Smoking ban in Ohio -- a report

[Marzzz]

Originally posted by MidLifeCrisis:

As stupid as that may sound, when you let the government dictate what is acceptable, you open yourself up to the next round of conservatives wanting to ban public embibbing of deamon rum.

Hmmmm.....let's see.....first major smoking bans were in California, New York City, Chicago...yep, conservative hotbeds one and all!

[MidLifeCrisis]

Originally posted by Marzzz:

first major smoking bans were in California, New York City, Chicago

California - Bars in 1998 - Good call

New York - 2003

Illinois - 2004

 

Liberal Florida - 2002

[Joe Muscara]

Originally posted by MidLifeCrisis:

Originally posted by Joe Muscara:

Drunks only stink up the immediate area. Their acts don't necessarily infringe on other's rights, and when they do, they are (hopefully) held responsible.

Boy you haven't been to many bars have you?

Drunks get into fights, vomit everywhere, and generally tend to be disgusting.

 

Ask a parent whose child has been killed by a drunk driver if holding the drunk responsible helped eased their pain.

I said they don't necessarily infringe on other's rights.

 

EDIT: Maybe I should have said alcohol drinkers don't necessarily infringe. I've been to bars where most people were drinking and smoking, and their drinking didn't affect me one bit, but the smoking definitely did.

[stepay]

Didn't mean for this thread to turn all political, but since it has, I have just this one comment regarding the smoking ban in Ohio...

 

The people voted for this law, and it passed convincingly. Not really the government deciding to ban smoking -- just the people deciding to.

 

Personally I have mixed feelings on this one. I voted FOR the ban because I don't like smoky places and I think that smoking is one of the worst things a person can do to their body (along with drug abuse, both legal and illegal and alcohol abuse). I do feel for some workers who have to be in that environment all the time even though they could get another job if they wanted to.

 

But at the same time, if the ban didn't pass I wouldn't have been too upset. People have a choice to enter a really smoky bar or go have drinks at a restaurant bar that isn't so smoky.

 

Not adamant one way or the other. Adamant about personally not smoking though, but as far as other people doing it, fine with me; except there is that increased health care cost that hits me even though I don't smoke.

[Prague]

Originally posted by Joe Muscara:

Conservatives? I don't think conservatives were behind the smoking bans.

 

Besides, smoking generally infringes on others rights.

Oddly enough, it is liberals behind this. It doesn't surprise me, however. I expect convoluted logic from them.

 

It's like beating a dead horse, but I'm amazed at how people think they have "rights" on private property. Owners have rights. Customers have priviledges.

 

At least Indians understand the US Constitution.

[Joe Muscara]

The problem to me isn't so much the workers as the fact that it makes going to see bands a less enjoyable experience. So do the bad drunks, but knock on wood, I haven't encountered those much, if ever lately.

[EscapeRocks]

Just to chime in here....

 

In the case of our city, it wasn't the government who enacted a ban. It was the people .

 

By that I mean: a year ago, a group was able to colect enough signaturs to put it on the ballot.

 

The election had th ehighest local turnout ever, and he ban passed 94% for, 6% against.

 

 

I know we're just one city, and it's anecdotal, but in the year since the ban's been on effect, not one bar or other nightspot has closed, and from our view from the stage, the live venues are still packed.

 

One bar/nightspot owner out here was interviewed recently since the ban is being considered state-wide. He said that he was surprised at how many non-smokers there were who liked coming to his club, based on comments he's received in the last year. I appreciated th man's candor when he actually said that he might have one his own "no smoking" had he known, but in the bar business, how does one know?

 

Anyway, just a report from my little town....your experience may be completly different.

 

On a personal note, playing gigs around the past year has been great. Neither my equipment nor I smell like smoke at the end of a gig, and I no longer get that dry, grity feeling at the end of a night. Also, I personally have a lot more friends who come see us play who wouldn't when all the venues were basically a haze.

[DanL]

Here in Delaware we've had a smoking ban for several years. It's the best thing they ever did. I hated doing gigs in bars. My clothes, gear, even my car smelled like smoke from me and my gear being in there for the ride home.

[Bill H.]

Originally posted by EscapeRocks:

Just to chime in here....

 

In the case of our city, it wasn't the government who enacted a ban. It was the people .

 

Well yeah... voter's iniatives against smoking are always going to pass because smokers are in a minority. If the initiative only allowed people who support live music by attending bars to vote, the result may have been different.

 

Which city... ? I know some cities are doing all right with this. From what I've heard, Seattle is, but that's a different kind of place than out here in Eastern Washington.

 

I played a country club Christmas party in Yakima Washington on Tuesday. It was wonderful. They went non-smoking years before the state mandated ban, because it made good business sense for them to do so. As a non-smoker, I've always enjoyed playing this room. They hire me twice a year.

 

Tonight I'm in smokey Oregon. This bar hires me twice a week. The smokers make my steady job in this place possible. And I'm not kidding... I'm always watching the room, and they are the ones who are the most regular, and drinking and gambling the most (video poker and slots are as big a revenue generator as liquor sales in most Oregon bars). It's that addictive personality thing. I don't like the smoke, but I like working.

[Analogaddict]

Originally posted by soundscape:

Originally posted by Joe Muscara:

 

Then again...

 

"In 1970, [snip] the Swedish Government banned the use of carpet in all public facilities. [...]"

That's sweden for you, alright... Ideas that totally collide with reality are not uncommon at all..! On the topic, the smoking ban here is working out REALLY well, AFAIK bars and restaurants are actually selling more now. I do some work outside of sweden, and it's painfully obvious just how bad smoking indoors actually is. Just like many people thought, nowadays it's hard to believe that smoking was ever allowed indoors...

[Blue JC]

This Ohio news was announced on Monday 12/11/2006:

 

Approved by voters in November, the law banned smoking as of Dec. 7 in virtually all enclosed public places, including restaurants, bars, bowling alleys and bingo parlors. However, the law contained no rules of enforcement.

 

So while smoking in public places is against the law in Ohio, there's no one to enforce the law.

 

And until the enforcement rules are in place, the Ohio Department of Health has agreed not to issue warning letters or fines against businesses breaking the law.

----------------

 

So, it's back to business as usual - at least for the short term. Every place has their ash trays back out.

 

In addition, I have received over 40 gig offers in the last 4 days since the announcement. My first-half 2007 bookings are now at an almost identical level as my first-half 2006 bookings were. I'll probably have more than 2006 by the end of the year.

 

And, while I can't speak for anyone else, I no longer have ANY doubt about the impact of smoking bans affecting the hiring of musicians.