Should casinos be exempt from smoking restrictions?

I write a gambling column for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in Pennsylvania (home to some of the best blackjack rules in the U.S.), and I'm seeking comments about smoking in casinos.
On 4/27/15, I wrote about plans at Presque Isle in Erie, Pa., and Mountaineer in Chester, W.Va., to make accommodations for nonsmokers (link:
April 27 column). Those who read the whole column will see I favor banning smoking in casinos.
I'm trying to get a sense of what other casino-goers think, and I figured WoV would be a good place to get a lot of observations from people familiar with casinos.
Here's the question: Should casinos be exempted from government-approved smoking bans that apply to other workplaces and sites open to the public?
I plan to do a follow-up column with a sampling of responses, from here and from other forums.
If you prefer not to post your thoughts here, you can email me at players@tribweb.com.
Thanks for your help.

Maybe you should have made it a poll. Would have been easier to record the votes.

Yes
10char

I am a rare breed. I really hate smoking completely. Hate breathing it and hate how you smell when you get home. That being said I support the right of the casino to allow smoking areas as it is a big market for them. Anecdotally I find smokers to be more heavy gamblers than average and I find that their skill level is lower or at the least they are less likely to engage in AP.

While I hate smoking, I used to like a cigar with friends a few times a year. (I said I am weird already.) So we were at one of the bars at Rivers that allowed it. We didn't know it was allowed only "at the bar." So while casino watching some guy who looked like maybe a dealer going to/from break or something says, "hey, no smoking!" We replied back that it was a smoking area and I guess we had a bit of an attitude on us, being old college buddies getting together. He left and we heard nothing more on it. I later learned of the "at the bar" rule. Ooopsie!

My point is they should be allowed to have smoking as the places are huge with room for both, but they could do a better job of segregating an labeling where and where not allowed.

Should casinos also be exempt from government approved drinking laws, money laundry laws, labor laws, child endangerment laws etc..... What makes a casino so special that it is above the law?

I'm hoping for responses beyond yes or no. I started to write that, then thought I sounded like a teacher handing out an essay test.

I don't smoke, never have, never will outside of an occasional wedding cigar, but I don't think government should ban smoking in casinos, however if you are at a table playing blackjack or craps or something, if the table can agree they can put up a non-smoking sign for that table and they usually will honor that request. However, if an individual casino wishes to ban smoking, I am all for that. It's their business and their money and they should be able to make those rules, not have them thrown down their throat by the government

Hi Mark, Welcome to the forum. I enjoy reading your columns in the trib.

Smoking is such a touchy subject and I am shocked that the casinos are going to attempt to battle it. Just ask Revel how well that worked. As a non smoker I CAN NOT stand being near smokers in a casino. It seems like even a casual smoker will chain smoke when playing in a casino. Smoke doesn't bother me like it does my wife but chain smoking does. The Meadows will put a no smoking sign on a table if the current players all want it. I like that they do that.

So with that being said, I don't think there should be a law against smoking in a casino or bars for that matter. I am all for the non smoking in restaurants but that is for another discussion. I am ok with a casino making a rule about no smoking like the Revel did but I am against the state making the decision. If a business wants to limit what is ok in their venue then so be it. Doesn't the state have enough to worry about instead of whether or not people smoke. This is actually one time that the state is trying to take away revenue. Can you imagine how many packs are smoked daily in a casino and the amount of tax revenue would be lost if they made casinos non smoking.

I am on my phone so hopefully my rambling makes sense.

I have a question for the board, in states where marijuana is legal for everyone, what are the rules in casinos? For people who are in favor of smoking at casinos does your view change for smoking marijuana in a casino?

Quote: zoobrew

Should casinos also be exempt from government approved drinking laws, money laundry laws, labor laws, child endangerment laws etc..... What makes a casino so special that it is above the law?

Many places have many exemptions for many laws. As to smoking, I sit here about 10 miles from Rivers and in my town every single bar is grandfathered to smoking laws. They are all smoking and it is a reason among others that I do not go to bars like I used to.

Quote: zoobrew

I have a question for the board, in states where marijuana is legal for everyone, what are the rules in casinos? For people who are in favor of smoking at casinos does your view change for smoking marijuana in a casino?

I would prefer not to be around pot smokers, given the choice of tobacco or pot I would prefer to be around tobacco. Not quite so much for the smoke difference, but the way the smokers will be acting.

States where pot is legal it isn't legal to smoke in public. The same SHOULD be true for tobacco smoking, absolutely disgusting habit, and should be done in the interest of public health

Quote: mcallister3200

States where pot is legal it isn't legal to smoke in public. The same SHOULD be true for tobacco smoking, absolutely disgusting habit, and should be done in the interest of public health

Agree infinity%

Quote: mcallister3200

States where pot is legal it isn't legal to smoke in public. The same SHOULD be true for tobacco smoking, absolutely disgusting habit, and should be done in the interest of public health

Then you cam gamble in the nonsmoking section. I dont know why people get upset over smokers when they are in a smoking area.

Quote: zoobrew

Should casinos also be exempt from government approved drinking laws, money laundry laws, labor laws, child endangerment laws etc..... What makes a casino so special that it is above the law?

Money

What would happen if a casino chose to became completely smoke free without a government ban? Especially in Las Vegas. Wouldn't they have all the customers who wanted to enjoy a smoke-free casino environment? At least until others noticed the success and followed. Or would too many smokers stay away?

In Iowa, the only place where smoking is allowed indoors in a public setting is at a casino. Bars and restaurants are not allowed to have a smoking section any more. I would personally appreciate it if casinos were not exempted, but it would hurt business. There is one tribal casino in Iowa that likely would not have to follow the smoking ban, so they might pick up some business at the expense of the other casinos if smoking were banned.

In most states "smoking bans" are not blanket bans for indoor areas. It usually labels businesses based on business types and states where smoking is allowed and where it is restricted (seperated smoking rooms etc...) and which businesses it must be completely banned. In some states smoking is banned in restaurants, but allowed in bars, etc...
So its not so much an exemption as it is being a business labeled as allowed to have smoking.

I live in NJ and I like the AC system. Casinos have to have smoking and nonsmoking gambling areas (though to be fair at many casinos here this is laxly enforced if at all). And, there are sneaky ways casinos can expand the smoking areas (technically no more than 25% of gambling areas are suppose to allow smoking), but if you look at the "smoking floor plans" for casinos you will note that many "non smoking areas" are inaccessible gray areas, which actually makes more of the functioning accessible floor smoking.

Philosophically I am against any government enforced smoking ban for any private property. But I think making smoking sections and nonsmoking areas is a fair compromise. Casinos that do it by having separate floors as smoking and nonsmoking is even better as it is easier to enforce as oppose to arbitrary borders at various points in the floor which are virtually nonenforceable.

I think banning smoking totally will devastate the industry, there is a reason Casinos do so much to accommodate smokers, because a large percentage of gamblers smoke. And, if they need to exit the building to smoke, it is less likely they will immediately continue playing or may feel like walking to another casino.

I am not a "smoker" generally , but when I go to the Casinos I will occasionally pick up a pack or two because it is relaxing and feels natural. And, its one of the last socially acceptable places to smoke without being judged. Also, in my state anyway (NJ), Casinos seem to be the last place that are allowed to have cigarette vending machines, at least its the only place I have ever seen them. I am guessing because there is an age restriction to access the floor, so they figure it is safe from minors.

Quote: TomG

What would happen if a casino chose to became completely smoke free without a government ban? Especially in Las Vegas. Wouldn't they have all the customers who wanted to enjoy a smoke-free casino environment? At least until others noticed the success and followed. Or would too many smokers stay away?

I have zero problem if a business itself says it is its best interest to not allow smoking for the benefit of its customers, however it shouldn't be the governments business to do this. I understand many states ban smoking in bars (I happen to live in one of those states) but IMO it is none of the governments business. OTOH, I do favor banning marijuana smoke in public places as having residue of said smoke could potentially cost someone a potential job.

I work in a smoke-free casino. It's filthy enough without having to breathe smoke. Granted, it's the state that demands it, but the company is even stricter - as I understand it, other properties in the state allow vaping but ours does not.

I'm sure some more casinos will go smoke-free in time, though if they are smart, they will allow and offer alternatives - vaping, snus, and my personal favorite idea - nicotine mints, y'know, for players with foul breath.

If I were in charge of a casino, it would be smoke-free but allow vaping and other forms of nicotine consumption.

Quote: hwccdealer

I work in a smoke-free casino. It's filthy enough without having to breathe smoke. Granted, it's the state that demands it, but the company is even stricter - as I understand it, other properties in the state allow vaping but ours does not.

I'm sure some more casinos will go smoke-free in time, though if they are smart, they will allow and offer alternatives - vaping, snus, and my personal favorite idea - nicotine mints, y'know, for players with foul breath.

If I were in charge of a casino, it would be smoke-free but allow vaping and other forms of nicotine consumption.

In some states, (including my own) Vaporized nicotine products (such as e-cigarettes, vapes , etc...) can only be used in smoking approved areas and are banned everywhere smoking is banned (basically they are considered "smoking products" and are looked at as no different than cigarettes legally).

I consider it my right to smoke at a table while gambling. If I have a choice between a smoking casino and a non-smoking casino, I will ALWAYS choose the smoking.

Look up Muckleshoot Casino in Auburn, Washington. It's a huge casino that is half smoking and half nonsmoking, both halves include table games and slots, blackjack/roulette/craps at the very least are in both areas. They do it the right way.

As a casino smoker (I smoking maybe 2-3 packs a year outside of the casino) I vote that all casinos should be exempt from anti-smoking hysteria. As a political realist, it isn't worth the fight. I vote with my feet: I live in northern Virginia and haven't been to a MD casino for over a year. If I need to go locally, it's to Charles Town, WV... Otherwise Vegas/AC. Part of it is the drive (traffic), but the no-smoking definitely doesn't help.

I have asthma and I find cigarette smoke blowing in my face to be very irritating. And I hate leaving a casino and finding that my clothes reek of cigarette smoke.

Requiring a smoker to step away from a poker or gaming table before they smoke may seem like a reasonable compromise - but sometimes the absence of the player is disruptive to the game. I've been at Texas Hold 'em tables where we perpetually averaged two or 3 empty seats out of 10 because various players would step away to smoke. The non-smoking players didn't even get free blind bets - the smokers would hand a lit cigarette off to a fellow smoker and rush back to the table to quickly look at their cards whenever the rotation of the blind bets came around to them. Very annoying to have poker players bouncing back and forth between the table and the designated smoking area.

Same issue in PGP - Pai Gow Poker. There is a bonus bet, the Fortune Bet, in which the House edge is a function of the number of players (Max: 6 players.) making the bet on a given deal. Having continuously vacant seats because players are yo-yo-ing between the table and the smoking area increases the House Edge for the remaining players.

Not sure of the best answer. I'll be reading the posts in this thread to see what other players think.

Quote: Gandler

In most states "smoking bans" are not blanket bans for indoor areas. It usually labels businesses based on business types and states where smoking is allowed and where it is restricted (seperated smoking rooms etc...) and which businesses it must be completely banned. In some states smoking is banned in restaurants, but allowed in bars, etc...
So its not so much an exemption as it is being a business labeled as allowed to have smoking.

I live in NJ and I like the AC system. Casinos have to have smoking and nonsmoking gambling areas (though to be fair at many casinos here this is laxly enforced if at all). And, there are sneaky ways casinos can expand the smoking areas (technically no more than 25% of gambling areas are suppose to allow smoking), but if you look at the "smoking floor plans" for casinos you will note that many "non smoking areas" are inaccessible gray areas, which actually makes more of the functioning accessible floor smoking.

Philosophically I am against any government enforced smoking ban for any private property. But I think making smoking sections and nonsmoking areas is a fair compromise. Casinos that do it by having separate floors as smoking and nonsmoking is even better as it is easier to enforce as oppose to arbitrary borders at various points in the floor which are virtually nonenforceable.

I think banning smoking totally will devastate the industry, there is a reason Casinos do so much to accommodate smokers, because a large percentage of gamblers smoke. And, if they need to exit the building to smoke, it is less likely they will immediately continue playing or may feel like walking to another casino.

I am not a "smoker" generally , but when I go to the Casinos I will occasionally pick up a pack or two because it is relaxing and feels natural. And, its one of the last socially acceptable places to smoke without being judged. Also, in my state anyway (NJ), Casinos seem to be the last place that are allowed to have cigarette vending machines, at least its the only place I have ever seen them. I am guessing because there is an age restriction to access the floor, so they figure it is safe from minors.

+1

Random thoughts in addition/support:

Let the market dictate. The casinos are private property, available to the public. Most make accommodation for both smoking and non-smoking patrons; to force a change through government regulation is against their business interests and alienating a good portion of their customers. If the business plan provides an advantage through differentiation as a non-smoking casino, then more power to them. However, both Revel and AC itself both serve as cautionary tales against this model; AC was forced to go non-smoking for a brief period in the early 2000's, saw a disastrous decline in clientele and revenue, and modified to their current configuration quickly. Revel thought there was enough demand for a smoke-free environment that they made it policy, and lost billions (no accounting for how much was due to the non-smoking environment, but all reports I've seen found it to be a major contributor to the failure).

Beyond that, it's just annoying and invasive to push your agenda into casinos; 99% of public venues are already all non-smoking. People who work in casinos signed up to work in a smoking environment, so I reject that argument. Customers like to relax with a drink and a cigarette at the tables, which they can do almost nowhere else any more, which IMO is part of what's bringing people into casinos. Haven't seen a restaurant in or near a casino that allowed smoking in that area in over a decade, so objections about drifting smoke while eating are questionable at best; go out the door and find another restaurant among the near-monopoly of smoke-free eateries nationwide if it's a problem. Just a very Big Brother action on activists' parts to serve their self-interests at the expense of others.

And the reason it will fail everywhere casino owners have any pull in local governments is that NA casinos are now virtually everywhere and will not comply. They make entirely too much money off tobacco, with their ability to sell it without the burden of state and local taxes, and they are very aware that a sizeable portion of their casino patrons want to be able to smoke while they play. The non-NA casinos can't compete on a level playing field as all-non-smoking properties in most areas (I realize there are some states where that's already the law.). And as both types of casinos proliferate, none can afford to alienate new and returning customers, not when the internet is increasingly allowing people to gamble (and smoke) in the privacy of their homes.

All JMHO;YMMV.

Quote: djatc

Then you cam gamble in the nonsmoking section. I dont know why people get upset over smokers when they are in a smoking area.

They usually don't have the same gaming options. I don't stick my butt up in someone's face and fart just because it's not disallowed.

Didn't Revel try that?

I don't smoke but have no problem with those who do. Anymore, I find most smokers trying to keep it out of people's faces.
There are always A&$@ol3$ who are drunk and have no respect. Mostly though, I don't mind smoking in that environment.

Others have strong opinions about it and I respect that. We're all different.

I also doubt it will happen in Vegas in my lifetime. In my 60s so that may not be as long as some here.

Quote: zoobrew

Should casinos also be exempt from government approved drinking laws, money laundry laws, labor laws, child endangerment laws etc..... What makes a casino so special that it is above the law?

AGREED.

So my 2 cents is that casinos should NOT be exempted from a State Law that affects all other businesses.

As far as I can tell, the Ohio casinos are doing just fine with the State Law that bans smoking for INDOOR public places. In fact, places like the Hardrock Racino have a novel solution, outdoor patio (covered roof) smoking areas, complete with heaters, for the Smoking crowd.

Now, if you want to debate whether or not the whole law should be repealed, that's another discussion.

Disclaimer: I am not a smoker.

Quote: djatc

Then you cam gamble in the nonsmoking section. I dont know why people get upset over smokers when they are in a smoking area.

Yhe problem is the smoking areas aren't really separate from the non smoking areas. If they were truly separate it would be much better.

However if the state's laws don't allow smoking in other public venues why should casino's have special privileges? If they were all smoke free then you could throw out the argument about losing business.

I personally hate smoking and wish it was illegal. I always try to make a table non smoking.

Quote: JohnnyQ

So my 2 cents is that casinos should NOT be exempted from a State Law that affects all other businesses.

As far as I can tell, the Ohio casinos are doing just fine with the State Law that bans smoking for INDOOR public places. In fact, places like the Hardrock Racino have a novel solution, outdoor patio (covered roof) smoking areas, complete with heaters, for the Smoking crowd.

Exactly... the Ohio casinos are doing just fine, and they have a place for smoking and yet they don't smell like a stale ash tray when you walk through the door.

On top of that, Ohio casinos also don't give out free drinks.


The ironic thing about the Revel is that when they finally did allow smoking, their modern air handling system was good enough that the conditions there were always pretty good (as long as you weren't right at the same table with a smoker). The same cannot be said for the other A.C. casinos.

Quote: djatc

Then you cam gamble in the nonsmoking section. I dont know why people get upset over smokers when they are in a smoking area.

Split sections are a PIA because there is often not as much variety in the games unless you want to go to both sections.

solution

Quote: TriathlonTodd

In Iowa, the only place where smoking is allowed indoors in a public setting is at a casino. Bars and restaurants are not allowed to have a smoking section any more. I would personally appreciate it if casinos were not exempted, but it would hurt business. There is one tribal casino in Iowa that likely would not have to follow the smoking ban, so they might pick up some business at the expense of the other casinos if smoking were banned.

That's another thing that pisses me off the tribal sovereign nation bs.That's a subject for another day.

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful, non-hysterical or inflammatory responses. Quite refreshing as this is a hot button topic. I am a smoker, live in NJ and I enjoy smoking while I gamble. I won't gamble where I cannot smoke, just as many others would not think of gambling without cocktail service. Just last week one of my favorite casinos, Harrahs New Orleans, was forced to go smoke free by city ordinance. While it is too soon to tell what if any financial impact this will have, I will go out on a limb and say it will be costly. Just my personal observations but it seems that every other person playing slots or video poker has a smoke in hand. When Revel opened as a non-smoking property, I was looking forward to seeing if this really would draw in the seemingly thousands of gamblers who constantly complained about smoking. Well, it seems that these same folks were willing to put up with smoke in exchange for free buffets and comp offers that the Revel was not giving away. Revel failed for a variety of reasons but starting off alienating smokers was not the best plan. The best accommodation I have ever seen is at Harrahs Laughlin. Two identical casinos separated by a large walled area, one smoking and the other smoke-free. Same machines, table games etc in each half. The casinos should have been proactive about this issue instead of waiting for the other shoe to drop, by making a genuine effort to accommodate both groups. Personally, I have had many bad experiences with drunk gamblers but no one is talking about banning alcohol. Gambling, drinking and smoking seem to go together. None of these activities is part of a healthy lifestyle, are they? Let the casino make the call about smoking. It's their business and their gamble. Let them decide which group is more costly to alienate. After all, it's all about the money. It always was and it always will be.

Quote: ACMama

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful, non-hysterical or inflammatory responses. Quite refreshing as this is a hot button topic. I am a smoker, live in NJ and I enjoy smoking while I gamble. I won't gamble where I cannot smoke, just as many others would not think of gambling without cocktail service. Just last week one of my favorite casinos, Harrahs New Orleans, was forced to go smoke free by city ordinance. While it is too soon to tell what if any financial impact this will have, I will go out on a limb and say it will be costly. Just my personal observations but it seems that every other person playing slots or video poker has a smoke in hand. When Revel opened as a non-smoking property, I was looking forward to seeing if this really would draw in the seemingly thousands of gamblers who constantly complained about smoking. Well, it seems that these same folks were willing to put up with smoke in exchange for free buffets and comp offers that the Revel was not giving away. Revel failed for a variety of reasons but starting off alienating smokers was not the best plan. The best accommodation I have ever seen is at Harrahs Laughlin. Two identical casinos separated by a large walled area, one smoking and the other smoke-free. Same machines, table games etc in each half. The casinos should have been proactive about this issue instead of waiting for the other shoe to drop, by making a genuine effort to accommodate both groups. Personally, I have had many bad experiences with drunk gamblers but no one is talking about banning alcohol. Gambling, drinking and smoking seem to go together. None of these activities is part of a healthy lifestyle, are they? Let the casino make the call about smoking. It's their business and their gamble. Let them decide which group is more costly to alienate. After all, it's all about the money. It always was and it always will be.

Quote: ACMama

Thanks to everyone for your thoughtful, non-hysterical or inflammatory responses. Quite refreshing as this is a hot button topic. I am a smoker, live in NJ and I enjoy smoking while I gamble. I won't gamble where I cannot smoke, just as many others would not think of gambling without cocktail service. Just last week one of my favorite casinos, Harrahs New Orleans, was forced to go smoke free by city ordinance. While it is too soon to tell what if any financial impact this will have, I will go out on a limb and say it will be costly. Just my personal observations but it seems that every other person playing slots or video poker has a smoke in hand. When Revel opened as a non-smoking property, I was looking forward to seeing if this really would draw in the seemingly thousands of gamblers who constantly complained about smoking. Well, it seems that these same folks were willing to put up with smoke in exchange for free buffets and comp offers that the Revel was not giving away. Revel failed for a variety of reasons but starting off alienating smokers was not the best plan. The best accommodation I have ever seen is at Harrahs Laughlin. Two identical casinos separated by a large walled area, one smoking and the other smoke-free. Same machines, table games etc in each half. The casinos should have been proactive about this issue instead of waiting for the other shoe to drop, by making a genuine effort to accommodate both groups. Personally, I have had many bad experiences with drunk gamblers but no one is talking about banning alcohol. Gambling, drinking and smoking seem to go together. None of these activities is part of a healthy lifestyle, are they? Let the casino make the call about smoking. It's their business and their gamble. Let them decide which group is more costly to alienate. After all, it's all about the money. It always was and it always will be.

Gambling and drinking might be bad habits but they don't invade the space of of people around them.Yes I realize there are obnoxious drunks but it's not the same as having to suck in others smoke. Again if they would make totally separate areas with the same games it would be ok.But that doesn't take into account of the employees having to work in that cancer causing nasty environment. Yeah I know they can work somewhere else but it's not always easy to find a job.I guess they could be a coal miner or work in an asbestos factory.

Quote: ECoaster

On top of that, Ohio casinos also don't give out free drinks.

Now in that case, the state has over-stepped its bounds !

Quote: ACMama

... The best accommodation I have ever seen is at Harrahs Laughlin.

Did they put a craps table in the non smoking section? The smoking side of that place is thick as syrup, I basically quit going in there.

Quote: mcallister3200

They usually don't have the same gaming options. I don't stick my butt up in someone's face and fart just because it's not disallowed.

I knew that's what you were going to reply and I agree. The non-smoking areas are vastly different in game choices, but that's the argument for casinos not for smokers. I prefer a private business decide whether or not to allow a decision regarding smoking/drinking/farting instead of the government.

Farting is allowed but probably will get you thrown out lol.

I just hate the argument that non-smokers complain and they can choose to not go to the casino, or stay in the non-smoking section. Or they can get their voices heard through the proper channels instead of complaining to the smoker.

I was playing VP at a casino a while back and some old guy decided the row of machines we were playing is a non-smoking section, I did not follow that rule since it was a regular section on the floor. He brought his daughter to tell me that I shouldn't be smoking. I lit one just because they told me not to.

Can we have a rule about dress code for fat people showing off their fat and nastiness?

Quote: Hunterhill

Gambling and drinking might be bad habits but they don't invade the space of of people around them.Yes I realize there are obnoxious drunks but it's not the same as having to suck in others smoke. Again if they would make totally separate areas with the same games it would be ok.But that doesn't take into account of the employees having to work in that cancer causing nasty environment. Yeah I know they can work somewhere else but it's not always easy to find a job.I guess they could be a coal miner or work in an asbestos factory.

Are you serious drunk people piss me off all the time, holding up the game or being belligerent.

Quote: djatc

Are you serious drunk people piss me off all the time, holding up the game or being belligerent.

Yeah but that doesn't give you cancer.Or Copd.Yeah drunks can be annoying and I also don't like when they slow down the game,except sometimes.

Quote: GWAE

... I don't think there should be a law against smoking in a casino or bars for that matter. I am all for the non smoking in restaurants but that is for another discussion. I am ok with a casino making a rule about no smoking like the Revel did but I am against the state making the decision. If a business wants to limit what is ok in their venue then so be it. Doesn't the state have enough to worry about instead of whether or not people smoke..

+1

about 4-5 years ago our place went no smoking. There was talk of losing 50% of our business and of mass layoffs. The players adjusted to smoking outside and things went on as normal.

Quote: beachbumbabs

+1

Random thoughts in addition/support:

Let the market dictate. The casinos are private property, available to the public. Most make accommodation for both smoking and non-smoking patrons; to force a change through government regulation is against their business interests and alienating a good portion of their customers. If the business plan provides an advantage through differentiation as a non-smoking casino, then more power to them. However, both Revel and AC itself both serve as cautionary tales against this model; AC was forced to go non-smoking for a brief period in the early 2000's, saw a disastrous decline in clientele and revenue, and modified to their current configuration quickly. Revel thought there was enough demand for a smoke-free environment that they made it policy, and lost billions (no accounting for how much was due to the non-smoking environment, but all reports I've seen found it to be a major contributor to the failure).

Beyond that, it's just annoying and invasive to push your agenda into casinos; 99% of public venues are already all non-smoking. People who work in casinos signed up to work in a smoking environment, so I reject that argument. Customers like to relax with a drink and a cigarette at the tables, which they can do almost nowhere else any more, which IMO is part of what's bringing people into casinos. Haven't seen a restaurant in or near a casino that allowed smoking in that area in over a decade, so objections about drifting smoke while eating are questionable at best; go out the door and find another restaurant among the near-monopoly of smoke-free eateries nationwide if it's a problem. Just a very Big Brother action on activists' parts to serve their self-interests at the expense of others.

And the reason it will fail everywhere casino owners have any pull in local governments is that NA casinos are now virtually everywhere and will not comply. They make entirely too much money off tobacco, with their ability to sell it without the burden of state and local taxes, and they are very aware that a sizeable portion of their casino patrons want to be able to smoke while they play. The non-NA casinos can't compete on a level playing field as all-non-smoking properties in most areas (I realize there are some states where that's already the law.). And as both types of casinos proliferate, none can afford to alienate new and returning customers, not when the internet is increasingly allowing people to gamble (and smoke) in the privacy of their homes.

All JMHO;YMMV.

Well said.

If somebody cares so much about their health that they need everything in their environment maximized for them, then casinos and bars are not places they should work or visit anyway.

Quote: Gandler

Well said.

If somebody cares so much about their health that they need everything in their environment maximized for them, then casinos and bars are not places they should work or visit anyway.

So if you like to gamble or drink that means you have to pay the price and put up with the smoking?

Quote: Hunterhill

So if you like to gamble or drink that means you have to pay the price and put up with the smoking?

Essentially yes.

A casino has no obligation to change its rules that make the majority happy, to please a minority.

If there was a market for smoke free casinos there would be more.

I don't like car exhaust, should I have a right to have nobody drive down the street while I am walking on the sidewalk?

Quote: Gandler

Essentially yes.

A casino has no obligation to change its rules that make the majority happy, to please a minority.

If there was a market for smoke free casinos there would be more.

I don't like car exhaust, should I have a right to have nobody drive down the street while I am walking on the sidewalk?

Are smokers the majority? I realize more gamblers smoke than the general population but is it a majority?

Quote: Hunterhill

Are smokers the majority? I realize more gamblers smoke than the general population but is it a majority?

No, but you have to factor in the social smokers, the people who like to have cigars occasionally while gambling, and the people who simply are not slightly bothered by it.

There is a reason why AC reversed the casino smoking bans (one of the few times a smoking ban in America was ever reversed), because it was devastating, especially with the neighboring casinos that allowed smoking.

And, there is a reason the Revel reversed its own no smoking policy, because it proved to be unpopular. The Revel tried to model itself as a modern, clean, healthy casino, and it failed.

Quote: Gandler

No, but you have to factor in the social smokers, the people who like to have cigars occasionally while gambling, and the people who simply are not slightly bothered by it.

There is a reason why AC reversed the casino smoking bans (one of the few times a smoking ban in America was ever reversed), because it was devastating, especially with the neighboring casinos that allowed smoking.

And, there is a reason the Revel reversed its own no smoking policy, because it proved to be unpopular. The Revel tried to model itself as a modern, clean, healthy casino, and it failed.

I think the casino's used the bad economy to reverse the smoking ban. Even though they still allowed smoking we see how bad their business was.I believe Revels woes were caused by a combination of many factors. I think they still would have failed even had they been a smoking facility.

But back to the op's original question. Why should casino's have rights that local businesses don't have. It's all about the money.

Quote: Hunterhill

Are smokers the majority? I realize more gamblers smoke than the general population but is it a majority?

What it's not is a democracy. It's a business that wants to appeal to as many people as they can. I don't have access to their demographics, but if it made business sense for them to go non-smoking, I don't doubt for a minute they'd be non-smoking. Certainly a business case can be made contrasting the loss of revenue of smoking patrons (including selling tobacco in the casino and associated shops) against the cost of any additional cleaning, including installation and operation of smoke-handling ventilation systems.

There's kind of a larger environmental design driving at least some of this. Casinos want to provide a venue that encourages people to stay in its confines as long as possible, and many of the things they do incrementally assist with this. Additional amenities in a casino to basic gambling include a variety of banking options to get more money, music (from overhead piped-in to live bands and frequent entertainers or shows), roving masseuses, flower and gift girls, cigarette girls, every drink both alcoholic and non-, anyone could want, roving noodle carts, self-serve pastry or snack bars, adjoining eating areas, tableside food service, other people to meet/flirt with/hook up, large and convenient rest rooms. Every time a customer leaves the actual casino for something they want or need, there's a chance they won't come back in, whether distracted by something else or whether they just check their wallet and stop earlier than they might have if they hadn't had to run off and get whatever.

The other part is psychological and probably predatory. None of the activities in a casino are universally socially acceptable; smoking, drinking, gambling. Smokers are people already willing to defy or ignore peer disapproval and what's "best" for them; personality-wise, they're more likely to do other things not PC, and take the risk of playing -EV games. So smokers seem more likely to make up a reliable customer base, both in frequency and dollar value, than the general public as a whole, and probably are a majority in a smoking-allowed casino.

There's also the corollary I mentioned before; nearly every other public space does not allow smoking any more, so smoker's options are very limited if they want to spend their recreational time somewhere they can smoke. Is it that surprising that they go to casinos?

Some of you younger guys may find some of these hard to believe, but in my lifetime, the following places have gone from all smoking to nearly all non-smoking:

Colleges and universities
Restaurants
Bars
Airplanes
Buses
Trains
Cruise ships
Hospitals
Waiting rooms everywhere
Airports
Most business offices
Movie theaters (usually had a smoking loge)
Malls
Hotels
Rental Cars
Government buildings
High schools
NASCAR racetracks
Theme parks
Summer camps (counselors only)
Every sports venue I can think of, indoor or outdoor
Probably a hundred others, but those are the ones I've personally experienced.

Quote: Hunterhill

I think the casino's used the bad economy to reverse the smoking ban. Even though they still allowed smoking we see how bad their business was.I believe Revels woes were caused by a combination of many factors. I think they still would have failed even had they been a smoking facility.

But back to the op's original question. Why should casino's have rights that local businesses don't have. It's all about the money.

They don't in many states. In every state businesses get evaluated on a case by case basis and get approved or denied the ability to allow smoking. And, even if it is allowed, they can still ban it on their own, or restrict it to limited areas.

I just looked up Nevada Smoking Laws. Casinos do not have a monopoly.

Currently included on the approved for smoking business list are : Bars/Taverns, Strip Clubs, Brothels, Casinos, and Tobacco Shops. What they all have in common are they are adult only businesses that do not generally appeal to healthy people.

Somebody who is a health nut would be unlikely to frequent any of those categories of businesses.

Since casinos are (generally) large and spread out buildings, I think a fair compromise would be for separate smoking and non smoking areas (preferably separate floors when possible).

Businesses that are adult only should have the legal option to allow smoking if they choose. If this offends somebody, there is nobody forcing them to go there. There are plenty of non smoking places you can spend your money at instead.

Casinos, bars, strip clubs, etc.... are not vital businesses you need to go to to survive, everyone there is there by choice. There is no reason for a non-vital adult only business to be smoke free by force (if they choose to they are free to do so) ...

I have always maintained that business decisions that could affect revenue, related to things (such as smoking) that are otherwise legal, should be left up to the business owners.

I'm pretty vehemently anti smoking, and I have no problem with smokers in casinos. It's my choice to enter a place where they are welcomed. My home casino, Mohegan Pocono, is 50/50, but all the good table games are in the smoking section, so I go there for the PaiGow and Mississippi. What I have found is that smokers will be very accommodating as far as little things like moving an ashtray without being asked. Politeness on both parts goes a long way.