Reply #107: THAT is the real issue.. Owners should be able [View All]

[SoCalDem]

to offer what the customers want.. In California, they had to disallow this because most bars had owners and staff who are smokers.. They wanted to be able to decide for themselves.. It would have been a simple thing too.. Employees (who mostly were smokers anyway) could have signed a paper stating that they knew smoking was dangerous)..

The owner could have added signage out front that stated that this was an establishment that allowed smoking.. The non smokers would have had the option to go to a different place, but the smokers would have had a place to hang out as well..

The "do-gooders" would not accept this policy, because they knew full well that the "non smoking" bars would suffer, and the smoking allowed places would boom..

There has been study after study, that pointed out the fact that people who smoke have "tended" to be MORE likely to go to bars and socialize..

Liquor and tobacco have always been a twosome.:)

Californians are a bit luckier than some places, since a lot of restaurants and bars just added large outdoor areas.. So we can have it both ways.. Our "Don Jose's" has a much nicer patio than the inside of the restaurant.. We prefer eating out there.. Every time we have eaten inside, we have been annoyed to death by screaming babies, rambunctious kids who refuse to stay seated, and uncomfortable booths..

But over all, we just have saved money on our eating out habit.. We did manage to break that one.. We used to eat out 3or 4 times a week, now it's about once every other week..

Even back in the smoking/non-smoking days, we always had to wait for a table, while nonsmoking tables sat there ..empty..

Another reason we loved Tahiti.. French people are very liberal thinkers.. smokers and non smokers coexist very nicely there..