Public Smoking Ban

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: m316foley
This is absolutely outrageous. If they ever ban smoking in my state to this extent, then I WILL go to canada.

Please. The exit is due north. However, you'll probably find our Canadian neighbors are even less tolerant of your fumes than U.S. citizens.

It's not like we're not polluting the air as it is with factories and cars. Wow, now pick on the cigarette smokers. Take smoking away from any bar I go to, yes, they WILL lose business.

It appears you're also reading impared, or at least, you didn't read my previous post directly refuting the same false assertion by previously posted by BlancoNino[/i]. I'll save the wear and tear on your "Back" button by reposting it, here.

It's hardly outrageous, and according to The American Lung Association, your basic assumption that these laws harm businesses is just dead ass wrong. See their conclusion starting on page 7:

The Debate Is Over

Legislators need to be made aware that there is no longer any need to argue about the economic impact of smokefree air laws. The only economic issue left in the debate is the influence tobacco industry lobbyists and their front groups have in the halls of state capitals. This influence is eroding as more evidence surfaces regarding smokefree ordinances that have been in place for years. Even some restaurant and bar associations are beginning to take notice and have changed their stance to neutral on the issue, including groups in California and Florida. The New York State Restaurant Association actively supported passage of New York state?s smokefree air law in 2003.

We also are seeing a positive ?domino effect? in smokefree air laws at both the state and local level. Seven states have passed laws prohibiting smoking in restaurants and/or bars in the past two years. Georgia came close to passing a statewide law prohibiting smoking in most workplaces and restaurants in 2004. Cities such as Columbus, OH, Lawrence, KS, Lincoln, NE, and Minneapolis, MN have enacted smokefree ordinances in 2004 as well. These are encouraging trends, but we shouldn?t lose sight of the fact that it doesn?t matter what neighbors are doing. Whether the jurisdiction is a small suburb or a large state where most of the population lives hours from the border, smokefree air laws simply don?t have a negative economic impact.

If you disagree, you can start with their list of references. Get back to us when you've got anything to refute them:

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RESOURCES

Economic Impact Studies
Bartosch, W., Pope, G., Economic Effect of Restaurant Smoking Restrictions on Restaurant Business in Massachusetts, 1992 to 1998, Tobacco Control 2002; 11(suppl. II): ii38-ii42.

Bartosch, W., Pope, G., The Economic Effect of Smoke-Free Restaurant Policies on Restaurant Business in Massachusetts, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 53-62.

Bartosch, W., Pope G., Preliminary Analysis of the Economic Impact of Brookline?s Smoking Ban, Health Economics Research Inc., 1995.

Bourns, B., Malcomson, A., Economic Impact Analysis of the Non-Smoking Bylaw on the Hospitality Industry in Ottawa, KPMG, 2001.

Dai, Chifeng, et al., The Economic Impact of Florida?s Smokefree Workplace Law, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida, June 2004.

Dresser, J., Boles, S., Lichtenstein, T., et al., Multiple Impacts of a Bar Smoking Prohibition Ordinance in Corvalis, OR, Pacific Research Institute, 1999.

Dresser, L., Clearing the Air, Wisconsin: Tobacco-Free Wisconsin Coalition, 1999. Ferrence, R., Luk, R., Gmel, G., The Economic Impact of a Smoke-Free Bylaw on Restaurant and Bar Sales in Ottawa, Canada, Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, 2003.

Fletcher, J., An Analysis of Sales Tax Receipts from Restaurants with Bars and Free Standing Bars in Chico, CA 1995-1997, California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section, 1998.

Glantz, S., Wilson-Loots, R., No Association of Smoke-Free Ordinances with Profits from Bingo and Charitable Games in Massachusetts, Tobacco Control 2003; 12: 411-413.

Glantz, Stanton A., Effect of Smokefree Bar Law on Bar Revenues in California, Tobacco Control 2000; 9:111-112.

Glantz, Stanton A., and Charlesworth, Annemarie, Tourism and Hotel Revenues Before and After Passage of Smoke-Free Restaurant Ordinances, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) 1999; 281: 1911-1918.

Glantz, S., Smith, L., The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-Free Restaurants and Bars on Revenues: A Follow Up, American Journal of Public Health 1997; 87: 1687-1693.

Glantz, S., Smith, L., The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-Free Restaurants on Restaurant Sales, American Journal of Public Health 1994; 84: 1081-1085.

Goldstein, A., Sobel, R., Environmental Tobacco Smoke Regulations Have Not Hurt Restaurants? Sales in North Carolina, North Carolina Medical Journal 1998; 59:284-287.

Hayslett, James A., Huang, Philip P., Impact of Clean Indoor Air Ordinances on Restaurant Revenues in Four Texas Cities, Bureau of Disease, Injury and Tobacco Prevention, Texas Department of Health, March 2000.

Huang, P., De, A.K., McCusker, M.E., Impact of a Smoking Ban on Restaurant and Bar Revenues ? El Paso, Texas, 2002, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) February 2004; 53(07): 150-152.

Huang, P., Tobias, S., Kohout, S., et al., Assessment of the Impact of a 100% Smoke-Free Ordinances on Restaurant Sales ? West Lake Hills, Texas, 1992-1994, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), May 1995; 44(19): 370-372.

Hyland, A., Before and After Smoke-Free Regulations in New Taxable Sales From Eating and Drinking Places in New York State, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, June 2002.

Hyland, A., Cummings, K., Restaurant Employment Before and After the New York City Smoke-Free Air Act, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 22-27.

Hyland, A., Cummings, K., and Nauenberg, E., Analysis of Taxable Sales Receipts: Was New York City?s Smoke-Free Air Act Bad for Restaurant Business? Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 14-21.

Hyland, A., Puli, V., Cummings, K.M., Sciandra, R., New York?s Smoke-Free Regulations: Effects on Employment and Sales in the Hospitality Industry, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 2003; June.

Hyland, A., Tuk, J., Restaurant Employment Boom in New York City, Tobacco Control 2001; 10: 199-200.

Hyland, A., Vena, C., Cummings K., et al., The Effect of the Clean Air Act of Erie County, New York on Restaurant Employment, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 2000; 6(6): 76-85.

Hild, C., Larson, E., Weiss, L., et al., Review of Municipality of Anchorage Chapter 16.65 ? Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places, Institute for Circumpolar Health Studies, October 2001.

Lal, A., Siahpush, M., Scollo, M., The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Policies on Sales in Restaurants and Cafes in Victoria (Australia), Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2003; 27 (5): 557-558.

Maroney, N., Sherwood, D., Stubblebine, W., The Impact of Tobacco Control Ordinances on Restaurant Revenues in California, Claremont, California: The Claremont Institute for Economic Policy Studies, 1994.

Moseley, F., Schmidt, K., The Economic Impact of Minot?s Smoke-Free Restaurant Ordinance, Minot State University, 2003.

New York City Departments of Finance, Health and Mental Hygiene, Small Business Services and New York City Economic Development Corporation, The State of Smoke-Free New York City: A One-Year Review, March 2004.

Ong, M., Lightwood, J. and Glantz, S., Health and Economic Impacts of the Proposed Florida Smokefree for Health Initiative, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, 2002.

Pope, G., Bartosch, W., Effect of Local Smokefree Restaurant Policies on Restaurant Revenues in Massachusetts, Center for Health Economics Research, April 1997.

Sciacca, J., Eckrem, M, Effects of City Ordinance Regulating Smoking in Restaurants and Retail Stores, Journal of Community Health 1999; 18(3): 175-182.

Sciacca, J., Ratliff, M., Prohibiting Smoking in Restaurants: Effects on Restaurant Sales, American Journal of Health Promotion 1998; 12: 176-184.

Styring, W., A Study of the Fort Wayne (IN) Restaurant Smoking Ban: Has It Impacted the Restaurant Business? Indianapolis: Hudson Institute, 2001.

Taylor Consulting Group, The San Luis Obispo Smoking Ordinance: Study of the Economic Impacts on San Luis Obispo Restaurants and Bars, San Luis Obispo, California, 1993.

Wakefield ,M., Siahpush, M., Scollo, M., et al., The Effect of a Smoke-Free Law on Monthly Restaurant Retail Turnover in South Australia, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2002; 26: 375- 382.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

:thumbsup:

 

[MCsommerreid]

If such a strict smoking ban is enacted they should set up some kind of "public smoking lounges", and add some kind of addendum to allow businesses to set up smoking lounges seperate from the non-smoking areas.

Also, it should be noted that its generally cigarette smoking that is the super dangerous one both due to quantity and quality of material smoked. Cigarettes are laced with things, use super insanely cheap tobacco, and is wrapped with paper and smoked through fiber glass or cotton waste filters. This increases any danger inherent to inhaling smoke because it's not just tobbaco smoke, but it's also preservative, "flavoring", and combustables smoke that's being inhaled.

What really should be done is the tobacco companies should be legeslated and required to provide real tobacco products, not just mass produced machined cancer sticks. I'm pretty sure the death rates from lung cancer are lower among cigar and pipe smokers who inhale, even though the heart problems rate is higher.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: MCsommerreid
If such a strict smoking ban is enacted they should set up some kind of "public smoking lounges", and add some kind of addendum to allow businesses to set up smoking lounges seperate from the non-smoking areas.

Grief counselors at funerals and wakes might be appropriate and effective.

What really should be done is the tobacco companies should be legeslated and required to provide real tobacco products, not just mass produced machined cancer sticks. I'm pretty sure the death rates from lung cancer are lower among cigar and pipe smokers who inhale, even though the heart problems rate is higher.

Bullsh8! Tobacco, by itself, is highly addictive and deadly, even before you get to the additives. The reason pipe and cigar smokers have lower incidents of lung cancer is because most smokers don't inhale pipe and cigar smoke. These same smokers have much higher incidents of mouth and throat cancer than non-smokers.

 

[MCsommerreid]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: MCsommerreid
If such a strict smoking ban is enacted they should set up some kind of "public smoking lounges", and add some kind of addendum to allow businesses to set up smoking lounges seperate from the non-smoking areas.

Grief counselors at funerals and wakes might be appropriate and effective.

What really should be done is the tobacco companies should be legeslated and required to provide real tobacco products, not just mass produced machined cancer sticks. I'm pretty sure the death rates from lung cancer are lower among cigar and pipe smokers who inhale, even though the heart problems rate is higher.

Bullsh8! Tobacco, by itself, is highly addictive and deadly, even before you get to the additives. The reason pipe and cigar smokers have lower incidents of lung cancer is because most smokers don't inhale pipe and cigar smoke. These same smokers have much higher incidents of mouth and throat cancer than non-smokers.

In comparison to your average cigarette smoker, not in comparison to your average non-smoker. And I specifically said "cigar and pipe smokers who inhale" because comparing those who only taste wouldn't be at all accurate.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: MCsommerreid
In comparison to your average cigarette smoker, not in comparison to your average non-smoker. And I specifically said "cigar and pipe smokers who inhale" because comparing those who only taste wouldn't be at all accurate.

Why does it even matter when the stronger arguement is that, even in dedicated smoking areas, employees who have to work for extended periods in such a polluted area are as much at risk as the smokers? Those employees have a fine choice between losing their income or their health, whether or not they smoke.

Also, smoke can't read, and it just won't obey the rules. I've never seen a dedicated smoking area where the foul stench didn't escape to other areas. The only way that could work is with a very expensive negative pressure system that constantly draws air from the outside and exhaust from the contained area is filtered to trap the toxic gasses and particulate.

Smokers who allow their addiction to kill themselves are tragic. Allowing them to kill others is criminal, as much for any legislative body that has public responsibility for public health as it is for those who lobby to continue the practice with false claims of potential economic harm.

 

[iGrooCk]

yeh i support smoking bans and if i was a bussiness owner of a large company i would make people that smoke quit smoking or quit working, pretty simple. smoking is one of the leading causes of death in US, its funny how they didnt ban it all across the country. if you like smocking so much you should do it at home before work + smoking people just stink like some nasty old rag in the closet, when they walk by feels like i am gonna pass out. my 2 cents on the situation

 

[eits]

one of the sweetest things about going to bars in maryland/dc is smoking is banned. all the white trash states, though, still have it

they really need to get rid of it... it's so disgusting and inconsiderate of others, smoking.

 

[GregGreen]

Originally posted by: Harvey


It's hardly outrageous, and according to The American Lung Association, your basic assumption that these laws harm businesses is just dead ass wrong. See their conclusion starting on page 7:

BULLSH!T! It most certainly does hurt bars. Just because some industry group supports a ban doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt any businesses. That might be worst logical fallacy in this entire thread. And if you want proof go ask any bar owner or bartender in New York State!

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: SMOKE20

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Todd33
Ban it. Smokers should be free to kill themselves in their homes and no where else. You have no rights to poison others.

:thumbsup:

Coca Cola is bad for you, so is coffee, the preservatives in most foods cause cancer, alcohol is definately bad............where shall it stop then?

I don't think anyone's had any deaths or illnesses due to second hand cola. You really should think before you speak. 2nd hand smoke is deadly, and usually given without others consent.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: GregGreen

Originally posted by: Harvey


It's hardly outrageous, and according to The American Lung Association, your basic assumption that these laws harm businesses is just dead ass wrong. See their conclusion starting on page 7:

BULLSH!T! It most certainly does hurt bars. Just because some industry group supports a ban doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt any businesses. That might be worst logical fallacy in this entire thread. And if you want proof go ask any bar owner or bartender in New York State!

Pardon me while I rosin up my bow for the poor bar owners. It's a damn shame when even drug pushers are forced to comply with workplace safety regs.

 

[Liver]

Originally posted by: eits
one of the sweetest things about going to bars in maryland/dc is smoking is banned. all the white trash states, though, still have it

they really need to get rid of it... it's so disgusting and inconsiderate of others, smoking.

:thumbsup:

In the past (way past) the AMA endorsed cigarette smoking. The statement was that it "burned fat off the heart." Tidbit of trivia, not really relevent.

Some anti-tobacco proponents are preaching that cigarette smokers should be denied health insurance. As willingly participating in detrimental behavior should not be covered by health insurance.

I do NOT believe that, but what if it was made into a pre-existing condition? A person has a choice to smoke or not to smoke. A person with type one diabetes does not. However, type I diabetes is classified under many insurance policies as a pre-existing condition and coverage may be denied.

Bar employees (smokers or not) and patrons (smoking or not) should not be subjected to someone else's smoke. Period. Whether they object to said smoke is a different issue.

It is fact that smoking and general tobacco use / abuse has far reaching health consequences. There is no easy solution to this probelm, as long as people (mainly smokers) believe that their rights are be violated. Do not forget the economic impact of everyone involved in cigarettes and the bar owner whose business may decrease. So many issues.

Should we as a nation allow condone smoking? I do not know the answer, but I believe Americans would be better off not smoking. I live in the South (i.e. a "White trash state"), and I think cigarettes are in the food pyramid down here.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: iGrooCk
yeh i support smoking bans and if i was a bussiness owner of a large company i would make people that smoke quit smoking or quit working, pretty simple. smoking is one of the leading causes of death in US, its funny how they didnt ban it all across the country. if you like smocking so much you should do it at home before work + smoking people just stink like some nasty old rag in the closet, when they walk by feels like i am gonna pass out. my 2 cents on the situation

Right. I might like to masturbate, but I know enough to keep my vices at home where they belong.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

Why am I a troll, because I point out the folly of people who think it is ok to ban things they don't like?

The point is, just because you don't like the smell and smoking is unpopular, does not give you the right to ban it from being done in public....

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

Why am I a troll, because I point out the folly of people who think it is ok to ban things they don't like?

The point is, just because you don't like the smell and smoking is unpopular, does not give you the right to ban it from being done in public....

That's like saying I shouldn't shoot you because you don't like bullets.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

Why am I a troll, because I point out the folly of people who think it is ok to ban things they don't like?

The point is, just because you don't like the smell and smoking is unpopular, does not give you the right to ban it from being done in public....

That's like saying I shouldn't shoot you because you don't like bullets.

Filling you with bullets are a pretty major infringement upon your rights. Smoke wafting into your nostrils on the sidewalk maybe a small annoyance, but it little more. The fact that it is bad for the smoker is irrelevant and the notion that second hand smoke is bad is overblown and unproven.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

Why am I a troll, because I point out the folly of people who think it is ok to ban things they don't like?

The point is, just because you don't like the smell and smoking is unpopular, does not give you the right to ban it from being done in public....

That's like saying I shouldn't shoot you because you don't like bullets.

Filling you with bullets are a pretty major infringement upon your rights. Smoke wafting into your nostrils on the sidewalk maybe a small annoyance, but it little more. The fact that it is bad for the smoker is irrelevant and the notion that second hand smoke is bad is overblown and unproven.

second hand smoke's danger overblown and unproven? Nice hole you live in.

Secondhand smoke is classified as a ?known human carcinogen? (cancer-causing agent) by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US National Toxicology Program, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organization.

Link

2nd hand links

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Mwilding

Originally posted by: Strk
I like smoking bans, they make places much nicer.

I think we should ban fat people. Them not being around would make the world better.

Then we can ban stupid people. Not having their life sucking ignorance around would make things more pleasant.

I'd like to follow that by banning anyone whose political philosophy differs from mine.

Then we can ban people who piss me off.

People who fart...

People who pick their nose in public.

People who don't shower enough...

Frankly, anyone who offends my sensibilities should be sent to a death camp.

The world will be so much more pleasant then. Don't you think?

Troll

Why am I a troll, because I point out the folly of people who think it is ok to ban things they don't like?

The point is, just because you don't like the smell and smoking is unpopular, does not give you the right to ban it from being done in public....

That's like saying I shouldn't shoot you because you don't like bullets.

Filling you with bullets are a pretty major infringement upon your rights. Smoke wafting into your nostrils on the sidewalk maybe a small annoyance, but it little more. The fact that it is bad for the smoker is irrelevant and the notion that second hand smoke is bad is overblown and unproven.

Tell it to my lungs when they go into spasms. They missed the memo about the overblown part.

 

[1EZduzit]

Peoples attitudes about smokers just makes me want to blow some smoke yopur way. I dont' hear a one of you complaining about all the tax dollars collected from tobacco sales being used to reduce your tax bill. They should be used to provide smoking areas in public buildings, lung cancer research, and things like that.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: GregGreen

Originally posted by: Harvey

It's hardly outrageous, and according to The American Lung Association, your basic assumption that these laws harm businesses is just dead ass wrong. See their conclusion starting on page 7:

BULLSH!T! It most certainly does hurt bars. Just because some industry group supports a ban doesn't mean that it doesn't hurt any businesses. That might be worst logical fallacy in this entire thread. And if you want proof go ask any bar owner or bartender in New York State!

Thanks, but unless you're as qualified as the American Lung Association and have some good references to back your insufficiently humble opinion, I'll stick with the second half of my previous post you quoted. If you disagree, you can start with their list of references. Get back to us when you've got anything to refute them:

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RESOURCES

Economic Impact Studies

Bartosch, W., Pope, G., Economic Effect of Restaurant Smoking Restrictions on Restaurant Business in Massachusetts, 1992 to 1998, Tobacco Control 2002; 11(suppl. II): ii38-ii42.

Bartosch, W., Pope, G., The Economic Effect of Smoke-Free Restaurant Policies on Restaurant Business in Massachusetts, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 53-62.

Bartosch, W., Pope G., Preliminary Analysis of the Economic Impact of Brookline?s Smoking Ban, Health Economics Research Inc., 1995.

Bourns, B., Malcomson, A., Economic Impact Analysis of the Non-Smoking Bylaw on the Hospitality Industry in Ottawa, KPMG, 2001.

Dai, Chifeng, et al., The Economic Impact of Florida?s Smokefree Workplace Law, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Florida, June 2004.

Dresser, J., Boles, S., Lichtenstein, T., et al., Multiple Impacts of a Bar Smoking Prohibition Ordinance in Corvalis, OR, Pacific Research Institute, 1999.

Dresser, L., Clearing the Air, Wisconsin: Tobacco-Free Wisconsin Coalition, 1999. Ferrence, R., Luk, R., Gmel, G., The Economic Impact of a Smoke-Free Bylaw on Restaurant and Bar Sales in Ottawa, Canada, Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, 2003.

Fletcher, J., An Analysis of Sales Tax Receipts from Restaurants with Bars and Free Standing Bars in Chico, CA 1995-1997, California Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Section, 1998.

Glantz, S., Wilson-Loots, R., No Association of Smoke-Free Ordinances with Profits from Bingo and Charitable Games in Massachusetts, Tobacco Control 2003; 12: 411-413.

Glantz, Stanton A., Effect of Smokefree Bar Law on Bar Revenues in California, Tobacco Control 2000; 9:111-112.

Glantz, Stanton A., and Charlesworth, Annemarie, Tourism and Hotel Revenues Before and After Passage of Smoke-Free Restaurant Ordinances, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) 1999; 281: 1911-1918.

Glantz, S., Smith, L., The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-Free Restaurants and Bars on Revenues: A Follow Up, American Journal of Public Health 1997; 87: 1687-1693.

Glantz, S., Smith, L., The Effect of Ordinances Requiring Smoke-Free Restaurants on Restaurant Sales, American Journal of Public Health 1994; 84: 1081-1085.

Goldstein, A., Sobel, R., Environmental Tobacco Smoke Regulations Have Not Hurt Restaurants? Sales in North Carolina, North Carolina Medical Journal 1998; 59:284-287.

Hayslett, James A., Huang, Philip P., Impact of Clean Indoor Air Ordinances on Restaurant Revenues in Four Texas Cities, Bureau of Disease, Injury and Tobacco Prevention, Texas Department of Health, March 2000.

Huang, P., De, A.K., McCusker, M.E., Impact of a Smoking Ban on Restaurant and Bar Revenues ? El Paso, Texas, 2002, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) February 2004; 53(07): 150-152.

Huang, P., Tobias, S., Kohout, S., et al., Assessment of the Impact of a 100% Smoke-Free Ordinances on Restaurant Sales ? West Lake Hills, Texas, 1992-1994, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), May 1995; 44(19): 370-372.

Hyland, A., Before and After Smoke-Free Regulations in New Taxable Sales From Eating and Drinking Places in New York State, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, June 2002.

Hyland, A., Cummings, K., Restaurant Employment Before and After the New York City Smoke-Free Air Act, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 22-27.

Hyland, A., Cummings, K., and Nauenberg, E., Analysis of Taxable Sales Receipts: Was New York City?s Smoke-Free Air Act Bad for Restaurant Business? Journal of Public Health Management Practice 1999; 5(1): 14-21.

Hyland, A., Puli, V., Cummings, K.M., Sciandra, R., New York?s Smoke-Free Regulations: Effects on Employment and Sales in the Hospitality Industry, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 2003; June.

Hyland, A., Tuk, J., Restaurant Employment Boom in New York City, Tobacco Control 2001; 10: 199-200.

Hyland, A., Vena, C., Cummings K., et al., The Effect of the Clean Air Act of Erie County, New York on Restaurant Employment, Journal of Public Health Management Practice 2000; 6(6): 76-85.

Hild, C., Larson, E., Weiss, L., et al., Review of Municipality of Anchorage Chapter 16.65 ? Prohibition of Smoking in Public Places, Institute for Circumpolar Health Studies, October 2001.

Lal, A., Siahpush, M., Scollo, M., The Economic Impact of Smoke-Free Policies on Sales in Restaurants and Cafes in Victoria (Australia), Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2003; 27 (5): 557-558.

Maroney, N., Sherwood, D., Stubblebine, W., The Impact of Tobacco Control Ordinances on Restaurant Revenues in California, Claremont, California: The Claremont Institute for Economic Policy Studies, 1994.

Moseley, F., Schmidt, K., The Economic Impact of Minot?s Smoke-Free Restaurant Ordinance, Minot State University, 2003.

New York City Departments of Finance, Health and Mental Hygiene, Small Business Services and New York City Economic Development Corporation, The State of Smoke-Free New York City: A One-Year Review, March 2004.

Ong, M., Lightwood, J. and Glantz, S., Health and Economic Impacts of the Proposed Florida Smokefree for Health Initiative, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco, 2002.

Pope, G., Bartosch, W., Effect of Local Smokefree Restaurant Policies on Restaurant Revenues in Massachusetts, Center for Health Economics Research, April 1997.

Sciacca, J., Eckrem, M, Effects of City Ordinance Regulating Smoking in Restaurants and Retail Stores, Journal of Community Health 1999; 18(3): 175-182.

Sciacca, J., Ratliff, M., Prohibiting Smoking in Restaurants: Effects on Restaurant Sales, American Journal of Health Promotion 1998; 12: 176-184.

Styring, W., A Study of the Fort Wayne (IN) Restaurant Smoking Ban: Has It Impacted the Restaurant Business? Indianapolis: Hudson Institute, 2001.

Taylor Consulting Group, The San Luis Obispo Smoking Ordinance: Study of the Economic Impacts on San Luis Obispo Restaurants and Bars, San Luis Obispo, California, 1993.

Wakefield ,M., Siahpush, M., Scollo, M., et al., The Effect of a Smoke-Free Law on Monthly Restaurant Retail Turnover in South Australia, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2002; 26: 375- 382.

 

[HombrePequeno]

This ban closed down all the hookah bars. I personally have never been to one but all of my friends said it was a lot of fun going to those. I'm sure all the owner's of the bars are really happy about the fact they have to find new jobs.

The public smoking ban was really shortsighted. I hate smoke as much as the next person but that doesn't mean it should be banned from inside buildings. The whole being able to smoke 25 feet away from a building is retarded too. Nobody follows it and nobody enforces it.

 

[SMOKE20]

Originally posted by: Sheik Yerbouti

Originally posted by: SMOKE20

Originally posted by: daveshel

Originally posted by: Todd33
Ban it. Smokers should be free to kill themselves in their homes and no where else. You have no rights to poison others.

:thumbsup:

Coca Cola is bad for you, so is coffee, the preservatives in most foods cause cancer, alcohol is definately bad............where shall it stop then?

I don't think anyone's had any deaths or illnesses due to second hand cola. You really should think before you speak. 2nd hand smoke is deadly, and usually given without others consent.

No, my thinking is not the problem. The problem is with the thinking of those like you whom lack the capacity to understand.

As stated, I don't smoke, never have. Can't stand the smell on clothes and will dump my clothes in wash shortly after returning from a place with smokers.

My point is this: As I said, I hate smoking, but am also aware that it is those people whom wish to do so's perogative to do so. If I don't want to put up with it....I don't go into those places...if I do go in, I know beforehand exactly what to expect and what I'll need to do.

Also, I am firmly in the corner that believes this is NOT something we need the goverment to be involved in. The last time something similar to this began (1920) the same people pushing it suddenly had a huge list of other things which needed attention......like businesses conducting business on Sundays. Luckily, prohibition didn't last long enough for them to gain enough support for most of their "agenda" but who knows what could happen these days....

 

[AragornTK]

what about diet soda? most contain sacarine(sp?) which is a known carcinogen, but you can get it in much greater quantities and cheap than cigarettes AND they don't have labels saying it's bad for you