No it's not. By your argument there should be no laws. The only reason smoking is legal is because it generates a disgusting amount of tax revenue which gives the tobacco companies a loud voice in a government's ear. Smoking is proven beyond doubt to cause death - it's not unreasonable for it to be discouraged.

If it so wanted Vegas is quite uniquely positioned to actually experiment with this. Rather than blanket ban across the city MGM could for example market Aria and NYNY as smoke free, CET could do the same with e.g. Bally's. If people want to gamble smoke free then they wouldn't have to walk far to do it. Powers that be would quickly see what if any effect this has and react accordingly.

"If"

Using that logic, bar owners could allow their patrons to shoot each other in the legs. And more importantly, allow patrons to shoot the bartender who isn’t allowed to carry.

You could argue for overreach if there wasn’t any danger from second hand smoke but that’s clearly not the case.

As far as the economic impact of smoke bans, I don’t know about casinos. But studies in countries that banned smoking in bars showed that the ones that catered to an older and less educated crowd (aka higher percentage of smokers) were severely impacted. That’s exactly the target audience for slots..

the great thing about our 'new normal' is that we don't need laws anymore....

we are in a perpetual state of emergency.....

Sisolak can just outlaw it whenever he wants....

Doctor on local news (Boston) was asked if Corona virus could be spread by 2nd hand smoke. The answer was "yes, if you can smell the smoke, it could contain droplets of corona virus"

You would think that casinos would rethink their smoking policies when they reopen but I doubt they will.

So, are you and this doctor on the local news are saying that smoke carries CoVid further than would plain air ?

Sounds like bull****. The way smoke gets in the air is when a person exhales. Why would exhaled smoke have any more corona than exhaled breath?

So, if laws prohibiting smoking cigarettes is gov't overreach, where is the line drawn, and why?

Why have laws at all, and simply let all business owners do whatever they want?

Is it legal to sit at a casino, card room, restaurant or bar in any state in the United States and smoke weed? What about smoking DMT or Crack? or Keith Richard's father's ashes?

Can people shoot heroin and coke into their arms in a restaurant? Why not? It's their bodies, and no gov't should have the right to tell those people that they can't shoot heroin wherever they want, without restriction. What's the problem, Snowflake? If you don't like junkies shooting heroin in their arms, you don't have to eat at Applebees! That's freedom.

What about masturbation in a bar or casino? Pissing on the floor? Should those activities be legal as well, as long as the business owner is cool with it?

Why have laws requiring employees to wash hands after using the restroom or handling raw meat (or both)? Nobody is forcing anybody to patronize businesses where emloyees don't wash their hands after taking a ****.

If laws banning smoking tobacco in bars, restaurants, casinos etc. are government overreach, do most reasonable people also consider laws banning the above activities to be government overreach?

You know what? Let me kick down a little thing to you that our Founding Fathers kicked down to me. It goes, "Don't. Tread. On me," and right now, you guys are TREADING ALL OVER ME.

I'm gonna rise up, I'm gonna kick a little ass, Gonna kick some ass in the USA, Gonna climb a mountain, Gonna sew a flag, Gonna fly on an Eagle, I'm gonna kick some butt, I'm gonna drive a big truck, I'm gonna rule this world, Gonna kick some ass, Gonna rise up, Kick a little ass, ROCK, FLAG AND EAGLE!

"Because that is what we decided. It is arbitrary."

That is how I'd explain it to an alien. Or someone who enjoyed jaq-ing.

I'm amazed we have grown so little as a country that we are still debating things like this in 2020.

For those of you that want to wrap yourself in The Constitution and scream about your freedoms, you realize they don't really exist, they never have. If the current situation hasn't taught you that, you really need to pay better attention.

Also, for those of you claiming The Constitution as the be all, end all, you realize two thirds of the framers of The Constitution owned slaves? Is that OK? Of course it isn't, but keep claiming The Constitution, at least when it works in your favor.

When duly elected local officials pass laws its not SOME people, but they speak for the majority of the people. As I assume you know, the majority cant take away your basic Constitutional rights, but “right to have a restaurant with smoking” isnt up there. If you have a problem, then get the votes. Otherwise get an AK, storm the Capitol like those braindeads in Michigan, and cry about not being as free as bluebird.

Americans have mastered the art of doing 99% of what they want, yet crying and whining over the unfair oppression related to the 1% they cant. “Its socialism!” “Its communism!” Of course all the while calling other people “snowflakes” when they choose a different 1% to complain about.

Why would he do that? He isn't the one whining that there aren't laws banning smoking in casinos in Las Vegas.

The constitution has nothing to do with it either way. States can ban or not ban smoking in casinos if they feel like it. Whether they feel like it is at least somewhat based on the will of the populace of that state.

Not much at all to debate here. From what I've heard, there are places to visit in the world that aren't Nevada, so no one should feel put out by it.

He is exactly the one whining about local governments telling some business owners they cant allow smoking.

I'm keenly aware of that. I was addressing the "you're treading on my Constitutional freedom" people.

As he seems unlikely to become a business owner in, let's say, Orlando the point (both sides) is moot.

Regarding the 1998 bill that prohibited smoking in bars and card rooms in California. At the time, I was a regular at a small card room that was part of a bar in the San Francisco Bay area. A good old fashioned liquor in the front, poker in the rear establishment that still exists.

The hands-on owner was openly against the new law, and tried to fight it, fearing that it would hurt his business. He was a nice guy, and we would occasionally argue about the issue in a good natured manner.

A year later, he admitted to me that the no-smoking law turned out to be good for his business, though he would have never banned smoking if not for the law. He was glad it happened.

He did not ultimately lose any smoking customers from the bar or card room, as a result of the indoor smoking prohibition. They would step outside to smoke on a patio in back of the building.

For non-smoking customers there was 1 less reason to leave. Yes, sometimes the smoke would influence my decision to stay at a game or not. Business wound up increasing, with new, non-smoking customers.

Guys who wanted to sneak in some poker or drinks after work without approval from their wives, now could do so without stinking like cigarettes and giving themselves away.

He also said without the cigarettes that it was easier to keep the place clean, and to keep good dealers and bartenders longer. A win/win situation for everybody.

In the end, nobody's constitutional rights got violated. Until the recent shutdown, business had been good for a long time. Smokers have long since gotten used to stepping outside to smoke, and the inconvenience didn't ruin their lives.

Sadly, the owner, who smoked unfiltered camel cigarettes for decades, passed away from lung cancer a few years ago. His family currently runs the business.

You seem to be missing the key fact that there is currently a lack of will in Nevada to ban smoking in casinos.

Because of that, the potential positive and negative effects for businesses and individuals (constitutional issues that don't actually exist), aren't even remotely relevant.

You could try moving to Las Vegas and running for office or something, I guess.

The last poker room in Las Vegas that allowed smoking was Arizona Charlie's Decatur. That stopped in 2017. The poker room closed in 2018.

If one really wants to smoke in a poker room, the casino in Beatty still permits it. I've seen dealers smoking at the table there.

I don't expect Nevada to ban smoking in casinos any time soon, nor am I lobbying for that, nor would I want to move to Las Vegas and run for office. I didn't even start this thread. I like to visit Vegas though, and when I do, I put up with the nasty cigarette smoke in casinos, while having to step outside to smoke cannabis. Go figure!

If (I know, another IF) in the distant future, perhaps when we are all dead, Nevada casinos were prohibited by state law from allowing smoking, no individual casino would be ultimately hurt by it, because customers couldn't go to a different casino to smoke.

Just like in California, people would adapt by getting used to smoking outside and in designated smoking areas. If people want to go to casinos, they won't stop going to casinos because they have to smoke outside. Not saying everybody would prefer this scenario, but they would accept it, similar to how weed smokers accept that they have to step outside. I would like to smoke a J inside the casino, but not being able to smoke weed indoors does not ultimately prevent me from going to casinos.

Ultimately, the casinos would not be hurting financially as a result of indoor smoking prohibition laws. It could actually work out in the businesses favor in the long run.

The positive and negative effects of smoking vs. no smoking for businesses are the same, regardless of what state they operate in, as long as the same rules apply to everybody statewide. Bigger stakes involved sometimes. Dirty business.

All the evidence in the world tells the opposite story:

Illinois patrons move to casinos in other states after smoking ban (This pertains to NV because reservations in AZ and CA wouldn't be nonsmoking)

Deadwood and video lottery down 20 percent three years after smoking ban (It took raising bet limit to $1,000 and adding craps and roulette to get close to normal again)

Montana video gaming never recovered after dropping 20 percent after smoking ban

Etc Etc.

It’s simply a matter of letting the market dictate the policies of businesses. There are reasons why no major casino is banning cigarette smoke, because it will cost them business. All you have to do is look at the ban on smoking for harrahs in New Orleans. Personally I love smoking cigars, some places don’t allow them at table games or in sports books so they lose my business. Hell I even have a heck of a lot of personal experience with more dealers telling me that they prefer cigar smokers because they tip the best, but that is meaningless. At the same time I realize I’m in the minority so it forces me to seek out places, not simply demand everyone abide by my beliefs. Finally anyone is more than welcome to offer suggestions for any business, but to bring govt in to get your way instead of winning a debate is foolish to me.

Thanks for posting those links. It's hard to argue with the powers of addiction and the tobacco lobby. I can see how no smoking laws would effect casinos in border towns if a nearby state allowed smoking indoors, at least in the short term. It's harder to think that ultimately a significant amount of people would choose to go to an Indian casino in AZ or CA over Las Vegas only because they couldn't smoke indoors in Vegas.

The difference isn’t between going to an Indian casino and a nonsmoking Vegas. A lot of people would just stay home from Vegas. It seems like you acknowledge that it would hurt the bottom line. I guess it just comes down to ideologies: you think the government should decide for the individual, and at least personally that scares the hell out of me