Italy to ban plastic bags

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Just a retarded "green" fad, like banning smoking in bars, ffs.

Uh, no, banning smoking isn't about being green it is about addressing a public health issue. 

Because people who drink in bars are seriously concerned about their health.   

No, but the employees might be. 

*shrug*

I work around welding fumes all day.  Life's tough, wear a filter mask.

Sorry, I can't agree with that. Bartending is the best-paying job a lot of people can get around here; a LOT of single parents rely on it to raise their kids. A lot of working-class moms without (and many with) college degrees bartend at night so their husbands can work during the day, so they don't have to pay for childcare they can't afford. They don't deserve to get cancer just for being poor. And, sometimes women who work in bars get pregnant. What should they do? Quit their job and go on welfare? Lose their health insurance and income?

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

[AFK]

Doh! I did link to the wrong article.

All I'm trying to say is that it's a scary road. First it's something like tobacco, then, red meat, chocolate, sugar, cheese,

Well no, because you can't get sick from second-hand sugar.  You can't sit next to someone eating a big juicy steak and have the grease from that steak go into YOUR veins.  Those examples are ridiculous and not remotely in the same spirit as the policies for tobacco.  

booze

Well, as long as you don't drink and drive or give booze to kids, you're fine to enjoy your booze any way you please.  

anything you enjoy in life that's not exactly good for you, they've set the precedent, they've drilled it into the public's skull, they do it once, they can do it again. Where does it stop?

What the hell does this even mean?  "they've drilled it into the public's skull".  They've drilled what into their skull?  

[hooplala]

Just a retarded "green" fad, like banning smoking in bars, ffs.

Uh, no, banning smoking isn't about being green it is about addressing a public health issue. 

Because people who drink in bars are seriously concerned about their health.   

No, but the employees might be. 

*shrug*

I work around welding fumes all day.  Life's tough, wear a filter mask.

Sorry, I can't agree with that. Bartending is the best-paying job a lot of people can get around here; a LOT of single parents rely on it to raise their kids. A lot of working-class moms without (and many with) college degrees bartend at night so their husbands can work during the day, so they don't have to pay for childcare they can't afford. They don't deserve to get cancer just for being poor. And, sometimes women who work in bars get pregnant. What should they do? Quit their job and go on welfare? Lose their health insurance and income?

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

The simple solution seems to me to be to take away the legislation.  There will be some employers who want to their bar toward the smoke-free crowd, and those people can work there if they want to.

There are lots of people who worked in smoke filled bars for decades and never contracted lung cancer, so obviously there is more to that than simply exposure.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Also, Fujikoma, there is NO FUCKING SUCH THING as "Passive meat eating" so shut the fuck up with stupid comparisons. I know TWO women who got lung cancer from passive smoking. Sure, patrons in smoky bars aren't at much increased risk unless they spend way too much time there, but employees are.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

We call those "Grills", and smoking is and should be banned in them.

I'm in the camp that believes that restaurants should be 100% non-smoking, but bars that are 100% bars should be smoking or non-smoking, based on the owner's preference (and marked that way on the outside door).

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Just a retarded "green" fad, like banning smoking in bars, ffs.

Uh, no, banning smoking isn't about being green it is about addressing a public health issue. 

Because people who drink in bars are seriously concerned about their health.   

No, but the employees might be. 

*shrug*

I work around welding fumes all day.  Life's tough, wear a filter mask.

Sorry, I can't agree with that. Bartending is the best-paying job a lot of people can get around here; a LOT of single parents rely on it to raise their kids. A lot of working-class moms without (and many with) college degrees bartend at night so their husbands can work during the day, so they don't have to pay for childcare they can't afford. They don't deserve to get cancer just for being poor. And, sometimes women who work in bars get pregnant. What should they do? Quit their job and go on welfare? Lose their health insurance and income?

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

The simple solution seems to me to be to take away the legislation.  There will be some employers who want to their bar toward the smoke-free crowd, and those people can work there if they want to.

There are lots of people who worked in smoke filled bars for decades and never contracted lung cancer, so obviously there is more to that than simply exposure.

There are lots of people who smoke and never contracted lung cancer. Your logic is nonexistent. "Increased risk" does not mean "100% morbidity".

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

We call those "Grills", and smoking is and should be banned in them.

I'm in the camp that believes that restaurants should be 100% non-smoking, but bars that are 100% bars should be smoking or non-smoking, based on the owner's preference (and marked that way on the outside door).

All bars here must serve food.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

There are lots of people who worked in smoke filled bars for decades and never contracted lung cancer, so obviously there is more to that than simply exposure.

Probably not.  I know a guy who got cancer at 18, 6 months after he took up smoking.  Conversely, my great-grandmother smoked for 70 years and never did get it.  It's a lottery that is influenced by the amount of exposure you have.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I think it makes sense to allow "smoking bars". It would be a special permit.

[hooplala]

Doh! I did link to the wrong article.

All I'm trying to say is that it's a scary road. First it's something like tobacco, then, red meat, chocolate, sugar, cheese,

Well no, because you can't get sick from second-hand sugar.  You can't sit next to someone eating a big juicy steak and have the grease from that steak go into YOUR veins.  Those examples are ridiculous and not remotely in the same spirit as the policies for tobacco.

No, but you DO get what is overheard a LOT in places with socialized healthcare (like Canada), which goes a little something like this:  No, he shouldn't be able to just eat whatever he wants whenever he wants, because it will be ME paying for it when he has a heart attack.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Doh! I did link to the wrong article.

All I'm trying to say is that it's a scary road. First it's something like tobacco, then, red meat, chocolate, sugar, cheese,

Well no, because you can't get sick from second-hand sugar.  You can't sit next to someone eating a big juicy steak and have the grease from that steak go into YOUR veins.  Those examples are ridiculous and not remotely in the same spirit as the policies for tobacco.

No, but you DO get what is overheard a LOT in places with socialized healthcare (like Canada), which goes a little something like this:  No, he shouldn't be able to just eat whatever he wants whenever he wants, because it will be ME paying for it when he has a heart attack.

Idiots talking out of their asses are everywhere. And?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

We call those "Grills", and smoking is and should be banned in them.

I'm in the camp that believes that restaurants should be 100% non-smoking, but bars that are 100% bars should be smoking or non-smoking, based on the owner's preference (and marked that way on the outside door).

All bars here must serve food.

That's because you live behind the Patchouli Curtain, where there isn't even a word for freedom.

"As I understand it, the Russian language doesn't even have a word for 'freedom'."
- Ronald Reagan, who apparently missed the word "Svoboda".

[Adios]

Around here, bars aren't just places to get drunk. They're places to gather with your friends and play games and eat dinner. I'm pretty happy there's no smoking in bars anymore, and if anything it's made bars busier because people really use them as community hangouts now.

We call those "Grills", and smoking is and should be banned in them.

I'm in the camp that believes that restaurants should be 100% non-smoking, but bars that are 100% bars should be smoking or non-smoking, based on the owner's preference (and marked that way on the outside door).

What? Give people a CHOICE? Why do you hate America? Non-smokers aren't forced to go into a smoke friendly establishment. But smokers are forced to go into a non-smoker friendly establishment. If we choose to go out, which I stopped doing when the law passed here, as did many others.

Oddly, it hurt business so badly owners are fighting the law in court. But what do I know?

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Doh! I did link to the wrong article.

All I'm trying to say is that it's a scary road. First it's something like tobacco, then, red meat, chocolate, sugar, cheese,

Well no, because you can't get sick from second-hand sugar.  You can't sit next to someone eating a big juicy steak and have the grease from that steak go into YOUR veins.  Those examples are ridiculous and not remotely in the same spirit as the policies for tobacco.

No, but you DO get what is overheard a LOT in places with socialized healthcare (like Canada), which goes a little something like this:  No, he shouldn't be able to just eat whatever he wants whenever he wants, because it will be ME paying for it when he has a heart attack.

Not the same thing.  By that logic, private ownership of automobiles should be illegal.

[AFK]

I think it makes sense to allow "smoking bars". It would be a special permit.

Yes, I agree with this.  In fact, in Portland we have one or two of them including a hookah bar.