Personally, I think Hawaii's government enforced smoking bans are ridiculous. On Oahu, some bars reported up to 30% losses in revenue after the anti-smoking law was formed. It should be up to the owner of the establishment. Not the state. As a smoker, I believe that we have rights too. But before anyone argues that our "passive" smoke is harmful to others, consider that we could have come to some sort of compromise. Clearly, civil agreements are far too civilized for our state's brain-less legislature. In Missouri, there is a ban being considered. Against swearing, drinking contests, table dancing, and profane music. How far will local municipalities go in entrenching on the rights of private business owners? Ever caught yourself swearing? If you said no, youre a liar. It saddens me to see that someone out there thinks they can justify making swearing illegal. Chew on that.

Sorry, Katie, but your addiction is speaking loud and clear & your logic is flawed... Anytime addicts' use gets threatened, they cry "foul!" from the "victim" place saying their rights are being violated. How much sense does it make to say to the MAHORITY, i.e. non=tobacco users, "You have to let us continue to kill ourselves AND jeopardize the halth of others so we can continue to engage in our addiction!" I've got some news for you: Actual economic reports from multiple states have proved WITHOUT A DOUBT that revenus actually INCREASED when smoking is banned in restaurants & nightclubs when smoking was banned. In Portland, ME, for example, where winter rules at least 6 months out of the year, people were required to go outside in the freezing cold to smoke because of the ban. Businesses cried "Foul!" saying they would lose business. Guess what happened to the business revenue when the smoking ban was passed? It actually went UP by 30%! Why? Because non-smokers finally felt safe enough to go to those places and give them their business...