| Navigation Bar Placeholder |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
Opinion
| | | | | | | | | | |
:: Arizona Pool Scene www.azpoolscene.com
| Arizona Pool Scene |
| www.azpoolscene.com |
| Dated 8/10/06 |
It is my understanding that, in November 2006, there is going to be legislation up for vote in Arizona that
(if passed) will ban smoking in all public places in the state of Arizona. It is also my understanding that
legislation will be up for vote that will ban smoking in all public places in Arizona with the exception of
bars. One or the other will probably pass. I could be wrong about this pending legislation because I
really have not found the time to verify all this. However, I have heard and read enough about it to think I
am pretty close to what the voters of Arizona will be faced with in November.
I am not here to argue that smoking should not be banned in Arizona public places. I have always
assumed, just like most of us do, that all the research that has been done in regards to smoking and second
hand smoke is correct. The research, that we are assuming is correct, indicates that smoking and second
hand smoke does indeed cause various health issues including lung cancer, bronchitis, emphysema, and
heart disease. Once again, I am not here to argue that.
I personally do not support pending legislation in Arizona that would ban smoking in all public places
including bars. However, I do support Arizona legislation that would ban smoking in all public places
with the exception of bars. You would think that my opinion and stance on this subject is based entirely
on the fact that I do own a bar. If that is what you think, (and I could see exactly why you would think
that), you would be incorrect. Owning a bar, with this pending legislation right around the corner, is what
led me to give this issue a whole lot of thought. However, owning a bar is not why I have decided to
support the smoking ban with the bar exception.
My reasoning for bar exception is really quite simple. I don’t know what the real number is, but I would
guess that close to 90% to 95% of the adults in the United States have to work for a living. We have no
choice. We have to pay the bills. We have to work in order to survive. I don’t think I am going too far
out on a limb when I say that 100% of us have to eat in order to survive. We have no choice. I would
think that is pretty much a proven fact. Now, in order to eat we have to shop. We have no choice. You
can’t eat what you don’t have. When we get sick, we have to go to a doctor in order to survive. We have
no choice. That’s the way it is. The theme here is beginning to become clear. Is it a building you will
someday have to go in, or is it a building that you could choose to never go in? I support a smoking ban
in public places (with the exception of bars) because I do not think it to be fair or right to subject those
who don’t smoke to any second hand smoke when I know for a fact they have to frequent most public
places in order to basically, just live their lives!
Now I ask a very simplistic question. How many people do you know that have to drink alcohol in order
to survive? None is the answer. People drink by choice. No one has to go into a bar! No one.
Therefore, if you know that there is a real good chance that a bar is going to have cigarette smoke in it,
then don’t go in it. A bar is not something or someplace you have to be in order to live a normal life.
It’s all about choice. Ban the smoking in any and all places where people have no choice as to whether
they go in those places. Ban it. It really is the right thing to do. However, don’t ban smoking in a bar
where any and all persons have a choice as to whether they go in. I think that’s also the right thing to do.
It bothers me that so many of the voters that can vote for a total smoking ban in all public places
(including bars) in Arizona are the same people that never go into the bars. These folks may be playing a
huge part in making bars non-smoking without ever intending to even go into a bar. That does not seem
too fair but I accept it as reality and know there is really nothing that can be done about it. That’s just
the way it works.
Let me get a little silly and prove a point at the same time. When this Arizona legislation comes up for
vote in Arizona, will the good folks from New Mexico or Utah or Nevada or California have a say in it?
No. We all know they won’t. Why won’t they? Because it doesn’t affect them. Same for the Arizona
voters that will vote on whether smoking remains legal in bars in Arizona. We could possibly face a law,
in the near future, that makes it illegal to smoke in a public place including bars. It is most likely the
majority of the voters voting to place that law into effect don’t even go into a bar and most likely never
will. To me, that’s like asking the folks in Nevada or New Mexico to decide if Arizona should adopt a
complete smoking ban. Establishing a law requiring all bar owners to take a straw vote every hour on the
hour, but only allowing the bar customers in the bar at the time of the vote to vote, would make more
sense. At least only those affected by the vote would be the ones voting! … When the NFL took a vote
last week to decide who would replace the outgoing NFL Commissioner, did you get a call and a chance to
vote? I didn’t think so. The voters, in that particular case, were the NFL team owners. Wow, can you
believe it. That vote was done by those and only those that it affected.
How about this. A little more silly, but a point can be derived. I am no expert on what it takes to get a
proposition like this smoking ban on the ballot. I think it comes down to getting a specific amount of
signatures that in turn makes the proposition valid and ballot worthy. If this is indeed the case, what is
to keep the following from happening? … Out of the blue someone decides that drivers over the age of
(65) are too dangerous to be driving. Let’s say someone does some research and finds that, percentage
wise, over age (65) drivers are involved in the most accidents. This someone decides to get the required
number of signatures and before we know it, it goes up for vote. Over night, anyone (65) or older can no
longer operate a motor vehicle on the street in Arizona.
Is it really this simple? And better yet, is all this really fair? Those of you that know me personally
know that I pretty much believe that what is right is right, what is wrong is wrong and what is fair is fair.
If it turns out that the forthcoming smoking ban in Arizona includes the bars, I personally don’t believe
that would be fair. However I will live with it because I have no choice.
Ron Merseal
Alexander's Sports Bar
(if passed) will ban smoking in all public places in the state of Arizona. It is also my understanding that
legislation will be up for vote that will ban smoking in all public places in Arizona with the exception of
bars. One or the other will probably pass. I could be wrong about this pending legislation because I
really have not found the time to verify all this. However, I have heard and read enough about it to think I
am pretty close to what the voters of Arizona will be faced with in November.
I am not here to argue that smoking should not be banned in Arizona public places. I have always
assumed, just like most of us do, that all the research that has been done in regards to smoking and second
hand smoke is correct. The research, that we are assuming is correct, indicates that smoking and second
hand smoke does indeed cause various health issues including lung cancer, bronchitis, emphysema, and
heart disease. Once again, I am not here to argue that.
I personally do not support pending legislation in Arizona that would ban smoking in all public places
including bars. However, I do support Arizona legislation that would ban smoking in all public places
with the exception of bars. You would think that my opinion and stance on this subject is based entirely
on the fact that I do own a bar. If that is what you think, (and I could see exactly why you would think
that), you would be incorrect. Owning a bar, with this pending legislation right around the corner, is what
led me to give this issue a whole lot of thought. However, owning a bar is not why I have decided to
support the smoking ban with the bar exception.
My reasoning for bar exception is really quite simple. I don’t know what the real number is, but I would
guess that close to 90% to 95% of the adults in the United States have to work for a living. We have no
choice. We have to pay the bills. We have to work in order to survive. I don’t think I am going too far
out on a limb when I say that 100% of us have to eat in order to survive. We have no choice. I would
think that is pretty much a proven fact. Now, in order to eat we have to shop. We have no choice. You
can’t eat what you don’t have. When we get sick, we have to go to a doctor in order to survive. We have
no choice. That’s the way it is. The theme here is beginning to become clear. Is it a building you will
someday have to go in, or is it a building that you could choose to never go in? I support a smoking ban
in public places (with the exception of bars) because I do not think it to be fair or right to subject those
who don’t smoke to any second hand smoke when I know for a fact they have to frequent most public
places in order to basically, just live their lives!
Now I ask a very simplistic question. How many people do you know that have to drink alcohol in order
to survive? None is the answer. People drink by choice. No one has to go into a bar! No one.
Therefore, if you know that there is a real good chance that a bar is going to have cigarette smoke in it,
then don’t go in it. A bar is not something or someplace you have to be in order to live a normal life.
It’s all about choice. Ban the smoking in any and all places where people have no choice as to whether
they go in those places. Ban it. It really is the right thing to do. However, don’t ban smoking in a bar
where any and all persons have a choice as to whether they go in. I think that’s also the right thing to do.
It bothers me that so many of the voters that can vote for a total smoking ban in all public places
(including bars) in Arizona are the same people that never go into the bars. These folks may be playing a
huge part in making bars non-smoking without ever intending to even go into a bar. That does not seem
too fair but I accept it as reality and know there is really nothing that can be done about it. That’s just
the way it works.
Let me get a little silly and prove a point at the same time. When this Arizona legislation comes up for
vote in Arizona, will the good folks from New Mexico or Utah or Nevada or California have a say in it?
No. We all know they won’t. Why won’t they? Because it doesn’t affect them. Same for the Arizona
voters that will vote on whether smoking remains legal in bars in Arizona. We could possibly face a law,
in the near future, that makes it illegal to smoke in a public place including bars. It is most likely the
majority of the voters voting to place that law into effect don’t even go into a bar and most likely never
will. To me, that’s like asking the folks in Nevada or New Mexico to decide if Arizona should adopt a
complete smoking ban. Establishing a law requiring all bar owners to take a straw vote every hour on the
hour, but only allowing the bar customers in the bar at the time of the vote to vote, would make more
sense. At least only those affected by the vote would be the ones voting! … When the NFL took a vote
last week to decide who would replace the outgoing NFL Commissioner, did you get a call and a chance to
vote? I didn’t think so. The voters, in that particular case, were the NFL team owners. Wow, can you
believe it. That vote was done by those and only those that it affected.
How about this. A little more silly, but a point can be derived. I am no expert on what it takes to get a
proposition like this smoking ban on the ballot. I think it comes down to getting a specific amount of
signatures that in turn makes the proposition valid and ballot worthy. If this is indeed the case, what is
to keep the following from happening? … Out of the blue someone decides that drivers over the age of
(65) are too dangerous to be driving. Let’s say someone does some research and finds that, percentage
wise, over age (65) drivers are involved in the most accidents. This someone decides to get the required
number of signatures and before we know it, it goes up for vote. Over night, anyone (65) or older can no
longer operate a motor vehicle on the street in Arizona.
Is it really this simple? And better yet, is all this really fair? Those of you that know me personally
know that I pretty much believe that what is right is right, what is wrong is wrong and what is fair is fair.
If it turns out that the forthcoming smoking ban in Arizona includes the bars, I personally don’t believe
that would be fair. However I will live with it because I have no choice.
Ron Merseal
Alexander's Sports Bar