• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Bar Attendance in CT . . .

#4
DirtDog said:
Nope - our city banned smoking in bars since 2001. Business is booming. People adapt.

Maybe it was the weather???

BTW - I played a two night gig this weekend in another city w/o smoking ban - I damn near died.....

DD
Click to expand...


that has happened here as well, people get used to it, they come back. It's better for me, as I don't smoke.
 
#8
Invalid Link Removed

The EPA used statistically insignificant studies and meta-analysis trickery to reach arbitrary assumptions-such as the unsubstantiated assumption that ETS causes 3,060 cancer deaths each year in the United States.
Click to expand...
etc., etc.

I'm bracing myself for the "statistics are just numbers" argument...

:hiding: :D
Edit: I could find more, but you could just google second hand smoke myths. You'll come up with more anti-smoking hits (I'd guess 15:1). But my point is, it is very easy to manipulate data and pass them off as scientific studies to get numbers you want. This has been done to an almost sickening level with secondhand smoke. I think we can agree smoking is harmful to the smoker, but exposure to secondhand smoke just means that you'll have to do your laundry more often.
This is a book I've read for one of my stat classes, not really on subject, but it's a great resource if you read a lot of numbers...
 
As an Amazon Associate, TalkBass may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via links on this site.
#14
A 16 oz. well done steak on the grill has more carcinogens than 100 packs of cigarettes.

But unlike cigarettes, one can choose not to eat a steak, whereas with smoking the smoke is all around you.

One question though...do smokers get a double dose of it? I mean they are smoking AND they are sitting in the second hand smoke.

In truth, second hand smoke damage is minimal to a non-smoker compared to a smoker who inhales it directly off the cigarette. I don't smoke any more. I quit...but it doesn't bother me what others choose to do. One thing is for sure...the old down and dirty blues bars are becoming a thing of the past as they are being replaced with hip, trendy, non-smoking, non alcoholic fern bars. Wusses.

Any place that doesn't serve alcohol, allow smoking and have some kick-ass music going on is a place I'd rather not play in.

The sixties were great in that we really learned how government worked. Unfortunately, now anyone with an issue and enough money can get laws passed to stop (insert your favorite complaint here).
 
#15
Sundogue said:
A 16 oz. well done steak on the grill has more carcinogens than 100 packs of cigarettes.

But unlike cigarettes, one can choose not to eat a steak, whereas with smoking the smoke is all around you.

One question though...do smokers get a double dose of it? I mean they are smoking AND they are sitting in the second hand smoke.

In truth, second hand smoke damage is minimal to a non-smoker compared to a smoker who inhales it directly off the cigarette. I don't smoke any more. I quit...but it doesn't bother me what others choose to do. One thing is for sure...the old down and dirty blues bars are becoming a thing of the past as they are being replaced with hip, trendy, non-smoking, non alcoholic fern bars. Wusses.

Any place that doesn't serve alcohol, allow smoking and have some kick-ass music going on is a place I'd rather not play in.

The sixties were great in that we really learned how government worked. Unfortunately, now anyone with an issue and enough money can get laws passed to stop (insert your favorite complaint here).
Click to expand...

the steak comprison is somewhat meaningless when one takes into account deliver method, GI track vs. lungs. Oh yeah IBTL. :D
 
#16
SMASH said:
I like going to bars and going out to see bands, and playing gigs in said places.

I DO NOT like my clothes stinking, my eyes burning, my lungs burning, my hair and skin stinking, or blackened globs in the kleenex when I blow my nose after getting home. Don't much care for a layer of filth on my equipment either.

I like to smoke cigars, but I do not like to force my smoking on others.

I like to consider someone who makes me choke on their 2nd hand smoke in a public place an assault on my lungs.

I like to assault those who assault me, with a generous bonus.

You're much better off dealing with the smoking bylaw officer than with me.

We've had these laws here for years and they are fantastic, have had zero affect on attendance or style of music, and even the smokers enjoy the excuse to go outside and, ironically, get some fresh air.

This whole thing hasx been discussed before to great extent and acrimony. Try searching for "anti-smoking law", "New York smoking law" or something like that.
Click to expand...
Excellent, I agree Mr.SMASH.
 
#17
I will leave my opinions on the laws out of this but say:

People will return to the bars. I watched it happen in California. It's a process: These laws pass, people whine, some refuse to go to bars, some bars allow smoking anyway, said bars get fined, bars finally concede, patrons concede, life goes on, everyone is healthier.
 
#18
Josh Walsh said:
Oops! To answer the original poster (salutations mang!); didn't make it out this weekend, but I'm all for the no smoking law.
Click to expand...

Salut! :D

I'm all for it as well. I was just making an observation. I overheard people complaining that now they can't smoke with their drink (inside) and they can't drink with their smoke (outside). How ironic is that?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back