And there are the foregone tobacco excise taxes as well (btw -- I haven't touched a one-armed bandit or hung in a bar since spurning the nicotine habit).

Which all goes to show that there are indeed "addictive personalities," i.e., people predisposed to engage in addictive-type behaviors. Giving someone like a video poker machine with a pack of smokes and a steady supply of alcohol is like manna from heaven. But if you break the circle and prohibit the smoking, ...

...problem being is that as a cigar smoker, the law now prevents me from enjoying a smoke is places previously dedicated to same...like cigar bars and in cigar stores. It'd be like banning wine tasting at vineyards.

I don't have a problem respecting folks preferences, but I wish folks that choose to smoke were afforded the same courtesy.

I've always thought the simple answer would be to pass a sign requirement. If an establishment allowed smoking, they'd be required to post a large sign by all entrances to that effect. Heck, make it a huge sign with scary red letters. Establishments that don't allow smoking would be allowed but not required to post a sign stating same. Let the market decide. I can assure you that if the "no smoking" places were packed and the "smoking allowed" places were empty, the owners would make the prudent financial decision.

And please spare me the "it will kill you and the folks next to you" speech. We all choose to undertake activities that are potentially harmful to us and the folks around us, every day. Depending on who you believe, there are plenty of contradicting studies, funded by folks that have agendas. All I'm proposing is to give folks a choice.

The losses in gambling revenue will probably be made up by the lower health care costs for ex-smokers and bar workers.