No public smoking ban for North Charleston
By Warren Wise
North Charleston has been changing its image recently with tougher ordinances and policies. But on Wednesday night, City Council bucked that trend by voting 6-4 not to ban smoking in public places.
Council made the decision at the end of a lengthy discussion that ultimately rested on business owners and their rights.
"I believe as a government we have gone to the Nth degree of involving ourselves in business decisions," said Mayor Keith Summey, who recently quit smoking. "I just don't believe we should be interjecting ourselves (in those decisions)."
Councilwoman Dorothy Williams, who does not smoke, agreed.
"I don't believe we should dictate to businesses," said Williams, who also didn't like the 2 a.m. bar-closing mandate the city passed last fall. "If you don't want to go into an establishment, don't go."
On the opposite end of the argument was Councilman Steve Ayer.
"I support banning it outright," the non-smoker said. "We dictated to the bars that they had to shut down at 2 o'clock in the morning. We slapped everybody in the face with that."
Charleston, Mount Pleasant and Sullivan's Island have passed bans on indoor smoking in public places, and Councilman Bob King said he believes North Charleston should not be the only major jurisdiction left in the metro area that does not have a ban.
King wanted to set parameters on smoking in public places, but his ideas were snuffed out.
"A row of plants is not a barrier," said Councilman Bobby Jameson, referring to some businesses that separate smoking and non-smoking sections. "We have an obligation to protect non-smokers where we believe we have a health hazard."
Dan Carrigan, executive director of the Smoke Free Action Network that lobbies for smoke-free workplaces across the state, urged council to adopt the smoking ban.
"Everyone has a right to breathe clean air," Carrigan said, citing study after study that secondhand smoke is harmful.
Berenice Moreno is one of those people he is trying to protect. She doesn't smoke, but she waits tables in a North Charleston restaurant that allows smoking.
"The smoke bothers me a little," the North Charleston resident said.
Daniel Boone manages another restaurant in the city. He doesn't smoke, but he said if someone wants to, it's his or her right. "Nobody twists your arm to come into a place to eat," he said.
"It's an infringement on a person's choice," said Phil Lugo, a smoker and resident in Olde North Charleston near Park Circle. "They should not tell us what to do."
North Charleston considered a ban on smoking in public places such as restaurants and bars after the state Supreme Court ruled unanimously in March that it's OK for local governments to pass bans on indoor smoking in public places.
Besides Summey and Williams, those voting to deny the ban were Councilmen Ed Astle, Michael Brown, Sam Hart and Kurt Taylor.
Councilwoman Phoebe Miller voted with Ayer, Jameson and King against denying the ban. Councilwoman Rhonda Jerome left the meeting before the vote.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
NativeSon (anonymous) says...
Another bunch of cowards who have ZERO concern for children forced to smoke every time they are taken into eating establishments.
As far as rights, smokers have a right to do that drug and non smokers have an equal right to not be forced to smoke.
Smoking should never be allowed where people are congregated. Smoking is an individual thing and as such should be kept within 6 inches of the junkie.
May 15, 2008 at 6:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
RTC (anonymous) says...
North Charleston has it right.
Leave these decisions up to the establishment owners.
May 15, 2008 at 7:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UberBlitzkrieg (anonymous) says...
Excellent Choice North Charleston! No one forces people to go into restaurants that allow smoking. NativeSon... there are plenty of places where you can eat that do not allow smoking.
For the record... I do not smoke.
May 15, 2008 at 7:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Slappa (anonymous) says...
so your saying it's your right to harm children and the rest of the public. It doesn't surprise me that this kind of attitude would be prevalent in North Chuck...a place i'd really like to visit ! Go hot box your car with the kids in the back and smoke up and down rivers avenue and stall ave.
May 15, 2008 at 7:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
gencon1 (anonymous) says...
Stupid nanny staters! Why don't you require parents to wrap their kids in bubble wrap and make them wear helmets when they get out of bed. We don't want anyone to get hurt!
Get government out of our lives!
May 15, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bcstaffasst (anonymous) says...
ColdBeer....you hit the nail on the head! I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm NOT a business owner and I DO NOT smoke, but I feel just as you do.
May 15, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
newto843 (anonymous) says...
Well said Coldbeer, taking your kids into a smokey restaurant is your choice and your choice alone. There are many non smoking establishments to choose from.
May 15, 2008 at 8:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
desspec (anonymous) says...
Funny that no one fusses about restaurants being required to keep their floors, tables, and utensils clean, just the air ...
May 15, 2008 at 8:24 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DOODGUY (anonymous) says...
Doesn't take long for a bleeding heart liberal to scream "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREENNNNNNNN!!!!" NativeSon if your stance is that Children are forced to smoke because of this, you sir have no brains. Do you not think that parents can raise their kids better than government? Why not just go ahead and lobby city council to charge parents with child neglect if their kids are within 100 ft of someone smoking. Thank you North Charleston City Council for allowing me to exercise my rights as a business owner and property owner. If you don't like smoking don't go to the restaurant. Pretty simple.
May 15, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
anon (anonymous) says...
Go ahead, enjoy your smokes, I hear steak tastes better with an oxygen tank.
May 15, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
icbmman (anonymous) says...
I have one question about what some of the people are saying here. They're saying that you as an individual have a choice to go into an establishment that allows smoking or not. It is your prerogative to take you and your family into a smoky restaurant.
OK, I agree with that, but here's the question: what if ALL the restaurants are smoky? If a city allows smoking in EVERY SINGLE restaurant, what do you do? Stay home?
I know that many restaurants have non-smoking areas, but many of those areas are ineffective. Many buildings are equipped with inadequate ventilation/smoke filtration systems. What is the solution here?
May 15, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
flinsc (anonymous) says...
Another reason Mt. Pleasant is better.
May 15, 2008 at 9:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmw9 (anonymous) says...
I don't smoke and I never have. I don't see any worthy advantages in smoking. We all know there are a lot of disadvantages though. I suppose people who smoke don't see those disadvantages because they're hooked on the drug and the discipline to stop is too much.
Individually, I don't have anything against if someone wants to smoke and pollute themselves - that's on them.
People commenting on this board refer the right to smoke an adult decision. I guess as an adult they're saying to themselves "Hey, self, let's smoke and ruin my my lungs with this cancer stick and give myself a myriad of health problems and raise the cost of health insurance for everyone."
"And as an adult, whereever I'm smoking this cancer stick I won't care who is around me being polluted by my cancer smoke."
"And as an adult, wherever I am, I'm gonna throw my cancer stick butt away right there - no matter if it's out my car window, walking down the street, just where ever I happen to be."
Too bad there are other adults and children who are affected and infected by your selfish, not so responsible adult decision to smoke.
May 15, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
summerville_guy (anonymous) says...
Having sex is legal too. Can I do that the next time I'm at Applebee's?
May 15, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Girleygirl (anonymous) says...
You know what's funny? Half of you all complaining about the smoking ban in North Charleston are the same set of folks saying they won't go to North Charleston for shopping, or anything else. Why are you so upset about it? You hate the mall, tanger outlets, and everything else in North Charleston so why are you upset about a place you barely frequent in? How would you feel if you had your own business and the government told you what to do with it and you have to pay taxes, how would you feel. This should be the business decision and if the business does not support your cause, then don't support them!
May 15, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abc123 (anonymous) says...
I would have no problem with smoking in restaurants if smoking were in a separate room, but the majority of non-smoking sections lie directly next to the smoking section with no barrier.
Smokers have every right to smoke, but I should also have the right to not inhale smoke while I'm eating. The majority of the population (non-smokers) should have to boycott restaurants, so the minority can smoke. I see this as a health regulation, similar to requiring that restaurants must meet proper sanitation guidelines.
May 15, 2008 at 9:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abc123 (anonymous) says...
Edit: The majority of the population (non-smokers) should NOT have to boycott restaurants, so the minority can smoke.
May 15, 2008 at 9:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
Those who are for government control of every facet of life can afford to lose this vote. They can afford to lose over and over; they only need to win once. And they only need two lousy votes to win. Then they can come for the rest of us for something, comrades.
May 15, 2008 at 9:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
To add to Coldbeers great post...Gov't has no business telling privately owned establishments what and what not their clients can be allowed to do.(as long as it's legal of course)Whats next?not allowing fat people to eat from buffets?Its ridiculous.I have children and guess what?I don't take them to smoke filled restaurants.Guess what again?It's the U.S.A. so I have a choice.It's so simple to me,the freedom to choose.I wouldnt expect a restaurant/bar to conform to what I want b/c I have kids.Get over yourselves people.My pet peeve is when non smokers go into a smoking section and b$tch about the smoke,causing a scene.Move to non smoking-problem solved.Oh and before I'm pegged as a smoker who sits in my smoke filled car with my kids-youre wrong,I'm not.
May 15, 2008 at 10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
carolinapanther (anonymous) says...
I will support restaurants in Mount Pleasant, Sullivans Island, and City of Charleston!
May 15, 2008 at 10:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyfigueroa (anonymous) says...
cold beer: a few months ago I commented about the ban in charleston and I was crucified by the other posters.
I'm in agreement with raregar. (OML!!! The apocalypse!)
Many of those who disagree with you today Coldbeer claim to be staunch fiscal/govt. conservatives. They bemoan the 'nanny state' that give welfare benefits to the lazy but now cry for 'Big Daddy' to come in to protect them.
May 15, 2008 at 10:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bigwhip (anonymous) says...
Thanks, North Charleston. A wise decision and one less government intrusion into the private sector.
May 15, 2008 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Zod (anonymous) says...
I support Summerville guy's right to have sex in Applebee's. You just remember that it must be with sex with your wife under consent. I think everything else is illegal......
May 15, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Zod (anonymous) says...
"I will support restaurants in Mount Pleasant, Sullivans Island, and City of Charleston!"
Did you ever come to the north area? I would think that these parts were just too redneck for ya anyway.....
May 15, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MsPiggy (anonymous) says...
As a woman who waited tables for a very long time, I am very much objected to smoking in a public resturant.
First off, if you're the poor waitress that gets stuck with 3 smoking tables on a Friday night, you better start learning how to help your fellow co-workers because you are going to have a pretty empty section all night.
I can't tell you how many nights the hostess sat tables in smoking, only for them to get this awful look on their face and ask, "Is this the smoking section?" Get up, and move to non-smoking. We've just gotten used to seeing people getting up and leaving. Every time I've gone up to the hostess and say, "It was because of smoking, right?"
Of course it was. So what does that mean? I don't make any money! Now I know many will say, GET A DIFFERENT JOB IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT!! Okay, okay. So I'll bring it to you from the guest's perspective----
If I'm sitting down trying to enjoy my Country Fried Steak, and somebody 6 tables down from me in smoking (Which by the way, is only seperated by a row of plants!) lights up a big fatty cigar or their pipe...I'm sorry, I don't want to taste smoke while I'm eating. I don't want to have to fight through a cloud of smoke to walk to the bathroom. I don't want to smell a skrawberry black while trying to talk to the person I'm with. I think that if people want to smoke, more power to them, but GO OUTSIDE. If a person cannot wait for 45 stinkin' minutes without lighting up, somethings wrong. I find it so rude to smoke in an enclosed area when you know there are non-smokers around. Probably people with asthma or bad allegeries (ap). So what, does that mean those people cannot eat in a resturant because a smoker might be there? NO. People who want to smoke in a resturant are part of the minority. That means one thing....
GO OUTSIDE.
Yeah I just got on my soap box and probably pissed off some people. But the only people that are ticked are the ones who light up in a resturant. Well I guess it doesn't really matter anyway because N.Charleston resturants are still going to have smokers. So puff away!!
Cough, cough, HACK
May 15, 2008 at 10:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
drdcrimj (anonymous) says...
That's why I continue to leave my home in North Charleston to eat out in Charleston and Mt. Pleasant. Wake up y'all. We non-smokers do not have to patronize restaurants that smell bad and be subjected to the stink and smoke. I surely woud like to patronize restaurants in my hometown.
May 15, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
iceman1978 (anonymous) says...
I don't see why everyone is so upset over this. There are already restaurants in the north area that don't permit smoking. The city of Charleston has a public smoking ban. Just go to restaurants in Charleston. I'm not at all surprised that N Charleston voted against this. It doesn't mean that I agree with their decision, it just means that I'm not surprised.
I know that I'm going to catch heat for what I'm about to say, but there's one thing that bothers me more than cigarette smoke. Screaming children who have never been taught that there is a time and a place to sit still and keep their voices a tad lower. When you go to any restaurant that has a playground or passes out coloring sheets at the table you expect that, but not in some of the finer establishments. I know that kids are going to be kids, but honestly, why must some parents sit by while little Suzy or Jr throws a tantrum, jumps up and down on the chair and runs through the aisles of the place disrupting the enjoyment of the other customers?
We have smoking and non-smoking in places that permit it. Why not have a section in the restaurant that's adults-only?
May 15, 2008 at 10:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
summerville_guy (anonymous) says...
Zod and Coldbeer,
I think I'll just go try it out and see what happens. Should be good times.
May 15, 2008 at 10:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Rebel_Yell (anonymous) says...
Close bars at 12 am? Why don't we just outlaw all bars and wrap everyone in bubble wrap so that the soccer moms in their mini vans will finally be satisfied.
May 15, 2008 at 11:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
KidYendor (anonymous) says...
Get out of town Dan Carrigan and take your wimpy nanny state propaganda with you in your bicycle basket. You need to address councils where you live and not spread your special interest group anti-freedom filth everywhere you see fit. I am a non smoker but I support freedom which is much more important than mountains of laws for people and business owners to abide by daily which do not involve force or fraud. Thank you members of City Council who voted against Carrigan and the anti-smoking Nazis. Hip Hip Hooray we are proud to be North Charlestonians today.
May 15, 2008 at 11:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
MsPiggy-just playing devil's advocate here for a minute.Consider some people go into a restaurant/bar style restaurant to eat and drink a few cocktails.Smokers have a tendency to,rightfully so,extend their visit after the meal is done to smoke and drink.The company in turn is making a higher profit.Rather than telling smokers to hurry up and eat your meal and leave.I personally wouldnt work in a smoke filled place.I went to go into Flowertown the other day with my family and the smoke smell was hideous.We left,no biggie.Goes into my previous post regarding choice.I have to agree that the so called section divisions are at times quite comical.As if a fake plant does any good.
May 15, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
letstakeawalk (anonymous) says...
I also agree with everyone who is pleased that North Charleston has allowed private businesses to make their own decisions regarding smoking. I don't smoke, and I don't enjoy being around smokers while I eat, but I understand that there are plenty of decent restaurants that will accomodate me. Why should I care if a restaurant wants to cater to a smoking clientel? Kudos to N. Chuck for doing the right thing.
Re: the public intercourse - isn't that covered by the no-touching rule (ala the Gentlemen's Clubs) already?
May 15, 2008 at 12:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Charles_Town (anonymous) says...
Failure to pass the smoking ban is like not passing any laws requiring businesses to provide health care insurance. How can you ask them to not ban smoking and then require the state, or other institution to cover your healthcare. Something does not add up here with these two. If they say businesses have a right to do what they want in regard to smoking than why limit them on other things: closing times, zoning violations, etc... People complain about North Charleston, yet they have a chance to pass a good law and improve their citizens quality of life, people are happy the bill was defeated. And for those who say "I smoke, but hope to quite someday." GROW UP. No difference than the businesses making their decision and standing by it, you want to quit than quit. Until you truly make up your mind on what you want, how can you really take a stand on this issue? You say you want to smoke, than say you want to quit in the next sentence, yet when lawmakers contradict themselves you jump all over them. Guess we do really have a lot of smoke blowing politicians out there.
May 15, 2008 at 12:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmw9 (anonymous) says...
I'm for more government involvement on issues such as this.
Ha ha ha ha !!!!
Raise the drinking age and lower speed limits too.
Ha ha ha ha !!!!!
Stop being brats.
All of these things come up because WE THE PEOPLE can't take care of ourselves and be responsible.
May 15, 2008 at 12:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
geekguy2008 (anonymous) says...
Lung Biscuits aren't the only thing smokers are going to continue to cough up. More taxes are being put on cigs to give health care to all the little raisins out there.
May 15, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
It's easy for intelligent smokers/nonsmokers to take a stand on this issue.They respect the freedom of choice.Ok let's mandate that if you weigh over 200 lbs you can't wear spandex.Let's also make laws concerning the following....
No fat people riding in motorized scooters drinking diet cokes,parking in handicapped spots at Walmart.Women with flab must have their stomachs covered at all times.No fat people at buffets.If your kids throwing a fit in a restaurant,you will be asked to leave or be fined.No cell phone use in restaurants.Where would the govt stop?
May 15, 2008 at 12:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmw9 (anonymous) says...
Actually coolfreaknbeans, I don't eat at buffets because I hate watching fat people pig out. There should be a weight limit to eat and shop in certain places.
May 15, 2008 at 12:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Charles_Town (anonymous) says...
I have no problems with them raising the taxes on cigs. They should add a litter tax. I mean lets face it, it is not the non-smokers throwing smoking related items (butts, empty packs, broken lighters, etc...) out their car windows as the sit at corner or go down the road. A great community service task would be to give someone a defined section of a road and tell them when they pick up 10,000 (or even more) butts they are done for the day.
May 15, 2008 at 12:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Patrick (anonymous) says...
Smoking is stupid. Those who talk about freedom of choice and non-interference don't have the strength to fight the addiction. It destroys the body. If you smoke for 20 years and your doctor tells you that you're in big trouble one day during a check-up, will you thumb your nose in everyone's face and be proud of your right to freedom, or will you wish you could take it all back and not have to face mortality? How many of you smokers look at yourself occasionally and say to yourself I've got to quit this some day?
May 15, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
I referenced freedom of choice and I DON'T SMOKE!!!What about people who destroy their livers drinking excessively? I swear some of you must be all for the fat people suing McDonalds too.Consumer accountability.No one is "forcing" anyone to be around smokers-no one.Where will the Gov't stop at trying to mandate common sense?
May 15, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmw9 (anonymous) says...
Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.Smoking is stupid.
May 15, 2008 at 1:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
eyfigueroa (anonymous) says...
Allwoman: I'm back from the doctor and he said that my agreeing with raregar was an isolated incident and I shouldn't be overly concerned. If it happens again, re-read his post, if I still agree, be honest about it and hope for the best!
May 15, 2008 at 1:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Charles_Town (anonymous) says...
So some of you are saying I should not go hear a band I want or hang out in a bar for a drink, play pool, or conversation, etc... because I do not like to be around smoke. Why should I have deny myself other things I like and enjoy. There are more and much better reasons to go to a bar than to smoke. People act like bars and clubs are the strongholds for smokers. Then we get to define the difference between bars and restaurants. If a bar serves food as well as alcohol, could it be considered a restaurant and therefore smoking be banned.
May 15, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
abitskeptical (anonymous) says...
summervilleguy--let us know how that turns out for you :)
May 15, 2008 at 2:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
coolfreaknbeans (anonymous) says...
Why should smokers deny themselves the right to smoke?Especially in an "adults only" atmosphere such as a bar.If the main purpose of an establishment is to sell food-it's a restaurant.If it's main purpose is to sell alcohol-it's a bar.Ex: Wetwillies is a bar,Ryans is a restaurant
May 15, 2008 at 3:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ForPnC (anonymous) says...
Here's my half cents worth (recession you know.)
I'm a smoker. I don't smoke inside. I don't smoke in crowds. I don't throw my cigarette butts on the ground or out of my car window. I eat in the no smoking sections of restaurants.
It's rare that I go to restaurants but not because of smokers. It's because of the nasty, ill-behaved kids that need smacked upside the back of their heads. I specifically ask to be seated away from any table with kids under 16 years old.
There's something to irritate everyone when you choose to go out in public and experience the world.
May 15, 2008 at 3:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Girleygirl (anonymous) says...
ForPNC- That's why people have to smoke because of bad kids in the restaurant. :>)
Chuckie Cheese don't allow smoking in the restaurants as well...take the kids there to eat! Food & fun!!!!
May 15, 2008 at 3:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ForPnC (anonymous) says...
LOL Girley! I thought that was why I drank!
May 15, 2008 at 3:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
geekguy2008 (anonymous) says...
OMFG Soooo true about the kids! I could NOT agree more.
What I always 'liked' was Breck's on Rivers Ave: You walk in the front door, and you have to walk THROUGH the smoking section to get to the BACK where the no-smoking section was.
Intelligent design.
And yes, as far as this law goes, it opens up the door for places such as www.wetspot.org to open up for the underground Kink community in Charleston. After all, no government should dictate to the owner of a private business what can and cannot go on behind its closed doors.
May 15, 2008 at 4:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pithy (anonymous) says...
flinsc - I agree Mt Pleasant is better, but the restaurants are suffering due to the non-smoking ordinance.
May 15, 2008 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
luvmydogs59 (anonymous) says...
As ColdBeer said earlier, we are adults who can make our own decisions whether to smoke or not.
I'm a smoker, but what I would term a "considerate smoker". I have a couple of non-smoking friends, and when I am in their presence, even if it is in my own home, I will not smoke. If I go out to a restaurant with them, we sit in the non-smoking section, or go to a totally non-smoking restaurant. It doesn't bother me to not smoke for a while when in situations that call for it. I can smoke plenty the rest of the time. There have been times in the past that I have quit for a few years at a time. It still didn't bother me to be around smokers. To each their own choice!
As other posters have stated, I'd rather not be surrounded by little kids who scream and throw tantrums and their parents won't control them, therefore making my dining experience totally suck. When my kids were little, I controlled them when we were out, so that other people could enjoy themselves.
We all have plenty of choices of where we can go to avoid smoking, cranky kids, etc. If the non-smokers don't want to be surrounded by us smokers, then pick one of the many choices available to you. I tend to avoid places with kids running all over the place.
Any non-smoker is welcome to spend time with me to see what a "considerate smoker" is like. I'm sure that many smokers fall into this category as well. Just because we smoke, doesn't mean we ignore how non-smokers feel.
How about that...another stereotype shot to hell!
May 15, 2008 at 7:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DontSpamMeBro (anonymous) says...
Good job, N. Charleston!! Many of you believe this issue is about the rights of smokers to smoke. It's not. It's about private property rights - the rights of business owners to set their own policies on their own property. Nice to see the correct side win one for a change.
May 15, 2008 at 7:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DontSpamMeBro (anonymous) says...
Oh...and for those that claim they don't eat in N. Chas. dining establishments - I really don't think they miss you much. Every time I've been out to dinner at a respectable dining establishment, I have had to wait for a table.
May 15, 2008 at 8:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
griff895 (anonymous) says...
As ColdBeer has said, the real issue is government interference with private enterprise. There is a HUGE difference between "public places" and places open to the public. Libraries, city hall, court facilities, and other Government owned NON-TAX-PAYING enterprises are public places. Privately owned, TAX PAYING businesses are only "open to the public". If you do not like what occurs there, don't patronize them. Simple enough!!
May 15, 2008 at 10:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tilgar (anonymous) says...
Life in North Charleston would be better if all the liberal
jerks were to just stay in Mount Pleasant and pay extra for the priveledge.
May 15, 2008 at 10:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dmwallac (anonymous) says...
Coldbeer,
A restaurant or bar that is open to the public is considered a PUBLIC place, unlike the PRIVATE places the same business owner may own. If I want to serve food on dirty dishes at home, I have every right to do so. But I cannot do this in my restaurant. Health and safe workplace laws are not the "Nanny State" and people trivialize the danger of said Nanny State by using the term so foolishly.
You seem to think you are really onto something here because smoking is a legal activity, though. I mean you have posted it over and over all day. But so what? Drinking alcoholic beverages is also LEGAL, but I cannot drink in my PRIVATE car, nor can I drink while walking down a PUBLIC sidewalk. Getting naked is legal as well, but not at Applebee's.
Anyway, think it through. Would you really be okay with it if, after successfully going through all the pain of it and kicking the habit, your workplace was filled with cigarette smoke all day and your only option was to get another job?
May 15, 2008 at 11:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DontSpamMeBro (anonymous) says...
You can't drink in your private car while driving on the public roadways. Nice job tossing in all those fallacious, red-herring arguments. I won't even waste my time explaining the rest of 'em to you.
May 16, 2008 at 6:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
geekguy2008 (anonymous) says...
dumbwall, your sob-story is breaking my heart.
May 19, 2008 at 2:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full Terms and Conditions.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Thank you for your interest in this story. The comment thread for this article has been closed.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- Shared
- Upper King on rise: Hotels, apartments, restaurants changing face of downtown area
- UPDATE: Missing woman's fiance seen leaving scene of burned SUV, carrying a shovel
- Missing woman case gets murkier
- Magnolia Gardens offering free dream wedding to contest winner
- Body of missing woman's fiance was found near handgun
- Pinterest: Pinning hopes and dreams
- DAVID SLADE: S.C. offers hybrid car tax credit
- Black women today: Strong. Resilient. Ambitious.
- Ex-Boeing worker claims racism, retaliation in firing
- MCDERMOTT COLUMN: Golf business has risks, rewards
