lakeheron Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I never get why smokers object to not smoking in public, let alone in restaurants where tables are close together and where even outdoor fans and breezes send the smoke to neighboring patrons. It just seems like common courtesy not to subject others to smoke. I have never smoked and never been married to a smoker. But I grew up with three parents (mother, father, stepfather) who smoked and smoked a lot. I was so surprised to learn recently when I had a chest x-ray before surgery that I have damage to one lung, undoubtedly caused by my exposure to second hand and third hand smoke. I have developed minor asthma and all colds that I get go into my bronchials and lungs but I didn't know why until I had the x-ray. I don't understand the anger, hostility and outright nastiness that so many smokers have against non smokers who are just trying to stay as healthy as possible. So many among us have had cancer and other illnesses so are not as strong as they used to be so why create even more health problems for them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillinaBus Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Smoking in public places, especially restaurants is damaging to the people around or in fact anywhere near the person doing it, indoors or out.... not admitting that and not behaving with respect for others well being seems to me to be rude at best and anti-social at worst. Everyone has the right to damage themselves by smoking, but not random people in the community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieluise Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 If they are going to enforce the smoking laws, then they need to enforce the law against having animals in restaurants too. There are laws against having animals in restaurants in Mexico? That's news to me. You're certain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieluise Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I never get why smokers object to not smoking in public, let alone in restaurants where tables are close together and where even outdoor fans and breezes send the smoke to neighboring patrons. It just seems like common courtesy not to subject others to smoke. Smoking in public places, especially restaurants is damaging to the people around or in fact anywhere near the person doing it, indoors or out.... not admitting that and not behaving with respect for others well being seems to me to be rude at best and anti-social at worst. Everyone has the right to damage themselves by smoking, but not random people in the community. I find these comments to be right on target. It's a matter of respecting others' rights, kinda like breaking wind in a crowded elevator -- yes, you have the right, but do you really want to subject others to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexicanseahorse Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I am a smoker and try and respect others' rights not to be around it. That is why, both here and in the United States, most places ban smoking inside a restaurant but do allow it outside and that is where I sit, despite the weather conditions. What gets me is that it never fails that a non-smoker will sit among the smokers and then complain when there is usually plenty of seating available in the non-smoking areas. On a recent cruise, I was sitting on a chaise lounge on the smoking side of the Lido deck having a cigarette. A woman comes and sits in the chaise next to me, on the down wind side, and then started complaining about my smoke bothering her. There was plenty of seating on the non-smoking side and up wind from me but it was like she just wanted to have something to complain about and chose that seat on purpose. I think people have the same rights as I do. I can choose to go to a restaurant that allows smoking, allows smoking only outdoors, or not at all. Non-smokers have the same rights. There are plenty of restaurants here that do not allow smoking so go to them. Stop complaining about smokers at a restaurant, especially when they are outside, as it was your perogative to eat there or go elsewhere where smoking is not allowed. Let's also talk about pets. I take my dog with me nearly all the time. She is bathed regularly, given flea treatments constantly, and we have never seen a flea, tick, or anything else on her. She is cleaner and better behaved than most people. Certain restaurants do not allow pets and certain ones do and even welcome them. When I am with our dog, those that welcome pets are the ones I frequent. When we decide to go to a restaurant that does not allow pets, I leave her at home. My choice, just as it is a person's choice to frequent only those restaurants that do not allow pets. The American Legion normally has cats running around. Roberto of Roberto's normally has his dog there. The Early Bird welcomes pets and does a heck of a business because of it. At Salvador's, they allow pets outside and, even if they did not, there are always stray dogs there looking for food. My point is real simple. There are plenty of restaurants to choose from. If smoking or pets bother you, frequent those places that do not allow one or the other or both. It is your right. It is also my right to frequent those restaurants that allow one or the other or both. But, as long as we are on the subject of peoples' rights and what should and should not be allowed in restaurants, I would like to add a few suggestions. 1. I am a non-drinker and think alcohol should be banned in restaurants. This will really cause an uproar with all the alcoholics here but let's look at it realistically. Many people get loud, boisterous, and even nasty after consumming a few drinks. That takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in a quiet atmosphere where I can carry on a conversation with my wife without having to shout. And, these same people are likely to maim, injure, or even kill somebody on their way home when driving. A lot more immediate effect than somebody maybe getting a whiff of a cigarette once in a while. 2. Let's ban children from restaurants, especially the Mexican ones. They run around, scream, cry, run into patrons and waiters, and the parents do nothing about it. That certainly takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in a relaxing atmosphere. 3. Let's ban traffic that is near any restaurant. The exhaust fumes, the noise from the engines, especially from the big trucks, the horns, etc. certainly detract from me having a nice meal. 4. Let's ban large groups of people, say anything over six. They have a tendency to get loud, shouting from one end of the table to another, and so on. That takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in peace and quiet. 5. Let's ban reading in restaurants. I do not know how many times I have waited for a table because there are two or three tables occupied by someone that just sits there for hours reading a book with no concern that there are others waiting to be seated and wanting something to eat. 6. Let's ban those groups that meet for coffee every day and take up a needed table, especially at the smaller places, that prevent others from sitting and having a meal. And, many of these groups are loud with no concern about the others around them. I think you get the point. There is always something one can complain about whether it be smoking, pets, children, alcohol, or anything else. If something bothers you at a place, go elsewhere because there are certainly enough places here to choose from that do not allow those things that bother you and stop complaining. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 I am a smoker and try and respect others' rights not to be around it. That is why, both here and in the United States, most places ban smoking inside a restaurant but do allow it outside and that is where I sit, despite the weather conditions. What gets me is that it never fails that a non-smoker will sit among the smokers and then complain when there is usually plenty of seating available in the non-smoking areas. On a recent cruise, I was sitting on a chaise lounge on the smoking side of the Lido deck having a cigarette. A woman comes and sits in the chaise next to me, on the down wind side, and then started complaining about my smoke bothering her. There was plenty of seating on the non-smoking side and up wind from me but it was like she just wanted to have something to complain about and chose that seat on purpose. I think people have the same rights as I do. I can choose to go to a restaurant that allows smoking, allows smoking only outdoors, or not at all. Non-smokers have the same rights. There are plenty of restaurants here that do not allow smoking so go to them. Stop complaining about smokers at a restaurant, especially when they are outside, as it was your perogative to eat there or go elsewhere where smoking is not allowed. Let's also talk about pets. I take my dog with me nearly all the time. She is bathed regularly, given flea treatments constantly, and we have never seen a flea, tick, or anything else on her. She is cleaner and better behaved than most people. Certain restaurants do not allow pets and certain ones do and even welcome them. When I am with our dog, those that welcome pets are the ones I frequent. When we decide to go to a restaurant that does not allow pets, I leave her at home. My choice, just as it is a person's choice to frequent only those restaurants that do not allow pets. The American Legion normally has cats running around. Roberto of Roberto's normally has his dog there. The Early Bird welcomes pets and does a heck of a business because of it. At Salvador's, they allow pets outside and, even if they did not, there are always stray dogs there looking for food. My point is real simple. There are plenty of restaurants to choose from. If smoking or pets bother you, frequent those places that do not allow one or the other or both. It is your right. It is also my right to frequent those restaurants that allow one or the other or both. But, as long as we are on the subject of peoples' rights and what should and should not be allowed in restaurants, I would like to add a few suggestions. 1. I am a non-drinker and think alcohol should be banned in restaurants. This will really cause an uproar with all the alcoholics here but let's look at it realistically. Many people get loud, boisterous, and even nasty after consumming a few drinks. That takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in a quiet atmosphere where I can carry on a conversation with my wife without having to shout. And, these same people are likely to maim, injure, or even kill somebody on their way home when driving. A lot more immediate effect than somebody maybe getting a whiff of a cigarette once in a while. 2. Let's ban children from restaurants, especially the Mexican ones. They run around, scream, cry, run into patrons and waiters, and the parents do nothing about it. That certainly takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in a relaxing atmosphere. 3. Let's ban traffic that is near any restaurant. The exhaust fumes, the noise from the engines, especially from the big trucks, the horns, etc. certainly detract from me having a nice meal. 4. Let's ban large groups of people, say anything over six. They have a tendency to get loud, shouting from one end of the table to another, and so on. That takes away from my right to enjoy a nice meal in peace and quiet. 5. Let's ban reading in restaurants. I do not know how many times I have waited for a table because there are two or three tables occupied by someone that just sits there for hours reading a book with no concern that there are others waiting to be seated and wanting something to eat. 6. Let's ban those groups that meet for coffee every day and take up a needed table, especially at the smaller places, that prevent others from sitting and having a meal. And, many of these groups are loud with no concern about the others around them. I think you get the point. There is always something one can complain about whether it be smoking, pets, children, alcohol, or anything else. If something bothers you at a place, go elsewhere because there are certainly enough places here to choose from that do not allow those things that bother you and stop complaining. Well said, Peter. Thanks for your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gringal Posted February 22, 2011 Report Share Posted February 22, 2011 Peter's post is very articulate, but it fails the logic test. No one else's health is affected by kids, loudmouths, drunks, solitary diners or friends hanging out for a long time. Second hand smoke and fleas are exceptions. (not his pet's fleas, of course; just those of other pets) Sure, we all have choices in where to dine. Peter's will be narrowed if the health dept. gets around to enforcing its rules. Mine will be expanded to places I now avoid. I'll even be able to sit outside. If someone is dumb enough to sit downwind of a smoker in a outdoor area, she or he has no right to complain. Some people do enjoy complaining. That's a given, so why bother mentioning it? Kids? What's the problem there? They're kids. We all were. Solitary diners? One of the nice things about Mexican attitudes is that people are not rushed out of restaurants if they choose to hang out there and read or chat, for hours. One of the other nice things is that they leave their pet at home unless it fits into their handbag. IMO, gringos here have a bizarre attitude towards their pets. When a person can sit down in a restaurant without wearing a garment covering his or her butt, parity will have been achieved. How did this topic veer off so far? I believe the topic being discussed was smoking laws in Jalisco. Can we perhaps return to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RevImmigrant Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Peter's posting is the best one yet, filled with common sense, which, judging by some of the other postings, seems to be uncommon around here. I have never seen such intolerant non-smokers as American non-smokers. In my experience European non-smokers, at least Germans and Poles, are far less intolerant than Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailrunner Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I have never been around as many smokers in my life as I have here at the lake. I am from northern CA where most of us, myself included, were smart enough to quit smoking some 30 years ago! In terms of Peter's post, I too see a failure in logic. You see, when a smoker goes to a restaurant that observes an inside no smoking area versus an outdoor smoking area — they actually have 2 choices or options. They can decide not to smoke while in the restaurant and sit either inside or out. I, on the other hand, MUST sit inside if I am to avoid their 2nd hand smoke and the possible resulting COPD, emphysema, or lung cancer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gringal Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I have never been around as many smokers in my life as I have here at the lake. I am from northern CA where most of us, myself included, were smart enough to quit smoking some 30 years ago! In terms of Peter's post, I too see a failure in logic. You see, when a smoker goes to a restaurant that observes an inside no smoking area versus an outdoor smoking area — they actually have 2 choices or options. They can decide not to smoke while in the restaurant and sit either inside or out. I, on the other hand, MUST sit inside if I am to avoid their 2nd hand smoke and the possible resulting COPD, emphysema, or lung cancer. Thanks. Always nice to have someone agree with me. lol. I, too am from Northern CA where most people I knew dumped the habit long ago. I don't think it's a matter of "tolerance". It's a matter of health. IMO, the notion of tolerance should only be applied to those things others can't change: disabilities, mental impairments, physical appearance, skin pigmentation, ethnicity......and of course, differences of deep convictions on religion and politics. (Unless they want to act out like the Taliban.) As an ex-smoker, I have great empathy for those who try to quit and have difficulty doing so. Authorities on the subject have said nicotine is more addictive than heroin and that it's more difficult for women to quit than for men. My experience bore this out. It was a real eye-opener to realize how utterly selfish I had been to expect my non-smoking friends to put up with my exhalations at a dinner table....inside or out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexicanseahorse Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Actually, there is logic to my comments. Non-smokers certainly have rights not to be around cigarettes. For those of us that are still stupid enough to smoke, lack the intestinal fortitude to quit, do not want to quit, or are totally hooked on the habit, we also have rights. The last time I looked, it was still a free country. I see nothing wrong with a restaurant having a no smoking policy, allowing smoking, or having a separate area for smokers, whether it be inside or out. It seems you non-smokers want it all with you being able to sit anywhere, in any restaurant. It is not enough for you to be seated comfortably inside, away from all smoke, but also want the outside areas, the patio areas, the miradors, and everywhere else you want. That is despite the fact that very little smoke, if any, actually comes your way in outside areas. Unless one eats out all 3 meals a day, 7 days a week, which most of us here do not do, the chances of you getting COPD, lung cancer, or anything else from second or third hand smoke is probably less likely than you being abducted by aliens. So, I will respect your rights to sit in a non-smoking area of a restaurant and wish you would show a little respect for smokers to enjoy a meal in an area of a restaurant that allows smoking. Another point of my logic is alcohol. Gringal wrote that drunks do not affect one's health. I say alcohol served in restaurants and bars is far more likely to be deadly than an occasional whiff of smoke and certainly a lot more immediate. Just look at the number of car accidents, injuries, and deaths caused each year by drunk drivers. I have seen dozens of people here have liquid lunches, be so inebriated from alcohol at lunch or dinner they can't walk straight, and then get behind the wheel of their car. They certainly pose a greater risk to me getting killed by them than I do to them because a small puff of smoke drifted in their vicinity. People love talking about rights like the one where people can sit in a restaurant for hours reading a book despite people waiting for a table, etc. They think only of their rights and not the rights of others. One of the things I like about Mexico is the fact I can sit outside, smoke a cigarette, have my dog with me, and not be alienated because of it. That is my right and the right of others like me. This type of debate can go on forever as long as there are smokers and non-smokers. While the number of smokers is dwindling, mostly because of people quitting and not because of them dying off as some of you will undoubtedly point out, there are still a good percentage of people that do smoke. You non-smokers have more than enough restaurants to choose from that are non-smoking or have non-smoking areas. Let us smokers have at least a few places we can go and enjoy our habit in peace without having to put up with a bunch of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieluise Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 I've refrained from jumping into this pit of snakes because of the futility of trying to change others' minds. But, Peter, I have to say that your comments are the epitome of non sequitur, especially those directed at gringal. The core of the discussion is centered on what happens in the environment of the restaurant. Drunks inside the restaurant do not have any kind of adverse affect upon other diners' health. It does not follow that once they are inebriated and could possibly pose a hazard upon the highways, they should be denied the opportunity of eating at the restaurant while consuming alcohol. That is as illogical as one can get. One can as easily get drunk at a friend's house or at one's own home. How do you legislate that activity? Of course, by making it unlawful to drive under the influence -- not by legislating consumption in the restaurant or other locality. On the other hand, smokers inside the restaurant pose a direct threat to the health of other patrons by spewing poisons into the air that others are forced to breathe. Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gringal Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 You are right that this debate can go on interminably, as long as smokers believe that smoking is a "right" in the same class as breathing. The other things you brought up just don't belong in the same class of issues: they are matters that may annoy you and others, but do no physical harm to anyone else. As far as drunks are concerned especially those who drive drunk: I believe thinking people agree that they are a danger to themselves and others, but that is another subject entirely. In theory, the bartender is supposed to call the limit......but that's in theory. I think we're into the matter of personal responsibility there....knowing when enough is enough. Some people obviously don't or don't care. Tragedy can occur. I don't know about the rest of you.....but I have nothing more to add to this debate, so I'm done. Obviously, no converts are going to me made and fortunately, no real verbal rocks have been thrown. Well, nothing serious. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Riley Posted February 23, 2011 Report Share Posted February 23, 2011 Wow, that was exhausting. I feel like lighting up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexicolindo Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Interesting..... Can someone please name the restaurants at lakeside where you can still smoke? If there is any left.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lakeheron Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Most of them. Start with Robertos, add Salvadors, El Jardin, Brissis, the Egyptian place and many, many more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim-Mary K Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Wow! Not one restaurant named is in Chapala. Don't any of you ever go there? Many good places to eat,with tables outside where the owners appreciate your business and the table next to you won't complain about the smoking. We have enjoyed the live and let live attitude of Mexico for 15 years now ,one of the reasons we came here! Too many of you have come here and want to change it. This is not Calif. or NY. If you have a problem with the culture here, go back to wherever you came from, maybe you will be happier there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bisbee Gal Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Too many of you have come here and want to change it. This is not Calif. or NY. If you have a problem with the culture here, go back to wherever you came from, maybe you will be happier there! Mexican's decision to enact and (now) enforce smoking bans in public places has absolutely nothing to do with the expats living here or foreign guests. Anti smoking laws have been enacted world wide. Here's the list: Smoking Bans Worldwide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim-Mary K Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Smokers,just go to Chapala or Joco, eat where the locals do and be happy! Food and prices are better also. And why only use part of my post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mexicolindo Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Went to "Delicias" in Chapala the other day and, smoking is forbbiden indoors or outdoors. And with the air "so clean" I found out that it smelled like dog! I looked at the patio and there were more dogs than clients!! Funny! And thanks for the answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim-Mary K Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Went to "Delicias" in Chapala the other day and, smoking is forbbiden indoors or outdoors. And with the air "so clean" I found out that it smelled like dog! I looked at the patio and there were more dogs than clients!! Funny! And thanks for the answer! Is that a direct jab at my name[4 dogs]? Then i'm sure you would never eat from a street food stand. Well like I said this is Mexico,not the US where you seem to need a law to protect you from everything.Common sense, if your standing near the sewer and don't like the odor, MOVE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieluise Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Interesting..... Can someone please name the restaurants at lakeside where you can still smoke? If there is any left.... Well, the last time I ate at Panino's (a couple of weeks ago) I was breathing the fumes from a woman sitting two tables behind me. I looked around, and ashtrays were available at several tables there. Then I realized that Panino's is "open-air" dining, so smoking is allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marieluise Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Common sense, if your [sic] standing near the sewer and don't like the odor, MOVE. At least your analogy is on target, with the exception of the fact that usually the sewer odor doesn't invade one's eating environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim-Mary K Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 At least your analogy is on target, with the exception of the fact that usually the sewer odor doesn't invade one's eating environment. True,and thank you.To me it's just about choices, We are fortunate to live in such a great place. We have seen many changes here, some good and some not so good [our opinion]. We liked it here before they started to pave paradise, but also appreciate all the benefits that have come along with progress [well most], so enjoy every day and try not to complain to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gringal Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 The response of "go back where you came from" as a defense has to the lamest of the lame, but it is all too frequently employed on these forums. Can we put it on the same list as "far out, man" and "whatever"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.