“The law protects restaurant employees and patrons from the effects of secondhand smoke, which is responsible for as many as 1,040 adult deaths each year in Virginia.”
The State has a vested interest in protecting the health of workers. Be they coal miners or waitresses, it is the State’s place to regulate a work environment in a reasonable way that will make them less sick.
You can argue that this law goes too far, but the government is definitely within its constitutional authority to do it.
To say that “You have NO private property rights” is entirely hyperbolic, but is remarkably effective and amusing.
everyday car exhaust is a health hazard, so do you need the govt. to protect you from that too. Everybody thast runs to the govt. to solve their problems cause taxes to go up.
Liberty, the commonwealth does do that. It’s part of our annual inspection to keep levels to a “safe” level. But, I guess that is just another attack on freedom.
Liberty, to expand on David’s point, the government demands that your vehicle pass inspection every year to ultimately protect your health and that of other drivers. The (partial) smoking ban is also designed to protect your health and that of other diners. Your car’s broken axle is a threat to other driver’s health, just as your cigarette is a threat to other diners’ health. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Don’t forget, Liberty, the gov’t intrusion into car exhaust reduction by mandating catalytic converters, gas mileage minimums and outlawing leaded gasoline, just to name a few. We do need gov’t to protect us from those things, otherwise we’d have a lot more neurologically damaged children from lead poisoning and a lot more premature deaths from lung ailments attributable to higher exhaust levels in the air.
I’ve been wondering if the govt. should adopt a less draconian method of regulating this. A lot of the debate centers around freedom of choice, but when 99% of bars allow smoking, that leaves virtually no choice for non-smokers.
What if, instead of an all-out ban, smoking were regulated by a permit system, like alcohol sales. There would be a certain density of smoking-permitted establishments within a certain area, and once that density was reached, no new permits would be issued. This would give freedom of choice to both smokers and non-smokers.
We’re looking forward to trying Dot’s when we move to the area next month. That most likely would not be happening if it still allowed smoking.
Remember, your government is also offering protection from rat crap, dirty hands, and whatever else can make you sick in your food, and I’ll bet THAT is ok with you…
I don’t agree with the sentiment but love the sign.
Richard-I guess you need the govt. to tell you what to do
ditto! i’m glad i can finally eat at dot’s without fearing an asthma attack or future lung cancer in my baby boy!
From http://www.vdh.virginia.gov:80/breatheeasy/tenThings.htm :
“The law protects restaurant employees and patrons from the effects of secondhand smoke, which is responsible for as many as 1,040 adult deaths each year in Virginia.”
The State has a vested interest in protecting the health of workers. Be they coal miners or waitresses, it is the State’s place to regulate a work environment in a reasonable way that will make them less sick.
You can argue that this law goes too far, but the government is definitely within its constitutional authority to do it.
To say that “You have NO private property rights” is entirely hyperbolic, but is remarkably effective and amusing.
everyday car exhaust is a health hazard, so do you need the govt. to protect you from that too. Everybody thast runs to the govt. to solve their problems cause taxes to go up.
Those who suffered under actual communism would and should be insulted by this. Americans today have lost all sense of proportion.
I’m guessing this poster is a bit of a joke, but either way, it makes me want to reconsider my decision to finally go back to Dot’s after 6 years.
The last time my wife and I went we smelled like smoke for days and vowed not to go back, no matter how much we liked the food.
Liberty, the commonwealth does do that. It’s part of our annual inspection to keep levels to a “safe” level. But, I guess that is just another attack on freedom.
Liberty, to expand on David’s point, the government demands that your vehicle pass inspection every year to ultimately protect your health and that of other drivers. The (partial) smoking ban is also designed to protect your health and that of other diners. Your car’s broken axle is a threat to other driver’s health, just as your cigarette is a threat to other diners’ health. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Don’t forget, Liberty, the gov’t intrusion into car exhaust reduction by mandating catalytic converters, gas mileage minimums and outlawing leaded gasoline, just to name a few. We do need gov’t to protect us from those things, otherwise we’d have a lot more neurologically damaged children from lead poisoning and a lot more premature deaths from lung ailments attributable to higher exhaust levels in the air.
I’ve been wondering if the govt. should adopt a less draconian method of regulating this. A lot of the debate centers around freedom of choice, but when 99% of bars allow smoking, that leaves virtually no choice for non-smokers.
What if, instead of an all-out ban, smoking were regulated by a permit system, like alcohol sales. There would be a certain density of smoking-permitted establishments within a certain area, and once that density was reached, no new permits would be issued. This would give freedom of choice to both smokers and non-smokers.
We went to Dot’s for the first time in years today BECAUSE now there’s no smoke. Yummy. And no headache or drycleaning.
We’re looking forward to trying Dot’s when we move to the area next month. That most likely would not be happening if it still allowed smoking.
Remember, your government is also offering protection from rat crap, dirty hands, and whatever else can make you sick in your food, and I’ll bet THAT is ok with you…