Friday, June 03, 2005
Where are all The Non-Smokers?
Well, non-smokers, you got what you wanted. So...WHERE ARE YOU? You pushed for this ban, you said you'd go out more often, that the only reason you didn't go out is because you didn't want to inhale or smell like cigarette smoke, and if bars would be smoke free-BANG!-you'd be hitting the town tossing out the greenbacks. The "non's" were supposed to be flooding the bars, eagerly inhaling the mountain spring fresh air!
...in the words of Judge Smails, "Well...we're waiting."
Jeff Moritko owns Mayslack's Bar in Minneapolis. He was asked by the non's to be part of their "Task Force", representing bar owners, and to "hash out a ban that would appease the anti-smok[er's]."
...within minutes of the first meeting last summer, Moritko got the distinct feeling he was outnumbered.
"The task force wasn't there for creative input. It was a forgone conclusion, and nobody wanted to hear what the bar owners had to say."
"[The loss of business] is a real problem," says Jeff Ormond, owner of Gabby's. "We don't have a lot of time to correct it. You'll see a lot of bars closing in a month's time."
"Everything that's happening now, we said would happen," Moritko said.
[Minneapolis] Mayor [R.T.] Rybak, (NEVER trust a politician using their initials, no matter which side of the aisle; DD.), according to one source, even refused to discuss a compromise on the ban at City Hall one day.
Dan O'Gara, owner of O'Gara's [located in St. Paul, where smoking is permitted in qualifying establishments, mostly bars] says "receipts were up 14 percent in April compared with the previous year." AND: "You don't want to see an increase in sales simply because something has been legislated."
Jeff Moritko and Dan O'Gara seems to understand how a free market works, or should be allowed to work. The city doesn't. Well, it's not that they don't, they simply suppress reality and subjugate it for a cause that is politically correct. O'Gara's comment of an increase in sales because of legislation is equally frightening. Once the Camel's nose is under the tent, it's there to stay.
District Court Judge Charles Porter, ruling on the financial plea of the plaintiff's writes:
"It is quite possible that some, if not all, of the Plaintiffs will eventually go out of business as an incidental result of the smoking ban." And, "Plaintiffs are not entitled to a Court's intervention simply because they have suffered and continue to suffer such harm."
You may say good, good for the tobacco companies, and good for the liquor companies and the places that sell it, and if an incidental casualty is a restaurant, bar, club - someone's livelihood-well, that's how it is.
The non's have been lobbying for total smoking bans for what, twenty years now? Your little indulgence, way to relax, or reward is next in line in the crosshairs. Please don't peddle your cause to anyone in the food, beverage and entertainment industry. Where are you non-smokers? Why aren't you bellying up to the bar for a breath of fresh air?
Original Source: City Pages
Alabama Internet
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.
Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.
