Looks like the smoking ban is going to favor health over business profits. I knew there was a reason I keep voting for Mr Abramson.

Ok, first off, I am one of those evil bad smoker people... which means apparently my opinion isn't worth squat in this city but here goes anyway...

I have to agree with a lot that has been said. Canon has some great points. Also I must agree with a lot of the posts regarding the business owners should have been the ones to ultimately decide whether or not to be smoke-free.

After all, the business owner is the one who has money at stake, not to mention the fact that some businesses spent upwards to $50,000 on new ventilation systems to keep their businesses smoker friendly in order to comply with the original smoking ordinance.

Metro then passes a new ban saying that doesn't matter anymore so these businesses are flat S.O.L. and have to eat the loss. They should be reimbursed by the city for that now pointless expense specifically required by Metro Counsel and then they go and change their minds about it. That's complete BS. Some of the smaller bars & restaurants that had to eat the loss can't compete with 4th Street or the big fancy places like Phoenix Hill and Porters on a financial level.

Also take into account your local fraternities and social clubs. Most of these are not even open to the public and you must be a dues-paying member to be a part of many of them. I guarantee that the majority of the members of some of these clubs are smokers, so the Metro is also saying that people who are members of a private club... they can't smoke in their own private club, even though they are privately owned by their own members and not even open to the public.

Also on a lighter note...

Say someone is a really bad driver. Doesn't use turning signals, stops in the middle of the road, merges unexpectedly into traffic, runs stoplights, etc. We have a lot of bad drivers in this city, especially when it rains or snows. Bad driving is a health risk. I could hurt myself or someone else anytime I pull out of my driveway. Metro Counsel should ban driving to make things safer for us. It's the exact same principle of the smoking ban due to health issues and protecting our community. Maybe Metro Counsel can drive us around in TARC busses to make sure we're all safe and healthy. How is that principle any different?

Now, honestly, I don't care if I have to go outside and smoke, I really don't. But my problem with it begins when Metro thinks they have to tell people what's best for them, that crosses the line... It is NOT their responsibility to do so. They need to be taking care of buildings the city owns... not infringing on independently and privately owned businesses. One stroke of their pen could literally mean that someone in this city eventually loses their business, assets, home, car, etc. and end up on the street due to loss of revenue caused by the smoking ban passed by the Counsel. That's a worst case scenario obviously, but nobody ever brought that point up, and it could very easily happen.

Anyway, just my opinion.

Good discussion and points brought up by everyone BTW!

According to wikipedia, here's a list of states with bans:

quote:

Bans in public places or bars/restaurants

Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

All of california is smoke free, with some cities even banning smoking in all areas except your residence. The businesses are still profitable, life goes on.

It's not like a meteor just struck louisville. But again, the focus of your complaints ignore the impact of second hand smoke. Anywhere the public is invited is under the scrutiny of governmental agencies to ensure their safety. Granted, there's room for improvement and some of their ideas are entirely off target. I wonder how biased your opinion is in this scenario simply because you welcome the smoke into your lungs. Nobody is fighting to keep asbestos insulation or lead paint because it's cheaper to leave it than replace it. If you were to quit smoking, u might not want that back in you.

As for the driving, it's the same as smoking. Driving safely isn't illegal. Smoking safely isn't either. The only difference now is that some recognition is being given to the hazards of second hand smoke. Your right to smoke wasn't banned, just your location for reasons that deal with the health of people around you.

If I decided to drive around drinking a beer, it's not the drinking which is banned, it's the location. I don't even have to be drunk, having an open container in the car is a big no no. My right to own a gun doesn't allow me to shoot it in any location I want. My right to vote doesn't mean I get to go state to state voting for their candidates.

And much like prohibition of alcohol was repealed, I'm sure metro council retains the authority to undo the ban before Louisville turned into a ghost town from the mass exodus of businesses and smokers should the need arise.

Welcome to the board, hope u stick around.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: canon_photo,

Thanks for the response and welcome Canon! (I'm a Minolta man myself tho!)

I agree with you about the second-hand smoke stuff... 100%. My smoking outside as a courtesy for others is totally acceptable to me. And yes I will always be somewhat biased because I am a smoker and it's an inconvenience to have to go outside and freeze or be rained on, but that's what I have to do now, and that's my choice to say whether or not a cigarette is worth all that, so I'll just say a couple profanities and get over it.

You've got the smaller family-owned bars who's main clients are the regulars who have been going there for years, the places where when you walk in, everyone automatically turns around and gives you the "Who the hell are you?" look unless you're a regular. I'm a big advocate of locally owned businesses. People invested their time, money, and effort into pursuing their American dream, and kudos to them for that. Those are the places that will suffer the most from it.

There are places like that who's owners want to allow smoking, who's majority of customers want to smoke, and who will not be silent and fight this to the end, and Metro's "our way or no way" attitude will kill some of these places off. How's that for a pat on the back?

Here's a possible scenario. You've got a guy who's dad owned a bar for years, and he took over the family business after the dad died. It stayed in the family. The same regulars have been coming there for years, most of which light up a smoke while they drink their beer. The business is pretty successful. It's not a million-dollar enterprise, but makes just enough money to pay the bills and and the staff enough to live on, and it took a long time to become self-sufficient financially. Smoking ban gets passed, business drops off somewhat because now the epiphany is that you can go to the liquor store and stay at home where you can smoke instead of to Joe Schmoe's bar and now the bar is struggling because of a decision made not by the owner of the establishment, but by a group of people who probably have never even been to or heard of the place, but want to protect the community as a whole, even though they have no interests involved. Whether or not that it has been proven in other cities that business usually goes back up after a year or so. Some of these places don't have the income to sustain losses for that long.

Since the counsel pretty much blew off anyone who contested it, who's to say that there won't be a push to ban alcohol in the future? It's harmful as well, and someone's irresponsible drinking habits will kill someone if they drove drunk and caused a wreck... just as a smoker who inadvertently blows smoke in someone's face, causing them respiratory problems. Then hundreds of businesses will go under.

I guess my main point is trying to look at the bigger picture here. Not because the smoking ban passed into law... but how it happened and how Metro pretty much took a giant crap on the small business owners even though some were screaming for exemptions because of potential financial losses and they were kicked to the curb and ignored because the bar business wasn't a billion dollar industry like Churchill Downs. Obviously Churchill Downs is not exempt anymore but originally that was the case.

Anyway I guess that's my main argument about it... And no, Louisville will never become a ghost town and will continue thrive... as a city. I just feel like the small establishments got the crap end of the stick on this deal. I have a very good friend who works with his dad who's company provides arcade game, pool table, & cigarette machine rentals to local bars. Their business dropped off almost 50% because of the smoking ban and now the company is barely able to stay afloat, and the fear is that they will eventually have to shut the business down. How is that fair to a hard working tax paying family who's just trying to pay the bills?

The smoking ban doesn't just affect smokers and non-smokers... it affects a lot of companies and a lot of families as well.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Korgman,

As for drinking at home instead of the bar... I find that highly unlikely. Bar goers could have been drinking at home this whole time. People don't go to bars because they are cheaper smoking environments, they go to be around other people. I went to the Back Door bar during the ban (first ban) and it was impossible to even find a chair. You could see the smokers walking thru the bar heading to the outdoor smoking area... unlit cigarette hanging out of their mouth. The reality is that if the majority of smokers had been doing this on their own the whole time, this wouldn't be an issue.

When i smoked, i was guilty of lighting up wherever the businesses allowed me to and was just as upset about smoking bans as they would pop up. It wasn't until I quit smoking that i saw how bad it was to be on the other side of the argument. Being a non-smoker in a smoking town meant either staying home or being inconvenienced by someone else's smoke. And unlike the inconvenience of having to walk outside like smokers now have to do, this inconvenience carries carcinogens into the lungs of anyone willing (or forced) to remain in that environment.


While I feel bad for any business which is teetering on the edge of failure, the time to make changes to become more profitable isn't after some change in the laws is going to potentially decrease business. Specifically, the business you mentioned (rental business for arcade games, pool tables, cigarette machines) is one of those businesses which is being hurt most not by smoking ban, but by progress itself.

Video games appeal to people who play video games, and most of those people have an xbox or playstation at home. Arcade games became too expensive and offer lousy graphics and gaming experience compared to the home gaming systems and online pc games like World of Warcraft. Why would I dump countless quarters into a game that's only a fraction as good as what I have at home? When I see the remaining game rooms (like at a bowling alley), they're empty. The screens are faded and they cost fifty cents or a dollar for each play.

With the smoking ban, your friend's business basically went to being a pool table rental... and I can't imagine renting pool tables is profitable enough alone to sustain a business. Change is always painful, and there are always those who end up in the footprints of progress. I get the same feeling when i see the smaller movie rental places who can't compete with NetFlix or the $1 rental machines at McDonalds now. Also, people have to give up homes for airport expansion, interstate development, or other improvements. I don't know what else to say... I hope your friend's dads business makes the necessary changes to stay above water.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: canon_photo,