New smoking ban in effect

[huskyfever]

The smoking ban is now officially in effect.  I'm a non-smoker and I can't stand being next to someone puffing away, but I'm against the ban.  I don't understand why people who don't like smoke just go somewhere else.  Most common places that everyone needs to visit are smoke free anyway.. I don't worry about second hand smoke in the airport or the library or the DMV.  If I go to a bar or a nightclub, I know what to expect. 

If anything, it'd be nice if more clubs/bars made the decision to be smoke free, clearly there's a market for it if the voters wanted it.  I wonder how many of the voters were older people who just don't like smoke, but aren't really affected by it anyway because they don't go to smoking establishments.

[Lea]

I tend to disagree. I was in a bar for lunch today that I could not have set foot in a couple of days ago because of the smoking. It still reeks, but I was able to breathe while I ate my lunch. I am allergic to cigarette smoke. I have asthma attacks from breathing smoke. It will also be nice to be able to go out without having to wash everything I wore from the skin out, and shower before I can go to bed because of the smell.

Smokers represent only about 22% of the population nationwide and about 15% of the population here in the Seattle area. There is no reason why 85% of the population should have to be held hostage to their bad habits, not to mention the health of those who work in these establishments.

I remember when smoking was allowed in offices. Few smokers were considerate or willing to restrict their smoking when we were in confined spaces like conference rooms. Now the shoe is on the other foot.

Personally though I do think that cigar bars should be exempt since smoking is the purpose of such places. It doesn't make sense to restrict smoking in such places. I hope the legislature sees this and fixes it really quickly. Otherwise though I am delighted with the new law. It makes my life much easier.

[huskyfever]

Good points, but 22% is actually a significant percentage.  Even if you view it as a small percentage, I think a valid question to ask is "why do bars/clubs want to allow smoking then?"  Wouldn't it make sense to cater to the majority?  I think the key here is that the percentage of bar/club patrons who are smokers is probably quite high, which is why it would make sense for them want to continue to allow smoking.  That's why I almost feel like your argument is correct, but it might be the other way around.. that there is a minority of non-smokers who are raising a fuss about these establishments where the majority of people are either smokers or non-smokers who don't mind.

If a restaurant allows smoking, it is up to me whether or not I want to go in there.  I'd rather it be my decision and the restaurant's decision as opposed to the government's decision.  In general, I think society needs to be more flexible and understanding if we are going to continue to progress.  If I have to be the flexible one, even if it means less conveniences for me, so be it.  Someone has to give at some point.

Again, just my opinion - but I don't think this ban will last.  If it does, I really think it'll just cause more problems.

[jeff]

As a non smoker, I really could not be any happier about this. I am currently living in Pennsylvania, part time in Philadelphia, and moving to Seattle in Febuary. Philly had a proposal to ban smoking, but the politicans have since forgot about it, and it looks like it will never happen now. I am absolutely thrilled that I will soon be living in a state with a smoking ban.

Huskyfever: A few questions then. . .I'm also a part time bartender. What about my health? Should I be forced to inhale smoke just because I work a job that I enjoy? It doesn't seem fair to me. Also, in Philly, there was certainly a fair deal of support for the ban, and a fair deal of hating going on, but I didn't know of many bars that banned it on their own. Of course they are afraid of losing business, but I also don't think it is fair to tell me not to visit a bar that I would otherwise enjoy just because there will be smoking there. I generally like going out to a bar once or twice a week, and while I have indeed stopped going to the smokiest places, I still end up coming home smelling like an ashtray.

But, the bottom line is, what about the health of the employees working in such places? In my opinion, if you want to smoke, you go right ahead. Outside, and away from me.

[huskyfever]

Hey Jeff, welcome to Seattle - bring me a cheesesteak.

No, I don't think you should be forced to inhale smoke, which is why you have a choice in where you can work.  Sometimes what we enjoy doing and what is best for us are two different things.  I love football but don't like the obnoxious fans that spill beer on me, yell and argue the entire game.  But that's the culture of football, if you go to a game, that's what will be around you.  Granted, it's not as hazardous as cigarette smoke, but my point is that if you enjoy a hobby or a bar or a club enough, you'll go to it regardless.  If the annoyance or hazard is bad enough, you'll avoid the place.  If I'm in the minority and everyone wants to do something I don't like or doesn't seem to mind, I'm not going to ask everyone else to change.

You're right, most bars won't ban smoking on their own.  I really think the answer is for government to 'encourage' bars/clubs to go smokeless.  Give them some sort of incentive so that doing so makes financial sense, but don't force them to.  Again.. if all these people are really for the smoking ban, why won't the bars just go smokeless?  There should be a huge money making opportunity here.  Open the only smoke free bar in town and watch everyone flock to it because there's so many people who want it - which would pave the way for more smoke free bars.  It doesn't happen because non-smokers who are for the ban are the minority in these environments.  Let the actual demand dictate whether or not bars go smoke free, not people who don't go to the bars and don't work at the bars and just don't like smoke.

[Lea]

Actually that seemed to happen in restaurants before the ban. Something like 75% of restaurants in King County were smoke free before the ban even though they were allowed to have smoking sections if they wished.

My sympathy is with the workers who must breathe that crap night in and night out. It's not as if they really have all that much choice before, given the preponderence of smoking bars. It was extremely difficult to find a non-smoking one. I hadn't been to a bar in years before the ban for that reason.

The same argument could be made for other work places before Washington went to a smoke free office environment....people say if you don't like it don't work there, but often where else are you going to work if it's everywhere? I personally suffered for years when people could smoke in offices. I cannot tell you how nice it is to be able to work and breathe at the same time.

While 22% may be a "significant percentage," 78% is decidedly higher and these people shouldn't be held hostage to the bad habits of a few people. I often wonder if smokers had been more considerate back in the bad old days, if people wouldn't be a whole lot more sympathetic to them now.

[huskyfever]

Don't get me wrong, I do feel sympathy for the workers at the bar if they don't want to inhale smoke all the time, but they DO have a choice.  My question is, why choose that profession in the first place if you have issues with the culture?  If you don't like animals, maybe working at the zoo isn't the best thing for you.  The bar scene is established and has been for many years.  It's not like this is some kind of unexpected surprise, in which case I'd feel more sympathy for the workers.

Remember, 22% is a general stat nationwide - it doesn't reflect the percentage of bar/club patrons who are smokers.  To me, that's the beauty of the free market economy.  If the majority of bar/club patrons hate smoke, the bars/clubs will become smoke free on their own because they will cater to the majority to maximize profits.  There's a reason why they haven't.  I'd love to see a stat on how many people in favor of the ban actually frequent bars/clubs every week.  Again, I dislike smoke and I do go to bars from time to time - but from a completely objective standpoint, it seems unfair for me to ask everyone else to change for me.

[Mav1984]

I've lived in California for a number of years where small areas have been smoke free for a long time and then several years ago the state became smokefree (I think). 

For non-smokes, what you are going to find is that when you travel to states that still allow smoking in public places, you will immediately recognize how offensive second hand smoke is.   Trips to Las Vegas, Dallas and Oklahoma City really stick out in my mind on how uncomfortable my dining experiences were because of a smoker(s) in the room. 

It's an overall positive for the greater good. 

[huskyfever]

Wow, haven't been here in a while.  Saw some of my old posts and wanted to bring this one back.  Quite frankly, I'm surprised there hasn't been more of a fight from smokers on this.  I have to say, I'm still glad there's no smoking anywhere now, but I expected more of a fight from smokers.  Have they given up?  Is anyone fighting this at all?  Or are they all just going to the Indian casinos to smoke indoors?

[frank1976]

There was recently a scam circulating in Seattle and people receiving phony citations for public smoking. You have to check this out, how clever of these scam artists:)

http://www.SeattleScams.com It is posted under the forum