It's official - Washington State is going Smoke Free on Dec 8th

[brick]

I'm thinking about quiting live poker for the next month,
but I'm worried that I might have withdrawl symptoms from the second hand smoke.

http://www.komonews.com/stories/40178.htm

OLYMPIA - Smokers will be evicted from bars, restaurants and private clubs across the state next month after voters overwhelming approved a statewide indoor smoking ban. Some bar owners worry that their businesses will go with the smokers.

With about 70 percent of the expected vote counted Wednesday, 63 percent of voters supported the more restrictive statewide ban on indoor smoking, 37 percent opposed it.

"I don't look at it as much as a smoking as a personal rights issue," said Bob Materne, owner of The Swinging Doors, a restaurant and sports bar in north Spokane. "My customers can go to war, but they can't smoke."

Materne said the ban - which takes effect Dec. 8 - could force him to lay off of as many as 15 of his 50 employees due to expected loss of business.

Hey, just in time for me to start playing B&M!

Only drawback is it takes away a major tell (according to Caro), but I can live with that (double meaning intended). Maybe the smokers will tilt more.

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Edit: sounds like the Swinging Doors is one of those rare bars that actively cultivates a smoking clientelle. He might need some good service, atmosphere or prices to make up for that now.

[BigBrother]

hehe we posted at the same time. I don't get down to Olympia much, but the Spar is a landmark. It would be a shame to see it go.

[mike4bmp]

the businesses in WA will do fine....the same law is in effect in California...and the last time I was in LA (last December) people were content with having to go outside. I fully support this law...as I am an ex-smoker and sometimes it is hard for me to be around chain smoking poker players. blah!

[RadioMike]

The best thing to happen to Tacoma since they improved the odor technology at the pulp mill. After choking on fumes and having my eyes water during $3-6 games, I can't wait to play smoke-free poker around this town!!!

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

Non-smokers will rejoice to be sure.

But lets be clear. This is about being annoyed and not health. I find it disturbing when annoyances are legislated. Not one blurb on the news showed someone walking out of a bar glad for their health. It was mainly platinum blond bimbos who said that they are glad that they will not smell like smoke anymore when they are out ho'in it up.

Card rooms have always had the option to be non-smoking and if all the non-smokers had really cared that much the hideaway would still be in business or at least it would have forced sh!t holes like Parkers to do the same or lose business. (I, BTW both smoke and play in a non-smoking room and agree that it is invasive.)

When super majorities can get away w/ this sort of legislation don't you think that there are things that you like that are in jeopardy, like cardrooms.

Look around next time you are in some dive in shoreline. Do you think any of those places contribute to society. Just one high profile crime by a regular poker player and the voters could take that away in an instant.

Democracy w/o guarantees of personal freedom can be very tyrannical to those who do not fit in a majority.

You can be glad that now you do not have to exercise a choice and not go to a place that allows smoking (like I have), but I'm not so sure that this is really a victory for anyone except the self rightious Washingtonians, of which there are plenty.

[brick]

The idealist past of me wants to be a libertarian but I realize that we need laws to improve life for the majority. As the standards of the majority change so should the laws.

[tonypaladino]

[ QUOTE ]
the businesses in WA will do fine....the same law is in effect in California...and the last time I was in LA (last December) people were content with having to go outside. I fully support this law...as I am an ex-smoker and sometimes it is hard for me to be around chain smoking poker players. blah!

[/ QUOTE ]

People don't mind going outside in LA because it's usually nice weather. NYC bars have suffered from the law here. No one wants to stand in the snow to smoke, and people in WA probably won't either.

[wayabvpar]

[ QUOTE ]
No one wants to stand in the snow to smoke, and people in WA probably won't either.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not many people want to stand in a cloud of smoke to drink or play cards either.

Less than 20% of the population smokes. Imposing their will on the vast majority of nonsmokers hardly seems fair.

I am uncomfortable with the perceived invasion of personal rights, but in this case I think it is well justified. Smokers aren't being told they can't smoke; they just can't do it inside public buildings.

Why is it always ok to have the majority rule the minority? Why not let the business owners decide how they want to run their business. If there are so many poker players or people who frequent bars that are non smokers they should open there own business.
If it truely is 20% of people who smoke your business will boom.

[ QUOTE ]
But lets be clear. This is about being annoyed and not health.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's nice when public health issues can also be "being annoyed" issues, though. We effectively killed two birds with one stone.

I for one voted against the ban even though I am a non-smoker, but I am extremely excited that I will not have to contemplate switching from a profitable seat because the two clowns next to me are smoking like chimneys and showing no regard for those around them.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
The idealist past of me wants to be a libertarian but I realize that we need laws to improve life for the majority. As the standards of the majority change so should the laws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats disgusting. Ignorant self rightous right wingers from middle America and Elitist self-rightous leftwingers from the coasts will soon agree on everything.

I thought that we, as Americans, believed that people should and can make choices.

America as I thought I knew it is dead.

[brick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The idealist past of me wants to be a libertarian but I realize that we need laws to improve life for the majority. As the standards of the majority change so should the laws.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats disgusting. Ignorant self rightous right wingers from middle America and Elitist self-rightous leftwingers from the coasts will soon agree on everything.

I thought that we, as Americans, believed that people should and can make choices.

America as I thought I knew it is dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can always move to Montana or Alasksa!

[Ray Zee]

it isnt about being annoyed only. it is a health hazard to breath second hand smoke. also what about the workers they dont have a choice. if you say they dont have to work there that is true. but then what about the factory polluting the air. if you dont like that move to another city. what about health hazards in the workplace. the workers can go elsewhere.
when do we stop and say that a person or business cannot harm you just because its in their self interest.

[slavic]

Relax people, the game at the muck just got better.

The smokers will have to go to the Indian Casinos now, nothing new.

[ QUOTE ]
it isnt about being annoyed only. it is a health hazard to breath second hand smoke.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think what the libertarians are saying is that people should have the right to suicide by tobacco.

At least that's the only interpretation I can get out of it.

[boondockst]

as far as "going outside", i understand the rule is you must also be 25 feet from any door...Interesting...

[wayabvpar]

The enforcement folks have gone on record saying that they won't be running around with tape measures to insure compliance. As long as there are no complaints, smokers can probably stand nearer than that and not worry. It will only be if the would be patrons have to walk through a smokey throng of people directly blocking the entrance where there might be a problem, I would imagine.

[ QUOTE ]

Relax people, the game at the muck just got better.

The smokers will have to go to the Indian Casinos now, nothing new.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not being a smoker, I have no idea if this is true. Will people really drive farther just to be able to smoke? Do all the bad players smoke? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[smoore]

Easiest way to get smokers to go where you want them is to put a covered, possibly heated area with ashtrays and benches in the designated smoking area. Lots of offices here in colorado have those radiant heaters in the smoking area on a ten minute timer. Perhaps sympathetic businesses in WA will follow suit... I understand it rains there every so often.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
it isnt about being annoyed only.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Though I think the case for health hazards of 2nd hand smoke is exagerated, this new law was based on a reforendum (sp?) and virtually all people interviewed who voted for the measure have cited reasons of annoyance. I can assure you that very few people in Wa. State care about anything beyond themselves and their causes. Service workers have very little standing in most Wa. residents minds. All bartenders that I have seen interviewed and talked to voted against the measure.

[ QUOTE ]
also what about the workers they dont have a choice. if you say they dont have to work there that is true. but then what about the factory polluting the air. if you dont like that move to another city. what about health hazards in the workplace. the workers can go elsewhere.


[/ QUOTE ]

The worker analogy does have some merit, but the polluting factory one doesn't.

But let me ask you. How far are we willing to allow people to infringe on our choices?

Doesn't this have a smack of puritanism that bothers anyone?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it isnt about being annoyed only.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then you're wrong.

Yeah, it helped that cigarettes are also nasty-smelling to most of us. I can assure you that the measure's major supporters didn't do so simply because smoke smell is icky.

You even contradict yourself below.

[ QUOTE ]
I can assure you that very few people in Wa. State care about anything beyond themselves and their causes. Service workers have very little standing in most Wa. residents minds. All bartenders that I have seen interviewed and talked to voted against the measure.

[/ QUOTE ]

We at 2+2 would call that "small sample size." Bartenders in other states worried too, before they found out that smoking bans didn't stop people from going to bars (a fact which you'd think would be categorized under "D" for "Duh," but for some reason continues to be disputed).

[ QUOTE ]
The worker analogy does have some merit

[/ QUOTE ]
How quickly you zoom past this. Of course, it's the bartenders' choice to take a job that could kill them, right?

[ QUOTE ]
But let me ask you. How far are we willing to allow people to infringe on our choices?

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, you may believe that smokers have a right to suicide, but I believe they should not have a right to kill themselves in a public place, and certainly not in a way that could take others with them.

[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't this have a smack of puritanism that bothers anyone?

[/ QUOTE ]
As someone whose father's quality of life has suffered greatly for over 20 years now, directly and provably due to tobacco...

No.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Not being a smoker, I have no idea if this is true. Will people really drive farther just to be able to smoke?

[/ QUOTE ]

Aren't people driving all the way to Tulalip to avoid the smoke? Same thing, isn't it?

b

IIRC Tulalip is a non-smoking room - this may actually hurt them if non-smokers start patronizing the formerly smoke-filled rooms instead.