28.3% of the French population smokes as compared to 20.9% in the US.
Hoke wrote:In California, when the initial bans went into effect in restaurants and drinking establishments, some places had initial fall offs in traffic and revenue....but that didn't last for long
Glenn Mackles wrote:And if they can legislate and ban this legal behavior in private places, exactly where does it stop?
Covert wrote:I wish I could remember the town, maybe Denver, maybe Aspen, where a smoking ban has been in effect long enough to have produced results in fewer hospital admissions for cardiovascular events. Admissions declined 30% just from the ban. These bans will save taxpayers billions in fewer Medicare bills for emergency surgeries, respirators, etc. And as it was pointed out, businesses do not suffer even in the mid-term. Eliminating trans fats might have an even greater benefit to taxpayers, and children and spouses who like to see their loved ones around (but we need to add palm oil and the like). Unfortunately, as we look further and further into programmed cell death, we will probably eventually find virtually everything that we like responsible in some way.
Robin Garr wrote:Glenn Mackles wrote:And if they can legislate and ban this legal behavior in private places, exactly where does it stop?
Glenn, with all respect, this argument simply doesn't apply. Remember that restaurants, hotels and similar facilities are not private places like your home is a private place.
I'm not a lawyer (whew!) but as I understand it, legally, they are places of public accommodation, and under hundreds of law and precedent, the community has clearly established the principle that such places need to be regulated to ensure the public health and safety.
There are literally hundreds of laws and codes that appropriately govern public accommodations, and they range from fire safety to food sanitation to child labor, access to people in wheelchairs and much more.
It's not even a close call to extend this principle to public smoking, which is demonstrably offensive to many people and arguably unhealthy to innocent bystanders - both diners and staff - and I'm quite sure that this issue has already been amply litigated.
Bob Ross wrote:"However, I strongly disagree with any mandatory requirements."
Wow, none at all, Glenn? Are there any governmental requirements that you think are appropriate?
I'm only asking to see whether it's worth thinking about your position. If you do believe some mandatory requirements are appropriate, I'd appreciate reading what they might be, and what standard you would apply to decide whether they should be implemented or not.
Many thanks, Bob
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 11 guests