The following represents only the opinion of Angry Ed, and does not in any way reflect Quicken Loans company policy or collective employee beliefs surrounding the issue discussed. In other words, please feel free to tell Ed how much you hate him if you disagree with him. Or if you agree, leave him some kind words.
Weekend warriors be warned! One by one, from coast to coast, states are conforming to pass a long-overdue ban on your weapons: NO SMOKING IN BARS OR RESTAURANTS!
First, it was California in 1998. Soon to follow were; Delaware, New York, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Montana, South Dakota, Ohio, Nevada, Illinois, Arizona, Texas, and thanks to a new bill with strong republican support for the first time, soon Michigan could join the list of the lands of the smoke-free public dining rooms and watering holes.
Until the bill becomes a law, we that prefer clean air while drinking and dining can visit a select few locations that in my opinion represent "THE DIFF" between conservative establishments run by executives that make business decisions based on short-term financial effects, and progressive organizations with leaders who recognize the long-term benefits of enacting a good idea because it will positively affect the health and comfort of their patrons. A complete list of these clean-air (and clean clothing, clean hair and health conscious) bars and restaurants can be found here: http://www.smokefreemichigan.org/restaurants.htm.
I suggest you show your support by frequenting them in your bread-breaking and beer-pounding endeavors. At very least, their risk deserves to be rewarded with your patronage, for in a state where 23.4% of the adult population can be classified as smokers, a self-imposed ban on lighting up could certainly have a negative effect on business.
A Few Minutes with Angry Ed
The smoking ban is an interesting thing. I’m not a smoker, but the idea of banning something that isn’t illegal could be considered unconstitutional. If I own a bar, smoking is legal, and I smoke, I should not be restricted from smoking or allowing others to smoke in my privately owned establishment. Should I? Why should the government have a say? I can understand it being necessary to post notice of the toxic fumes so that potential patrons don’t get duped into inhaling unwanted CO, but what actually goes on in my privately owned domain, as long as it doesn’t break any laws, should not be governed by the powers that be.
Questioning the constitutionality of the issue, to me presents a logical and reasonable argument. But I challenge that logic with another question: Have you ever met a smoker who didn’t want to quit -– someone who completely disregarded the known health risks, and offensive nature of the habit, so much that he or she is able to confidently say, "I’m glad I smoke?" If you answered, "yes," your friend is most likely a teenager, or simply an idiot, who should probably be encouraged to smoke as much as possible, as he or she is polluting the gene pool.
But seriously, shouldn’t the simple fact that 99.9% of intelligent people actually dislike smoking, be enough to warrant the passing of this law, and other laws in pursuit of eradicating this publicly agreed to be disgusting and unnecessary evil? Say nothing of it’s negative health effect – were we to consider that aspect in our law making, 9 out of 10 human indulgences would be illegal, but to put it as simply as possible – if no one likes it, what’s the problem? Let’s get rid of it!
See ya at the Red Robin!