New Quick Web Poll!

Now that the smoking ban is in effect, how’s it been out there in bar land? Vote on the poll in the left sidebar and leave comments right on this post.

Posted by Mike

Comments

[Karline]

That's so Wisconsin. "Pretty good" means "I'm not happy about it."

[Compassionate Badger]

This really should be a state law. :-P

Thanks Eau Claire for making my lungs cleaner.

[Mark]

The smoking ban really doesn't bother me one way or the other. The problem I have is in how our esteemed council went about it and wrote it. The night of public comment had a better then 2-1 against the ban yet our council voted it in anyway. As for the health aspect, the councils biggest concern was for the health of the workers and children, yet almost all people employed in the bar business smoked and children are NOT allowed in bars. Now we have taken the one place that a parent could smoke away from their children and drove them back home to smoke around the kids. Also the exemption for hotel rooms seems a little shady. Why are hotels allowed to have smoking in some rooms? Is not the health of the employees assigned to those rooms a concern of our council? And with people not being able to smoke in the hotel bar, do you think they will go outside? No they will go up to their room and smoke, in a confined space with their kids. Lastly, has anyone else noticed how lovely our streets have become outside of our local bars? Maybe V1 could start up a tour bus and give our out of town visitors a tour of our lovely butt lined streets. You could call it the Butt tour. Oh well, I guess everyone will just sit back and wait for our council to ban some other legal activity because they deem it bad for our health. I read that caffiene is bad for 90% of the people who drink it so I guess the council will be banning coffee houses next. Drink up now for tomorrow you may not be able to!!

[WD-40]

Now I have more time for drinking, the smoking ban has actually been a life changing experience. Thank you Eau Claire for remaining un-artificial!

[hapbt]

Yes, it was nice of the council to ignore the will of the people and choose their own personal principles instead.
This whole argument that workers in bars somehow need protection from cigarette smoke is just stupid if you stop to think about it for ten seconds-- what about workers at printing presses where tiny particles of ink fill the air, if some of them don't like it, should we ban printing with ink?
What about sewer workers, the sewers are unhealthy -- we could get some people to clean them up but nobody could be allowed to work there because it's not nice and clean.
Face it, there are hundreds and even thousands of service industry jobs in foodservice that were ALREADY IN non-smoking restraunts.
You can't just go work at a place and tell them you dislike their business so they must change, at least, not until now.
If you like going to the bar but don't like smoke, since when do you get to decide if everyone else in the bar can smoke or not?
The smoking ban should be left to the individual establishments, and if they don't get rid of it then that's because IT IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, something which no longer means anything in this country.

[crispinpierce]

Actually, Mark, children (with their parents) are allowed in bars, and so will be better protected by the ban. And actually, hapbt, workers on the job are protected from "particles of ink" and many other hazards by OSHA (although exposure risks on the job are almost always higher than those for the public).

Until local and statewide bans, regulation of smoking in bars and restaurants had "fallen between the cracks" in terms of worker protection.

I know smokers feel deprived, and that bar owners may see an initial drop in business. But lowered rates of asthma, lung disease, and cancer make a ban worthwhile, in my opinion. And family business will increase -- my daughter and I recently hoisted a couple of Shirley Temples at the Joynt to celebrate the ban.