I disagree, and I am a former smoker.  The ban was in effect when I was still smoking and I preferred it then too (not at first, but I warmed up to it).  The problem is if smoking is allowed, EVERY bar will allow it.  There might have been a few that didn't pre-ban, but overall, the vast majority allowed it and I remember, as I am sure many do, how smokey a crowded bar can get.

Okay, so every bar will allow smoking.  Whether or not one goes to a bar is a personal choice.  We're not talking about the post office.

 

OK cool, I'm with you.  Let's go ahead and let malls, sports stadiums in your seat, airplanes, barber shops, and office buildings allow smoking again.  I don't HAVE to go to any of those places, it's my personal choice.

I used to love smoking in the mall. I think the last mall cig I had was at Lancaster's River Valley Mall in in 1999.

 

edit: Scratch that, I think it was in some dead mall in Toledo in 2002.

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/10/smoking_ban_challenged_at_ohio.html

 

 

Ha - Zeno's...there's like a 99% chance you'll see a fight break out there and a 10% chance you'll get sucked in (unless you leave).

 

They're pretty open about allowing smoking.

The courts and the "checks and balances" in our government are supposed to protect the rights of the minority populations.  The supreme court will have to decide just how disadvantaged the smokers are with the new law.

 

Meanwhile, the tobacco industry is selling hard in developing economies in Asia and Eastern Europe to make up for lost business where people are smart.

Everybody dies of something.

The courts and the "checks and balances" in our government are supposed to protect the rights of the minority populations.  The supreme court will have to decide just how disadvantaged the smokers are with the new law.

 

In theory, that's what a constitution is intended to do (protect the minority from the whims of the majority).... but here in Ohio some idiot thought it would be a swell idea to let the constitution be controlled by the mob.... or at least the part of the mob that bothers to vote in whatever kind of election any given amendment makes it on the ballot.  It's how we ended up with negative rights in our 'document of freedom'

The courts and the "checks and balances" in our government are supposed to protect the rights of the minority populations.  The supreme court will have to decide just how disadvantaged the smokers are with the new law.

 

In theory, that's what a constitution is intended to do (protect the minority from the whims of the majority).... but here in Ohio some idiot thought it would be a swell idea to let the constitution be controlled by the mob.... or at least the part of the mob that bothers to vote in whatever kind of election any given amendment makes it on the ballot.  It's how we ended up with negative rights in our 'document of freedom'

 

Can't disagree with you on this one, indeed one of the great things about the US Constitution is the fact that it's so hard to amend.  We've only really made one mistake (okay, maybe two with the income tax lol) in over 200 years.

Loss of smokers hurts Ohio’s pocketbook

$1.2B of state funds are linked to tobacco use.

 

"Hundreds of billions of cigarettes and other tobacco products sold each year account for about 5 percent of Ohio’s tax-related revenue and help the state pay off billions of dollars owed in bonds.

But because the $1.2 billion of state funds tied to tobacco use can rise and fall on smokers’ habits, Ohio — like all states — has closely monitored the smoking rate that declined faster than many expected."

 

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/ohio-news/loss-of-smokers-hurts-ohios-pocketbook-1400612.html

At least there are less smokers on our health insurance policies, on medicaid, or somewhere between those two.

"Hundreds of billions of cigarettes and other tobacco products sold each year account for about 5 percent of Ohio’s tax-related revenue and help the state pay off billions of dollars owed in bonds.

But because the $1.2 billion of state funds tied to tobacco use can rise and fall on smokers’ habits, Ohio — like all states — has closely monitored the smoking rate that declined faster than many expected."

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/news/ohio-news/loss-of-smokers-hurts-ohios-pocketbook-1400612.html

 

At least there are less smokers on our health insurance policies, on medicaid, or somewhere between those two.

 

While it is unfortunate that any tax receipts are down, it is hard to be too upset with Ohioans living healthier lifestyles.  The problem really is that the costs of health insurance would only go down slowly over time and loss of the tax receipts now does sting.  We'll just have to see over time how this trend will affect our health care costs.  I was pretty excited when Ohio passed medical malpractice tort reform in 2004, but it appears to have only had a very minor affect on insurance costs.

 

Has Medical Malpractice Tort Reform Enacted any Positive Change in the United States?

http://www.feldmanshepherd.com/blog/2012/03/has-medical-malpractice-tort-reform-enacted-any-positive-change-in-the-united-states/

 

It's easy for someone to chalk up the drop in tobacco consumption to the smoking ban exclusivity -- but that's not the whole story. Throughout the course of 2008, most developed nations passed legislation mandating Fire Safe Cigarettes (FSCs). Cigarettes now must extinguish themselves after 30 seconds to one minute of inactivity. In order to do this, the cigarette companies had to add gross chemicals in them such as used in rollbar padding glue. They've gotten really nasty as compared to before, make you cough a lot more and stink way worse than older smokes. FSCs drag you down and are even more expensive. Light smoking's not fun like it was in the '90s.

^ isnt that article ignoring how much is saved in healthcare costs??

 

^ isnt that article ignoring how much is saved in healthcare costs??

 

 

You mean increased health care costs. 

 

Smoking is now permitted in parts of the casinos.

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2014/08/12/exclusive-ohio-casinos-smoke-gamble/13969517/

So they are getting around the smoking ban by creating a "designated smoking area" that happens to have slot machines?

 

Why can't restaurants have a "designated smoking area" where you can also order food? Or bars have a "designated smoking area" where you can also order a drink?

 

This seems like a dangerous exception to the smoking ban, potentially creating a slippery slope.

Smoking is now permitted in parts of the casinos.

 

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2014/08/12/exclusive-ohio-casinos-smoke-gamble/13969517/

 

I mentioned awhile back that the machine companies were figuring out ways to make outdoor-friendly machines.  Northfield Park has had this since it opened.

 

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

 

Do you have any statistics to back that statement up?

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

 

Do you have any statistics to back that statement up?

 

I'm peripherally in the business.  A lot of places have closed, revenue is down for everyone.  A lot more places used to stay open until 2:30, now that's just on the weekends.

 

Some of it is the economy, but by no means all.

I believe the casinos are placing slot machines outside under cover.

 

Bars can and do do the same thing (Neons, Kaze, Mt. Adams Pavillion, etc). It still has to follow the same rules about not venting with other non-smoking areas.

People often post numbers saying bar revenue is up but, since the smoking ban hit craft beers have exploded and liquor has gotten a lot more popular. That raises the average drink price significantly. A study that nets out the increase in drink prices would be the only way to scientifically determine the smoking ban's effect.

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

 

Do you have any statistics to back that statement up?

 

I'm peripherally in the business.  A lot of places have closed, revenue is down for everyone.  A lot more places used to stay open until 2:30, now that's just on the weekends.

 

Some of it is the economy, but by no means all.

 

So you have anecdotal evidence and are relying on a "common sense" argument?

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

 

Do you have any statistics to back that statement up?

 

I'm peripherally in the business.  A lot of places have closed, revenue is down for everyone.  A lot more places used to stay open until 2:30, now that's just on the weekends.

 

Some of it is the economy, but by no means all.

 

A lot of places close every year. Bars/restaurants have a notoriously high failure rate. Even businesses you thought were doing really well. And I guarantee revenue is not down for everyone. More than half? I don't know. I would need to look at some statistics.

People often post numbers saying bar revenue is up but, since the smoking ban hit craft beers have exploded and liquor has gotten a lot more popular. That raises the average drink price significantly. A study that nets out the increase in drink prices would be the only way to scientifically determine the smoking ban's effect.

 

Bar business would tend to be up currently due to demographics.  25% more births in the 90s than in the 70s.  Add the craft beer/cocktail trend and there's bound to be more money changing hands.

 

That said who can forget the smoking sections of Perkin's/Shoney's/Frisch's, etc., on a typical Tuesday evening.  A church group and some other upstanding folks would be dining politely in the non-smoking section until about 8:30pm.  Then non-smoking would clear out while smokers lingered deep into the night.

 

Less and less people smoke these days than in the past. Look at all the statistics about how few teenagers and 20-something year olds smoke these days compared to in decades past. It's a sharp decline. A lot more people don't smoke than those who do and thinking that a handful of smokers hanging around until 2:30 was the difference between a business surviving or not is somewhat comical when you see bars jam packed on weekends with everyone holding a drink that cost $10+. Five people sitting alone at the bar smoking and having two more Bud Lights does not a solid business make.

All I know is that I don't smoke and I don't believe any of my friends smoke. With the smoking ban, I don't think twice about wandering into a bar like MOTR or The Drinkery and watching live music. Without the smoking ban, I'd spend way less time in places that allow smoking.

Today's Fire Safe cigarettes are so awful I can see why young people didn't start.

Out of the dozens and dozens of people I'm friendly with I can count on one hand the number who smoke. And those people refuse to smoke indoors anywhere, regardless of its legality because they're courteous people. I've never met a person who refuses to go to a bar because they can't smoke but I've definitely met many people who refuse to go places where people can smoke because it's so unpleasant.

By the way, this ban has definitely had a negative impact on the bar business.

 

Do you have any statistics to back that statement up?

 

I'm peripherally in the business.  A lot of places have closed, revenue is down for everyone.  A lot more places used to stay open until 2:30, now that's just on the weekends.

 

Some of it is the economy, but by no means all.

 

Not saying you're not right, but I have never heard anyone even remotely suggest they weren't going out to a bar or restaurant because of lack of access to a smoking area.

 

On the contrary, I know countless others who would avoid bars that were smoke dens with low ceilings and no ventilation.

All these comments show the inherent problem with relying on anecdotal evidence.  Any laws that apply to businesses will create a situation that is beneficial to some and negative to others.  Whether or not we are better off in aggregate (business-wise as we're certainly better off health-wise) can only be born out by studies with statistics.  It's a personal pet peeve of mine when people make blanket statements like "revenue is down for everyone" based on anecdotal evidence.

It would be interesting to see an analysis of NKY bar business vs. Cincy bar business since the ban's implementation. I'd be hesitant to say the smoking ban has played a huge role, but it seems like the CBD and Over-the-Rhine are doing better and Newport on the Levee and Mainstrasse are worse or roughly the same as the early aughties. At the least we can say the smoking ban has not prevented the rise of OTR or made NKY nightlife take off. The opposite might be true, however.

People need to get out of the yuppie bubble for a moment, as the yuppie places comprise just a fraction of the total number of bars and restaurants in this area and state.  I still see people smoking in "normal" neighborhood bars with some regularity.  Slammer's in Oakley absolutely reeks of smoke as does that house bar in Norwood up by Cincinnati Playing Card.  I saw someone light one up in Murphy's about two weeks ago but he was promptly kicked out. 

If y'all hang around bars where it's passe to drink Budweiser you're not getting the full story.

If y'all hang around bars where it's passe to drink Budweiser you're not getting the full story.

 

Anywhere where Randy Peak & Miss Heather play, the smoking ban didn't happen.

 

http://www.randypeak.com/Pictures.html

If y'all hang around bars where it's passe to drink Budweiser you're not getting the full story.

 

Anywhere where Randy Peak & Miss Heather play, the smoking ban didn't happen.

 

http://www.randypeak.com/Pictures.html

 

How do you keep finding these terrible, 1990s websites?

If y'all hang around bars where it's passe to drink Budweiser you're not getting the full story.

 

Anywhere where Randy Peak & Miss Heather play, the smoking ban didn't happen.

 

http://www.randypeak.com/Pictures.html

 

How do you keep finding these terrible, 1990s websites?

 

They are links from other terrible, 1990s websites:

http://www.knottypinerocks.com

 

Carmen Electra grew up about four houses down from the Knotty Pine.  I was about two blocks in the other direction. 

 

 

 

Somebody out there's still smoking because I typically spend 2-3+ hours each day scrubbing video games and movies so that they don't smell like cigarette smoke afterward.

 

I was trying to remember the name of that bar in Oakley.

Somebody out there's still smoking because I typically spend 2-3+ hours each day scrubbing video games and movies so that they don't smell like cigarette smoke afterward.

 

I was trying to remember the name of that bar in Oakley.

 

 

Here is Slammer's on Brotherton in Oakley:

 

The Happy Hollow in Norwood:

 

The Knotty Pine in White Oak (not to be confused with the Knotty Pine south of Wilder, KY):

 

Trio's Lounge in Colerain...this was Janelle's when I lived nearby and one night Janelle shot and killed her husband in the bar:

 

Vince's Other Place in Mt. Healthy...this bar sponsored my high school bowling team:

 

These are all smoker-friendly post-smoking ban establishments, I can confirm. 

 

 

 

 

When I was frequenting Slammer's they hadn't differentiated themselves in that manner yet.

fascinating pix but let's keep it to the related topic, please.

 

I also have only personal, anecdotal evidence which probably doesn't amount to much more than has already been said, but as someone else pointed out, what I know of me and my friends who live in Cleveland may not be at all relevant outside of bigger cities. While I know very few people that smoke, and even fewer who would do so even inside someone's home, when I go to Mansfield, it's the complete opposite, and in fact two bars I've been to there just let people smoke anyway because so many of the patrons do that nobody reports it, which was a horrible shock and made me certain never to go back to those two places. I went to such a place in Cleveland last year as well and won't be going back there. Now that it's out of bars/restaurants, it's even more awful to my sinuses and throat when I do go to places that allow smoking. There is a guy who has tried to have cast parties for a few shows he's been in and nobody goes because he smokes and his home smells and it's hard to be inside while he's smoking all the time. He quit having parties and has complained on FB about how nobody shows up so he's not having any more parties. How do you politely say, it's because you smoke and nobody wants to be around it? You don't, I guess.

 

That being said, there would need to be some statistics in order for me to believe this has in any way negatively affected any places. The overwhelming majority, even state-wide, no longer smokes and I think the passage of the ban by a majority would indicate that it did not hurt businesses because of a small minority of people who have a problem stepping outside for a smoke.

Now that it's out of bars/restaurants, it's even more awful to my sinuses and throat when I do go to places that allow smoking. There is a guy who has tried to have cast parties for a few shows he's been in and nobody goes because he smokes and his home smells and it's hard to be inside while he's smoking all the time. He quit having parties and has complained on FB about how nobody shows up so he's not having any more parties.

 

While you might feel that your sinuses and lungs were more used to cigarette smoke as a non-smoker before the smoking ban, they probably weren't unless you were a smoker up until the smoking ban. The real problem, again, is the Fire Safe Cigarettes. But since the smoking ban happened at the exact same time people don't know. Smoking half a pack a day or less of FSCs is extremely rough on your sinuses. As in can't breathe out of your nose rough. This goes for what's in the air too. Nobody smokes even 2 packs a day anymore. Even one pack is really tough. It's just too gross. Yet before FSCs you'd meet people who smoked 3 packs a day regularly. In the '70s and '80s some people smoked five.

 

A guy here at work just quit smoking. I know he didn't even smoke one pack a day because he wouldn't have enough time between his two jobs. He's 21 and reported that he just couldn't take the nausea, coughing and general malaise. Nothing like that went on when we were 21 and smoking at least one pack a day of awesome '90s-early 2000s non-FSCs. I remember going out in public when I was a kid and cigarette smoke actually smelling good when you'd walk past a hotel bar or get a whiff in a mall.

 

Yeah I still like the smell of cigarette smoke even though I have smoked fewer than 50 cigarettes in my life.  My entire family smoked when I was a kid and now nobody does.  Nobody has gotten lung cancer, and in fact I don't personally know anyone who has gotten lung cancer.  My grandma quit smoking around 1990 after a nice 40-year run and she's still traveling. 

 

What irritates me about smokers isn't the smoke, it's the swagger and all the crap that goes with it.  Banging a pack against your hand when you walk out of the gas station?  I hate that.  Oh, and how smokers get breaks that regular employees don't.  It's like somehow taking a break to check email on your phone is "slacking" but standing back by the loading dock bullshitting with the maintenance guys is necessary. 

I might be misreading, but did you just insinuate that smoking doesn't actually cause lung cancer?

I think he was saying that it is no guarantee.  That's true.  In fact, although this is not the PSA which is usually pushed on us...... no matter how much you smoke or drink, you eating habits, your exercise routine, the amount you sleep, your stress level, etc..... the #1 determinative factor in longevity is genes.  If several people in your family have died of lung cancer (or any form of cancer) you need to be much more wary about smoking than somebody who has a family full of 70 somethings who still smoke a pack a day.  No guarantees either way, of course.

Yeah I still like the smell of cigarette smoke even though I have smoked fewer than 50 cigarettes in my life.  My entire family smoked when I was a kid and now nobody does.  Nobody has gotten lung cancer, and in fact I don't personally know anyone who has gotten lung cancer.  My grandma quit smoking around 1990 after a nice 40-year run and she's still traveling. 

 

What irritates me about smokers isn't the smoke, it's the swagger and all the crap that goes with it.  Banging a pack against your hand when you walk out of the gas station?  I hate that.  Oh, and how smokers get breaks that regular employees don't.  It's like somehow taking a break to check email on your phone is "slacking" but standing back by the loading dock bullshitting with the maintenance guys is necessary. 

I don't smoke, but I find the holier than thou attitude of the militant non smokers at least as irritating.  Even worse is the attempt to insinuate that the slightest aroma of cigarette is somehow "second hand smoke" and just as bad as actual smoking.

I think he was saying that it is no guarantee.  That's true.  In fact, although this is not the PSA which is usually pushed on us...... no matter how much you smoke or drink, you eating habits, your exercise routine, the amount you sleep, your stress level, etc..... the #1 determinative factor in longevity is genes.  If several people in your family have died of lung cancer (or any form of cancer) you need to be much more wary about smoking than somebody who has a family full of 70 somethings who still smoke a pack a day.  No guarantees either way, of course.

 

The retirement homes of America are full of people who smoke, drank, have eaten processed food every day since 1945, and haven't exercised...ever.

Yeah I still like the smell of cigarette smoke even though I have smoked fewer than 50 cigarettes in my life.  My entire family smoked when I was a kid and now nobody does.  Nobody has gotten lung cancer, and in fact I don't personally know anyone who has gotten lung cancer.  My grandma quit smoking around 1990 after a nice 40-year run and she's still traveling. 

 

What irritates me about smokers isn't the smoke, it's the swagger and all the crap that goes with it.  Banging a pack against your hand when you walk out of the gas station?  I hate that.  Oh, and how smokers get breaks that regular employees don't.  It's like somehow taking a break to check email on your phone is "slacking" but standing back by the loading dock bullshitting with the maintenance guys is necessary. 

I don't smoke, but I find the holier than thou attitude of the militant non smokers at least as irritating.  Even worse is the attempt to insinuate that the slightest aroma of cigarette is somehow "second hand smoke" and just as bad as actual smoking.

 

Yeah people just want to wag their fingers at somebody and make a scene.  I wish it was socially acceptable to cause a similar scene complaining about bad music wafting out of mall stores. 

And don't dare mention how much worse Nu-Country is than other Country genres outside of a beltway.

I would vote for a ban on overwhelmingly strong perfumes and colognes in public.  I've been in a few elevators recently where I wished someone would light up just to cover up that smell.

I would vote for a ban on overwhelmingly strong perfumes and colognes in public.  I've been in a few elevators recently where I wished someone would light up just to cover up that smell.

 

I'm sure my summer 1986 babysitter's hairspray took a few years off of my life. 

Yeah I still like the smell of cigarette smoke even though I have smoked fewer than 50 cigarettes in my life.  My entire family smoked when I was a kid and now nobody does.  Nobody has gotten lung cancer, and in fact I don't personally know anyone who has gotten lung cancer.  My grandma quit smoking around 1990 after a nice 40-year run and she's still traveling. 

 

What irritates me about smokers isn't the smoke, it's the swagger and all the crap that goes with it.  Banging a pack against your hand when you walk out of the gas station?  I hate that.  Oh, and how smokers get breaks that regular employees don't.  It's like somehow taking a break to check email on your phone is "slacking" but standing back by the loading dock bullshitting with the maintenance guys is necessary. 

 

I used to work in a car dealership during high school/college and at least half the people there took smoke breaks all the time. I would usually just join them and do something just as arbitrary like eat a banana or drink a soda. I never got any crap for it but I guess that depends upon the type of boss man I had.