Las Vegas - smokers beware, new Nevada law

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061109/NEWS10/611090344/1016/NEWS

good news for most people...

They also said NO to Question # 7
Pot is still a NO NO in Nevada.

So if your from California going to Nevada.
Beware.
I think Pot is still a felony in Nevada ?

Surprisingly, the marijuana ballot initiative lost by a relatively small margin, 55% to 44%.

And it is a misdemeanor, not a felony to have under an ounce:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2001/Sep-30-Sun-2001/news/17075141.html

Granted, that is an old article, but I believe that law is still in effect, at least from what I heard during this past election.

And regarding the smoking ban - most tourists coming to Las Vegas won't notice an iota of difference. Smoking still allowed in casinos, but not in most better restaurants (as has been the case for quite sometime) and there are still smoking and non-smoking areas in most, but not all, buffets. The Wynn buffet, for instance, has never had a smoking area.
II think the hotels have already said that smoking in hotel rooms will be impossible to police, and there is some dispute whether that is even included in this new law.
The only real difference is for the small, local bars that used to serve burgers and chicken fingers, etc to patrons who hang out and play video poker and drink with friends. Now they either have to stop serving food to allow smoking, or stop smoking to allow food. Three guesses which is going to win out in most bars, considering their real income is derived from people sitting at the bar, playing video poker and, yes, smoking.

DMark

Here is the link to the Norml site
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?wtm_view=&Group_ID=4550

I heard thru one of my son`s friends it was a Felony.
Guess he learned first hand.
Looks like if your under 21 its a Felony. Ouch.

Now let me preface this by saying I am not-nor have I ever been-a smoker.
This new law is really going to put the screws on the smaller bars in Las Vegas.My employers son owns three and he is now going to have to play policeman enforcing this .
A lot of money came from the big casino corps. to fund this law-a move that might be seen as trying to squeeze out the smaller operations.

My wife and I are both smokers. We respect the no-smoking areas and signage when posted, yet we still enjoy having a cigarette in our hotel room or other areas that allow smoking. While we agree that we smokers are becoming a minority, still establishments that are open to the public should give people, IMO, the possiblity of choosing a smoking or non-smoking environment in their hotel rooms. Here in Ontario, the three major casinos and all of the smaller ones and bingo halls have all gone non-smoking after years of having both smoking and non-smoking areas. As smokers, we now have to leave the gaming areas in the casinos and go outside for a smoke, in designated smoking areas, as specified by the provincial government. Not very comfortable in the Canadian winters, even with "heated" smoking areas. Recent announcements have stated that the casinos' revenue had fallen significantly (and the tax revenues to the province from them) since the new smoking rules were put into place a few months ago. And employees lost many jobs because of the slowdowns. We still travel to these casinos, though not as often as before. And I don't envision the LV casinos all following suit in short order, as the loss of the smokers' business in Vegas would be a disaster for them.

I saw on the recent news up here that a group of bar owners in Quebec are going to court to challenge the non-smoking laws in that province because of the loss of business that they've seen since the law was implemented. They may not get very far with their challenge, but it's an indication that they're hurting.

bj-21.

I'm guessing the revenue drop will be short term. Poker rooms are non smoking and are doing fabulously. Non smoking r00lz.

QL

I remember when these laws went into effect her in California
many years ago. All the BS about how much business it was going to cost
turned out to be just that. BS. Its so nice to come home from Vegas
and enjoy the smoke free restaurants and other public places. Other new laws in places like Santa Monica And Calabassas keep you from smoking anywhere except in designated spots within the city. Not on the beaches or the parks or any other public places.

Its only a matter of time before the same laws take hold in Nevada.
Face it. In our society the majority can set the rules. And the majority
of us do not smoke. Looking forward to being able to enjoy Vegas without smelling that nasty smell on everything. And having to get it out of all my clothes when I get home. Bet within 5 years we have smoke free casinos.

I remember when these laws went into effect her in California
many years ago. All the BS about how much business it was going to cost
turned out to be just that. BS. Its so nice to come home from Vegas
and enjoy the smoke free restaurants and other public places. Other new laws in places like Santa Monica And Calabassas keep you from smoking anywhere except in designated spots within the city. Not on the beaches or the parks or any other public places.

Its only a matter of time before the same laws take hold in Nevada.
Face it. In our society the majority can set the rules. And the majority
of us do not smoke. Looking forward to being able to enjoy Vegas without smelling that nasty smell on everything. And having to get it out of all my clothes when I get home. Bet within 5 years we have smoke free casinos.

I agree with the laws --- as long as they are fair w/ respect to being consistent for ALL establishments.

What they did in NJ just doesn't sit right with me --- really strict non-smoking laws EVERYWHERE EXCEPT in Atlantic City Casinos. Though, I have heard that "might" be changing. IMHO, if a state goes SMOKE-FREE that should also include that state's casinos.

Vegas was one of the last havens where I could walk around and smoke with very few questions asked. I can see why the Hermes store didn't like it when I walked in to buy a few ties and proceeded to stink up their clothing, but I was giving them business and although I got a few looks, they never asked me to extinguish them. As long as they don't get rid of the cigar lounge at Del Frisco's we won't have any problems :cool:

I observed a casino with an entire non-smoking BJ pit (the MGM Grand, west side near Studio 54). They seemed to have plenty of business.

The restaurant and bar ban goes into effect Dec 8. You can still stink up the tables, but if you do, you are an *******.

I am NOT a smoker but I think these smoking laws are getting out of control. Goverment has no business telling private businesses what they can and can't allow with regards to smoking. It should be up to the bar/restaurant etc.

I can see in confined places like airplanes but I think they need to butt out of everything else.

BTW, smoking ban doesn't relate to the casinos. ^ At least one small victory for private enterprise.

I would love a smoke-free casino. Smokers are gross.

it is about time Nevada joined the first world on this issue.

It is surprising that there arent more smoke free casinos..Would be great as there are now whole hotel chains that are smoke free!

I am NOT a smoker but I think these smoking laws are getting out of control. Goverment has no business telling private businesses what they can and can't allow with regards to smoking. It should be up to the bar/restaurant etc.

I can see in confined places like airplanes but I think they need to butt out of everything else.

BTW, smoking ban doesn't relate to the casinos. ^ At least one small victory for private enterprise.

Reality check: this law is the result of action by the electors, not the legislature.

Reality check: this law is the result of action by the electors, not the legislature.
yup. I am one of the voters in favor of it :)

Reality check: this law is the result of action by the electors, not the legislature.


well yeah, duh. Who do you think the "government" is? "Of the people, by the people, for the people."

However, I still don't think they have any business telling PRIVATE businesses whether they can allow smoking inside the business. Just my two cents, of course.

But then, I also don't believe in government running my life from womb to tomb either. :D

It is surprising that there arent more smoke free casinos..Would be great as there are now whole hotel chains that are smoke free!

There actually was a smoke free casino years ago, across the street from the Stardust (Silver City?)...it remained smoke free for I think about a year or less, and their business dropped so they changed and made half the casino smoke-free, and the other half allowed smoking. Too late - by then business had dwindled (not that it was all that hot to begin with) and they eventually closed, tore the place down and now you will find Walgreens and Ross at that location.

My two cents - I understand not having smoking where children are present, and I could even understand haviing smoking and non-smoking sections in the casinos - but the new laws basically have targeted the small, local bars that live off of gaming revenue (at the bar, the video poker machines) and served light food (burgers, sandwiches, pizzas, etc.) as a courtesy to their customers. Now, most of them will simply stop serving food and remain a "bar" only, meaning customers can continue to smoke in the bar, but only eat pre-packaged foods, and the restaurant areas will close - losing jobs for those employees of the establishment.

I would probably agree with this except for one thing - my guess is the vast majority of non-smokers who voted for this law would not be caught dead in any of these bars, smoke or no smoke, and the regular patrons will remain the same. So all the non-smokers who voted for it will still not frequent the establishment, but can sleep soundly knowing that food is not being served in smoky places they never frequent.

The argument about the local poker bars is one that we will have to wait and see how it plays out. However, during the election season, there was a great deal of moaning and crying by local bars, convenience stores, and others about the impact on their business, and there was a fairly deceptive advertising campaign against the new iniative. "Local" companies like Terrible Herbst's (which is a large gas station/car wash/casino company) lobbied hard against the iniative and even had their employees speak against it to customers in their establishments. I think it is too soon to evaluate the overall economic impact of the new law, but I do recall that when CA eliminated smoking in bars, many of the same arguments were made, but when I go to a bar in CA, there still seems to be many patrons, and I have not seen lots of stories on the sharp increase in unemployed bartenders.....

I agree on the womb to tomb analogy.
Keep government out of our personal lives.
But smoking is intrusive on others health.
Like banning asbestos or lead. Smoking is toxic to others.
If you want to get cancer. Do it by yourself or with others
that are not concerned for their long term health.
FYI:
If you dont have insurance. We pay for your bad behavior as well.

And the ballot measure is a majority of the voting public.
Not the government !

As time goes by less people will smoke. Business will go on.
Vegas and Nevada will also evolve and mature. And the new
health oriented generation that includes my kids. Will generate
more income for properties that are mindfull of their lifestyle
and preferences.

Dmark
You can bet that the seedy little mom and pop places will stay
smoking. And serving food.
They have stayed that way here in California as well.
And guess what. Only smokers go there. Just as before.

As far as the Police.
They cant enforce the law and will just turn a blind eye.
Law enforcement has bigger fish to fry. Its has taken over 10 years
for these laws to change here in California. And we have 2 local places
close to work that still have not changed whatsoever.

But for Nevada. I think its just the "wind finally changing direction"
with regards to smoking regulation.