+72 Almost all restaurants don't allow smoking/vaping. There shouldn't be government intervention for having smoking/vaping be allowed in your establishment if you have clear signage and the government shouldn't restrict your ability to serve food if you allow smoking/vaping inside. amirite?

by matilde49 2 days ago

This is a health and safety issue. The government is in charge of regulating health and safety. It's pretty simple.

by Virtual-Road 2 days ago

Health and safety of the public. I am wholeheartedly against smoking but that's only because it has negative effects to others. How someone chooses to live their life should not be regulated by government if it has no adverse effects to others.

by OkDrawer 2 days ago

If you want to get a double bacon cheese burger the government doesn't step in and says you can't offer that because a risk of health if you eat this every day....

by matilde49 2 days ago

Lol you also need food to survive and it has zero effect on the people around you. No such arguments for vaping 24/7. Oh noooo my 2nd hand double bacon cheeseburger exposure

by Anonymous 2 days ago

You don't think the strain that obesity has on our healthcare system affects you?

by Spiritual_Plate 2 days ago

And nobody would be forcing non smokers to go to a smoking environment.

by Spiritual_Plate 2 days ago

Don't go to restaurants that allow smoking if you don't like it.

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Smoke outside if you don't like it.

by Virtual-Road 2 days ago

Well that's what smokers have to do now, this is a hypothetical that would only affect the patrons/staff of the business. The market will dictate whether or not it was a good decision to allow smoking. It'd be a risk the business owner would be taking and I agree with OP that that should be a decision that's left up to the owner. It's then up to the public whether or not they want to frequent the establishment.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

"The market will dictate" Free market believer lmao

by Virtual-Road 2 days ago

So then the business will have to hire people who are cool with inhaling toxic second hand smoke all night? I guess there could be some people into that.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Why would you work there if you don't like smoking? Yeah, some people might be into that, I guess. I don't smoke.

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

God, libertarians are so annoying. What about the health and safety of employees? Why are you so against not allowing toxic clouds of smoke in public places?

by Virtual-Road 2 days ago

Don't work there if you don't smoke, lol. I don't smoke, but some people do. I'm sure they would like going to business that cater to their wants.

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Lmao "don't work there" Do you know what a job shortage is Not everyone gets to pick and choose their job, especially low paying jobs like service workers. Smoke outside or stay home.

by Virtual-Road 2 days ago

There's a job shortage? I wasn't aware

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Do you really want people blowing their breath on you though? It's bad enough we have to breathe the same air. Do you want it forced on you? Also, do you have the same argument for drinking and driving? Or selling alcohol to minors? These laws are in place to protect people. Not hurt them.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Bad enough we have to breathe the same air... get a grip bud. You can choose not to go to that bar or restaurant. We are talking about private business. Smoking is legal

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

It's not normally legal or a personal choice to pollute the environment. A minor analogy, imagine if the government ignored noise pollution laws because it's the choice of the restaurant.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Smoking isn't legal? That's not a great analogy, but I'd be fine with that too.

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Work somewhere else. Pretty simple.

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Open a business, im sure it would be super successful

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Of course, I forgot every person is in the position to open a business. Especially single moms looking for a waitress job to feed her kids.

by Potential_Sherbet 2 days ago

What would you put on the ad? Willing to inhale smoke all night while you work?

by Anonymous 2 days ago

Don't work there if you don't like smoking. The same logic applies.

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

Don't go out and eat in restaurants if you can't survive for an hour not smoking indoors, same logic applies.

by Potential_Sherbet 2 days ago

Some people like sitting at bars and smoking, I don't smoke, but it's understandable. I don't see why you would care at all. Just don't go there lol

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

I don't care, smoking is rightly banned. So I can go anywhere I like. lol

by Potential_Sherbet 2 days ago

Yeah me too, lol. Not all bars banned smoking. There are exceptions in my city. That's a good thing

by danikamacejkovi 2 days ago

yeah.

by Due-Box8185 2 days ago

I don't want smoking everywhere. But you could argue if you don't want secondhand indoor smoke, just don't go to or support businesses that allow it. It's still a choice. If like the DMV or hospital or some other essential service allowed smoking it would be different.

by clauddurgan 1 day ago

It's for employees though, who don't have that choice. Sure they could go work somewhere else, but this is about across the board occupational safety.

by boyerphilip 1 day ago

What about employees? They don't get a choice not to work there. People need jobs, especially during job shortages. You are ruining peoples lives over "muh free-dumbs".

by Virtual-Road 1 day ago

of course they get a choice. they aren't forced to work at one specific place.

by Intelligent_Buy 1 day ago

I can't inhale the second hand double bacon cheese burger smoke… I can inhale your second cigarette and vape smoke against my will.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

No one said you have to eat there.

by matilde49 1 day ago

So your solution is to exclude potential customers so that smokers can satisfy their wants?

by Anonymous 1 day ago

It's almost like the laws are to protect the health of people that choose not to smoke.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

What about clear signage don't you understand. You have free will. You can eat anywhere

by matilde49 1 day ago

But if the laws changed, and all venues started to allow smoking again, where would everyone go? That is how bad it was back then. Doctors used to smoke in hospitals too. Watch the Exorcist (1973) for an example.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

That burger doesn't cause everyone around you to inhale second hand burger fumes tho - One critical difference is that eating unhealthy really only effects you directly, unlike smoking. Also, eating unhealthy, whilst terrible long term, is a lot less harmful than smoking

by Anonymous 1 day ago

No one said you must eat there.

by matilde49 1 day ago

There's also employees there who may not wish to have second hand smoke or vape all day.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

They can also choose to not apply, some smokers may want to work there. It's up to them

by matilde49 1 day ago

Many people don't have these options that you have

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Then they can smoke outside on their government-guaranteed smoke breaks. This is pretty simple. There's no good reason to allow smoking indoors

by Appropriate_Pay_6814 1 day ago

Fair enough, I misremembered, but the point still stands. Step outside and smoke. Not that difficult

by Appropriate_Pay_6814 1 day ago

No one says YOU have to eat there. Can't find a bar with indoor smoking? Stay home. Don't like there's no smoking? Stay home

by Anonymous 1 day ago

That begs the question. If you smoke and through your smoking you have caused someone to develop cancer which then proceeds to kill them, have you not then committed involuntary manslaughter? Beaaring in mind that by definition, Involuntary manslaughter is the unintentional killing of someone through one's reckless and/or negligent actions, which one could argue smoking around other people is because at this point in time we all should know that smoking, and by extension secondhand smoke, increases one's chances of developing cancer. Before anyone mentions it, I know it wouldn't be admissible in court, just something to think about in regards to the argument at hand

by Anonymous 1 day ago

You having a double bacon cheeseburger has no impact on my health. You're only hurting yourself. Vaping, smoking, etc. all affect those around you. The government has every right to regulate this and I'm glad they made all restaurants non-smoking.

by Ancient_Paramedic 1 day ago

Why not just go eat somewhere else though? I always have a hard time believing that the government is actually concerned about health and safety. But im jaded since I live next to a refinery, a gun range, and millions of dollars from the city's sugar tax disappeared into a slush fund.

by cfahey 1 day ago

Write to your congressman if you think bacon double cheeseburgers are an issue.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Employees of the establishment don't get lung cancer for serving a customer a double bacon cheeseburger.

by blickjewel 1 day ago

Is the government forcing you to eat at an establishment that has clear signage outside that says "smoking/vaping is allowed inside"?

by matilde49 1 day ago

I guess maybe you weren't alive when smoking everywhere in public was commonplace. Almost every restaurant/bar was filled with smoke pretty much all the time. Your analogy is useless because what I eat doesn't affect your health and vice versa. Smoking on the other hand does negatively affect everyone in the immediate area

by Anonymous 1 day ago

The problem is secondhand smoke. You can get an unhealthy cheeseburger no problem, your choice, but if somehow your cheeseburger affected my condition, then there's an issue to be addressed. A better analogy might be helmets, idk

by Allenepredovic 1 day ago

Nah this is a health and safety issue. There's plenty of waitresses who got cancer thanks to second hand smoke in enclosed spaces like diners.

by Raynorchasity 1 day ago

How do you feel about exemptions for owner operated businesses?

by Normal-Wishbone4278 1 day ago

The issue with this is that almost no business has one staff member. Presumably even an owner operated business has a few employees, the owner isn't cooking, serving, cleaning, managing, and doing all of the office work, unless it's a food truck. Which is outdoors, problem solved.

by Raynorelody 1 day ago

They don't allow it because the government banned it. Any place where alcohol is the primary product would allow smoking in 10 seconds if it was legal.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Poland allows smoking areas as long as restaurant have also nonsmoking ones. Almost no restaurant have smoking areas because those are bad business.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Smoker here; It is rude to intrude upon some absolute strangers enjoyment of their meal. Don't smoke around food anyways, there are better aromas to be enjoyed.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

You don't have to eat there either.

by matilde49 1 day ago

Just say you're a nic addict dude

by Anonymous 1 day ago

What about the staff? Most restaurants don't offer insurance and pay low wages.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

If you believe it's a danger don't work there. Hell might be an incentive to a worker who smokes who doesn't want to head outside for each smoke.

by Worldly_Cattle_1476 1 day ago

If you believe it's a danger don't work there. Why does it not surprise me the person advocating to remove an indoor public smoking ban refers to the dangers of second hand smoke as if it's a matter of personal belief.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

No I believe it's a danger, just worded that poorly. I meant it more like "if it's too big a risk for you to personally take".

by Worldly_Cattle_1476 1 day ago

Don't work there I suppose?

by Dependent-Level 1 day ago

It's your state. There's no federal ban. The only federal ban is smoking in federal buildings. Go to your local government meetings and take it up with them.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

As I stated above. There will be signage, consider it a gimmick. You won't be able to approwch the place without knowing. And that's the point.

by matilde49 1 day ago

You can't go for a meal without smoking? The idea behind the clean air acts is, who wants to sit and second hand smoke. Plus that smoke gets stuck on the walls and tables and chairs and is a nightmare to truly flush.

by AffectionateWeb1723 1 day ago

That is the idea. Smokers can smoke at home and order food.

by AffectionateWeb1723 1 day ago

So to operate a business (any business) you need government licenses. Those licenses come with rules, one of the rules is that smoking in restaurants is illegal. Smoke in your home or car. Nobody else wants your second hand smoke.

by AffectionateWeb1723 1 day ago

It's illegal even with the signage. You have to understand that smoke contaminates food and if some get sick in your restaurant, you have to answer the DoH complaint. The license addresses smoking. It says no. If you allow smoking you can't be licensed. If you don't have a license you can't operate a business (you can serve food but you can't charge anyone for it.)

by AffectionateWeb1723 1 day ago

Every town with smoking bans has a few dive bars where no one cares. Knock yourself out. Obviously the current situation works for the majority or people would be fighting against it.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Ever been to a hookah bar?

by hubert72 1 day ago

Maybe if everyone followed the rules/guidelines of the business to a T. You gotta plan for the absolute worst people, who, if given an inch, take a mile. If the business uses their personal judgment to make the call, that will open a never-ending, revolving door of discrimination lawsuits.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Smoking has been banned everywhere in California since the 90s and we've all lived. Bars and restaurants started getting more traffic as a result and prior to that smoking sections were completely glassed in for 10+ years. If smoking didn't impact the health of others no one would care, but it does and causes damage to walls and soft furnishings. There is no benefit to business owners to want smoking.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Unless they want to cater to smokers....

by matilde49 1 day ago

Why not allow it then?

by matilde49 1 day ago

Because the law is there to protect the health and safety of the majority not cater to the exceptions. If there was a genuine need for smoker friendly establishments they would be lobbied for. There is no need or want.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

With clear signage, who cares. You don't have to go there.

by matilde49 1 day ago

Because it would violate state law. If anyone wants to lobby to change the state law they are welcome to start the proposition process.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Oh I'm sorry that I was too pro freedom than the government... Imagine that.

by matilde49 1 day ago

What other industry allows you to knowingly endanger the health of your other customers?

by Mental-Crab 1 day ago

Gun industry, cars, fireworks...

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Extremely poor argument, for the most part. If you use cars or fireworks correctly, they don't endanger anyone's health. Also applies to guns for sporting purposes. Cigarettes endanger not only the customer's health, but anyone else in the area when used exactly as intended.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

If you use cars or fireworks correctly, If the correct filtration/air unit is installed and people exhale up the exposure should be kept to a minimum also anyone there knows that smoking is allowed and could choose to go somewhere else.

by DryMusic4728 1 day ago

Most factories, they have the msd data sheets right up front for all the chemicals you may or do come in contact with

by matilde49 1 day ago

They are also required to provide PPE and have safety equipment on hand for those chemicals. Isn't like most places are going to have you working with no PPE with the dangerous chemicals. What exactly would the PPE be for wait staff in a smoke filled room be? A gas mask? Really inviting to the customers to require gas masks for the staff.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Factories expose their customers to hazardous chemicals? The workers will require WHIMIS training and as long as they follow the safety data sheet and handle appropriately with the proper PPE there is minimal risk. They aren't just pumping hazardous chemicals into the air with abandon.

by Mental-Crab 1 day ago

Okay so the government wants to tell you what to with your body that you already do willingly against government guidelines... Is that okay if you want to do it?

by matilde49 1 day ago

And who do you think regulates exposure limits for those chemicals?

by Appropriate_Pay_6814 1 day ago

Federal law regulates hazard exposure through OSHA

by Appropriate_Pay_6814 1 day ago

Here in NY you can, the owners just don't want to deal with the ventilation changes required. They did the math I assume and smokers still come so 🤷‍♀️

by Anonymous 1 day ago

And that was part of the big problem with smoking and non smoking sections. In most places it was just a wall, or even a half wall. Sure you couldn't see people smoking but it most certainly didn't stay in the designated area. It would have if they had decent ventilation but that is a heft price tag.

by opagac 1 day ago

"the government shouldn't be able to regulate health and safety"

by Anonymous 1 day ago

My brain worm agrees while doing Burns fingers. My brain worm has fingers.

by Grand-Orchid4644 1 day ago

what

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Every place would allow smoking because alcohol sales are where the money is at, and people like to smoke when they drink. Your bigger drinkers will go the place that allows smoking. I'm a former smoker, and worked in restaurants back in the day, and banning smoking is better. Maybe I could go for allowing it on patios or a single well ventilated room…. But life is better than it was in 90s.

by bernhardtheresi 1 day ago

But life is better than it was in 90s. By what metric?

by DryMusic4728 1 day ago

You can in Pennsylvania for example

by Anonymous 1 day ago

Silly

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I agree with this while knowing I would not go to any establishment that allowed smoking. I think it should be up to the customer and business for that's what freedom is about. I get that smoking effects others but no one is forcing you to be there and that is your choice to go into a place like that or not. I think banning it on transportation makes sense but banning it in private businesses is over stepping the freedoms of private citizens and how they wish to run their establishments. Let them run their gross ass ash tray smelling places how they see fit.

by Due-Box8185 1 day ago

Based take

by matilde49 1 day ago

God I'm old…

by Initial-Brother 1 day ago

What about the staff? They have a right to not get lung caner too.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I'm okay with that, but it should be 18+ only because you can't count on parents to do the right thing.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

My state allows smoking in bars that are 21+. Even then, most bars are non-smoking. I agree it should be left up to the individual business to make those decisions.

by Budget-Big8483 1 day ago

The rare unpopular opinion that's also true. It's really none of the government's business. It should be up to the owner of the establishment, especially now. There are so many people that wouldn't go into a restaurant if it allowed smoking, so I imagine if it were all of a sudden legal, the vast majority of restaurants still wouldn't allow it. But it should be up to the business owner to decide what's best for their business.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I'm all for vaping and smoking inside. I have a working theory that because 25 years ago smoking was banned everywhere, everything has gotten worse. That's how we got Trump. Everyone is so got damned angsty because they can't just chill at their desk and smoke a Camel

by Cristbonnie 1 day ago

Nah, ban the whole industry for good.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I'm old enough to remember when every restaurant had smoking and nonsmoking areas and they stank. Even if you didn't smoke you'd come home smelling like it. Vaping doesn't smell bad usually but it's kinda gross. I don't want someone vaping into my food and getting cooties all over it

by Dependent-Side-6164 1 day ago

I still live in a place where the government has stayed out of it and yes they still ask "smoking or non" it also allows them to have a cigar bar. I'm good with it.

by DryMusic4728 1 day ago

It's called a dive bar, that's all they get if they wanna smoke, but it's more than they deserve

by RelevantEbb 1 day ago

Cringe, imagine being a snitch. Smokers don't deserve the right of safety.

by Nannie12 1 day ago

You can smoke and eat and drink in a quite a few places near me

by Anonymous 1 day ago

I do wish cigar lounges still existed, but I also think that should come with a strict license and a waiver.

by Anonymous 1 day ago

They do still exist in places without massive government overreach that everyone just accepts. I have one less than 3 miles from my house.

by DryMusic4728 1 day ago

Well, I'm okay with them banning smoking indoors. Rather have that than a dictator with secret police who disappear dissenters.

by Anonymous 23 hours ago

The employees are clearly on board You got a source for that statement?

by Efficient_Style_6865 23 hours ago

Idk if I could completely agree, but I absolutely think the rule should change to "no VISIBLE smoke or vapor". I can ghost my vape perfectly. Nobody sees or smells anything. There's no vapor. Why aren't I allowed to vape in a restaurant and ghost my hits? Ofc I do it anyway and nobody has ever said anything (probably nobody has noticed) but it'd be nice not to have to hide the fact that I'm doing it.

by Infamous-Grade-8754 23 hours ago