our leaders are not just making this thing up out of the blue to take control, they are acting on it becaues I believe this is what the majority of the population wants. When empirical research supports a ban on smoking, it will be more like to be a reality. It would seem that the governmental process is actually working for once!

Lead sinkers and lures? This is a tough question and I will voluntarily switch to something else. However, if I have read thing correctly, there actaully is not scientific evidence that lead sinkers effect the water quality. This is not to say that there is not a harmful effect because there might be and we just have not been able to pin point it yet. Hey, why not switch over, you can go to one of the DNR exchanges and get your stuff for free. Now thats a good step in my opinion.

[Leaky]

Hum...........All interesting comments.

My take is this: If the market place or majority of patrons dictate a smoke free environment, then make it smoke free. (IE McDonalds, Bakers Square).

Nobody is forcing a non smoker to go to a smoking establishment and visa versa. The owners of these establishments should be making the call, not the governnmet.

[This message has been edited by Leaky (edited 05-07-2004).]

[lotalota]

Hey Boys. I have a solution to this whole mess. Ban booze and grits. They both make you feel like crap and they both kill you. Imagine if somebody "invented" alcohol and tobacco today. Neither would ever make it past the FDA or USDA, the FBI or whomever the regulators are. MY SOLUTION...ban booze and grits (as mentioned before) and legalize weed. Imagine how much better the bar and grill business would be with a bunch of baked dudes sitting at the bar with the munchies. Solved!!!

Really though. I remember sitting in an eatery next to two parents with a little boy about a year old. Both parents were smoking and the smoke was just pouring over the kids face. I am not much for confrontation but, now that I have a little one of my own, it bothered me enough to say "nice looking kid...nice smoke". Probably won't make one bit of difference but you never know.

I value the non-smoking environment in Duluth. It is nice to be able to take my family out to dinner and not have somebody's d-stick belching all over us. I don't, however, take my kid to the bar that often. By the way, there are bars (Grandma's et al) and there are BARS (take your pick of all the crusty bars in the twin ports). When I go into a bar I don't expect to have smoke filling the room. When I go into a BAR I do.

Maybe no smoking in public places except for BARS. I still like my first idea better.

lota lota...

[This message has been edited by lotalota (edited 05-07-2004).]

[Hibbing]

Hooray for Duluth if they go ahead with the ban! It's about time that we all start to realize that smoking affects ALL of us!

My dad died as a result of 40 years of smoking. To watch a person slowly die from from lung disease would make anyone quit. The last 2 years of his life he could not go to a bar or restaurant because of the second hand smoke.

[scifisher]

Leaky

I truly appreciate the power of the market to make decisions because it gives people the most freedom possible. When it comes to public health, though, the market has a very poor track record. I don't think that the smoking decision can be decided this way. There will always be a place where smoking will be allowed and those places will appear to draw more business to places that have smoking bans. Eventually, the decision to ban smoking gets weaker and weaker and weaker. Meanwhile, the public health crisis smoking is causes goes on and on. That is why, in this case, I think that government regulation is warrented.

scifisher

[jlm]

Leaky-I respect your opinion but I have to disagree with you. People should not have to make a decision on where to go have a drink or a bite to eat based on the harmful habits of others. It should actually be the other way around. Those who have the harmful habits should have their rights/opportunites limited. It almost seems as though the non-smokers get punished and have to make decisions based on the unhealthy behaviors of others. This is completely out of line in my opinion. Perhaps the best way to do this is to have establishemnt owners have two parts to their facility. One for smokers and one for non-smokers. That way nobody will be limited as to their choice. Here is another that may cause a stir but I thought I would mention it. How do you feel about people smoking in their car when they have their children in it?

[scifisher]

The children have no choice in the matter and it is there health that will suffer in the future. Children of smokers have a 90% rate increase for asthma...

Sigh...

Where does the government interference end? I don't know. I just wish that all people could be trusted to make good decisions. Reality bites.

[Leaky]

jlm & Sci (long time no talk to sci) - I respect your opinions as well. Here's my analgy:

If I go walking through North Minneapolis at night with a 100.00 bill sticking out of my pocket, I'm putting myself in a positon to get robbed. Do I deserve it it? No. Is it unfair that I get punished for it? Maybe. Did I have a choice to go walking in that neighborhood? Yes.

My point is bars and restaurants are owned by people that have a financial stake in them. Thats different than banning smoking in a Government building. Currently the bar owner has the right to refuse service to anyone. It's their business. That said, if they want to refuse service to smokers, then do it. If someone doesn't agree with that owner, then go somewhere else. This is whether you are a smoker or nonsmoker.

As far as smoking with children in cars, those people ought to be slapped up side the head. Here I wouldn't have a problem with regulation, cause those children have no choice in the matter.

OK - gotta head up north. Have a good weekend everyone.