15 Hours To Smoke in Washington’s Public Places

Note the delicate sidestepping of the ever so popular, “smoke if you got em” headline. As of midnight tonight Initiative 901 goes into effect, barring smoking inside all of Washington State’s public places. This is something I’ve been looking forward too for a long time.

I do lament the fact that this legislation became enacted via initiative however—too often the “by the people” process is co-opted by special interests, and I believe leads to overzealous law. Take for example the 25-foot provision of I-901, where smokers are banned from smoking anywhere near a public building. Why go this far?

  1. A 25 foot rule can easily lead to heavy-handed enforcement
  2. Will cause smoker / non-smoker resentment
  3. Will most likely do nothing to aid the issue
    Smokers cannot and will not remain 25 feet from all restaurants and bars, which would leave them in the middle of the street in urban areas (at best), and is more closely a total ban of smoking in the public sphere.

I am very grateful for the ban, and will no doubt visit many more of my local bars because of it. I have no doubt in the future our public spaces will be looked upon as our airplanes are now, “you mean, people used to be allowed to smoke in here?”

Cigarettes are vile, and I’m tired of burning my clothing (this becomes costly) after I’ve strayed too long in an smoke-dense bar. So light up while you can smokers of Washington! Soon all you’ll have is your own home and a crowded intersection to pleasure your lungs.

3 Comments and Counting

RSS feed for these comments Post TrackBack URI Skip to the Comment Form

  1. duderood left this comment on December 7, 2005 at 10:56 am

    hell yes! This is excellent. I’ve gotten used to the smoking ban here in Minneapolis, and couldn’t stand the smokey bars back home. What you newbies will find, is that without the smokey haze, you can drink more without feeling as sick as before. And you’re clothes don’t smell like bum clothes. Double-bonus.

  2. duderood left this comment on December 7, 2005 at 10:59 am

    Just as a side-note: there were tons of people against the bill at first, and during the first year (although many more supported it). But all the claims by those against the bill (“my business will shut down!” oh really? where else are these chain-smokers going to go to drink, the Minneapolis symphony?) have been steadily investigated by local papers, and have proven to be the direct opposite in many cases of what was anticipated. Sure, there are some bars that can show solid statistics that their business has gone down, but that is because they are crappy bars, and the better bars nearby added extra seating.

  3. Alex left this comment on December 7, 2005 at 11:16 am

    That’s good to know, I’ve read about similar happenings in NYC after their smoking ban. The surprising thing about this initiative in Washington to me was the nearly complete absense of opposition, from the day it was announced it would make the ballot it was mostly assumed safe passage.

Add a Comment