My husband and I will be visiting Las Vegas from next Thursday afternoon through the following Tuesday (12/7 – 12/12). He’s running the half-marathon on Sunday, and we figured that was as good an excuse as any to finally return to town after a LONG hiatus.
The last time he was there was probably about eight years ago or so; I haven’t been in more like fifteen, so for all intents and purposes, it’s a completely different place than either of us remember.
We’re staying at the Monte Carlo (decent rate — $80/night I think — on Priceline) and already have tickets for Mystere on Friday night.
I think I’d like to head out to Red Rock Canyon and/or Hoover Dam on one or two of the days we’re there, but other than that, I have nothing else in mind.
We can probably do one or two other big ticket shows if there’s something we shouldn’t pass up. We can spend some time gambling but don’t want to do hours and hours on end. Peter plays blackjack; I’ll do video poker, some slots and low-stakes blackjack.
We’re young baby-boomers (46 and 50), who like music, fun and good food.
What should be on our “don’t miss” list??
Thanks in advance for your help and suggestions!
~ Peri
More
Today’s newspaper had an article that on Friday, McCarran was going 100% No Smoking. They are planning to shut down the smoking lounges in the terminals and prohibit smoking anywhere inside any building.
I’ve stayed away from “right” or “wrong,” judgments in this discussion, but now I think it’s time to at least voice an opinion.
Selling and buying cigarettes is a legal act, sanctioned by our government and duly taxed. The gummint implicitly sanctions smoking by taxing it and not making it illegal. . . as they have marijuana. Smoking cigarettes is addictive, and being forced to not smoke for extended periods of time goes beyond inconveniencing people: It makes have cravings and physical withdrawl symptoms. While not smoking can be tolerated by smokers for short periods of time, being forced to not smoke for hours of time is unnecessarily mean spirited and punishing to many of our fellow humans.
Many airline flights last for hours. Where a short hop between LV and LA might be well under an hour flying time, you still need to add another couple of hours in the outbound airport and probably another half hour when arriving, by the time you (hopefully) retrieve your suitcase. A flight to the east coast might add another 3-4 hours to that time, and that is NOT counting layovers.
Nobody in my family is now a smoker, but we all were at different times in our lives. I can remember having one or two family members literally run through a non smoking airport during a layover so they could go outside and get a drag or two on a cigarette. It was awful for them, but they were addicted to the nicotine, or the psychology of cigarettes,
at that time.
In my opinion, I think that closing the smoking lounges at McCarran goes beyond protecting the lungs of non smokers and crosses the line into being both cruel and a bad business decision. Having flown with smokers at McCarran, I know that the smoking lounges pull a negative air pressure, compared to the terminals and that the only smoke smell at all is inside the lounges- not the public terminal. The only people being
exposed to secondhand smoke in or near the airport lounges are the smokers themselves.
Perhaps the powers that be at McCarran feel that the smoking ban might encourage more people to quit. Perhaps they feel they’re saving a life or two. Maybe, that is a rational justification for the airport-wide ban in and of itself. However, I sure as heck can’t see the removal of the smoking lounges doing much more than making smokers needlessly
uncomfortable. I feel the airport authority should go ahead with plans to ban smoking in the common areas, bar and food service areas and even the slot machine areas. These are areas where the non smoking general public moves about and cannot escape second hand smoke. However, I really feel that they should retain the smoking lounges for the comfort of smokers.
—Nonnymus—
More
