Now that is how to think outside the box

When the Minnesota Legislature passed and Governor Tim Pawlenty signed into law the statewide smoking ban that went into effect last fall, I was very much against its implementation. I don't smoke, and I don't like being around it, especially when I eat, but I think that private businesses should be able to operate how they see fit when it comes to legal products and activities, and let the free market take care of their success, or lack thereof. It also seems like a very dangerous road to start down. Are fatty foods or alcoholic drinks next? We all know how Prohibition turned out last time, and it wasn't pretty. All it gave us was the Mafia and the Kennedys. I'm still not sure which one was worse.

If Fred has a smoking bar, and Joe opens a non-smoking bar down the street and proceeds to clean Fred's clock financially, my guess is that Fred will see the light sooner or later and go non-smoking himself, in order for his business to make it long-term. In my own case, I very frequently chose to eat at Bakers Square instead of Perkins, as the Square had already had its own smoke-free policy in place for years. Both places seemed busy and prosperous, and everyone seemed happy with their choice of restaurant.

Minnesota has many small neighborhood bars that have either closed or been severely hurt by the smoking ban, as many patrons (and the workers who served them) went to these establishments to drink and smoke in peace. I don't remember hearing that anyone was forced at gunpoint to either work at or patronize these places before the ban took effect. It also doesn't help that Minnesota's severe winter climate isn't very conducive to having outdoor smoking patios, forcing customers to go stand uncomfortably in sub-zero conditions to get their fix.

One bar owner, however, has noticed that the benevolent legislators, at the request of the Brie and wine arts crowd, no doubt (curiously, some of the very people who agitated the loudest for the ban in the first place), had carved out an exception for theatrical productions in the ban. That is, actors on stage could smoke themselves silly without penalty. The poor audience would just have to be exposed to second-hand smoke, because, you know, it's art. How dare you criticize what a playwright decides to have his actors do? It's necessary for the atmosphere, you see.

The bar owner's solution: Set up webcams, tell the bar patrons that they are now "actors" in a "theater night", and now everyone's good to go. Fair is fair, after all. Absolute genius, and a sharp poke in the eye to the benevolent masters who deign to decide what's good for the peasantry, whether they want it or not.

"Lisa Anderson, owner of Mike's Uptown bar in Hill City, said that last Saturday she staged a "theater night" and packed in four times the usual crowd that has come in since the smoking ban took effect." (Emphasis mine)

Whoever would have thought that large amounts of law-abiding people merely wished to gather at certain places and indulge in legal activities with each other? If you don't approve of such activities, then don't go there. The people already at that destination probably don't want you around, either, you killjoy.

This loophole will obviously soon be closed by the overlords up at the Minnesota State Capitol. Until then, however, score one for the innovative free thinkers in Minnesota. "Free" in many more ways than one, for sure.