Frederick Maryland's Nightlife, Events, and Entertainment Authority.
FredRocks Smokin' Bar Crawl
For those of you who don't know, Maryland enacted a state wide smoking ban for all bars and restaurants. It's going into effect on February 1. I'm not much of a smoker, but part of me will miss the sketchy seedy feeling of a smoky bar. Is anybody up for a Smokin' Bar Crawl on Thursday, January 31? Call it a celebration of the removal of the killer clouds, or our own civil protest of the violation of our right to mutilate our bodies however we see fit. (however you want to look at it) Let me know if you're game, because this is a one time event, for better or for worse.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Garth on -
My apologies, I wasn't trying to do that either. Like I said in the other reply, I did not explain myself properly. There had to be a compromise for those who have friends that smoke and those bars they choose. I have no idea which places you refer to that were smoke-free because all the places my friends visited were always filled with smoke. Now, the Green Turtle pretty much recently opened and understand that was smoke-free before the ban took place. I am sorry, I will stick by my opinion that it is selfish for the smokers not to be compassionate towards those who do not smoke and want to enjoy the same fun the smokers enjoy, but cannot because of the smoke. If California and their bars can make more money with the smoke-free option, so can Maryland. For years non-smokers had to suck it up and deal with it. Yeah, it sucks for the smokers now, but maybe this ban will create an opportunity for some of them to stop smoking. It is good to be on here and I like the discussions.
-
Permalink Reply by joules on -
To quote: "...there were plenty of bars in town that didn't allow smoking. Anyone that wanted to go out and not be in a smoky atmosphere had plenty of options." I must have been looking in the wrong places - where were these no-smoking bars?? I never found any in Frederick. Greene Turtle doesn't count, since it just opened. Which bars are you referring to?
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Z on
-
I think you're all missing the point. This is not a debate about civil liberties. Your rights do not include the option to fill the air in a public space (and work space) with toxic chemicals. No more than I have the right to discharge a can of Mace in a bar. No one is going to challenge your right to smoke at home or in your car, but your right to smoke in bars and restaurants is trumped by the public's right to carcinogenic-free air. Just like I don't have the right to play music so loud in the middle of the night that it disturbs my neighbor's right to sleep. And no one is going to ban your right to drink till you puke, or eat Big Macs every day if you so choose.
The difference between smoking and the other unhealthy lifestyle choices listed above is eating and drinking do not effect the people around you. If I go to a bar and choose not to drink, I'm not going to get a hangover because you got wasted. But if I go to a place and you're blowing smoke in my face, well I'm getting the same negative health effects as you, even though I'm not taking part.
Even highly liberal states like California (where its legal to smoke weed with a doctor's note) have banned smoking in bars. California's ban was put in place TEN YEARS AGO, in 1998. And while its legal in Cali to smoke pot, they only ask that you do it in the privacy of your home. Along with your cigarettes.
There are plenty of activities that are banned in public because they are bad for the population in general. You can't have porn playing on TV's in your car where the general public (and children) can see through the windows. You can't shoot target practice in a city park. You can't drive 120 MPH on a public highway. There are all appropriate places for those activities, and in public is not one of them. Just like smoking. Its dangerous, and if you choose to do it, others should not have to rearrange their lives around you by avoiding the places where you are polluting the air. It is reasonable that when you go out to eat, (or go to work if you are employed in a restaurant) you should not have to worry about getting cancer from other's smoking habits.
-
-
Ichiban, I've been all over the world too, but I don't think this has anything to do with the number of stamps in our passports. Its simply about the right to breath clean air. You're right, drinking does affect others, but not in the same way as smoking. I'm not talking about alcoholism or DUI, I'm talking about an otherwise responsible "social drinker" who had too much (and gets a ride from a friend of course) and gets a hangover the next day. His drinking is not going to make me sick. But smoking does, and its CUMULATIVE, like radiation poisoning. The more time you spend in that environment, the worse it is. People who work in restaurants were getting a dose that was equal to a pack a day or more. Those people should not have to change their job (or risk death by cancer) because YOU want to smoke!
The bottom line is there is currently a scientific consensus that exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability. There is no compelling reason you can give me that justifies creating that kind of workplace hazard and exposing restaurant/bar patrons to it!
I don't agree with that Tanleytown law (however I don't think that landlords should have to pay for the damage their tenant's smoking does to their property) and it was rightfully overturned. People SHOULD be allowed to smoke in their homes. Thats the place to do it.
-
Permalink Reply by Darren on -
I really wish I had logged on to see some of his replies before he deleted his account. Hopefully he will change his mind and come back.
Amanda and Bob, I have to say that a lot of your arguments don't apply here. Any time anybody says something like "Just like I don't have the right to play music so loud in the middle of the night..." they are changing the topic to something that doesn't apply, and just distracts from the debate. Amanda also pointed this out with the"Next they'll take away this" or "Next they're going to take away that" comment.
In any case, here's my issue. The government has taken on the attitude that a restaurant or bar, or with this law, even a private club, is a "public" place, where the government must protect the general public from harm. The fact is, those places are not public property. They are the properties of the people who run the aforementioned businesses.
Nobody was forced into a smoky bar or club. They went in willingly. They (you) chose to go into a smoky place and breathe the smoky air. You had the choice to go somewhere that was smoke free, but that's not what you decided to do. If you had chosen to go to a smoke free place, the demand for smoke free places would have gone up, and more bars would have been smoke free.
Rather than making a mature decision for the sake of your own health, you have come to depend on the government to do a job for which it was not intended. The government doesn't exist to protect your health. It especially shouldn't take away any amount of your freedom, and the freedom of others, for the sake of your health. If you were really that concerned about that aspect of your health, you could have solved the problem yourself by only going to smoke free bars. As I already pointed out, that's not what you did.
Frankly, the attitude that we are somehow entitled use force on our neighbors to inflict a healthy lifestyle on those who choose to live otherwise, is highly dangerous. The suggestion that we should justify those actions because we were simply too lazy to avoid the unhealthy places of our own free will, is absolutely appalling to me.
And for the record, my use of the word "force" is not an exaggeration. If a person who owned a business and owned the property that business was on wanted to allow her guests to willingly smoke on her property while she served them food, what do you think would happen? Ultimately, if she did it long enough, men with guns would enter her business, chain her doors shut, and drag her away in handcuffs. It may sound unrealistic, but that is the unexaggerated reality of this ban.
All because a few people were too lazy and apathetic to go to a bar that didn't allow smoking.
Seriously. Please. Take some responsibility for your actions. Know that it is your job, and nobody else's, to see to it that you live a healthy lifestyle. Stop taking MY rights away for the sake of YOUR health, SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU CHOSE NOT TO BE HEALTHY ON YOUR OWN.
-
-
Well stop taking away my rights to breath clean air! And I think clean air is more important than your right to breath smoke. I disagree with you on a bar/restaurant being a public place. Its certainly public enough that anyone can just walk into it. (I think private clubs are exempt anyway) And I think most people would call that a "public space." They have licenses to operate a food establishment serving THE PUBLIC. This does not apply having a dinner party at your private home and allowing smoking. Those licenses specify a minimum set of standards for food safety to protect people, and they also should specify standards for clean air. I SHOULD NOT have to go to a different restaurant because a select few people in there want to poison the air in the entire place. And what about the servers who work in those places? Is it fair to expose them to cancer because you want to smoke? And don't say they should go work elsewhere. I'm totally against the idea that some people get to dictate the lives of others because they choose to poison the air around them with smoke.
Second hand smoke KILLS PEOPLE. Plain and simple. The government should do all it can with laws to protect people against that deadly problem. Just like it has laws to protect us from DWI, and laws to protect our kids from lead in toys, and protect us from people who drive recklessly and injure others... All actions that harm others.
YES it is the government's job to protect our health! That more than ANYTHING I think is a proper function of government.
Look at all the positive things that have happened when the government acts to protect our health... banning pesticides that harm people, banning asbestos in construction, banning companies from dumping toxic waste in rivers, banning lead in toys, banning medicines that do more harm than good, banning commercial airliners from transporting dangerous cargo...
Those are all things that have SAVED LIVES. And banning smoking will also SAVE LIVES and for that reason I'm all for it. I can't comprehend how someone can argue for allowing smoking in bars when its clear how damaging it is to the other people who choose not to smoke, or work there! And its totally preventable, by just not allowing people to smoke.
-
Permalink Reply by Garth on
-
My bad! This would not have gone the way it has if I would have kept the politics out of this. The website is about nightlife, not politics. I am sorry.
-
-
Whats wrong with a little political argument? Keeps things interesting :)
-
Permalink Reply by Garth on
-
I didn't say there was anything wrong with an argument. It keeps people healthy and on their toes. This intent of this site was for the nightlife in Frederick, not politics. I think Darren should create a sister site for the politcs of Frederick.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
About
Videos
Frederick News
Music
© 2010 Created by Darren Wigfield.
