Starbucks bans smoking within 25 feet of it's stores.

[ShaneHelms]

Whenever I drink coffee, I MUST smoke a cigarette. Or else I become hostile. They complete one another.

I thrive on cigarettes, coffee, and alcohol. Often I mix coffee with alcohol. addictive personality and all that.

I'm with you on the coffee and cigarettes. That said.. I'm not affected at all by this, the hell with Starbucks. I never go there.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

Whenever I drink coffee, I MUST smoke a cigarette. Or else I become hostile.

LOL, thats how i am when i drink. I'll out smoke John Constantine himself when i am drinking.

 

[Lantern Venom]

I don't get it... how can they enforce that. The street outside their shop isn't their property, so how can they tell people not to smoke there?

That's what puzzled me. I'm assuming that they can enforce the ban in a their parking lot, which would be equal to or greater than 25 ft, but it said in the article that it doesn't include Starbucks in certain places like malls. This could lead to some ambiguity and confusion.

 

[KevanG]

If they have people smoking right outside the doors then they can tell them to shove off or just ban them all together. The 25 feet thing is just a generalization saying they can't be right outside the doors anymore.

 

[ProjectPat2280]

but it said in the article that it doesn't include Starbucks in certain places like malls. This could lead to some ambiguity and confusion.

Id assume most malls have banned smoking themselves.

 

[Lantern Venom]

If they have people smoking right outside the doors then they can tell them to shove off or just ban them all together. The 25 feet thing is just a generalization saying they can't be right outside the doors anymore.

Id assume most malls have banned smoking themselves.

I'm speaking specifically about strip malls/centers. A store directly next to a Starbucks might still have a designated smoking area within a few feet of a Starbucks door.

 

[JJJ's Ulcer]

I can't do cocaine within 25 feet of a Starbucks (and if anything goes with coffee, it'd be THAT), but you don't see me complaining!

 

[KevanG]

You could check and see if they have anything specifically about that in the rules. If not, then do it until they say something about it.

 

[Cagefighterkip]

I don't get it... how can they enforce that. The street outside their shop isn't their property, so how can they tell people not to smoke there?

They can't -- until you reach their property. There's no case, they can "ban" it all they like but it won't mean a thing unless they own the entire parking lot or something. But if this is a Starbucks in a complex of other buildings, it's useless. Public smoking is legal.

 

[Heliflyer]

One word to the smoking ban now instituted at Starbucks.

GOOD!

 

[Heliflyer]

They can't -- until you reach their property. There's no case, they can "ban" it all they like but it won't mean a thing unless they own the entire parking lot or something. But if this is a Starbucks in a complex of other buildings, it's useless. Public smoking is legal.

Depends on where you live. I live in beautiful, sunny and sane Santa Barbara, California and most public access places ban smoking. No smoking within prescribed distances of entries and exits to public buildings, no smoking in bars and restaurants or down the street on State, and several parks even have smoking bans....and....it....is.....WONDERFUL.

Smoking is foul and dangerous to the smoker (more on that in a sec) and those who do not but are subjected to the smoker's toxic miasma. That said, if someone wishes to smoke, go ahead, Smoke up at home or places where the toxic smoke cannot infect others. But please, have some health insurance of you are going to smoke!

 

[Heliflyer]

If they have people smoking right outside the doors then they can tell them to shove off or just ban them all together. The 25 feet thing is just a generalization saying they can't be right outside the doors anymore.

Or on their patios or within the outdoor seating area if the Starbucks is so equipped.

 

[terry78]

Not to get all granola hipster, but I suspect the alcohol, caffeine and tabacco companies are all in league, getting you hooked simultaneously as a lot of people can't have one without the other to compliment.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

Thank God.

 

[TheDreamMaster]

Our only two Starbucks are in the mall, and inside one of our hospitals (and we actually had the hospital one for years before the mall one)., so this ban really doesn't effect anyone here anyway because of the locations. I don't smoke so it doesn't bother me, but I'd like to see Starbucks actually enforce this thing somehow.

 

[ThDWgeek]

Hmm. I'm of two minds about this. As a non-smoker who generally hates the smell of cigarette smoke, I see it as a good thing for me personally. On the other hand, it seems a bit of a slippery slope in the bigger picture. I know it's only a company banning this, not a government, but it still makes me a bit uneasy. Then again, I am in favour of the smoking ban in pubs here in the UK. I suppose I begrudgingly support this.

 

[Lunar_Wolf]

If I was world president, I'd ban smoking in public.

 

[enterthemadness]

If I was world president, I'd ban smoking in public.

I knew you were a Democrat. Just always want that Big Govt.

I'd make Friday's Disco Night. World wide.

 

[KevanG]

Hmm. I'm of two minds about this. As a non-smoker who generally hates the smell of cigarette smoke, I see it as a good thing for me personally. On the other hand, it seems a bit of a slippery slope in the bigger picture. I know it's only a company banning this, not a government, but it still makes me a bit uneasy. Then again, I am in favour of the smoking ban in pubs here in the UK. I suppose I begrudgingly support this.

They banned smoking in most public places in Canada a few years back. I like it much better than it was.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I am a smoker. I am also a conscientious smoker. I avoid smoking while walking through the city. At work, I walk out to my car and smoke, even though there is a smokers oasis next to the building (because its a high traffic area for people coming and going). On one hand, this doesn't bother me because I go out of my way to try and keep my habit from bothering others. On the other hand, as others have pointed out, there is a point where banning becomes too much. Where will the line be drawn? Not just for smoking (I'm pretty understanding) but of other things? Personal freedoms in general are very important - at what point will people stop allowing corporations and the government to limit what we can do?

 

[Schlosser85]

25 feet outside the store isn't their property, so they can't enforce this.

 

[chaseter]

I love the pro cancer cigaristas in here raging against Starbucks. Smoking is making a comeback! Hooooooooooray

 

[Lantern Venom]

25 feet outside the store isn't their property, so they can't enforce this.

That depends on the location.

 

[Steyin]

Typical LEED building rule, and it seems that it's being picked up on by a lot of places in NYC also. Fine by me, I'm allergic to cigarette smoke.

 

[Spider-Who?]

I love the pro cancer cigaristas in here raging against Starbucks. Smoking is making a comeback! Hooooooooooray

It's nice to see people missing the point. The concept of choosing self-prescribed ignorance before thought doesn't need a come back because it never left. Hooray!



I don't drink coffee, and the last time I even entered a Starbucks was well over 5 years ago, so I really don't give an iota of a rats ass about Starbucks in general. If they own the property they're setting rules about, then they have the right to do so. If they do NOT own the property within the 25' radius mentioned, then we have an issue.

What I care about is the notion that because cigarettes are the "ugly" unhealthy habit, that somehow automatically should negate any freedom a person has concerning it... I fully understand and agree that certain places should be smoke free (and smokers should absolutely be mindful and respectful), but a line was absolutely crossed with that idea; building owners lost what should be their right to decide if their place of business is smoke free or not. Unhealthy food causes illness and death in as much as, if not more people than smoking, but it's not an "ugly" habit, so there are much fewer restrictions with fewer complaints - if the government started restricting junk and fast food as much as they restrict smoking, people would be rioting in the streets. THAT'S the problem I have...this mentality that because person A thinks person B's habit is gross, person B's rights should be stripped away, but you better not touch person A's bad habits!

And no, my thoughts are not based on my smoking; I'd feel the same way if I did not smoke. I despise over-regulation and reduction of freedom, especially when it's fueled by bias and ignorance.