Pick and choose
Jim Sells, (Non-smoker finally, thank God), Emporia.
Monday, March 30, 2009
AN OLD DESERT RULE: Never let a camel get his nose in the tent. Local habits or practice is the same. Individuals make personal choices about what’s good for themselves, both smokers and non-smokers. Each has the ability to make their own decisions they feel are best for themselves.
If drunks offend you, stay away from clubs or taverns where drunks hang out. If fat people turn you off (or on), then hang out accordingly. If bald-headed people make you gag, then turn your head away. If you don’t like lawyers — (NO! Let’s not go there). Same with editors — don’t read their papers. If you don’t like smokers, avoid the places where they gather.
Smokers seem a minority of electors but that doesn’t mean we gang up on the minority to take away their rights. Taking away certain rights in a constitutional republic not only violates the Constitution, it takes away the individual’s right to pursue hisrights. And by the way, those rights were not given to us by any government. They are common, natural, God-given rights.
As long as we are acting like the camel getting into the tent, let’s vote to eliminate taxes being paid by those individuals that we delete from our constitutional laws. Take away their rights, take away their taxes. Let the business people decide what is best for their establishment. The customers always decide who makes a go and who fails in business. (We buy cars and furnaces).
If left unbridled, that camel might eventually decide which personalities would be allowed to live in our communities, while we rid ourselves of lawyers, editors, and fat, skinny and ugly people.
Happiness09 (anonymous) says...
crack: Go back in your sack. You make me tired.
March 30, 2009 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
With the way things are now with the free market in place doing it's job and the current restrictions on tobacco sales and use it is very easy to avoid places that smokers are. If someone decides to go around smokers when it is so easy not to they are essentially harming themselves. It hasn't always been this way for the nonsmoker to avoid shs but it is very easy right now. If you do not smoke and want it to be known that you do not smoke don't support businesses that cater to smokers. This is how our system works. If you want the system to work you must use it properly. Why support a business that you believe is harming you? There are more nonsmoking establishments in this town than smoking ones so support the ones that are nonsmoking. Simple. If you do this the market will reflect it. Please use your own common sense and don't rely on the government to do all your thinking for you. They have bigger fish to broil (yes broil, because frying is unhealthy;))
Please vote NO. Thank you.
March 30, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
As I had posted in the Vote no thread;
CRACK you posted:
Posted by crackinsack (anonymous) on March 27, 2009 at 3:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
BabyGirlSissy,
Used to go to Town Royal before the owner was very unpleasant to me for no reason other than we had a difference of opinion. I now go to Beer 30, J-Mo's, and occasionally places like Mallards or the Purple Duck. (and of course Bruff’s and other restaurants)
Why do you do you go to these places that allow smoking? Is it for the atmosphere,or the friendship? Or is it because your an alcoholic? I am worried about you, I don't want to see you hurt yourself so remember put your helmet on before you leave the house and get on the short bus and it will take you where you need to go.
Crack did you forget to put your helmet on today?
March 30, 2009 at 2:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Judging from something I read in another story perhaps I was wrong to say that broiled fish is more healthy than frying as it seems that broiling "produces potential carcinogens". Will broiling be the next ban? Look out Burger King you have been harming people too long, you're going down! LOL
Please vote NO. Thank you.
March 30, 2009 at 2:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Dido1969 (anonymous) says...
I was at "The Noose™" Friday night…nice place, clean, good service, good prices, no smoking inside the bar, they’ve went to a lot of expense to have a smoking area outside but I didn’t see you there. The bartender told me that business is down 20-25% since going smoke free almost a month ago…the're wondering where are all those folk who would just love to go out…if only, if only, if only “there was a place to go without smoke (sob!)”
Gee, they’d even sprung for a great local band. Hardly anyone heard them though.
I’ve got it on pretty good authority that if they don’t see some big changes soon---and if the smoking ban is rescinded---they’ll be returning to smoke-em-if-U-got-em…. Too much talk CAE, not enough action.
Talk is cheap.
March 30, 2009 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
crack
"I go to smoking establishments because this is America and as long as I'm not hurting anyone, I should be able to do as I please."
They are not hurting you. You choose to go there with the knowledge that there is shs present. That means it is you harming you. There are plenty of other places to go. Go to the other places and stop accusing other people of hurting you when you choose to go around them. It hasn't always been so easy for the nonsmoker to avoid shs but it is now. Please use your own common sense and don't rely on the government to do all your thinking for you.
Please vote NO. Thank you.
March 30, 2009 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
slvrnblck (anonymous) says...
Dido--
In case you didn't notice the weather got pretty bad on Friday and continued through Saturday. I stopped at my favorite watering hole and there was hardly anyone out there and another place I happened to stop that always seems busy. I think this weekend is a bad comparison to what could be the norm. I will be going to the Noose soon. I don't go out often but I will definitely give them some support for going No Smoking before everyone is forced to.
March 30, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
Crack is one of those rare individuals whose deluded sense of self worth has elevated her above the unwashed masses. She feels anyone who lives their life contrary to the way she deems acceptable is wrong and needs to be shown the light; by force, deceit, lies, or any other means necessary.
No one in Emporia is forced to endure the perils of second-hand smoke. Virtually every public, government, office, and retail building in the city is already smoke-free, as are 90% of all restaurants. About the only "dens of iniquity" allowing smoking are bars and private organizations such as the VFW and American Legion, and those are very easy to avoid if one so chooses. "Chooses" is a form of the word CHOICE and that is what what this issue is REALLY about.
Passing this offensively restrictive and punitive ban would be equal to calling for a ban on all carwashes because the one you used yesterday had a leaky hose and ruined your new shoes. If you don't like that one, use another. There are lots of them in town.
Don't let a small group of special interest social crusaders dictate morals, values, and laws in Emporia, Kansas.
Stand up for your rights as an individual and as an American. If you don't, you become one of them. Or even worse, you become controlled by them.
Vote "NO" on April 7.
March 30, 2009 at 2:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
I am not disrespecting you crack, I am truley worried about your well being. As far as the smoking goes in these places, your right this is AMERICA. The land of the free and home of the brave, So let the business owners chose how to run their business on there land (property). And Yes I am representing the Marines and you. I have defended this country, so you can make these irrational arguments, What have you done for your Country. Oh yea thats right you want to take away peoples rights. The very thing that I and other branches of service have fought against. Losing our rights is not an option. Because if we as a people lose one right, we are on the down fall to lose them all. We will no longer be a world power,but turn into a third world country. And who would then help us out,no one. Because this Great Nation of ours is the one that helps everyone.
March 30, 2009 at 2:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bloomsbury (SC DIXON) says...
What will you all find to worry---and fight about---when this issue is decided?
I love the Noose, good music, fun atmosphere, but I know two of the bartenders and, bad weather friday or not, I know their business is DOWN...of course that means I can sit where I want and get lots of special attention, but in the long run it isn't good for them. I know they feel let down by the "poor me, I can't go out cause people smoke" crowd, which is conspicuous in their absence. A bar relies on REGULARS...not people who go out once or twice a month for a Coke or a Shirley Temple. People who do not understand a business should not try to dictate policy. That is only fair.
March 30, 2009 at 3:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Buy the way crack this Great Nation got started by a simple tea party, you know something that resembles a ban. We have rights,One of this countries major crops is Tobacco, it has been used to pay the bills from the begining tell now. You say it's just one ban in Emporia, I say it's a ban on our whole economy,The end result is your group does not want smoking period. You have to be able to look at the big picture crack,not just your little 2 feet of the picture.
March 30, 2009 at 3:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bloomsbury (SC DIXON) says...
By the Bye, the "bad weather" Friday...we were home by a bit before 11...saw nothing but rain...people here don't go out in the rain?
Granted, it got dicey later, and was miserable by morning...but one doesn't have to make a career of going to a pub...an hour or two is quite nice as well.
March 30, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
justamarine,
I am going to respectfully disagree with you on the tea party being like a ban. The Boston Tea Party would be, to me at least, more akin to every smoker and smoking establishment collecting all their cigarette butts from now til the election, combining them, and, say, dumping them on Theresa Walter's doorstep or the front lawn of city hall.
March 30, 2009 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
In the debate of the meaning of America being the land of the free, I have to point out that we have many freedoms, but the most important freedom is to choose when and how we use all those freedoms. For instance, we have the freedom of speech. Just because we CAN say something, however, doesn't mean we SHOULD. An example that comes to mind is a poster who recently disappeared from these forums. He apparently disregarded the rules here, but I bet he says all those same things in venues where these forum rules don't exist---but just because we have given him that right, doesn't mean he should. I have the freedom to go into any place of business or religion that welcomes the general public. Zoos and snake-handling churches come to mind. Just because I CAN because this is America, doesn't mean I should--even if I'm not hurting anyone by being there, but all in attendance are potentially at some degree of risk. What if one of the zoo animals gets loose? Wild animals are proven to kill people, so I need to use some discretion and discernment before I go to the zoo. I need to weigh the risks as I see them, and make my decision based on my personal values. I have done this, and while I will enter a zoo, I will not enter the reptile house, nor will I enter a snake handling church. I CAN by way of freedom, but I SHOULDN'T based on my fears and determinations. The argument that I am not hurting anyone by being there isn't relevant. In America, "can" and "should" are not synonymous regarding our freedoms.
March 30, 2009 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Seriously...
Nicely Stated
March 30, 2009 at 3:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Josiesbar,
I can see that, not what I was trying to imply though, was trying to say; We as smokers are fed up with people telling us where we can smoke. We have very little places to go now as it is. And that we need to get this voted down now. As with the tea party they were fed up with paying taxes,and showed England that we were not going to pay these taxes, because they did not have a vote back in those days. That was their way of saying vote no. I hope you can see now where I was trying to go with this.
March 30, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
"Nice contribution, Happiness09. You, like many of the pro-SHS club, refuse to comprehend the opinions of others and add nothing to the debate with your snide remarks." --crackinsack
An interesting remark considering that I received no reply or debate to this post last week:
"As for the actual anti-ban argument, which I addressed above, not being logical, we can't really argue yours against mine and either one of us lay claim to the absolute high ground. Each person's logic is flawed and as logic dictates, subject to change because logic in and of itself is not absolute. I firmly believe that the logic I see is based on more absolutes than yours and, therefore, I believe it is more right than yours. I also believe that you refuse to see ANY logic in my logic, but I know that I can see some in yours. I understand that(read:your) logic if the starting point is where you believe it to be, but I believe it to be elsewhere. That is why it was important for this issue to be voted on--so that many logical angles can be assimilated and determined. If this ban passes, I will be disappointed at our collective snobbery and ill-founded logic, but at least the people will have made the decision about what they will or won't change, which keeps the power of the law in our hands."
After that, crack responded to many posters, but not me. In addition, crack has yet to acknowledge comprehension of the opinions of others either, but has made his/her fair share of snide remarks about their opinions.
Well, have fun, all. I have a lot to do and won't be able to participate much more this week.
March 30, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bloomsbury (SC DIXON) says...
I am new to these parts---and to this blog. Am I correct to assume that this "crack" person smokes crack or are the merely insane? If though I might possibly agree on some points, this person takes everything to the n-th degree and seems to deliberately misunderstand those who disagree..."Do you think you should be allowed to smoke everywhere?"
What did I miss? Who said that? Who even vaguely implied it? I mean, honestly, where did it come from? Is this person delusional?
Because someone said that smokers have few enough choices in places in which to imbibe, this Crack takes that to mean that smokers are out to conquer the world.
Color me perplexed.
March 30, 2009 at 4:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
Justamarine,
I knew exactly where you were going with that. And by all means, please don't think I am saying that I think EMPORIA NEEDS ITS OWN TEA PARTY because I didn't say that I think EMPORIA NEEDS ITS OWN TEA PARTY, I just said that IF someone were to GIVE EMPORIA ITS OWN TEA PARTY, then it would be like the Boston Tea Party, but I never said that I think EMPORIA NEEDS ITS OWN TEA PARTY. I would never say that! That's just downright un-American!
March 30, 2009 at 4:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brightliner (anonymous) says...
The Noose has created (possibly self inflicted for effect) an unlevel playing field. This undoubtedly hurts business while this debate goes on because ban opponents will stay away from the Noose to make their point. Once the ban is upheld the Noose's business should return to a more normal state (or even flourish) based on lots of eveidence from other communities. And by the way wasn't KU playing on Friday night?
March 30, 2009 at 4:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Crack,
I don't think your parents dropped you on your head.. I think they dribbled you around the house. You can't be that big of an idiot can you?
There are only a few places in Emporia where you can smoke. Let the business owners decide how to run their business. Since you love to go in these places that allow smoking, will you stop going if the ban passes? There are many places for people who do not like smoke can go now, as opposed to smokers, The choice is yours if you want to continue to harm yourself by putting youself in these positions. The next thing to go if this passes is we won't be allowed to smoke in our cars.How many more rights do I have to give up?I drove thru a drive thru the other day and had a cigarette in my hand, I watched the smoke go into the drive thru window into the restraunt, now will I get arrested since this is a no smoking place?
March 30, 2009 at 4:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
I talked to the owner of The Noose (I'll leave his name out, but we should all know him), and he said, and I quote "Their business is tanking." Now, The Noose and The Blind are the only non-smoking bars in Emporia. All the non-smokers (80% of Emporia, according to CAE) has 2 bars to go to, whereas all the smokers (20% of Emporia) have over ten bars to go to. If 80% of the population have 2 businesses to go to that cater to them, basic math should indicate that those two places should be packed every single minute they are open. However, according to the owner, their business is tanking. Why is that? Your "unlevel" playing field idea doesn't make sense. If anything, the playing field should be unlevel for the bars that ALLOW smoking, right?
March 30, 2009 at 4:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
josiesbar,
Ok brother you crack me up
March 30, 2009 at 4:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bloomsbury (SC DIXON) says...
"The Noose has created (possibly self inflicted for effect) an unlevel playing field..."
My, I know those darling lads at the Noose...do you honestly think either Bernie or S. C. are THAT clever...(or devious?)
S. C. talks 'a good game,' but is frightfully dull. Bernie is rarely seen on the premises.
Methinks you've given both far, far too much credit. Neither are all that bright, actually...well, maybe Bernie is...no, come to think if it, not a chance, I'm afraid. Victims of circumstance, pure & simple. A clever notion, though, but unsustainable.
March 30, 2009 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
slvrnblk;
If you are planning on visiting the non-smoking Noose, you had better hurry up. From what I have heard Teresa, Bobbie and Steve and their crew from MarkII are filling the place every night.
Seriously, WHERE ARE YOU GUYS?
IT HAS BEEN A MONTH NOW, WHERE ARE YOU?
Those people down there can't live on "I'll be there soon."
As Bloomsburry stated " a bar lives (and dies) by their regulars." Where IS that huge increase in business that we were told would happen? Maybe you wan't another bar to go non-smoking so you will have a better choice? After what has happened to the Noose I don't think I can afford to try it.
Steve
March 30, 2009 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
Also, The Noose went non-smoking the day the ban would have went into effect. I think The Noose is showing Emporia exactly what will happen after the ban. Ask Bamboozers how long they were non-smoking. The magical non-smoking, SHS-hating crowd will not come out to replace regulars, period.
The bars that are going to take the most direct hit from this smoking ban are going to be the bars that are already non-smoking. That is their carefully laid out business plan. That is how The Blind distinguishes itself from other establishments. That is The Noose's target market-group. By passing this smoking ban, you will be taking that market away from them.
March 30, 2009 at 4:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Bloomsburry;
I kind of like the owners of the Noose.
What did they do to you?
March 30, 2009 at 4:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Holy, Cow ! Can you believe this post by crack, "God doesn't want the smokers harming others...perhaps CAE has been sent by God... If not, why wouldn’t he stop them? "
For St. Pete's sake now crack is now saying that the CAE and possibilly the smoking ban supporters were possibly sent by God ! Again I say, " HOLY COW " !
We/you as freedom, rights loving people of Emporia have got to stop these delusional people, VOTE NO ! If you don't get out and VOTE NO, these dilusionsl people will have begun to control our very lives, freedoms and rights ! Because this will be only one of our freedoms and rights that will fall to this control, power and bullying campaign !
VOTE and VOTE NO !
March 30, 2009 at 4:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bobhornet (anonymous) says...
Josies, I love your comment about dumping cigarette butts on Teresa Walters's lawn. They'll go well with all of her beer cans and liquor bottles! Walters is Emporia's biggest hypocrite.
March 30, 2009 at 4:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Crack you stated.
Why not wait 5 minutes next time? Is endangering others worth it? Now you want me to wait, Hey I am already out side in my own car,(personal property), see crack give an inch take a mile. I am not endangering anyone,you are going to have to prove that one. give me solid facts, but do it with your helmet on. Because I don't want you to get hurt.
March 30, 2009 at 5:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Crack you stated,
I want to know where he thinks he should be allowed to smoke. I'd like to know where he would draw the line if it were up to him. If smoking shouldn't be allowed in some public places, why should it be allowed in others?
I would like to smoke at those businesses that allow smoking. Let the private business owner decide how he wants to succeed or fail. It is their lively hood. As I had said in an earlier post on another thread, If I opened a cigar and cigarette shop and allowed the customers to sample the product before they purchased a fine cigar, would you have a problem with this. I don't see how as it is my business, as long as they are of legal age to purchase this product. Because the bottom line is business owners make their living by have satisified and regular customers .
March 30, 2009 at 5:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pingeon (anonymous) says...
Posted by brightliner (anonymous) on March 30, 2009 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Noose has created (possibly self inflicted for effect) an unlevel playing field. This undoubtedly hurts business while this debate goes on because ban opponents will stay away from the Noose to make their point. Once the ban is upheld the Noose's business should return to a more normal state (or even flourish) based on lots of eveidence from other communities.
__________________________________________________________
What evidence from other communities are you looking at? The studies I've seen and the people I've talked to are pointing to the opposite effect. The business drop that The Noose is experiencing (which I am very sorry to hear, I was really hoping it wouldn't go that way) is pretty much on par compared to other communities. People that don't go out to the bars aren't going to suddenly change their habits just because there isn't smoke there. However, the people that smoke will change their habits and not go to the bars anymore. They will find other places they can enjoy a beer and a cigarette/pipe/cigar together.
March 30, 2009 at 5:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MisterO (anonymous) says...
bloomsbury posted, "I am new to these parts---and to this blog. Am I correct to assume that this "crack" takes everything to the n-th degree and seems to deliberately misunderstand those who disagree? Who said that? Who even vaguely implied it? I mean, honestly, where did it come from? Is this person delusional?"
Like many who support the ban and post on this comment board, crackinsack has a great deal of difficulty with honesty and reality. If someone disagrees with their opinion, they try to twis their words. They take research and conclusions based on active smoking and try to apply those conclusions to 2nd hand smoke. They are willing to allow someone else to read the research and tell them what to believe.
They say someone is being harmed, yet offer no doctor's statements to corroborate those claims.
They say 2nd hand smoke kills, yet can offer no bodies.
They are willing to give away rights that they choose not to exercise, without regard to those who value those rights.
March 30, 2009 at 6:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
allintogether (anonymous) says...
I love The Noose when it has people in it. I have been in there a few times lately and never more than 10 people in there. They have very cold beer, great cocktails, great bartenders and live music. I guess Crack will have to start drinking for 20 or 30 people to support his/her Utopian vision of bars nobody wants to drink or socialize in.
The Town Royal is a great place to drink a very cold beer in very comfortable surroundings with very nice people. I don't mind the smoke at all even though I don't smoke. I am usually there for 2 to 3 hours and after standing outside for 10 minutes my clothes don't even smell like smoke. 100% cotton.
Mary's is my favorite place to grab a cold beer in Emporia. Its nothing more than a double wide trailer with beer in it. Giant, ice cold beers for under $4. Great bartenders and great people. Very comfortable place to drink cold beer and play some pool, darts, shuffleboard or even basketball in the warmer months. People smoke there and they are great people for the most part.
Are we going to regulate ourselves into a bunch of boring, risk averse, social anxiety disordered shells of our former selves? Is it our goal to sanitize our lives to the point where nary a germ, bacteria or micron of carcinogen that has the potential to hurt us is left? Go watch Demolition Man (1993) and see what we will become if we allow groups like CAE to exceed their mandate. No cursing, no smoking, no alcohol, no fatty foods, etc. Boring, stale, generic, sterile will be the words we will use to describe ourselves.
I reject their ban. I will live my life the way I see fit and if there are consequences I will accept them. People can take care of themselves if allowed and encouraged to do so. My review of those bars has made me thirsty and it is after 5. I will be brave and face great peril to go drink a few beers with my friends. Crack you stay home and rail about how much cigarette smoke irritates you.
Vote NO!
March 30, 2009 at 6:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
Come on CRACK, Waiting for your reply to my last 2 posts
March 30, 2009 at 6:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
olddog (anonymous) says...
Crack will return Tuesday after 8am after he/she is on the time clock again.
March 30, 2009 at 7:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
LMAO,
Thanks for the tip olddog
I bet Crack still won't answer the posts
March 30, 2009 at 7:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pingeon (anonymous) says...
justamarine - No, Crack will not answer the posts. She is just here to stir the pot on a regular basis. I have asked her plenty of questions in the past, but have been ignored every time. Then I said something about business going down after the ban is implemented and wham! I don't have a clue what I am talking about. I responded to her and still haven't heard anything back.
I am against this ban because I see it involving my business next. I own rental property and the next place they are going is apartment complexes. I wholeheartedly disagree with telling people they can't smoke in their own home. Right now, they are saying employees don't have a choice on where to work. Next, they are going to say that tenants don't have a choice on where to live. I will fight for my tenants to do whatever in their own house as long as it is legal. Right now, smoking is legal. Go after tobacco, not business owners!
March 30, 2009 at 8:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
Hey crack,
Not that this has much to do with the issue, but I'm just saying that if MY name was budlightinsack, people would probably (understandably!) assume I like Bud Light.
I'm just saying...
March 30, 2009 at 9:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tbluma (anonymous) says...
crack says I'm more level headed and easier to get along with in person. I've seen those types all my life. They are afraid to say what they really think in person because they don't have the guts to go face to face. Me I'm the same if not more conservative in person and I have no respect for someone that won't tell me face to face what they really think. So now that you have shown me your true color crack I recind my offer to drink a beer and debate in person because I won't get the real crack and I hate cheap imitations.
As for Bloomsbury; I rather like the crew down at the Noose like rbow asked, what did they do to you?
March 30, 2009 at 9:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
slvrnblck (anonymous) says...
Not that crack needs any defending but I have never seen him avoid any questions. Give him time. None of us can be on here 24/7 to answer every single post.
The quick answer to your question is because businesses cater to the public and invite the public in they have to be conscious of the health and safety of all of its patrons, not to mention its employees.
March 30, 2009 at 9:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Questions can be pretty easy to avoid. You know what is also very easy to avoid? That's right folks............. shs. If you are afraid of shs and think that it will be the death of you, please avoid it. It is super easy to do. Simple. It hasn't always been so easy for the nonsmoker to avoid shs but it sure is easy now.
Please vote No. Thank you.
March 30, 2009 at 10:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
That's kind of touching to see you standing by your man like that, slvrnblk. Also a bit "legalistic." Sometimes a debating point isn't posed as a question but the implication is that a rebuttal is expected. I suppose on a fine point you are correct, but it doesn't change what everyone here knows.
March 30, 2009 at 11:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
oh4theluvof: I believe Crackinsack is a social reformer and communist-leaning agitor of the female persuasion.
March 30, 2009 at 11:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
spectator (anonymous) says...
Why oh why did I just KNOW crack would be the first to jump on this? I too have heard that the Noose is non-smoking and that the the huge amount of customers who didn't patronize a non-smoking bar (because of "smoke") have yet to materialize. What's worse, the "regular" (Translation- former) customers aren't going there either! This ban is nuts and I too worry what the better-than-thou people will attack next. Look, if you don't want to go somewhere because of shs, loud music, you don't like the owners, or because you don't like the color of the restroom fixtures, whatever, just go somewhere else. By the way, I don't smoke; never did and never will. But I refuse to simply stand by and allow my rights to be chipped away a little at a time without a fight. I'm voting NO.
March 31, 2009 at 12:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JohnDoe (anonymous) says...
Thank you 'Dido' and 'Josiesbar' for saying what needs to be said. The Noose spent a bunch of money to only watch business suffer. The rest of downtown doesn't have the ability to add a patio to accomodate this high volume business that the nonsmokers are supposed to bring. Maybe because the smoking ban is just because the whiners don't want to smell like smoke when they go out for dinner? I'd put money on it. As a non-smoker I feel your pain but leave the bars out of it. If non-smoking is so good for the bars, those 2 should have put every other bar against the ropes and closing in on the knockout punch. The opposite is happening. They're losing business because they are alienating customers to try to draw in a nonexistent customer base.
CAE, you should have just gone after the restaurants. You probably would have gotten your way instead of creating this big mess and wasting everyone's time.
Vote No to leave business owners with their businesses
March 31, 2009 at 1:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
moving to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
March 31, 2009 at 5:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
generalsn (anonymous) says...
After over a year of experience here in Chicago, now that the fanfare has worn off and the lobbyists have moved on to other states, it's clearly obvious that trying to ban smoking in small neighborhood "shot and beer" bars is pretty useless. Many small bars in my area ignore the ban to keep their customers, neighbors, and local police (many are patrons when off duty) satisfied. In areas where real crime is an issue, the problem of undesirables being attracted by groups of people outside the bars and causing disturbances on the PUBLIC street, property that the owner has no control over, far outweighs the issue of people peacefully smoking inside a bar, bothering absolutly no one, All of the complaints are from neighbors of bars that comply. It's fading into history in many small neighborhood bars. The only places it becomes an issue seems to be in rural areas where local police have little to do except visit local bars and monitor their parking lots.
March 31, 2009 at 5:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )