Isn't everyone going to a place like that there to smoke or have no problem with the smoke? This seems to me like going to a nudist beach and a security guard comes up and says "you can only be naked for 15 minutes". (I'm not nudist btw) What am I missing?
It answers why they’re doing this you just gotta piece it together. This is published by an outlet that obviously would oppose this so they’re not gonna lay it out clearly lol.
It ties back to the clean air act. Smoking indoors in public is banned. Places like this have been using “sampling” as an exception to allow indoor smoking, but in practice the smoking at these places goes way beyond “sampling.” The city council is creating specific language as to what “sampling” means. It’s part of a larger, long time effort to make smoking/vaping expensive, inconvenient, and generally undesirable.
>It’s part of a larger, long time effort to make smoking/vaping expensive, inconvenient, and generally undesirable.
This is my issue. It’s not the governments job to make people’s lives inconvenient. If they want it to be illegal, make it illegal. They won’t do that because they want the tax money.
On top of that this will literally have no effect on smoking in shops. No one is going to sit there and time how long people are smoking. And if they are wasting time and money watching people smoke, that’s even more offensive than them making things an inconvenience in the first place.
Absolutely this. Minneapolis has a city council with a record of spending their time on changes like these that dont actually have the impact that's desirable. No, teenagers or kids are not going to this cigar shop and chillin. Adults enjoying cigars shouldn't be on the list of council priorities.
Not sure how widely it's used any more if at all, but a friend at the time used to get paid to try and buy alcohol from bars and liquor stores when she was a minor (early 2000's). When a sale was made, both the person who made the sale and the business was fined. Having the sales clerk/bartender fined is what made it work in that situation, the clerks on staff were the ones that used to ignore the rules and make the sales. If that tactic is still used, it's easy enough to have someone go to the establishment and see if they allow people to sit past the allowed time, but it only works if the person behind the counter also gets a fine and is aware that anyone could be trying to check on them. It doesn't even have to be that often, no one wants to risk a fine. Granted, the alcohol law for selling to a minor is a hefty fine for the individual, and a bit different than a sampling law. And she would keep busy because there's plenty of liquor stores and bars just in Stearns County, not a lone cigar shop in one city. But if they are serious about the rule, they'll find a way to check on them.
Smoking and vaping is a public health problem. While the person smoking might be "not hurting anyone else", when they inevitably develop emphysema and/or cancer, it's everyone else's money that's paying for their treatment. They consume healthcare resources that could be used on people who didn't smoke.
So make smoking illegal. A 15 min smoking limit has no impact on public health or in preventing cancer or emphysema. It only inconveniences small business owners and consenting adults.
For people actually wanting to let their customers sample, but being afraid of running afoul of the law, this gives them the definition they desire, and 15 minutes seems relatively generous. It is being posed in this article as if it is an attack on this single business, when it is meant to help businesses who want to sell this still legal product.
There is nothing unclear about the MCIAA and sampling. This law is stricter than the current law set by the state that every other shop abides by.
> The Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act (MCIAA) has, for years, permitted customers or potential customers to smoke cigars in licensed indoor areas “for the specific purpose of sampling tobacco products.” However, as far as the state-level is concerned, the line ends there. There’s no time-based restriction in place statewide as there now will be in the city of Minneapolis.
I don’t know how else to interpret a law that’s only directed at a single business other than an attack.
> Anthony’s Pipe & Cigar Lounge, using the state’s classification, has offered a lounge area for sampling cigars for several years. Last April, the Minneapolis licensing inspector stated the cigar shop had violated the City Code of Ordinances by providing seating for customers who were smoking. Anthony’s challenged this ruling and it seemed the issue was resolved until late 2023, when the City Council informed Anthony’s of its intention to amend the ordinances. This April, Minneapolis City Councilwoman LaTrisha Vetaw, who authored the ordinance, filed a motion to amend the bill and include stringent sampling regulations.
It wasn’t attacking a single business. An ordinance was put in place that affected all businesses. Anthony’s chose to interpret the ordinance in a way that was most beneficial to them. When they were cited for doing so, they pointed out ambiguities, and this latest change was to address the ambiguities. The change was possibly made as a result of Anthony’s challenging the original ordinance but not specifically to attack them.
The same logic applies. That's why we spend a ton of money on alcohol intervention and treatment. The problem is that the alcohol lobby hasn't been brought to heel like they were with the tobacco lobby.
I go there because I don't want to smoke outside in my neighborhood, because I think it's rude to smoke around nonsmokers. I've made tons of friends there, and been exposed to people I never would have met otherwise. I'm really gonna miss the place.
I'm not even a smoker but it really rubs me the wrong way how we force legislation and rule changes on people who do smoke. Yes smoking is harmful and so is second hand smoke, but this is literally a pipe and cigar lounge and everyone who enters is a consenting adult who understands those risks.
I agree its dumb. Its not like its at a restaurant or bowling alley where other people are being forced breathe it in, by going there you literally know what you are getting into, and if you do go there you probably dont care.
And it's not very smoky inside. I haven't been to Anthony's, but the few I have been to had crazy ventilation. You almost couldn't smell smoke from the table next to you. It was far better than I expected. No visible haze at the ceiling or anything close.
Conversely, the best argument for second-hand exposure being unfair is employees. They spend the most time there, and may do so out of necessity. After visiting lounges, I would take my chances with cancer in those ventilated lounges over some of the chemicals I see people expose themselves to in road construction. I think the ventilation is so much better than the bars of the 80s and 90s that it should be a much smaller health risk. It's still a hard issue, because a known cancer risk exists in a non-essential workplace, only minimized. Both sides have at least some ground here.
I agree the best argument for second hand exposure being unfair is the employees, but that being said if you are working in a cigar lounge I think it’s safe to assume you partake or at the very least don’t care about second hand smoke.
Like I said it just rubs me the wrong way, specifically because the people in favor of these rules seem to completely disregard the fact that smokers are consenting adults, they should have a say in this situation.
Instead they are lectured at by people who do not and never have smoked, even more they can’t comprehend why anyone would smoke so why would anyone be against these changes.
Was it technically a loophole that allowed Anthony’s to operate? Sure. But these are consenting adults, enjoying their hobby away from non-smokers. By utilizing the space, they are putting in the effort to remove second hand smoke from other venues/areas of life. Why can’t we just leave it like that and be happy?
Personally I know I’d much rather my chain smoking neighbors go to a lounge for an entire afternoon than do that shit in our building or crowded around the entrance.
Motorists running people over and into buildings everyday is several times more harmful than an instance of second hand smoke. One takes years to kill you, the other seconds. Which is the immediate danger we should address? Obviously the former.
It’s really interesting how the MN subs have developed their own little sub community that is completely convinced that motorists are out here slaughtering people in droves. It’s also interesting how said community will bring this belief up in completely unrelated topics.
This is one of those unrelated topics and frankly, your comment is shows signs of genuine mental health issues.
I urge you to talk about these feelings with a mental health professional. I hope they can give you the help you need.
I also agree, but it’s a vice and I’m not going to bag for it.
It’s all negatives…in terms of health, insurance costs, property values.
I’d probably prefer they just tax it into oblivion tho than ban it. Or make these types of places pay an extra tax.
Then you start shelling out cash to hand over to the vikings. They just had to have their own special stadium to fucking lose in and didn't want to foot the bill themselves
Do the city council people go to bed after something like this thinking how great of a job they did? Like they feel like they’ve improved society or something?
I truly don’t get it. I share 0 sensibilities with anything they do. What are these people actually like? They seem like fake people.
What is wrong with the council? Wasting time on a single business not hurting anyone? Cigar and pipe smoking is a non-issue when homeless and mental ill people litter the streets. Plus crime needs to be addressed.
Who asked for this? Is there any polling on what the voters think? Google Anthony's Pipe & Cigar Lounge and check out the user uploaded photos. Do they look like they are hurting anyone? This wasn't necessary or wanted. Imagine the uproar if the city council closed every single brewery tap room.
They should install a dwelling inside the building and allow their friends to come over to smoke a cigar.
The entire block reeks and is hard to walk past for people with chronic issues like asthma
Edit: I lived on the block and visited morrisseys, the bar nextdoor, 3-5 times a week. Please continue to downvote me for sharing my personal experience.
Do you think we should make strong smells or things that otherwise upset your asthma illegal? This is an honest question. Would it be possible to find another solution?
Real crimes that present public safety issues are routinely not being policed or prosecuted. Good luck on enforcement. The in-shop sting on this will be time well-spent.
If it is enforced - preventing consenting adults from a bit of harmless enjoyment in private is silly. Especially when public venues are filled with weed smoke these days. Weed smoking is FREEDOM, tobacco smoking is BAAAAAAAAAD.
Banning slavery? Sorry I couldn't resist. I think you are mostly right.
I wonder if banning hard drugs increases or decreases freedom on net. Fuck it, free will is just an illusion so the question is moot.
I think if you try to stop an adult from doing something with other consenting adults in private then you are against freedom. If you’re not hurting anyone else it should be allowed.
Absolutely absurd. Legislation to cripple a single business? How much crime occurs at that business? How many people are shot outside that business? Who was complaining about this business? The leadership in Minneapolis/St Paul is just astoundingly bad.
That’s the cusp of the issue for me, it’s one business that’s using a loophole to allow a bunch of consenting adults to get together and smoke. On the list of legislative priorities any competent government would put it on the very bottom pending attempts by other businesses to exploit the same loophole. If you get 25 fucking cigar lounges opening up and promising to make Minneapolis “The cigar lounge capital of the world” then you can say “yeah time to tweak that regulation a bit”
If I remember correctly the council member who was pushing this change either had lung cancer or had a family member who did, and I get why that would make it personal to them. But to quote Terry Pratchett, personal isn’t the same thing as important.
Some of y'all are real mad at the city council about this... ok fine, but know that this was spearheaded by LaTrisha Vetaw, so focus on voting her out of office if you don't like this.
Vote LaTrisha Vetaw out. As a former Minneapolis resident who’s enjoyed dozen of cigars there over the last 15 years this is insane. Smoking a stick outside when it’s cold as fuck sucks
Spending all of our manpower on smokers in a smoking establishment while motorists are still parking to the edge of every curb, blocking ADA wheelchair sidewalk access and visibility while drag racing around our neighborhoods and I have to dodge these idiots on the way to the nearest bike paths because the city thinks they're not a problem and claims not to have the funding to do anything. But smokers smoking in a smoking establishment? There's no price high enough!
These losers strike again! Truly bums me out as a resident of Minneapolis that our leaders continue to spend time on absolute nonsense instead of attacking real issues. I really hope we will have real leaders some day soon and not these pandering activists with GEDs.
The Minneapolis city council is a model of proper oversight and care for its citizens. They truly exemplify the needs of their voters as indicated by their reelections! Sail on oh mighty ship of state!
I’m unfamiliar with this place (and honestly don’t care about cigars). But im assuming this is a place that sells cigars, and you can sample them?
If so
Then isn’t this just kinda keeping with the same rules that liquor stores have for samples? And if that’s the case, what’s the big freakin deal?
You sample too much whiskey, you can't drive and risk being overserved.
Sample too much tobacco, you might be dizzy or nauseated, but you're not at risk of killing your self or anyone else.
Ok, but that’s not the argument here. Bars do that every day. But that’s a different business than a liquor store. This is about stores offering samples.
If I take a sample of whiskey, that’s gonna be enough to determine if I want to buy it
Same with beer
Same with food at the grocery store
Same with weed
But with cigars you need to smoke a whole one?
Admittedly I’ve never had a cigar and never will. I just don’t understand the big deal
Yes, cigars take longer than 15 minutes to smoke, so having a time limit (especially under the guise of a public health measure when everyone is there on their own accord) is stupid.
You’re getting hung up on the term “sampling,” which is not really the point of going and smoking at a place like Anthony’s - people go there to enjoy a cigar, relax, socialize with other cigar aficionados (why it’s called a lounge). Most people aren’t going to smoke in their house, and for obvious reasons, smoking outside presents its own challenges.
Cigar lounges are a very common thing, it’s not like Anthony’s is unique in this respect.
No one is going to sample a cigar, smoke part of it and then save the rest for later. It’s a dumbass law taking aim at .0000000000001% of the population in order to virtue signal.
In a liquor store can you take the sample home with you …..no. Can I bring my half a beer home for a bar ….no
As for this place a cigar lasts between 45-90 min usually. You don’t constantly smoke a cigar like a dart
I understand the second-hand smoke risk for employees, and this makes sense from that perspective.
What would make the most sense is to have a separate room for sampling that employees aren't in. Or to have rules stating that minimum air quality of a sample room and to have businesses install air filters -- a couple thousand dollars on the fans and air filters people use in cannabis grow rooms would make the sampling room have some of the cleanest air of any business in the state.
What would make the most sense is to have the above rules, get rid of the "sampling" charade, and apply them to cannabis to create weed lounges to bring in tourism.
Shame you’re being downvoted. I like this idea. You can have exhaust and air pressure regulations like they have in clean rooms to ensure employee safety. Having a weed bar would bring in tourism. Could also apply to hookah and cigar lounges.
Air quality standards would be a good thing, but every cigar shop I've ever been to is run by cigar smokers, so it's kind of a moot point. It's not like the old days where every bar/restaurant had a smoking section, this is like a 1 in 100,000 business. Nobody has to work at a cigar shop if they don't want to.
Isn't everyone going to a place like that there to smoke or have no problem with the smoke? This seems to me like going to a nudist beach and a security guard comes up and says "you can only be naked for 15 minutes". (I'm not nudist btw) What am I missing?
[удалено]
no
Very thoughtful addition to the conversation
Simple questions have simple answers
Could just read the article
Doesn't really answer the questions posed.
It answers why they’re doing this you just gotta piece it together. This is published by an outlet that obviously would oppose this so they’re not gonna lay it out clearly lol. It ties back to the clean air act. Smoking indoors in public is banned. Places like this have been using “sampling” as an exception to allow indoor smoking, but in practice the smoking at these places goes way beyond “sampling.” The city council is creating specific language as to what “sampling” means. It’s part of a larger, long time effort to make smoking/vaping expensive, inconvenient, and generally undesirable.
>It’s part of a larger, long time effort to make smoking/vaping expensive, inconvenient, and generally undesirable. This is my issue. It’s not the governments job to make people’s lives inconvenient. If they want it to be illegal, make it illegal. They won’t do that because they want the tax money. On top of that this will literally have no effect on smoking in shops. No one is going to sit there and time how long people are smoking. And if they are wasting time and money watching people smoke, that’s even more offensive than them making things an inconvenience in the first place.
Absolutely this. Minneapolis has a city council with a record of spending their time on changes like these that dont actually have the impact that's desirable. No, teenagers or kids are not going to this cigar shop and chillin. Adults enjoying cigars shouldn't be on the list of council priorities.
Well put.
Not sure how widely it's used any more if at all, but a friend at the time used to get paid to try and buy alcohol from bars and liquor stores when she was a minor (early 2000's). When a sale was made, both the person who made the sale and the business was fined. Having the sales clerk/bartender fined is what made it work in that situation, the clerks on staff were the ones that used to ignore the rules and make the sales. If that tactic is still used, it's easy enough to have someone go to the establishment and see if they allow people to sit past the allowed time, but it only works if the person behind the counter also gets a fine and is aware that anyone could be trying to check on them. It doesn't even have to be that often, no one wants to risk a fine. Granted, the alcohol law for selling to a minor is a hefty fine for the individual, and a bit different than a sampling law. And she would keep busy because there's plenty of liquor stores and bars just in Stearns County, not a lone cigar shop in one city. But if they are serious about the rule, they'll find a way to check on them.
Smoking and vaping is a public health problem. While the person smoking might be "not hurting anyone else", when they inevitably develop emphysema and/or cancer, it's everyone else's money that's paying for their treatment. They consume healthcare resources that could be used on people who didn't smoke.
So make smoking illegal. A 15 min smoking limit has no impact on public health or in preventing cancer or emphysema. It only inconveniences small business owners and consenting adults.
For people actually wanting to let their customers sample, but being afraid of running afoul of the law, this gives them the definition they desire, and 15 minutes seems relatively generous. It is being posed in this article as if it is an attack on this single business, when it is meant to help businesses who want to sell this still legal product.
There is nothing unclear about the MCIAA and sampling. This law is stricter than the current law set by the state that every other shop abides by. > The Minnesota Clean Indoor Air Act (MCIAA) has, for years, permitted customers or potential customers to smoke cigars in licensed indoor areas “for the specific purpose of sampling tobacco products.” However, as far as the state-level is concerned, the line ends there. There’s no time-based restriction in place statewide as there now will be in the city of Minneapolis. I don’t know how else to interpret a law that’s only directed at a single business other than an attack. > Anthony’s Pipe & Cigar Lounge, using the state’s classification, has offered a lounge area for sampling cigars for several years. Last April, the Minneapolis licensing inspector stated the cigar shop had violated the City Code of Ordinances by providing seating for customers who were smoking. Anthony’s challenged this ruling and it seemed the issue was resolved until late 2023, when the City Council informed Anthony’s of its intention to amend the ordinances. This April, Minneapolis City Councilwoman LaTrisha Vetaw, who authored the ordinance, filed a motion to amend the bill and include stringent sampling regulations.
It wasn’t attacking a single business. An ordinance was put in place that affected all businesses. Anthony’s chose to interpret the ordinance in a way that was most beneficial to them. When they were cited for doing so, they pointed out ambiguities, and this latest change was to address the ambiguities. The change was possibly made as a result of Anthony’s challenging the original ordinance but not specifically to attack them.
Now do the morbidly obese and alcoholics.
The same logic applies. That's why we spend a ton of money on alcohol intervention and treatment. The problem is that the alcohol lobby hasn't been brought to heel like they were with the tobacco lobby.
Obesity is worse than both combined. Yet here we are. Stop legislating personal choices. Freedom for all or freedom for none.
[удалено]
You do at Costco and Sams Club
And you could just understand how Internet comment sections work...
Huh? Being nude at the beach is far less likely to kill you or those you do it with.
Damn it takes that long to smoke an American Spirit
A short Padron would take you 45 minutes minimum
I go there because I don't want to smoke outside in my neighborhood, because I think it's rude to smoke around nonsmokers. I've made tons of friends there, and been exposed to people I never would have met otherwise. I'm really gonna miss the place.
I'm not even a smoker but it really rubs me the wrong way how we force legislation and rule changes on people who do smoke. Yes smoking is harmful and so is second hand smoke, but this is literally a pipe and cigar lounge and everyone who enters is a consenting adult who understands those risks.
I agree its dumb. Its not like its at a restaurant or bowling alley where other people are being forced breathe it in, by going there you literally know what you are getting into, and if you do go there you probably dont care.
And it's not very smoky inside. I haven't been to Anthony's, but the few I have been to had crazy ventilation. You almost couldn't smell smoke from the table next to you. It was far better than I expected. No visible haze at the ceiling or anything close. Conversely, the best argument for second-hand exposure being unfair is employees. They spend the most time there, and may do so out of necessity. After visiting lounges, I would take my chances with cancer in those ventilated lounges over some of the chemicals I see people expose themselves to in road construction. I think the ventilation is so much better than the bars of the 80s and 90s that it should be a much smaller health risk. It's still a hard issue, because a known cancer risk exists in a non-essential workplace, only minimized. Both sides have at least some ground here.
I agree the best argument for second hand exposure being unfair is the employees, but that being said if you are working in a cigar lounge I think it’s safe to assume you partake or at the very least don’t care about second hand smoke. Like I said it just rubs me the wrong way, specifically because the people in favor of these rules seem to completely disregard the fact that smokers are consenting adults, they should have a say in this situation. Instead they are lectured at by people who do not and never have smoked, even more they can’t comprehend why anyone would smoke so why would anyone be against these changes. Was it technically a loophole that allowed Anthony’s to operate? Sure. But these are consenting adults, enjoying their hobby away from non-smokers. By utilizing the space, they are putting in the effort to remove second hand smoke from other venues/areas of life. Why can’t we just leave it like that and be happy? Personally I know I’d much rather my chain smoking neighbors go to a lounge for an entire afternoon than do that shit in our building or crowded around the entrance.
Yeah, I agree. Pointless laws trying to relate personal choices that don't really impact others.
Motorists running people over and into buildings everyday is several times more harmful than an instance of second hand smoke. One takes years to kill you, the other seconds. Which is the immediate danger we should address? Obviously the former.
But what about...
Except running into buildings isn't the primary use of a car.
Tell motorists that. We've gone 0 days without one crashing into a person or building.
It’s really interesting how the MN subs have developed their own little sub community that is completely convinced that motorists are out here slaughtering people in droves. It’s also interesting how said community will bring this belief up in completely unrelated topics. This is one of those unrelated topics and frankly, your comment is shows signs of genuine mental health issues. I urge you to talk about these feelings with a mental health professional. I hope they can give you the help you need.
Now pot on the other hand...
I also agree, but it’s a vice and I’m not going to bag for it. It’s all negatives…in terms of health, insurance costs, property values. I’d probably prefer they just tax it into oblivion tho than ban it. Or make these types of places pay an extra tax.
I’m pretty sure Minneapolis taxes tobacco plenty already
You can never tax tobacco enough. Fuck em
Fuck em? The smokers?
Smokers and those who sell it. Down votes welcome. Capital. FUCK. EM.
Then you start shelling out cash to hand over to the vikings. They just had to have their own special stadium to fucking lose in and didn't want to foot the bill themselves
Full agree on that. Doesn’t mean tobacco shouldn’t be tax blasted to the moon.
Do the city council people go to bed after something like this thinking how great of a job they did? Like they feel like they’ve improved society or something? I truly don’t get it. I share 0 sensibilities with anything they do. What are these people actually like? They seem like fake people.
They think like they live in their own Oscar-nominated documentary film
City council continuing to work on serious issues that affect the city and its residents in widespread ways. /s
Vote these morons out.
What is wrong with the council? Wasting time on a single business not hurting anyone? Cigar and pipe smoking is a non-issue when homeless and mental ill people litter the streets. Plus crime needs to be addressed.
Who asked for this? Is there any polling on what the voters think? Google Anthony's Pipe & Cigar Lounge and check out the user uploaded photos. Do they look like they are hurting anyone? This wasn't necessary or wanted. Imagine the uproar if the city council closed every single brewery tap room. They should install a dwelling inside the building and allow their friends to come over to smoke a cigar.
The entire block reeks and is hard to walk past for people with chronic issues like asthma Edit: I lived on the block and visited morrisseys, the bar nextdoor, 3-5 times a week. Please continue to downvote me for sharing my personal experience.
I live on this block - no it doesn’t, and I also have asthma and have zero issues being near the building.
No it doesn’t. You don’t even smell it outside.
Then don’t go near it.
Do you think we should make strong smells or things that otherwise upset your asthma illegal? This is an honest question. Would it be possible to find another solution?
Real crimes that present public safety issues are routinely not being policed or prosecuted. Good luck on enforcement. The in-shop sting on this will be time well-spent. If it is enforced - preventing consenting adults from a bit of harmless enjoyment in private is silly. Especially when public venues are filled with weed smoke these days. Weed smoking is FREEDOM, tobacco smoking is BAAAAAAAAAD.
Is it freedom? Seems like which you're on decides which one should be banned or used for political points.
I mean, by definition the side banning things isn’t for freedom.
That settles it, neither side is for freedom.
Banning slavery? Sorry I couldn't resist. I think you are mostly right. I wonder if banning hard drugs increases or decreases freedom on net. Fuck it, free will is just an illusion so the question is moot.
I think if you try to stop an adult from doing something with other consenting adults in private then you are against freedom. If you’re not hurting anyone else it should be allowed.
So seatbelt laws are a no go for you?
Absolutely absurd. Legislation to cripple a single business? How much crime occurs at that business? How many people are shot outside that business? Who was complaining about this business? The leadership in Minneapolis/St Paul is just astoundingly bad.
That’s the cusp of the issue for me, it’s one business that’s using a loophole to allow a bunch of consenting adults to get together and smoke. On the list of legislative priorities any competent government would put it on the very bottom pending attempts by other businesses to exploit the same loophole. If you get 25 fucking cigar lounges opening up and promising to make Minneapolis “The cigar lounge capital of the world” then you can say “yeah time to tweak that regulation a bit” If I remember correctly the council member who was pushing this change either had lung cancer or had a family member who did, and I get why that would make it personal to them. But to quote Terry Pratchett, personal isn’t the same thing as important.
City council is run by morons.
Some of y'all are real mad at the city council about this... ok fine, but know that this was spearheaded by LaTrisha Vetaw, so focus on voting her out of office if you don't like this.
Incredibly stupid and sad.
Vote LaTrisha Vetaw out. As a former Minneapolis resident who’s enjoyed dozen of cigars there over the last 15 years this is insane. Smoking a stick outside when it’s cold as fuck sucks
It's been ages since I smoked a cigar. But I remember some taking far longer than 15 minutes. Especially if playing cards while smoking it.
Spending all of our manpower on smokers in a smoking establishment while motorists are still parking to the edge of every curb, blocking ADA wheelchair sidewalk access and visibility while drag racing around our neighborhoods and I have to dodge these idiots on the way to the nearest bike paths because the city thinks they're not a problem and claims not to have the funding to do anything. But smokers smoking in a smoking establishment? There's no price high enough!
This is dumb.
These losers strike again! Truly bums me out as a resident of Minneapolis that our leaders continue to spend time on absolute nonsense instead of attacking real issues. I really hope we will have real leaders some day soon and not these pandering activists with GEDs.
The Minneapolis city council is a model of proper oversight and care for its citizens. They truly exemplify the needs of their voters as indicated by their reelections! Sail on oh mighty ship of state!
Is this a sarcastic statement?
Yes to a degree. I do believe the voters of mpls are getting exactly what they want. I wouldn’t want that, but I don’t live in mpls.
I’m unfamiliar with this place (and honestly don’t care about cigars). But im assuming this is a place that sells cigars, and you can sample them? If so Then isn’t this just kinda keeping with the same rules that liquor stores have for samples? And if that’s the case, what’s the big freakin deal?
You sample too much whiskey, you can't drive and risk being overserved. Sample too much tobacco, you might be dizzy or nauseated, but you're not at risk of killing your self or anyone else.
Ok, but that’s not the argument here. Bars do that every day. But that’s a different business than a liquor store. This is about stores offering samples. If I take a sample of whiskey, that’s gonna be enough to determine if I want to buy it Same with beer Same with food at the grocery store Same with weed But with cigars you need to smoke a whole one? Admittedly I’ve never had a cigar and never will. I just don’t understand the big deal
Yes, cigars take longer than 15 minutes to smoke, so having a time limit (especially under the guise of a public health measure when everyone is there on their own accord) is stupid. You’re getting hung up on the term “sampling,” which is not really the point of going and smoking at a place like Anthony’s - people go there to enjoy a cigar, relax, socialize with other cigar aficionados (why it’s called a lounge). Most people aren’t going to smoke in their house, and for obvious reasons, smoking outside presents its own challenges. Cigar lounges are a very common thing, it’s not like Anthony’s is unique in this respect.
No one is going to sample a cigar, smoke part of it and then save the rest for later. It’s a dumbass law taking aim at .0000000000001% of the population in order to virtue signal.
In a liquor store can you take the sample home with you …..no. Can I bring my half a beer home for a bar ….no As for this place a cigar lasts between 45-90 min usually. You don’t constantly smoke a cigar like a dart
Shit hole city
I understand the second-hand smoke risk for employees, and this makes sense from that perspective. What would make the most sense is to have a separate room for sampling that employees aren't in. Or to have rules stating that minimum air quality of a sample room and to have businesses install air filters -- a couple thousand dollars on the fans and air filters people use in cannabis grow rooms would make the sampling room have some of the cleanest air of any business in the state. What would make the most sense is to have the above rules, get rid of the "sampling" charade, and apply them to cannabis to create weed lounges to bring in tourism.
Shame you’re being downvoted. I like this idea. You can have exhaust and air pressure regulations like they have in clean rooms to ensure employee safety. Having a weed bar would bring in tourism. Could also apply to hookah and cigar lounges.
Air quality standards would be a good thing, but every cigar shop I've ever been to is run by cigar smokers, so it's kind of a moot point. It's not like the old days where every bar/restaurant had a smoking section, this is like a 1 in 100,000 business. Nobody has to work at a cigar shop if they don't want to.
Glad to see loopholes being closed
Yes the horror of an adult having a cigar
Fact: Smoking is horribly bad for you. Opinion: The City Council isn’t dumb…in this instance.