Some Musings on Etiquette (Hey what's that) When in Cozumel and Other "Stuff"

[DallasNewbie]

The "so what" is that smoking in a restaurant vastly diminishes the quality of the experience for the patrons who do not smoke, along with many who do, according to some of my smoker friends. With the rest of the things you mention, it's the person who is participating in the activity who suffers the consequences. If you want to kill yourself with tobacco, go ahead, I don't care. Pollute your own air, not mine.

The point is moot, anyway. Smoking indoors virtually everywhere in Austin is now illegal, and hip, hip, hooray for that.

Seriously, I am not bashing smokers. Some of my best friends smoke. Some people whom I loved have also been killed by smoking, and some others are quite a ways down that road. I don't think that smoking is a very smart thing to do, but I do stupid things from time to time, too, so who am I to say?

It is not accurate that businesses were not hurt by the city-wide smoking bans. In fact, the restaurants in the cities with smoking bans lost so much business to the cities without smoking bans that they got together and lobbied the state legislature. So now it's illegal to smoke in any restaurant in Texas. Cities like Addison thrived by allowing people to do things they weren't allowed to do across the street in Dallas. The fact that a restaurant would lose more business than it would gain from a smoking ban just demonstrates how anti-democratic they are.

It's my habit to tip $5/tank unless something was really wrong, but I haven't been to Coz in a few years.

 

[ggunn]

It is not accurate that businesses were not hurt by the city-wide smoking bans. In fact, the restaurants in the cities with smoking bans lost so much business to the cities without smoking bans that they got together and lobbied the state legislature. So now it's illegal to smoke in any restaurant in Texas. Cities like Addison thrived by allowing people to do things they weren't allowed to do across the street in Dallas. The fact that a restaurant would lose more business than it would gain from a smoking ban just demonstrates how anti-democratic they are.

I stand corrected, but it makes my point. Unless the ban is universally applied, it causes the restaurants that ban smoking to lose business to those that haven't. The only way for it to work is for everyone to do it, and the only way to make that happen is to legislate it. Once it is universally applied, then the only business they lose is the smokers who will stay home instead of going out to someplace they cannot pollute.

As to smoking bans being "anti-democratic", what's democratic is not and should not be the bottom line in all cases. Sometimes the right thing to do isn't especially popular; if it had been left up to a popular vote, we would still have "white only" restrooms and water fountains.

 

[cvchief]

I stand corrected, but it makes my point. Unless the ban is universally applied, it causes the restaurants that ban smoking to lose business to those that haven't. The only way for it to work is for everyone to do it, and the only way to make that happen is to legislate it. Once it is universally applied, then the only business they lose is the smokers who will stay home instead of going out to someplace they cannot pollute.

As to smoking bans being "anti-democratic", what's democratic is not and should not be the bottom line in all cases. Sometimes the right thing to do isn't especially popular; if it had been left up to a popular vote, we would still have "white only" restrooms and water fountains.

Gordo, please stop dragging my back in! I can't help it. You keep arguing with my points. What happened was the majority became anti-smoking and active in the opinion. They then made the law by popular vote. (Often known as the tyranny of the majority.) The same thing you refer to in racist practices. Just as I think that violated the the RIGHTS of those minorities, so too this represents a imposition on the rights of a property owner. Maybe I could see the right to make him post a sign saying "Smoking is allowed here" as fair warning, but it his property and there should be strict limitations on the right of government to tell him how to use his property.
What you are arguing is that the majority can deny a property owner's rights on his property because of their belief. That is sort of a foundation of the argument for inalienable rights. Without those you would drown in the 'good ideas' of one majority or another.
Did you know actually in the early days, only property owners could vote? That is how important property ownership was.

As a side note, I ordered some baja bob's sugar free margarita mix. I need to regain my svelte figure before arriving on La isla in July.... Also I am all scared about the rental car thing. I thinking of going back to Isis for the security.....

 

[ggunn]

Gordo, please stop dragging my back in! I can't help it. You keep arguing with my points. What happened was the majority became anti-smoking and active in the opinion. They then made the law by popular vote. (Often known as the tyranny of the majority.) The same thing you refer to in racist practices. Just as I think that violated the the RIGHTS of those minorities, so too this represents a imposition on the rights of a property owner. Maybe I could see the right to make him post a sign saying "Smoking is allowed here" as fair warning, but it his property and there should be strict limitations on the right of government to tell him how to use his property.
What you are arguing is that the majority can deny a property owner's rights on his property because of their belief. That is sort of a foundation of the argument for inalienable rights. Without those you would drown in the 'good ideas' of one majority or another.
Did you know actually in the early days, only property owners could vote? That is how important property ownership was.

So, was that a good thing, do you think? Should we go back to that system? Disenfranchise women and anyone with a trace of black blood in their pedigree? What about a restaurant owner's right to refuse service to anyone? What if he refused service to black people?

No, I'm sorry, that "tyranny of the majority" argument doesn't wash with me. Even if most people smoked, it would still be the right thing to do.

 

[judydivescoz]

As a side note, I ordered some baja bob's sugar free margarita mix. I need to regain my svelte figure before arriving on La isla in July.... Also I am all scared about the rental car thing. I thinking of going back to Isis for the security.....

Not getting drawn back into this argument. We will have to just agree to disagree on who regulates the pollution and the stench in public places by just a few people.
Now on the the margaritas. Margaritas made with a mix...I draw the line there...no margarita should ever be made with a mix! I suggest you start a thread, get some real recipes and make yourself a real margarita! FWIW, mine is 1/3 tequila, 1/3 controy or orange liquor, 1/3 fresh squeezed lime juice. a big splash of lime infused water and lots of ice. If you like it sweeter use triple sec instead of the controy.

 

[judydivescoz]

As a side note, I ordered some baja bob's sugar free margarita mix. I need to regain my svelte figure before arriving on La isla in July.... Also I am all scared about the rental car thing. I thinking of going back to Isis for the security.....

Not getting drawn back into this argument. We will have to just agree to disagree on who regulates the pollution and the stench in public places by just a few people.
Now on the the margaritas. Margaritas made with a mix...I draw the line there...no margarita should ever be made with a mix! I suggest you start a thread, get some real recipes and make yourself a real margarita! FWIW, mine is 1/3 tequila, 1/3 controy or orange liquor, 1/3 fresh squeezed lime juice. a big splash of lime infused water and lots of ice. If you like it sweeter use triple sec instead of the controy.

 

[Merfman]

Not getting drawn back into this argument. We will have to just agree to disagree on who regulates the pollution and the stench in public places by just a few people.
Now on the the margaritas. Margaritas made with a mix...I draw the line there...no margarita should ever be made with a mix! I suggest you start a thread, get some real recipes and make yourself a real margarita! FWIW, mine is 1/3 tequila, 1/3 controy or orange liquor, 1/3 fresh squeezed lime juice. a big splash of lime infused water and lots of ice. If you like it sweeter use triple sec instead of the controy.

Beer Marg (sounds gross but give it a try!): 6oz beer, 6oz frozen limeade concentrate, 6oz tequila, 2 shots Grand Marnier, ice, blender. They're potent so enjoy while engaging in non-driving activities. They're without a doubt my favorite margaritas!

 

[budaman]

Don't know if the double post was intentional or not, but this thread could use a good strong double margarita about now!! I like it!!!

Mike

 

[BTravlin]

Beer Marg (sounds gross but give it a try!): 6oz beer, 6oz frozen limeade concentrate, 6oz tequila, 2 shots Grand Marnier, ice, blender. They're potent so enjoy while engaging in non-driving activities. They're without a doubt my favorite margaritas!

Call me skeptical but I'd be willing to try one, or two.

 

[cvchief]

So, was that a good thing, do you think? Should we go back to that system? Disenfranchise women and anyone with a trace of black blood in their pedigree? What about a restaurant owner's right to refuse service to anyone? What if he refused service to black people?

No, I'm sorry, that "tyranny of the majority" argument doesn't wash with me. Even if most people smoked, it would still be the right thing to do.

You are missing me. The majority chose to infringe about the rights of women and minorities, because they thought it was the 'right thing to do.'
The 19th amendment clarified the rights of women with voting.
We also clarified though law the rights of people regardless of race, religion, national origin and gender.
All good things.

If I owned a restaurant, I could refuse you service for your manner of dress. For instance, I might run a black tie establishment and not let anyone without a jacket and tie. My investment, my property, my choice. Not protected right. I can refuse you for anything, except protected rights. It is my right as a property owner.

I would have less of an argument if you said you wanted to ban smoking altogether, like drugs or nuclear weapons, but to say hey it legal but you can't have it in your eatery you own, a private establishment, is the troublesome part.

1. Restaurants serve alcohol = people drive = higher risks of death or injury caused by alcohol OUTSIDE the restaurant to both patrons AND the general public.
2. Restaurants allow smoking = people smoke near other people = higher risks of people ONLY IN the restaurant suffering health effects.

#1 affects the public on public roads owned by the public.
#2 affects people in the establishment, a private property which the public can choose to enter or not.
Assumedly we are only talking health dangers. Now if you want to talk 'ruining the experience' then we should test the waiter and staff to issue licenses to be sure they too won't ruin the experience.
(Caveat: I am NOT against alcohol. I DO think smoking is a bad idea. If one of you starts a temperance movement, I am NOT responsible)

As to the rest of you and the Margaritas:
1. Yes, I will admit mixes aren't the best.
2. However, I am going for LOW CARB here and YOU are missing the point!

This Baja Bob mix is supposed to be pretty good for being O-Zero-Zip-Notta carbs. And that is what I am looking for. I look at it as a margarita replacement.... I will atone for the sin of drinking a mix the end of July. If I had to guess the first one will be at El Moro. And another side tip: Don't order your Marg with Hornitos at Pancho's Backyard. They charge a mint for the margarita upgrades there.