smoking in a pool hall?

Glad you are doing well RackEmBilliards. :smile:



The cleanliness is something I always assumed would improve dramatically when St. Louis went non-smoking but never imagined what a difference it would make. Even smokers have told me how much cleaner it is. Of course some of them think I never cleaned in 46 years before we went non smoking...:rolleyes: It just stays cleaner LONGER when you dont have black ash being embedded in the carpet (or table cloth) all day or a thin yellow layer of smoke on everything else. Most smokers will enjoy a table cloth that plays better for a longer period of time also. We are also non-alcohol. Which makes tables play better also. Too many people in bars think a pool table is a bed or couch. Beers get spilled, and a 10 second wipe job later the table is back in action.

If pool is truly a game you love, then any improvements in the playing conditions should be a welcome change.

We currently do not sell explosives, prostitutes, abortions or some other things AZBers seem to want. An exploding pregnant prostitute? Hmmm..

:shrug:
 
Hmmmm

Big Perm said:
Yes, that is exactly what I was saying.....we should sell explosives, abortions, and prostitutes out of pool halls....maybe offer them in vending machines......your reading comprehension is so more advanced than mine....

My conclusions were so wrong, you've dominated me with your superior intellect.....I give up....
/QUOTE]

**

BooYah. WHOSE NEXT !!!!
Click to expand...
 
Just me...

I drove 30 min to a pool hall that was non smoking last night and it seemed like I could have played there for days non stop. The room I usually play in is only 5 min away from my job and where I live but it was a totally different experience. I didn't smell like an ashtray when I left, and it was definately cleaner and nicer. It was good to see kids playing as well. I am seriously considering the change.
 
Big Perm said:
KM,

Kudos to you, I feel your passion. Ultimately, I'm with you regarding us improving as a society. Personally, I'd rather give my business to pool halls, bars, and restaurants that don't allow smoking. Even with the rare cigars I enjoy, I still don't like the way I smell afterward, and neither does my wife :D

With that being said, I don't like the ban approach. IMHO, we, as a society, are going backwards because of the government. We count on the law and government to tell us how to act and what is approrpriate instead of relying on ourselves. Additionally, the government (ie, responsible taxpayers) subsidize the mistakes of the irresponsible - they aren't forced to learn lessons because they can just claim hardship and we hand them money. Instead, we need to remove safety net programs so people will think before they act, ultimately improving decision making and improving as an individual.

When these threads show up, 2/3 of the posters claim they have the high ground, they are 100% right, and anyone that doesn't agree is an idiot. They praise the govt and areas for bans, claiming that it's healthy and for the good of all people. That smokers are just a bunch of selfish a-holes who could care less for anyone or anything. Well, I have quite a few friends on this board who smoke and many of them are the nicest, most caring people you could ever meet. They are considerate about smoking and do their best to manage thier smoke stack :D

But just banning something because it is unhealthy is a very slippery slope.....there are so many things that we do, whether daily or on the weekends, that are risky and unhealthy....whether it's people that drink a little much now and then, or eating too much, or risky sports, or whatever.....and people only associate smoke as having an impact on them, but that is short sided.....alcoholics cause accidents, people with poor eating choices drive up the car of health costs.....hell, I love big people......I have friends and family that are hefty, and I love them, but I don't want to sit between two bigguns on a 5 hour flight from San Diego to Atlanta (actual occurence, worst flight I've ever been on).....bad decisions often impact other people, whether it increases costs, or destroys families and friends.....there is no bad decision that ever effects just one person....

We need people to do the right thing on their own.....we tell them what to do, and they become sheep, they stop thinking for themselves and ultimately become more dependent....

Again, I don't like smoking and prefer to go where it's nonsmoking, but I don't like telling a business owner how to run their business.....we make people smarter by making them decide, not by telling them what to do.....

To the OP, sorry if I derailed your post man......don't like smoking, but also don't like smoking bans, and when pool comes up, this is always a hot topic :D
Click to expand...

This is a very good post. While I don't agree with everything you say, I think you do a good job stating your view. Also, I like how you appear not to be taking anything personally and getting defensive. Posts like this are a credit to a good discussion.

I agree that we need people to do the right thing on their own. However, the biggest disappointment of my adult life was the realization that most people *don't * do the right thing on their own. Most people get the basics right but tend to be not all that great when it comes to consideration and compassion. At what point should someone step in and say "you had your chance"? Some may argue never.

I don't believe that smoking bans pass because smoking is unhealthy (although only a fool would argue that it isn't unhealthy). I believe it has more to do with the way smoking affects other people. Second hand smoke is at very least disgusting, stinky, and bothersome, and at worst deadly (eventually). This is a lot different than some of the other things you mentioned, but I guess not *that* different. I think the important distinction is whether there is direct or indirect causality going on. The fat person in an airline seat is a great example. The fat person does not directly bother me by overeating, or eating fattening foods. However the indirect result of that is reducing my comfort when I have to sit next to him or her on a flight. For me, the solution here is simple. The *direct* cause of bother is the "too fattedness", not the eating. Thus if I owned an airline, the requirement would be that if you are above a certain size in any of several key areas, you must pay something different, and possibly clear the seats around you. If you want to avoid that fate, you know what to do. (Hint...it isn't to complain and say you are discriminated against).

Smoking, on the other hand, is a *directly* bothersome. It is not some potentially possible future outcome that cause the bother. It is the act itself. That is the big difference here (and LWW, if you are following along, why your analogy didn't work).

Greasy, hard to digest food for thought,

KMRUNOUT

Bigperm, keep the thoughtful posts coming!!
 
KMRUNOUT said:
This is a very good post. While I don't agree with everything you say, I think you do a good job stating your view. Also, I like how you appear not to be taking anything personally and getting defensive. Posts like this are a credit to a good discussion.

*** edited ***

Greasy, hard to digest food for thought,

KMRUNOUT

Bigperm, keep the thoughtful posts coming!!
Click to expand...

Hey now, of you and Bigperm keep up this reasonable discussion-stuff, what will become of this forum? :grin::p:lol:
 
justadub said:
Hey now, of you and Bigperm keep up this reasonable discussion-stuff, what will become of this forum? :grin::p:lol:
Click to expand...

Ha ha! I will make a sincere effort to supply some bitter, sarcastic, condescending, and self serving arguments at my next convenience ;-)

KMRUNOUT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top