Smoking Laws in NY and NJ

Could you please give the part of the constitution which makes this ok.

Some claim the Equal Protection Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause) of the 14th Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion) law protects smokers from having to stand outside, but who protects people who want to be inside without being subjected to toxic fumes? Simply put, the 14th Amendment is a double edged sword and the 15th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitut ion) and 19th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion) Amendments allows the public/community to decide what their public health needs are.

p.s. Smoking is bad, not smoking is good! Good wins over evil but you can still do evil outside or from the comfort of your home. May the force be with you.

ive been a smoker on and off for many years. im extremely considerate of nonsmokers even in outside settings, out of respect for their choice to not smoke. i dont smoke in my house or around my kids,ever. mostly i smoke during the day in my truck between jobs, and i do enjoy having a smoke if im out having a drink. i know theres alot of a-hole smokers out there who could care less about non smokers, which i think is ignorant. theres a time and place for everything.we shouldnt open the pandoras box of what should be legal/illegal and how the govt. should/shouldnt get involved. bzness owners should be aloud to make that decision. trust me if a bar/rest. owner can make more money being smoke free...well thats a no brainer. drinking,smoking and many other things should be done responsilby and w/ care. anyway, im going outside to burn one while i try the new heiny lite beer.

anyway, im going outside to burn one while i try the new heiny lite beer.

Speaking of that new heineken light, it's pretty damn good!

trust me if a bar/rest. owner can make more money being smoke free...well thats a no brainer.

Exactly, the market should dictate it, not government.

Some claim the Equal Protection Clause (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Protection_Clause) of the 14th Amendment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion) law protects smokers from having to stand outside, but who protects people who want to be inside without being subjected to toxic fumes? Simply put, the 14th Amendment is a double edged sword and the 15th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitut ion) and 19th (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitu tion) Amendments allows the public/community to decide what their public health needs are.

p.s. Smoking is bad, not smoking is good! Good wins over evil but you can still do evil outside or from the comfort of your home. May the force be with you.Thats right one can choose not to go to a Res or bar that allows smoking. I just feel that if there is a demand for nonsmoking bars and res then people will open them or switch to nonsmoking. IT has already started in most areas that Res and bars going to non smoking and if smoking bars and res see a drop in business or a demand from they public they will switch. The goverment just does not need to get involved in the private sector in this matter it will work its self out.

This entire argument about "free markets" dictating whether or not someone should allow smoking is off base. Sure, customers can choose to attend the restaurants/bars that suit their needs. But what about the employees? They have to work in that environment. Being subjected to a smoke-filled environment creates a hazardous work condition.

And if you let free markets dictate smoking and non-smoking, all bars are going to choose to allow smoking (as is the case in Pennsylvania and all other states without Tobacco bans). It's a no-brainer, they'll make much more cash by allowing smoking. And that's why there are no smoke-free bars in PA, and hence no smoke-free choices for bartenders and waitresses to work in. The law has to be in place to protect workers' rights, not to mention the health of everyone.

And the money lost by the bar and restaurant business due to a smoking ban will be more than offset by savings people will experience on health insurance premiums, Medicare and Medicaid taxes, and healthcare expenses in general over the next 50 years.

The less exposure society has to second hand smoke, the lower the incidence of cancer and other harmful health effects.

Sucks for the bar owners, but in the long run it's going to be better for America's collective pocketbook.

But what about the employees? They have to work in that environment. Being subjected to a smoke-filled environment creates a hazardous work condition.

And if you let free markets dictate smoking and non-smoking, all bars are going to choose to allow smoking (as is the case in Pennsylvania and all other states without Tobacco bans). It's a no-brainer, they'll make much more cash by allowing smoking. And that's why there are no smoke-free bars in PA, and hence no smoke-free choices for bartenders and waitresses to work in. The law has to be in place to protect workers' rights, not to mention the health of everyone.

No one forces anybody to work in a smoking bar or restaurant. Just like no one is forced to work in a coal mine or join the police or fire departments. I used to work in the restaurant business. There are ALWAYS jobs available for waiters, servers and bartenders. The turnover rate is like nothing you've ever seen in that field. If there are absolutely no restaurants that non-smoking employees can stand, then move to a place where there are non-smoking restaurants. If you can’t find any, THEN FIND A NEW LINE OF WORK.

And the money lost by the bar and restaurant business due to a smoking ban will be more than offset by savings people will experience on health insurance premiums, Medicare and Medicaid taxes, and healthcare expenses in general over the next 50 years.

The less exposure society has to second hand smoke, the lower the incidence of cancer and other harmful health effects.

Sucks for the bar owners, but in the long run it's going to be better for America's collective pocketbook.

Then why stop at restaurants? Why not ban smoking period? Make it as illegal as marijuana, cocaine and heroin. We all know how well that's working!

And the money lost by the bar and restaurant business due to a smoking ban will be more than offset by savings people will experience on health insurance premiums, Medicare and Medicaid taxes, and healthcare expenses in general over the next 50 years.

The less exposure society has to second hand smoke, the lower the incidence of cancer and other harmful health effects.

Sucks for the bar owners, but in the long run it's going to be better for America's collective pocketbook.Ok now we need a one drink per hour limit thats one beer, or one glass of wine, or 1oz achol. Druken driven kills thousands of people each year and alot of the drivers are coming home from bars or Resturants. This will reduce accidents, deaths, save on health insurance, medicade because of injuries in accidents. The less exposure society has from drunkin drivers the lower incidence of accidents and other harmful things drinking does.