I was there tonight. Boo ya
 

What a half-assed smoking ban. Congrats to the city of Omaha for being a bunch of pussies. Here's to another five years of my clothes smelling like crap!

This is the most effectively meaningless thing I've ever seen. I swear to god in order to be on the city council in this town you need to be wearing diapers. Way to slurp off the keno community!
 

They are pussies, alright. But not for the reasons you are saying, Pete. They are because they are telling themselves that they are making some great, moral stand against something that is BAD, and that they presumably think that THEY know better than I do as to how I should treat my body. Not to mention they know better how to run a business than the business owner. It is a disgusting display of those in power flexing just because they can. Fuck Chuck Siegerson.
 

I disagree. The government has been doing things under the claim of public safety and healht since the beginning of time. Things that you don't think about, yet obey, on a daily basis. Stoplights come to mind, as do curfews, bar closing times, etc. Some affect private businesses (bar closing times), some don't (stoplights).

To say that the government can't do things to a business is ridiculous. It can, it does, it will continue to do so. When I go out and enjoy said businesses, I like to do so in a manner that does not tarnish my lungs and thankfully this is the first step. Unfortunately they did not go far enough.

If it wasn't for the unfairness by only targeting certain establihsments and not others, this would be great. Smoking absolutely DOES infringe on the rights of those who wish to not get cancer, which is a hell of a lot more vital than being allowed to smoke indoors, anywhere you choose.

And don't tell me that bars are going to lose business, if a bar's business is contingent solely on providing a smoking venue, chances are that bar SHOULD go out of business.

To respond to your point about running a business better than a business owner: that's what government health inspectors do. They inspect your beloved private businesses to make sure they're safe. And aren't you glad they do?

Memo to smokers: Contrary to what you may believe, you have very few rights outside of your own home, as they've found out in New York, Chicago, Minneapolis and most other major metropolitan areas. And, I might add, very few of you smoke indoors at home, that includes you GA. So until one smoker gets frostbite from standing outside a local watering hole five years from now, I'm not feeling sorry because, after all, it's better than cancer.

GA I await your response.
 

First of all, allowing smoking in one's establishment does not infringe on peoples' rights at all--those people who do not wish to be somewhere with smoking permitted have every right to leave.

The beauty of the Invisible Hand is that the market should control itself, not the government: if there were that many people upset with smoking establishments, there would be far more exclusively non-smoking establishments in Omaha. And there's not. Last I checked, Indigo Joe's isn't exactly burning up the "place to be" lists.

As to your "stoplights and closing times" argument is very short-sided. It was established--many years ago--that it is illegal to run a stoplight, and it is illegal for establishments in Nebraska to sell alcohol past 1:00 am (which I also disagree with, philosophically and alcoholically). However, your argument is "hey, Mr. Business Owner, I know that using tobacco products is perfectally legal in the United States, but because I am a politician that thinks that because I was elected to power, I am in a position to tell you what is right and wrong--particularly as to how you run your business."

That is an absurdity. Again, the market should decide this type of argument--not an elected council of self-righteous douche bags. And the market has decided overwhelmingly that there is simply not much demand for non-smoking bars. It is just that simple.

As to your "don't tell me the bars are going to lose business argument"--there has been a series of articles in the Lincoln Journal-Star about bars that have seen insurmountable drops in business, and several have had to shut down. It is also very evident that the bars on O Street that have beer gardens/smoker areas available are far busier than those that do not.

And I will await for your response to this final response, Pete--how is your argument different than the anti-abortion argument? Women can be harmed physically and psychologically in several ways during and after an abortion. This is fact. So why isn't it outlawed?

Your serve.
 

All I can say is that when this passed in Lincoln I didn't vote for it because I didn't like the wording and principle of the ban. However, I fully enjoy the benefit, smoke free bars are great, especially the places that serve good food. It is possible to go there and enjoy a good meal without all the smoke. I wish the same could be said for my parents house. Can someone pass a smoking ban on my dad at the dinner table?

Oh, one more thing GA, these bars in Lincoln that "have had to shut down" have been quality establishments I am sure. Places like Big John's Billiards. Come on, that place is was a shit hole before the ban took affect. Whether the passing of this ban is right or wrong, Any establishment that cannot overcome the new law needs to rethink their business plan.
 

Shit hole or not, Napa, what matters is that a city council should not give an unfair advantage to other bars by way of grandstanding. It doesn't matter if you like said bar, or I do, or whoever does--they obviously have an established customer base, and because of a small group of elected officials, they lost it.

I agree that if some of them were not so shitty, they could have retained/gained new customers. But the point is that the free market should decide this, not city government. Obviously, their niche was having a neighborhood smoking bar. Take the smoking out, and they're out of business. Elected officials should not make such drastic changes to the market that regard a perfectally legal act (smoking).

And although I smoke when I go out, I agree--smoke-free bars are nice because my clothes don't stink up my entire closet and I don't smoke as much if I am at one.

Still doesn't make it right that city councils can take away the rights of business owners deciding what is best for their business.
 

Who thought I would agree with GA so fervently. The point all of you are missing in this whole FUCKING argument is that this is all about Keno.
"We'll let you smoke if you have Keno."

"Thanks. Now we'll vote for you."

What's worse, cirrhosis of the liver or lung cancer. Apparently cirrhosis, because you can cure lung cancer with Kenotherapy.
 

I thought I might chime in.

It does appear that everyone agrees that Omaha’s plan is dumb and lacks testicular fortitude so I wont add anymore comments about it. Also, MIB’s kenotherapy line was ridiculously funny.

I believe that smoking should be banned from all public establishments. We live in a free country where we can do whatever we want as long as it does not enfringe on someone else’s freedom. (Well that’s what I was told once) I believe smoking in public places does enfringe on the rights of the nonsmoker. Why should they have to pollute their lungs? And I really disagree with the statement“those people who do not wish to be somewhere with smoking permitted have every right to leave.” So your saying that if someone in Omaha wanted to go out to a bar as a nonsmoker they had the one option of Indigo Joe’s. Sorry, but that place sucks balls. I don’t think this is politicians trying to throw there power around, I think the are just protecting the rights of the nonsmoker.

I agree with a lot of your comments GA but not in regards to the smoking ban. I plan on posting on that later.