Popcorn anyone? Explain this call to action to me once again.

[skoony]

i can see it from the bar owners point of view as well though if you dont want smoking in there . +losing money to other businesses that allow it isnt an even playing field. i actually agree with their point. If my livelihood depended on it I would vote the same way they did. i think -some- stuff should have government involvement at least, as long as they dont strangle us.

they could simply allow it.
it is a level playing field. you run your business your way and
i'll run mine my way.
i wont get the government to interfere with your business if
you don't get the government to interfere in mine.
if and when the government gets involved they will strangle us,
so don't complain if they use an old rope.

regards
mike

 

[alicewonderland]

they could simply allow it.
it is a level playing field. you run your business your way and
i'll run mine my way.
i wont get the government to interfere with your business if
you don't get the government to interfere in mine.
if and when the government gets involved they will strangle us,
so don't complain if they use an old rope.

regards
mike

but allowing it doesnt take care of the issue the bar owners presented? they presented a legitimate issue imo.

 

[skoony]

but allowing it doesnt take care of the issue the bar owners presented? they presented a legitimate issue imo.

no,its a contrived ANTZ issue.
here in Minnesota all bar tenders or anyone who serves
alcohol are required to take mandatory safety classes.
they are taught not only to watch for signs of intoxication
but also the signs of being under the influence of drugs.
in either case the patron is not to be served and
can be legally asked to leave the bar.

regards
mike

 

[alicewonderland]

i wonder if some people refer to us as PNTZ

i personally can still see it as an issue, and coming from a non-vaper they would rather not have to deal with the problems allowing vaping would entail. i dont believe they are all just making up lies just because they hate vaping.

 

[rolygate]

Your right to vape threatens the smoking economy, which is a term I coined to describe the large number of people, jobs, corporate revenues and tax revenue (and more) that depends on smoking.

Because of this, there is now an unholy alliance between people who you might assume to be at the opposite end of the spectrum - such as the cigarette industry and the tobacco control industry - to try and crush ecigs. vaping threatens all their livelihoods. Add to that the pharmaceutical industry, who basically control health policy: they depend on smoking-created disease for a big slice of their income. They need smoking. Then the federal government, who need the tax revenue. Then add the State governments and the AGs - even the Attorneys General have a personal financial interest in protecting smoking. The MSA funding keeps States and cities in the black: take away those billions of smoking-dependent dollars paid in every year and what do you get? States and cities and government departments screaming in the agony of withdrawal symptoms.

There is no difference between a junkie jonesing for his fix and a State AG piteously whining and lying about ecigs because the MSA funds didn't get paid and his State is going bankrupt due to their total financial incompetence and his pension plan is crashing due to no tobacco money.

Everyone is against ecigs and it has nothing whatsoever to do with health. It's all about the money.

 

[JayWer]

I have no issues with restaurants or other businesses with the exception of pubs but when they start telling you that you cant use an alternative to smoking in out door public areas like the beaches here, or board walks, or parks, then its ludicrous. A lot of smokers I know turned to the healthier alternatives because of smoking bans then totally figured out they could kick carcinogens altogether. Now they wanna ban this too? I was all for banning smoking on my local area beaches, etc. It sucked having to step on a smoldering ...., or even worse if my children did. Then to be sitting there relaxing while someone with a huge cigar spews his nasty smoke your way it got really annoying but, there is a certain limit you reach when Its a fine example of how when you give law makers an inch they take a few thousand miles. If the business permits it then fine. But to have law makers tell them they can no longer permit it is way over stepping boundaries.

 

[Strings]

i can see it from the bar owners point of view as well though if you dont want smoking in there . +losing money to other businesses that allow it isnt an even playing field. i actually agree with their point. If my livelihood depended on it I would vote the same way they did. i think -some- stuff should have government involvement at least, as long as they dont strangle us.

What you are saying is that government should create an artificial "level playing field" to cater to the decisions made by certain bar owners

My understanding of the situation in MN was that bar owners who have banned vaping were in favor of a ban, citing (in part) that they were loosing business to bars that allowed it.

It is NOT the government's job to "level" this playing field: they (the bar owners who banned vaping) made their decision on how they wanted to run their business. It was a bad decision (based on losing business), that's their problem. Other bars (who didn't ban) were doing just fine. That's how business goes

 

[Mogar]

Please remember the past people. The legal slippery slope.
First they start with small actions that most people just ignore or go along with because is a slight inconvenience and not worth getting worked up about.
Once it starts they start chipping away at your liberties because "if they didn't mind the first part, they wont mind the second etc etc"
When they are completed most if not all your rights are gone and you say "Hay, what happened here" as you stand outside your home inside a government issued cardboard box in the back yard surrounded by chicken wire and a CC TV monitoring you to make sure the smoke does not escape....
The only way to keep this from happening is by fighting every single swing of the hammer. Don't let it start.

 

[alicewonderland]

What you are saying is that government should create an artificial "level playing field" to cater to the decisions made by certain bar owners

My understanding of the situation in MN was that bar owners who have banned vaping were in favor of a ban, citing (in part) that they were loosing business to bars that allowed it.

It is NOT the government's job to "level" this playing field: they (the bar owners who banned vaping) made their decision on how they wanted to run their business. It was a bad decision (based on losing business), that's their problem. Other bars (who didn't ban) were doing just fine. That's how business goes

stop putting words in my mouth. I said what I said in the way I said it, which is -> bar owners dont want to deal with the issues that would come with allowing vaping in their bars, they dont want to deal with allowing vaping in bars and dont want to deal with losing money. If they allow vaping, they allow something they dont want because of the issues it causes. If they dont allow vaping they lose income. Its a lose-lose scenario for them. I see their point of view.

 

[skoony]

stop putting words in my mouth. I said what I said in the way I said it, which is -> bar owners dont want to deal with the issues that would come with allowing vaping in their bars, they dont want to deal with allowing vaping in bars and dont want to deal with losing money. If they allow vaping, they allow something they dont want because of the issues it causes. If they dont allow vaping they lose income. Its a lose-lose scenario for them. I see their point of view.

i see their point of view also. they should deal with it..
not the government.
regards
mike

 

[Strings]

How is what I said putting words in your mouth? You're saying you can see their point, that using a government ban on vaping in bars "levels the playing field", when the bar owners that banned have skewed the playing field against themselves in the first place.

They "don't want to deal with the issues with allowing vaping", then they need to come up with something other than government coercion to compete against vape friendly bars. That's how business is supposed to work

 

[InTheShade]

stop putting words in my mouth. I said what I said in the way I said it, which is -> bar owners dont want to deal with the issues that would come with allowing vaping in their bars, they dont want to deal with allowing vaping in bars and dont want to deal with losing money. If they allow vaping, they allow something they dont want because of the issues it causes. If they dont allow vaping they lose income. Its a lose-lose scenario for them. I see their point of view.

I think Strings was making the point that the bar owners that banned vaping in the first place are free to run their businesses as they see fit, but no legislation should be enacted to protect them from the consequences of that decision.

 

[alicewonderland]

maybe its just me then. whenever I think of allowing vaping in places, i see it as a place vapers use to congregate and vape heavily, much more heavily than people would actually smoke or drink if they were at a bar. The billows of clouds the hazy atmosphere, the smell of a mixmash of weird flavors in the dense air. I see this in alot of vape lounges and B&M's and a few local bars and I dislike it. I personally am a vaper but when im around the excess haziness, smell, and dense fog that happens when vapers congregate it just gets annoying if there is no sufficient airducts systems in place to get rid of it. I mean as a community i think most will agree vaping helped them quit smoking, and a lot of people have lowered their nicotine levels, its not like they are addicted to nicotine and need to vape every minute on the dot or even less.

If they really werent addicted to cigarettes or nicotine anymore, then why should you have to force your clouds on places and businesses? "its not smoking, and im not addicted, but you should allow me to fill the atmosphere with a thick scented haze", and let me tell you, the majority of people here who go to these vape friendly businesses dont bring in egos, dont vape politely and just take small inhales, these guys are there for show and just billow clouds of pure VG on mechs, because they are allowed to. perhaps if vaping was akin to smoking as in, they feel like they need to vape, but it isn't to most vapors now, vaping is a hobby, and they want to bring it everywhere and do it everywhere, they dont -need- to do it everywhere, they want to without worrying if others find it rude or annoying regardless if its harmful to others or not.



There is a bar/restaurant here that did conform and adapted though and i find it pretty well done, the front is a restaurant/bar called the Pour house, and in the back there is a separate room with bar called the vaPour house.

 

[Strings]

In the Shade is correct

Sorry... I'm typing as I get ready for a LONG night at work,,,

 

[skoony]

maybe its just me then. whenever I think of allowing vaping in places, i see it as a place vapers use to congregate and vape heavily, much more heavily than people would actually smoke or drink if they were at a bar. The billows of clouds the hazy atmosphere, the smell of a mixmash of weird flavors in the dense air. I see this in alot of vape lounges and B&M's and a few local bars and I dislike it. I personally am a vaper but when im around the excess haziness, smell, and dense fog that happens when vapers congregate it just gets annoying if there is no sufficient airducts systems in place to get rid of it. I mean as a community i think most will agree vaping helped them quit smoking, and a lot of people have lowered their nicotine levels, its not like they are addicted to nicotine and need to vape every minute on the dot or even less.

If they really werent addicted to cigarettes or nicotine anymore, then why should you have to force your clouds on places and businesses? "its not smoking, and im not addicted, but you should allow me to fill the atmosphere with a thick scented haze", and let me tell you, the majority of people here who go to these vape friendly businesses dont bring in egos, dont vape politely and just take small inhales, these guys are there for show and just billow clouds of pure VG on mechs, because they are allowed to. perhaps if vaping was akin to smoking as in, they feel like they need to vape, but it isn't to most vapors now, vaping is a hobby, and they want to bring it everywhere and do it everywhere, they dont -need- to do it everywhere, they want to without worrying if others find it rude or annoying regardless if its harmful to others or not.



There is a bar/restaurant here that did conform and adapted though and i find it pretty well done, the front is a restaurant/bar called the Pour house, and in the back there is a separate room with bar called the vaPour house.

a few bars in Minneapolis were hard core vaping establishments.
the majority allowed polite vaping as in leave your competition mods at
home.its surprising how polite and unobtrusive vaping can be when people
are allowed to make choices.
it that way here in Saint Paul. i have only seen one mod in a bar when the
young man showed it to me after he noticed i was vaping. he said he would
show me how it worked if i wanted to go outside. he didn't want to fire it up
indoors.
regards
mike

 

[choochoogranny]

Well, Alice, I wouldn't do business in a vapor clouded place, but before I left I would quietly tell the mgr./owner why. However, I would also know that it's his place to control as he sees fit. It's his investment to grow or lose. I would not have a gov. of any kind interfere in that part of his busiess dealing with his customers. There are other places to go to or on line.

I go to quarterly "meets" of 400-600 people knowing full well that the ballroom will be filled with enough vapor to set off the smoke alarms. I can leave at any time, but usually having too much fun to even consider it!

 

[alicewonderland]

well, the majority of what i read i got one thing out of and now understand why my experiences tilt one way and the others tilt the other way. I live in California, we have different kind of people here lol. If you just base vaping on what you see over here, you would think 80% are young hipster cloud chasers.

 

[Robino1]

That's the point. If a person doesn't like an establishment that allows vaping, they have the choice to spend their money at one that doesn't allow vaping. Obviously, the vaping allowed establishments are doing a better business. Enough so that the ones that are not allowing vaping are crying foul.

I thought we were fighting to allow businesses to make that choice for themselves instead of having the choice legislated out of their hands

 

[choochoogranny]

Ha! Alice, "young hipster" to me anymore is anyone 50 yrs. and below! Thank goodness for the young 'cause it's usually them who discover and enthusiastically explore new things. Make's this old fogy aware. Of course, they push the limits.......starting with curfew and hotrods AND clouds. I do remember those times....barely.....and thank the heavens my children survived them without me killing them!

 

[alicewonderland]

I thought we were fighting to allow businesses to make that choice for themselves instead of having the choice legislated out of their hands

I was more stating that the people refer to as ANTZ have a point of view that makes sense. Personally I am more in favor of spreading word to vapors to be more polite, i wouldnt mind 'polite-vaping' establishments. I dont mind allowing business to make choices for themselves, i just dont want -extremes- to exist on either side.