Ban

[tackattack]

---

That would make more sense. Or, leave it up to the owner. The anti smoker movement, despite being well funded and coordinated, doesn't represent true freedom.

As an ex-cigarette smoker let me say that your right to enjoy that cigarette ends at my nose.

---

So those people who now can't smoke inside a restaurant in their own section, now have to stand outside and every man, woman and child walking in or out gets second hand smoke instead of those who choose to sit in the smoking section?

You're either being disingenuous or outright misinformed if you think that is actually how it works. Outdoors is not a closed environment. Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a pool.

---

Or neither. Airports did it well if not on the ventalation, at least on the segregation. Now a smoker has to go outside to smoke in between stop overs and then process all the way back though security. That's a lot more than a little infringment on equal service. Here in VA we had some restraunts and clubs with excellently segregated and ventilated smoking sections. There was never any complaints to the management about smoking. On the othe hand we have applebees which had a bar in the middle of the restraunt with seating surrounding it and called that the smoker section. There are 2 extremes of accountability happening there for the buisness owner. And I feel that's where the accountability lay with the owner, not the gov. or zealous lobbiests. Now it's illegal to smoke anywhere indoors, and padriac was talking about banning everything except n your own home (which would include the outdoors). A few months ago I saw some people arguing outside a TGIF because ther was someone smoking near the front door (within 10 feet of a cigarette butt recepticle) and they had to walk through the smoke with their kids. If it'd been me I'd say they kicked me out of the restraunt for smoking, but you still have the choice not to come into this restraunt. I was merely commenting on the usefullness (or lack there of) of the law as it's applied where I am. I'm well aware of the detriments of second hand smoke. I wasn't even broching the subject of restrictions of personal liberties, air cleanliness, ownership accountability, historial effectiveness of bans or social politeness. I personally think it's extremely rude for a smoker to force others to smell their tobacco and would agree with a business owner's choice to responsibly segregate them (thus giving both equal opportunities for service, without infringing on anyone's rights).