Reply #114: In some limited ways yes [View All]

[dmallind]

1) I have no problem if a reasonable number of bars do allow smoking as long as there are plenty of choices in a variety of locations and a variety of types that do not. Making this even remotely practicable as a law would be very difficult of course. But the theory is fine. Never said otherwise. No smokers ever came up with that preban though.

2) I share your beer snobbishness. Luckily I have an outlet that sales micorbrews of various kinds for $4 pints and $6 25oz mugs. Not cheap, but far from the silly prices some places charge. Good bars abound and I am (sincerely) sorry that you are not near one. They are a source of great pleasure.

3) There would be and indeed was. There were two just two nonsmoking bars in the entirety of the 7 county Twin Cities metropolitan area pre-ban. I would go to one occasionally just for some respite even though it was a long way away and didn't offer my main activity of choice (I am a keen player of NTN/BT satellite trivia). Not once in my many visits was somebody not reminded they could not smoke when they lit up - even having passed the prominent signs and seeing no ashtrays. This was a tiny bar too with the owner almost always present to be the enforcer. People preban expect to be able to smoke, and no amount of signage seems to be able to get that idea out of their heads.

4) I'll buy the scuba diver analogy is closer your way sure - but remember many people do one and not the other even so. Some people liking both is not a measure of an integral pair of activities. The Venn diagram may overlap more for photography than golf, just as one for drinking may overlap more with smoking than, say, ballet dancing, but the circles remain separate in large measure nonetheless.