Newsletter

Get a weekly recap in your inbox every Sunday of our best stories from the week plus a primer for the days ahead.

Find It

Search our directories for...

Dining

Dining

Bars

Bars

Events

Events

Attractions

Attractions

View All

View All

Comments

25 responses to “Smoking Ban: A Look to the Future”

  1. Jeff says:

    I’ve been meaning to ask this question to someone in the city government as this issue has been talked about vis-a-vis Dallas lately – but maybe your readers have some ideas. What really IS the criticism to having a city-wide smoking ban WHILE allowing a business owner (bar or restaurant primarily I suppose) to get a smoking permit that allows him to have smoking with some requirements for signage etc…

    Seems like this is a win-win. Smokers get to to go smokers lounges to get their smoke on. Non-smokers get to enjoy smoke-free conditions very easily. Business owners get to choose what is best for their market and business. My hunch is that 10% – 20% of bars would end up being smoking bars given market forces.

    Downsides? Is it a case of city governments around the country wanting to help reduce overall smoking in their cities or are the above mentioned measures just too hard and or expensive to practically implement and enforce?

  2. Kevin Bacon says:

    Non-smokers are some of the most vocal cry-babies. They can’t just win and get smoking banned from a city, they have to remove every reference to it so as to kick the smokers while they are down.

    Next will be editing of movies that were filmed 50 years ago in which the actors smoke…..because it could encourage their weak minded children to do it.

    Footloose people. Foot. Loose.

  3. NC says:

    don’t you all know? if it isn’t in movies, it doesn’t exist!

  4. jrp says:

    speaking of smoking in movies, you know what i got for Christmas? oh, it was a banner effin year at the old Bender home…i got a carton of cigarettes…the old man grabbed me and said, “hey, smoke up johnny”

    sorry, man, but The Breakfast Club has been on HBO like 10 times this week

  5. Hello Dolly says:

    I don’t quite understand why non-smokers should not be vocal. We all have to share the same air. If you choose to light up and inflict damage on yourself, on your own time, in the privacy of your own home or private property, I won’t complain. But please, don’t share your suicidal tendencies with others. I know too many who have been diagnosed with cancer due to secondhand smoke.

  6. Trey Garrison says:

    “I know too many who have been diagnosed with cancer due to secondhand smoke.”

    I call bull.

  7. Hello Dolly says:

    I know two people who have had that diagnosis.
    One is a high school friend and one was a co-worker.

    Personally, I think one is too many.

    However, I do disagree with it being forced out of a script.

  8. Trey Garrison says:

    There’s a world of difference between knowing two people who developed lung cancer and establishing that second-hand smoke caused it.

  9. Kevin Bacon says:

    Hello Dolly – I agree with you 100%. If I want to smoke on private property, where the owner of the property allows it, I should be able to do so.

    And for the record, I don’t smoke. I used to. For 20 years. But I quit.

  10. Trey Garrison says:

    “If I want to smoke on private property, where the owner of the property allows it, I should be able to do so.”

    Like a bar or a restaurant.

  11. Mr Big Cigs says:

    Hrm… Slow news day? Or The entire staff watching Zac smoke one last time before he quits?
    http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/Pickover/pc/cigarette2.jpg

  12. DallasWill says:

    There is no actual proof thatl inks cancer with secondhand smoke. I did a 20 page paper on it for a psuedo science class at SMU and not even the FDA has establishes an inconclusive link.

    I’ll hear from anyone who thinks otherwie, but the facts are out there.

  13. Zac Crain says:

    We’re learning how to talk to the internet. Flurry of posts TK.

  14. Kelly says:

    I would love to know who the Doctor is that made the second hand smoke diagnosis. Should be easy to find out.

  15. jrp says:

    suicidal tendencies, really?

    you’re equating smoking to suicide?

    then explain my great Aunt Sara who smoked from about 15 years old to her death at the ripe old age of 94

    did smoking kill her? if she hadn’t smoked might she have seen 104?

    cancer is genetic, folks, sure, outside influences may exacerbate the onset of the disease but blaming others’ actions for your disease shows a severe lack of understanding of the disease

    every culture on the planet smokes something in way form or another yet only uppity Americans dare blame smoking for a genetic problem

    my favorite are the people that claim to be allergic to smoke…yes, some are, but many, it seems to me, just claim to be

    just another over-blown thing to argue about

  16. DallasWill says:

    here, here jrp!

  17. NC says:

    FYI: not all lung cancers are linked to smoking. I also know multiple people living with the disease. My mom and her best friend. Neither are smokers and both are possibly linked to chemo from a previous cancer or a spread from breast cancer.

    I agree with DallasWill. Thanks for posting that.

  18. publicnewssense says:

    I just don’t like the way second-hand smoke smells on my clothes. So, either I don’t go to bars or I disrobe before I go in. Now, there’s your over-enforced ordinance. Try having a nice quiet drink naked without the benefit of being a paid performer. People get all bent out of shape. It’s enough to make you want to light up a Lucky, have a Coke and a smile and ask yourself, “Is Dallas really the center of the universe when it comes to scholarly discussion of black holes?”
    Dallas — as crazy as you want it to be.

  19. Kevin Bacon says:

    Trey – At least somebody got it. 🙂

    Look, right now it is in vogue to ban smoking. There are many more pressing needs for the city government to concentrate on, but some other city did it…..so we have to.

    It’s easy to see we will probably all be better off when cigarettes cease to exist. But, you could say the same about thousands of other things. This just happens to be the hot topic of the moment. The people pushing this ordinance will all line up behind something else when this is no longer a challenge……it just gives them something to do.

  20. Peterk says:

    “Next will be editing of movies that were filmed 50 years ago in which the actors smoke….”

    and they have already done that with US Postal stamps when they altered a photo of Jackson Pollock removing his ever present cigarette

  21. Peterk says:

    there is no end to what the banners will go after next.

    In Ulster they announced this year “Lighting up in motor vehicles is to be made illegal as part of a major road safety strategy being introduced by the devolved government in Belfast.”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/mar/29/northernireland.smoking

    but lets not stop there. Over in England some local councils have decided that the number of holes in salt shakers should be reduced from 17 to 5 thus reducing the amount of salt someone puts on their fish and chips
    “Research has suggested that slashing the holes from the traditional 17 to five could cut the amount people sprinkle on their food by more than half.”
    http://tinyurl.com/6n4dc2

    But what if second-hand smoke is not as deadly as we assume
    “In 2003 a definitive paper on SHS and lung cancer mortality was published in the British Medical Journal. It is the largest and most detailed study ever reported. The authors studied more than 35,000 California never-smokers over a 39-year period and found no statistically significant association between exposure to SHS and lung cancer mortality.”
    James E. Enstrom and Geoffrey C. Kabat, “Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98,” British Medical Journal, May 2003: http://www.heartland.org/article.cfm?artId=23332.

    http://tinyurl.com/5c4f4q

  22. Peterk says:

    re:Pollock stamp

    from the NYTimes
    “The United States Postal Service will unveil a new stamp on Feb. 18 celebrating Jackson Pollock’s contribution to Abstract Expressionism. The stamp, only the second to commemorate an American artist, is based on a 1949 Life magazine photograph showing the denim-clad artist, a chain smoker, in his studio pouring paint onto canvas, a cigarette hanging precariously from his mouth. But in an artist’s rendering of the photograph on the stamp, the cigarette has vanished.”
    http://tinyurl.com/5elb8n

  23. Steve says:

    Time for the next step, no alcohol in bars. Much, much more dangerous than cigarettes.

  24. Peterk says:

    “no alcohol in bars.”

    now there’s an idea. I’ll open a bar and call it the Carry Nation. There’ll be no alkyhall, no tabaccy, no transfats, nothing that makes you feel good

    I’ll make a mint!

  25. timothy says:

    recently my wife went to the her doctor and he said that when we smoke outside that the smell on our clothing would bring in second hand smoke into our home. we have a little one so of course we were concerned but, i thought about this. do you bring in second hand smoke from a campfire? she more recently went to the doctor’s office and another doctor told her the same thing.

    i think it is fine for a doctor to tell you that smoking is unhealthy but, blatently telling an untruth? unless these two doctors are dumb enough to believe this.

    lastly, i worked in a hospital for a while and i got one thing out of the experience. i don’t want to live to 85. when i was born i could not feed myself and wore a diaper…once is enough!