I understand that everyone is all about smoking bans, but it is terribly discriminatory and bad for the restaurant industry. It should be left up to the individual businesses. If you want to have a smoke-free business, people will go. Conversely, if you want to have smoking in your establishment, people will not come if they really do not want to inhale smoke. Let people vote with their money. Forcing smoking bans just makes people pissed off and puts a lot of smaller bars and restaurants with smoking clientele out of business. Not to mention the fascist element of it all.
It's bad enough that cigarettes cost a ton of money that gets siphoned off to everything but smoking cessation and health care, and it's bad enough that you already can't smoke in a number of places.
Here is a semi-fair solution that as a smoker I support and agree with: No smoking in restaurants, smoking in bars. It's only fair.

Ok, just let me clear up a few things. Nobody is saying you can't smoke in your own home, or is trying to outlaw smoking altogether. A smoking ban just says where you can smoke. All we are saying is that we want smokefree workplaces, which includes restaurants, bars, and bowling alleys.

Let's get real. The pot smoking argument is the stupidest argument against the smoking ban I've ever heard! First of all marijuana is already illegal, so you can't smoke that anywhere, much less have it. Second if it were legal, you would treat it like cigaretts under a smoking ban. You could smoke it in your home, but not public places.
And, second hand smoke IS hazardous. The U.S. Surgeon General's report on second hand smoke that came out in June 2006 proves it. Among other things, it says that "Even brief second hand smoke exposure can cause immediate harm." Second hand smoke exposure can cause heart disease and lung cancer in adults, and can cause sudden infant deaths syndrome, respiratory problems, and athsma in children.
The report also says that seprating smokers and nonsmokers in the same building cannot eliminate exposure to second hand smoke. This position is supported by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE). They say that "Ventilation technology cannot be relied on to control health risks from second hand smoke exposure".
Those are pretty good arguments for a smoking ban in workplaces including restaurants and bars. I suggest people check out these reports at www.hhs.gov/news/press/2006pres/20060627.html and www.ashrae.org/positiondocuments.

how many deaths are caused by second hand smoke? How's this?: 3000 adult nonsmokers are killed each year by second hand smoke from lung cancer. Don't believe me? I doubt you will. You don't even believe the surgeon general. But this is from the Center of Disease Control. I know you won't check it out, but for those interested, here's a link.
www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research.data/environmental/ets-fact.htm

And I must say this. I you smokers are so worried about bars and restaurants going out of business because of a smoking ban like you pretent to, GO TO THEM!!! It's the nonsmokers that leave them that make them go under. I do my part. I only go to smoke free restaurants and bars.

If everyone in a given state actually quit smoking cigarettes at the same time, or gradually phased themselves out of it, that state would run into such a huge budget deficit that everyone across the board would suffer. All of that tax money goes to practically everything but the people who contribute it, and everyone in society would lose something in the process. Potholes wouldn't get fixed, your kid's class would have a couple more kids in it every year, you'd spend more time in traffic, everything in society that tax money goes toward would be shortchanged in some way.
I guarantee that people would not be as happy if all of the tobacco tax went back into helping the people who put it there, and not everyone. If the state figured out how much money smokers contributed on an individual basis and used it as their health care premium, or gave them a refund check or a tax credit, people would be pissed off. People have no problem taxing something they don't like as long as it doesn't affect them.
On a complete seperate note, it would be cool if smokers could mail in the UPC codes or whatever and get shares of that companies' stock. That would kick ass.

sorry for the bad link. Just go to www.cdc.gov and do a search for secondhand smoke.

****mod edit for link****

http://www.cdc.gov/search.do?action=search&queryText=secondhand%2Bsmoke&...

Vote Republican: the party of deception, corruption, devastation, torture and oppression.

Not to mention the 450 - 500 nuke tests during the late 40s and early 50s. And now they are starting up the nuke programs againg. Just as they are threatening Iran and NK for doing less than they are.

The argument that banning smoking hurts restaurants and taverns is patently false. This argument has been advanced in California, New York, and other areas in opposition to laws banning smoking and its proven false time and time again. See http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5307a2.htm for an example. This same argument was advanced here in Nevada in opposition to a ballot initiative banning smoking in public places except for bars that don't serve food and on the casino floor. The ban passed, and starting December 8, visitors to Nevada can enjoy a smoke free environment in all restaurants, hotels, and other public places other than bars without food service and casino floors. Amazingly, effective next month smoking is now illegal in Sin City in most public places.

The comparison to alcohol use is also a red herring. If I'm sitting next to you in a bar drinking a beer there is a zero percent chance my drinking that beer will negatively impact you. If I'm smoking a cigarette, the odds are much higher that you will experience a negative result from my second hand smoke. Putting aside the health risks, there is also the fact that the smell will permeate your clothes, hair, etc.

Someone above argued in opposition to the ban that there are lots of things that create health hazards, and that's true. Heck on my TV now is an ad for "Jeff the Gun Trader" offering two boxes of free ammo with any gun purchase. But does that mean we should lift restrictions on hazardous waste dumping? Or water toxicity level limits? Of course not! Two wrongs don't make a right.

I don't see anyone advocating a total ban (prohibition style) on smoking. What you do in your home is your business. I myself enjoy the occasional cigar, but that's my choice and I would never smoke somewhere that my smoking causes imposition to others. There is no "right" to smoke, and my right to do so ends where my doing so causes harm to others. At least that's how I see it.

I'm kind of surprised to see people voicing opposition to smoking bans on a democratic web site. That's more of libertarian view isn't it? Personal freedom to do whatever, limited government, etc etc etc. I'd wager most democrats support (probably strongly) these smoking bans. I know I do.

Man the smokers get testy.

Almost as testy as those NRA folks when they think you are trying to take something away from them.

It's funny that all of a sudden we don't want to do something that would benefit our health system because gosh darnit that's our right! And oh by the way we're all so happy to be taxed on our cigarettes that we use THAT (of all things) as an argument to oppose a smoking ban. Oh the martyrs and their smoking are literally SAVING our country!!!! Puh-lease!!!!!!

I don't go into a bar to breathe yer GD smoke. I don't go into a restaraunt to come out smelling like an ashtray. I don't appreciate having to walk through a cloud of smoke to gain entrance to a building.

If you can't step out back to have a smoke for 2 minutes then it's time to quit. I smoked for a long damn time. I was up to 2 packs a day and I never saw the big whooping deal in having to step outside to have a smoke. It absolutely stinks, it's terribly bad for you to have to spend hours cooped up in hazy smoke filled rooms. And it's OTHER PEOPLES RIGHT TO NOT HAVE TO BREATHE IT!!!

Maybe we should just enact a law saying that all indoor public spaces need to have an indoor quality of air standard or fance sever penalties? That way it is no longer a smoke issue. That would cover the working conditions of thousands of different working hazards.

If an establishment is knowingly operating a public space that is contributing to the health problems of it's workers and patrons then it is in fault. So we can either be proactive about it and do something on the front end of it or we can wait for the lawsuits and the healthcare costs.

I say to get off your ass and go have a smoke outside. Otherwise you are free as an american to smoke in your own private dwelling. I could care less.