|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,907 Year: 4,164/9,624 Month: 1,035/974 Week: 362/286 Day: 5/13 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: We youth at EvC are in Moral Decline | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Rrhain, you might like repeating yourself. I hate it. But one more time, just for you, I'll spell this out. The bar is attempting to entice me to partake of their services by allowing smoking as one of their services. I choose to take them up on this enticement. If you need it simpler than that, I'm afraid I can't help you.
quote: Yes, you certainly do. And you have just as much right as me to leave if you don't like the conditions there, don't you?
quote: Yes, I would mind. Which is why I don't frequent sex clubs where that sort of thing is encouraged. I choose to take my business to an environment that caters to me. As a result, I stick to bars with a strict "no pissing in other peoples' drinks" policy. See how simple that is? I don't like the environment at a business... so I take my money elsewhere. Wotta concept.
quote: True. The fact that the owner of the bar has given me permission is what gives me permission. You know how he/she has done so? By allowing smoking in his/her bar. Does all this really need to be explained?
quote: Why is that? If there's really such a legion of bar patrons who want non-smoking bars, then wouldn't being the only non-smoking bar in town be a gold-mine? That is, of course, if the patrons actually want a non-smoking bar.
quote: You've stated this, yes. That's not the same as explaining it. One does not go to a bar simply to drink alcohol. One goes to a bar for conditions and circumstances in which the alcohol will be enjoyable to drink. These run the range from dancing, games, music, and any number of other things. If one of the amenities provided is that smoking is allowed, then the bar is, in fact, a smoking room as well as a drinking room.
quote: Nowhere. Where does it mention chicken wings? Where does it mention a jukebox? Where does it mention a pool table? The Starbucks I worked at in high school had a restaurant license. We had to have one because of the toaster with which we heated bagels. Nowhere on the restaurant license did it mention coffee. Clearly, by your logic, Starbucks is not a coffee house.
quote: My premise, which you managed to quote twice and still ignore, was that if a bar owner wants to allow smoking at his bar, he has to be able to allow smoking at his bar. I would have thought this was self explanatory. Apparently you find it untenable. May I ask why?
quote: Yes. It is a private institution that does business with the public. It is not your job to determine the terms of that business. It is (or ideally should be) between the bar owner and his/her patrons.
quote: Oh, a law! Well forget it then. It must be right.
quote: Why are the smokers even relevant to the establishment of a non-smoking bar? If there are that many non-smokers horribly put out by smokers, shouldn't they be able to support a non-smoking bar?
quote: Again. One does not go to a bar to slam a cold one and take off. You can always stop at the liquor store and do that at home. One stops at a bar for a nice place to have a drink. To kick back and grab a smoke. To chat up a pretty college girl. Whatever. These features are what makes the bar. Sure, smoking isn't necessary to have a drink. Neither is a glass that doesn't taste like a dog's mouth. Both increase the enjoyment.
quote: Wow. Sounds like they didn't need a law at all. If business increased, then obviously there are lots of people who would prefer a non-smoking bar to a smoking one. Makes me wonder why they don't just open a non-smoking bar, instead of trying to dictate terms to the smoking ones.
quote: (*blinks back!*) Yup. Looks like I did. If bars aren't in the business of providing a place to smoke, then why do you want to stop them from providing a place to smoke? Sounds like a big waste of effort to me.
quote: There are many things in a bar besides alcohol. Pretty simple when you read it, huh?
quote: This becomes very funny one post down the line, when you accuse me of being defensive.
quote: Just for you, Rrhain... really slowly, really simply. No, there is no need to limit employees to smokers only. Those willing to do the job, either smoker or non-smoker, will do just fine. Just like every other job on Earth.
quote: Man... those pimps in the bar industry? Fucking vicious. Once saw a bartender get his nose cut off for trying to quit. Tell you what. Go talk to a hooker. Ask her if she's got more or less options than a bartender. Let me know if she laughs, cries, or punches you.
quote: Yup. That ashtray you insist so strongly is "not an invitation." Can you give me one single reasons a business which did not allow smoking would provide ashtrays for its customers? For funny hats, perhaps?
quote: What you call coercion, most people call promise of greater profits. Of course, if we look at your comments on California, even the idea of greater profits falls apart. So where exactly is the coercion?
quote: Around when the bar decided to offer me a place to smoke, I suppose.
quote: Yup. I would definitely go to another bar. That's called capitalism. If the bar next door was charging less for drinks, I'd probably go there instead too. Bastard that I am, I'd be "coercing" the first bar to lower its prices.
quote: Actually, if I saw a no-smoking sign up, I wouldn't smoke. I probably wouldn't bring my business back there either. Just like if the bars around here all went non-smoking by law, I'd just drink at a friend's apartment. Would I still be coercing them if the law was passed, and I stopped patronizing their business?
quote: Sure. But I better understand, "We'd rather you didn't. And it's our place. So don't."
quote: Sure you can. Leave the bar. Bye!
quote: But Rrhain, the way you tell it there are throngs of non-smokers yearning for a place to call their own! Surely one bar could arise to meet this growing market?
quote: How about, "do it the way of the people providing the money, or don't get the money." Waitwait... how about "provide a service people want, or don't get paid." My God, what a horrible dystopian age this has become. You know, I have to go to work and do my job each day or not eat. Where's my special law?
quote: Those on a skill level with bartender? Usually by being able to fill out the application. They pay less, sure. Job happiness or more money... which to choose?
quote: From the way you're reacting, it would seem that I suggested they quite their jobs and run for Senate or something. There are other jobs on a level with or lower than bartender. There are very few jobs on a level with or lower than prostitute. Comparing the two directly is ridiculous.
quote: What, the other bartender, who had just stamped out a butt? You know, I didn't bother?
quote: If you keep saying that over and over, it'll probably become more convincing. But if a bar is not a smoking room (presumably "a room in which people smoke?") then what's your problem?
quote: No. Two wrongs don't make a right. But I do wonder how you can be against one and not the other. Tell you what, I'll make you a deal. I'll sit in a gasoline powered car for ten minutes with the windows rolled up, and smoke a full cigarette. Meanwhile, you can sit in a car of the same year and model with the windows rolled up, and a hose leading from the exhaust pipe into the car. We'll see who comes out in better health.
quote: Most cars do. But that's why I'm asking, to find out.
quote: Yup. Legs... marvelous things, aren't they?
quote: Obviously more than they need a different job.
quote: Sure. But I certainly don't need to do so with a gasoline-powered engine when more eco-friendly options are available.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Me, my girlfriend, two bartenders (both smoking) our friends, and many other patrons. Are you suggesting now that the other patrons are somehow coerced into visiting this bar? Must they also go to this bar or not eat?
quote: I can't wait to hear you justify this one. Why do the other patrons have the right to enter a smoking establishment and demand that nobody smoke? (Short of voting with their dollars?) Do they own the bar? Because last I heard the owner was the only one who controlled whether the customers were allowed to smoke in his/her bar or not.
quote: No. It's rancorous posts that make me assume you're angry. [This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 08-21-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Irrelevant. There's no Indian restaurant in my area, but I don't have the right to demand that the local Chinese place start serving Indian food.
quote: No they're not. They don't have to go to a bar at all. They might not like that, but they don't have the right to a bar they'll enjoy.
quote: Keep repeating it. It might become true. Do you have anything to say about the reasoning I gave which disagrees with this statement?
quote: By entering a bar which allows smoking, they made the choice to sit in a room full of smoke. If they don't like it, they're free to go elsewhere. Again... I can't stroll into Wok 'n Roll and demand a chicken tikka masala. Whether I can get a chicken tikka masala elsewhere makes no difference. If I decide to eat there anyway, nobody's forcing me to have general tsao's chicken.
quote: What the owner allows, however, is very much relevant. And the owner is, ultimately, the only one who can force himself to do anything.
quote: Your posts came off as rude and aggressive. If you really want, I can go back through and lift examples. But I'd rather tone things back and we can all just be civil from now on, if that's amenable to you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
I already answered the majority of this when Rrhain asked it. But to sum up...
quote: If you are in a bar which allows smoking, then you have intentionally gone to a smoke-filled area. The smoke-filled area has not come to you. Nobody invaded anything around you. That's your call. If you don't want to be in a smoke-filled area, don't seek one out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: I constantly bemoan the fact that there is no Indian restaurant in my community. I love Indian food. So?
quote: Cool, I hope that works out for you. It's always nice when a business you enjoy opens right near you. A Borders just opened up near my apartment, and that graphic novel section is gonna clean out my bank account...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: Frankly, yeah. Assuming it's not your plane, bus, train, restaurant, or bathroom. If it isn't, I'd much rather leave it up to the owner of the plane, bus, train, restaurant, or bathroom to decide. If you don't like their decision, tough luck. Just like if the owner of any of these things decides I can't smoke there, tough luck for me. It's when the government steps in and makes the decision for the owner that I get pissed off.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Rather than repeat the entire thread, I'd much rather advise you to go re-read it. You ignored an awful lot of stuff. For instance, I don't remember saying anything about "out in public." Just private institutions.
Of course, if you want is to toss some more insults, lemme know. I'll take off.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: But not owned by the public. It's that simple. As I said earlier in the thread, I really don't like repeating myself. If you have something new to say, lemme know. If not, post away. I just won't bother responding. In the meantime, I think I'll head over to McDonalds and demand that they serve me a lamb vindaloo. I've got a real hankering for a lamb vindaloo. And since they're open to the public, they must owe me the type of service I want.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: It's a tough question. My self-interest says, "YEAH! YEAH, I DO! THINK SO!" But honestly, logically, no. If I'm in a crowd of people, I move away from the crowd before lighting up. In other words, I'll still smoke a cigarette, but I don't see the point in getting in everyone's face with it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: I don't see the difference. One service or another. The service I'm looking for is bars and restaurants that allow you to smoke. It's part of the reason I live in the neighborhood I'm in; you're allowed to smoke just about anywhere. Go twenty minutes north, that won't be the case. In the case of my previous example, the service I'm looking for is Indian food. Some will let me smoke, some won't. If they won't, the Indian food will probably be enough of a draw to get me in the door anyway. If they will... damn, I've found my restaurant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
The addiction is part of it, sure. But another big part is when, for example, somebody tries to come along and outlaw smoking in bars. The smoker's reaction is, "Oh, come ON! No smoking in BARS now? Are you freakin' kidding me? That's it, I'm smoking every god-damned place I can. And if you don't like it, EAT IT."
Is it the most rational response in the world? Nah. But damn satisfying, in a juvenile way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Well, that just gets us right back into the whole debate, doesn't it? And as always, if the place you want to wear it is at a poison gas machine expo, then yeah. I think it is pretty ridiculous.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
For the most part, I'm with you. What I don't understand, though, is why a lot of people feel there can't be, for instance, a smoking movie theater. If the understanding before you go in is that one of the services available at the theater is the ability to smoke, what's the harm? Don't go there if you don't want a room full of smoke!
I'm not saying there shouldn't be non-smoking theaters as well. Far from it. I'm just wondering why it's an all or nothing proposition. As I've been saying throughout this thread, if there's really enough adamant demand for non-smoking businesses, what the Hell do we need a law for?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
Even that's not logically consistent, though. Why not just outlaw smoking?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
quote: And again... if someone starts a business where one of the services provided is that you can smoke, how is that asking you to accomodate anything? If you never enter the business, it has no effect on you whatsoever. For instance, if someone started a restaurant where the schtick was that waiters were constantly singing to you as you eat, it would annoy the living crap out of me. So I wouldn't go to that restaurant, and I would never have to hear a waiter sing as long as I lived. Not once. It would have no effect on my life at all. Now obviously, being annoyed is not the same as a health detriment. But the ability to avoid the situation is the same in either case. If the business isn't selling what you want, don't give them your time and money. But damn, don't pass a law that says that no one else is allowed to partake in it. That's not people expecting you to accomodate anything. It's exactly the opposite. If someone started a smoking lounge that was open to the public, would you object? Or would you just not go to the smoking lounge? If that smoking lounge served drinks or food, or showed movies, would you object? If that smoking lounge happened to be shaped like a bar, restaurant, or movie theater, why would you care? [This message has been edited by Dan Carroll, 08-25-2003]
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024