First Casulty of a Smoking Ban?
WEEK TV 25 had a report regarding the smoking ban for Bloomington, IL which passed Monday night and it’s first possible casualty. Pub One, which has one of the oldest liquor license in the city, is purported to have a high number of patrons who are die-hard smokers. Bar owner John Rokos claims approximately 85-90% of his clientele are smokers, and from what they have told him, they will probably not be back once the ban comes into effect.
Good going Bloomington! It sounds like you have effectively wiped out Mr. Rokos’ livelihood of the past 30 years. If tobacco is so bad (which it is) why do they not just make it illegal altogether? That will never happen. There’s too much tax revenue and class action settlements off of tobacco. The powers that be want you to purchase tobacco products and then not use them.
Eyebrows McGee had a great idea for these smoking bans; institute a no-smoking ban, but allow special licenses to allow smoking. That way, the business owner can decide what type of establishment they wish to be. Sounds like common sense to me, something of which no politician will ever possess.
Common Sense of it All: Like I’ve posted before, this is a continuation of losing our rights in this country. Consider it to be more legislation of morality.
posted by Common Sense Dude at 10:55 AM
4 Comments:
This is rediculous. I don't smoke.. but come on...this is just silly. I totally agree, if smoking is sooooo bad then why don't they just outlaw cigarettes altogether? How about cars? Those kill people too. Electricty? Fire?
May 10, 2006 1:08 PM
Don't forget guns. We've got a battle on that front too.
I don't smoke either and I'll even admit I prefer a non-smoking atmosphere. I can understand certain places remaining smoke free, such as schools, hospitals and airline flights. But I believe that should be up to the business owner of establishments that are "optional" to enter, such as restaurants and bars. If non-smoking bars are all the rage and that's what consumers want, let the marketplace take care of that, not city ordinances.
May 10, 2006 2:48 PM
As a former non smoking restaurant owner, I disagree with Bloomington's ban. I think there should be a law more along the lines of: if 50% or more of your revenue comes from alcohol, the owner makes the decision because the place is considered a bar. If 50% or more revenue comes from food, its a non smoking joint because it is considered a restaurant. When you reapply for your liquor license, you fill out a form stating your revenue from each. If you get audited, the numbers better match.
For all the proponents of non smoking bars, I want one of them to start one and see how long it lasts. I don't think the concept is as fashionable or popular as they think.
May 12, 2006 6:15 PM
Hey, look, my name's in a post!
May 17, 2006 4:22 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home