SEND THESE BAR-OWNERS TO WASHINGTON
Some bar-owners in Michigan want to ban state legislators.
(Thanks to KJP)
« Previous | Main | Next »
Some bar-owners in Michigan want to ban state legislators.
(Thanks to KJP)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
I can believe it. The bar owners must be hurting. It's got to be tough.
Posted by: Theresa | August 25, 2011 at 01:45 PM
In return, the police and fire departments will respond very slowly if needed.
...The bars here are GREAT without all that smoke. A buddy owns three, and his business with families went way up. He makes much more profit on a pop* than a beer...
*that's soda, for you east-coasters.
Posted by: Olo Baggins of Bywater | August 25, 2011 at 01:51 PM
This is just total BULL. We heard exactly the same nonsense when smoking was banned in New York - hurts business, places will close, etc. It proved to be total nonsense. If bars and restaurants close it's because the economy sucks or other similar reasons, not because of a smoking ban.
There are just as many bars in New York as there ever were, at a guess. As long as the playing field is even - smoking is banned everywhere - you deal with it. People go outside to smoke, period, they do NOT stop eating and drinking. And waiters and waitresses do not have all the smokers puffing in their faces.
Posted by: Jeff Meyerson | August 25, 2011 at 02:20 PM
For you southerners,'pop' and 'soda' are cokes here.
Posted by: nursecindy | August 25, 2011 at 02:43 PM
...Victims of Smoking Ban Cut Off Politicians...
Politician's what? I would pay to see that.
Posted by: MikeyVA | August 25, 2011 at 02:56 PM
I know a lot simpler solution. If I don't want to be around smoke I don't go into places that allow smoking. this allows the free market to work. I have never been forced to go into a bar or cafe that I did not want to go into. Public building are another story, but a private business should be able to allow smoking. If they go out of business because of all the non-smokers not coming in that is their problem. I also don't go into bars that play heavy metal. Should that be banned in case I want to go into that bar?
Posted by: oldfatguy | August 25, 2011 at 03:10 PM
And I won't go into Aberfrombie & Stitch because of the ear-splitting "music," either.
Posted by: Coconuts | August 25, 2011 at 03:56 PM
So what they're saying is that drinkers who smoke have now all become teetotalers?
Posted by: Braniff | August 25, 2011 at 04:35 PM
Just getting loaded at home. Ah, family togetherness.
Posted by: Loudmouth | August 25, 2011 at 08:12 PM
@oldfatguy: Heavy metal doesn't damage the lungs of the people who work in the bars day in and day out.
It's a public health issue.
Posted by: ADrunk | August 25, 2011 at 09:27 PM
what about all those stores that have to have fragrance in the air - worse than patchouli. i am an ex smoker. i smoked for 40 yrs. the smell makes me nauseated now, believe it or not. and its bad for you. ask my cardiologist...but, if they give you a separate area where you can smoke, that would be fine. it's your choice. as long as the rest of the people dont have to smell it.
as for letting pols in - i say, keep them away from all other humans. that's not a smell - its an odor!
Posted by: queensbee | August 26, 2011 at 07:53 AM
adrunk, McDonalds is hiring, no one has to work in a bar. If they do it is beause they want to. Too many other similar jobs that are in places that do not allow smoking. Plus if the bar owner cannot hire people because they worry about the smoke, then he has to go out of business. Free market is all that works.
Posted by: oldfatguy | August 26, 2011 at 09:12 AM
As long as the bar owners are cool with being banned from the State Capitol, local government facilities (going to make it hard to do business, I suppose, but hey, they're just defending their property rights,) and of course the homes of the legislators in question, it sounds fair to me.
Of course, they won't be around long to carry out their protest. Don't ask me how many bar employees I know who have or have had cancer -- you don't want to know.
Posted by: Omniskeptic | August 26, 2011 at 09:27 AM
The "Free Market" exists only in places like Somalia -- it's called piracy, kidnapping, drug dealing, extortion, etc.
If there are laws, taxes, licensing, etc. it's not a free market -- the only argument is over what to regulate, since the Constitution says the government is supposed to regulate commerce. It also says it's supposed to provide for the general welfare. I can't find any references to "smoker's rights." Is it in Amendment 9 3/4?
Posted by: Ralph | August 26, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Meanwhile, in Montana, alcohol sales are higher in the Capitol when the legislature is in session, and lower elsewhere:
Story here
So those bar owners would and in fact do welcome their state reps.
Posted by: oneblankspace | August 26, 2011 at 11:38 AM