|

samurai_taliban
|
NO IT"S NOT! idk about illinois but it's same here in the city and it's outrageous! they should at least have a indoor smoking section. |
|

KaThRyN
 |
As much as I want a cigarette, I say to the fairness of non smokers, no smoking in restaurants, children are there. But in a bar? Come on already. |
|

New Moon Daughter
|
No, it should be up to the individual restaurants. However, the effect seems to be close to nill on NYers--been the law for quite some time now. |
|

Pam H
 |
Yes. Smoking is bad for you and those around you. There should be an exemption for certain bars and clubs. |
|

kerfitz
|
"An individuals rights cannot supersede the rights of any other individual... the law is fair, But I think that there should be places that can be a "smokers bar or restaurant... making it the choice of a non smoker to enter there. Many of these laws were put into place to make a better working environment for people in them. |
|

Caukin
|
Yeah I believe so. For those people who don't smoke, why should they be forced to breathe in second hand smoke. Now as bars go, They should do whatever they feel. If you are going to a bar, your going to put "poison" in your body, whats so bad about adding smoke to that.
Edit: in some states that "ban" smoking in bars and such, the bar can pay a fee to allow smoking in their establishment. Most choose not to. |
|

Razor Sharp
 |
No, I think that each business should have the choice to allow smokers or not. Then each patron should have the choice whether to give their patronage to that business or not. It shouldn't be that non-smokers have all the rights and smokers are left out in the cold ... literally.
Let the businesses decide how they want to run their businesses.
If non-smokers don't want to be exposed to second-hand smoke, let them go to a non-smoking place rather than forcing every place to be smoke-free. |
|

boomer7382
|
Yes, if an individual doesn't smoke because they don't want it to affect their health, then their health shouldn't be affected by others who smoke. |
|

Pure Jersey
 |
Its only fair to those who think that they need the government to make all of their decisions for them. |
|

Not bilingual
 |
No, and I am not a smoker. If you own a business you should be able to operate it how you want. If you dont want to be around smoke - go to a restraunt that chooses to be a non-smoking restraunt. |
|

charlie davis
 |
to an extent i believe it is a fair law. i dont believe that the non smokers around a person should have to intake they smoke and toxins when they chose not to smoke. there should always be a designated smoking area for those who do smoke, but in open places a lot of states are starting to ban smoking. |
|

Al Mac Wheel
 |
Yes
For years smokers have abused non-smokers, so it became neccessary to have laws to protect non-smokers. If smokers had been considerate of people who don't smoke, or have breathing problems, if the the abusers had been rare exceptions, then it would not have been neccessary for laws to be passed to protect the non-smokers.
Then there is the issue of who pays the medical expenses thanks to someone getting a disease related to second hand smoke. |
|

Heather B
 |
Over in the UK yes it is fair. It lengthens everyones life span. |
|

MARY P
 |
Smoking is awful, and not good for your health. I really do not like being around persons who smoke.
However, I thought we were living in the land of the free. Who was it that said "I may not agree with you, but I will defend with my life the right for you to say it." In this case to do it. |
|

Elizabeth
 |
It goes both ways I guess. I don't think non-smokers should be subject to second hand smoke while they are trying to enjoy their meals. However, I don't think it's fair that resteraunts (mostly bars) have to suffer a cut in profits because of the ban. I guess I think the resteraunt ban is understandable. The bar ban is a little too much.
I think the bar owner should be able to chose whether or not to ban smoking at their establishment. There could be smoking and non-smoking bars.
I'm a non-smoker, but I realize the habit is very addictive and difficult to quit. I'm certain bars will lose some business as a result of the smoking ban. In a perfect world, everyone would just be able to kick the habit- but it's not happening. |
|

Colonel
 |
Sounds like Illus is the most recent state to enact this law. We have a similar law in Ohio. I do and don't agree with the law.
I do agree with the ban being put in place in restaurants, as I am a non-smoker.
I don't agree with the ban applying to bars/ pubs. Smoking is the known atmosphere of these places and people can chose to go elsewhere if they want to enjoy and drink in a smoke free environment. I feel if over half your profits come from the sale of alcohol that smoking should be permitted in that establishment. |
|

Queenie
|
Yes.
Smoking is so disgusting and if you must do it.
Do it at home where you are hopefully not infecting others. |
|

ed
 |
yes...
second hand smoke is harmful to others and people often dine out with their children... it is a shame to expose children, who've no choice at all in the matter, to the danger of second hand smoke... |
|

♥JAX♥
 |
Yes its unhealthy for everyone |
|

radicalman2035
|
I live in NY and we can't smoke in any public buildings... NOT EVEN BARS! Now that's ridiculous!
Count your blessings! |
|

♥♥CaNdY kIsSeS♥♥
|
No |
|

countrygirl92109
|
Hi. I am a smoker, but I believe the law is fair in many cases, but in some not...they just banned smoking anywhere in public here in my city. The law is you can't smoke in your car, you can't smoke on the sidewalk or you will get fined $500.00. However, it has been the law here in CA smoking isn't allowed in public places and it's ok. You will learn to adjust. |
|

grandparay00
|
yes if they want my bussiness I have COPD beleive me you dont want it. |
|

CW
 |
Yes. Smoke is a proven health hazard that should not be spread to people who do not want to smoke. Then again, an establishment should still have the ability to allow smokers via some type of permit. |
|

Gina T
 |
Yes and no...having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public pool...but smoking in a bar is expected. I smoke when I drink and I hate going outside but I hate sitting in a restaurant with a smoking section. |
|

ALAYNA
 |
i do think that it's far cause it's not like they say you can't just step outside and smoke you just can't inside because it puts other peoples health at risk no just your own. i use to be a smoker up until 1 1/2 years ago so i see both opinions but i agree with the law! |
|

yahoo_user
 |
I think so. It's gross to walk into a public place & usually end up having to sit by someone who's smoking a cigarette. |
|

Scott Y
|
sure its fair...its fair to all those non-smokers who do not have to breath that vile smoke anymore...they can actually go out and not come home smelling like an ash tray. |
|

heartzablaze215
 |
Yes it is. I live in NY and that law has been in effect for quite some time. People who want to smoke can go outside. There is no reason waiters/bartenders should be exposed to unwanted smoke that could cause them cancer. |
|

Mr.Decent
|
YES IT IS, BECAUSE PPL THAT DONT SMOKE INHALE THE AIR THAT HAS ALL THE TOXICANS OF SMOKE AND MAKE THEIR LUNGS SUFFER AND COUGH ... AND THEY ARE THE ONE THAT GET SECOND HAND SMOKE .... ALSO IF THEY HAVE PRIVATE LOBBY WHERE PPL CAN SMOKE AND STUFF .. IT WILL STYL AFFECT SINCE WHEN THEY OPEN DOOR AND GO IN THE ROOM AND WHEN THEY COME OUT ... THE SMELLS SPREAD OUT ... AND IT GETZ AFFECTED .... TO PPL THAT DONT SMOKE |
|

|
|
|