The Emporia Gazette

glarson (anonymous) says...

Additional comments on original story:

http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/20...

January 12, 2009 at 6:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Update on petition:

Stayed up last night checking petition sheets with a list of registered voters in Emporia. We kept at it until we started getting cross-eyed from the computer screens. Right now we have verified 568 valid signatures. We still have more sheets waiting to be checked, it is a time consuming job. We sure don't envy the county clerks office workers their jobs. Our count so far leaves us about 200 short for the minimum signature needed, but we are confident we will get the number needed by the deadline. I would like to thank Gary M. for giving me a fifty dollar bill to help pay for the cost of the voter registration list. Also thanks to Roxann and the county clerks staff for their help, as well as Mr. Slater for the fast service at the courthouse.
Steve Corbin

January 12, 2009 at 8:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

romano:
That's an awesome story--thanks for sharing! I looked for you on youtube, but I didn't find anything that looked right.
Steve:
I just sent out a bunch of facebook and e-mail reminders for people to find a petition if they haven't already signed. I kind of wonder if I should be volunteering to take a petition form around my neighborhood and to my friends and family.

January 12, 2009 at 10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof:

Thanks for the offer. If you are serious and want to carry a petition you must be a registered voter, living in the city limits and sign the affidaviet on the back of the petition swearing you witnessed each signature and your signature must be noterized. But any help would be greatly appreciated. We have extra petitions at the bar, so let me know or come in and get a sheet or two if you want.
Steve

January 12, 2009 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

romano1784 (anonymous) says...

oh4thelove- I doubt you'll find me on youtube but if you do let me know first. lol.
Steve- I'm glad we are nearing the milemarker of this whole thing. Thanks for the hard work.

January 12, 2009 at 10:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Steve,
You should have me verified as registered and legit already. What time could I come by and get one?

January 12, 2009 at 11:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof:
Sorry I have been spacing out. If youre initials arn't C.H. and you haven't stopped in yet you can drop by anytime after 1:00 & ask one of the bartenders for a sheet or two to take with you. If your initials are C.H. Let me know on here and I will Swing by your house with a couple of sheets. Sorry it took so long to respond.
Steve

January 12, 2009 at 1:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Well, Steve, I'm going to have to come in and get another form or two--your bartender gave me three for inspiration and they are all full. I still haven't talked to most of the family and neighbors that I originally had in mind. Alot of people have said that they know the petitions are out there, they just hadn't seen them yet. Alot of them are people who don't go to the bars, but don't like how the commission is running. I did run across a few who want it and wanted it voted on, but aren't willing to gamble that a vote will come out with the same result. I will have another couple of hours on Wed. to catch a few more people. Thanks for letting me do this!

January 12, 2009 at 7:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof;
THANK YOU &

God bless the USA.!

When this comes to a vote, it will be health rights versas personal rights. I KNOW Emporia voters will know the difference.
Steve

January 12, 2009 at 9:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

U.S. Group Calls for Cell-driving Bans Nationwide

http://www.pcworld.com/article/156975...

January 13, 2009 at 3:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Let's just ban everything and get it over with.
Steve

January 13, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

Was hoping you folks heard about that too Matt, what slippery slope they say?

January 13, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MatthewCook (anonymous) says...

i think its important not to attach other "ban 'X' " proposition to ours. The "cell phone while driving" ban doesn't effect local industry nearly as much as smoking would. And as a general strategy, slippery slopes are rarely true.

January 13, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Matt,
I will have to disagree with your slippery slope analogy. If only we could
ask the millions of Jewish people exterminated in the 30's and 40's in nazi Germany? If you go back in history the same people who commited this genoside, started out earlier with a guess what? A "Smoking Ban"

Bans are bans no matter what they are for, there is NO MIDDLE GROUND!
Today it is smoking on private property, tomorrow it's voicing your opinion in public. It is a slippery slope and it is happening now. Does the patriot act ring a bell? LIBERTY BELL , it's cracked don't you know?
Steve

January 13, 2009 at 9:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

I don't wish to speak too soon or not well enough informed, but I have a suspicion that anti-cell-while-driving people may be able to provide enough of a death statistic to make it reasonable to ban cell phones while driving. I may be wrong, bear in mind I haven't looked at what they have, but I believe it could be considered an unreasonably high number, comparable to DUI. If the number is high enough, then I believe we need to have the same laws for it as we have for DUI. JMO

January 13, 2009 at 11:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Emporia already has a cell phone ban while driving in place.

IT IS CALLED INNATENTIVE DRIVING.
It is a city ordinance and the police can enforce it now, hence no need for another law that won't be enforced anyway.
Steve

January 14, 2009 at 8:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Steve
We don't need more unnecessary laws or more and bigger government but I fear it's coming. I have a theory that I hope is wrong but we'll see. I think that since the "big government" party blew the other party out of the water in the last election on the federal level that it has emboldened those that believe government is the answer to all their problems to push their agendas(like the smoking ban and other bans) even harder and faster than before.

January 14, 2009 at 10:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Driving a car while talking on hand held phone to me is no different than driving after a few drinks, both impair your ability to drive, hands free options are not so bad but I agree %100 that people do not need to go own the road yapping with a phone in hand, no one can choose to avoid an idiot on the road till its too late.

January 14, 2009 at 12:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

soggy (anonymous) says...

Hey Crack,

I hope you don't drive your car while choking down one of those delicious Wendy's hamburgers.

It can be pretty hazardous to be driving near someone who is trying wipe up all the goop that just spilled all down the front of them.

January 14, 2009 at 6:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- There you go again. I'll bet that you not only drive while eating a lousy WENDYS choke burger, but I'll bet you even talk or try to text on your cell phone also, while you are driving ! Talk about endangering people, GEEEZ !
And if you do talk or text on your cell phone ,you of all people, the almost perfect person, are in violation of one of Emporias ban ordinances.
Do you talk or text on your cell phone while driving ? Be truthful crackinsack !

January 14, 2009 at 7:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Steve, I will try to bring in five notarized sheets tomorrow and pick up two or three more. I have a partial one still too. BBRRRRR it was cold this evening!!!!!

January 14, 2009 at 10:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- So you do admit that you do break the law regularly by talking on your cellphone while driving and it makes no difference whether you use a blue tooth connection or a speaker phone, and eating while driving, sounds to me like that is also an inatentive practice while driving and just because you excuse yourself because you do it while on the turnpike, etc., at 70+ mph just goes to show how you have no regard for others or their safety. The bottom line is, it makes no difference how or when you talk on your cell phone while driving it is still against the current laws and ordinances and while eating while driving is not against any laws or ordinances it is still unsafe and dangerous.
Smoking is or was a legal activity and has been for ions, until you and your gang of hypocrits decided to try and force others to live by your way of life and rules.
You need to stand in front of a mirror and take a good long, serious look at a real law breaker and safety hazard, before trying to force new laws, supposed safety laws and ordinances upon other citizens.

January 15, 2009 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Hey people- Since eating and driving is a safety and health hazard to everyone. Maybe we could propose a ban on eating while driving.
I wonder how many would oppose such a ban.
I bet I can think of more than a few who would protest such a ban, loudly.

January 15, 2009 at 9:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- I stand corrected, there is no law banning cell phone use in Kansas or Emporia at the present time, however there is a cell phone use while driving ban proposal before the Kansas legislators.
Since we are trying to ban all unsafe, unhealthy and hazardous practices that people choose to do. Lets ban cell phone use and eating while driving in Emporia and the State of Kansas. Would you support these bans, since they are both unsafe and hazardous to the public ?

January 15, 2009 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

WOW! I just got a totally funny picture in my head from these last few posts. Although..... I would like to know how holding a cig. in your hand while driving is more dangerous to others than either holding/eating a sloppy cheese burger or even having to turn your head to look at where your spouse is holding that same sloppy cheese burger so you can take a bite without wearing most of it. Ya'll are funny people sometimes. LOL this last debate has made my day. Thanks for the laughs. crack you just don't give up do ya?! Even when its soooo easy to see you have been bested. (shaking head smiling) tootles all

January 15, 2009 at 11:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Weltha
Things that are soooo easy for others seem to be very difficult for crack. You are right though there are a lot of good laughs to be had around here.

January 15, 2009 at 11:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

still shaking head smiling. lets try this one crack.

Steps for eating in a car:
1. Fumble for bag of food in seat beside you (eyes off road/hand off wheel)
2. Locate bag of food, pull out containers holdin said food (eyes off road/hands off wheel)
3. Fumble to get food out of packaging (eyes off road/hand off wheel)
4. Place food in mouth with one hand and wipe mouth with the other (hands off wheel)
5. Constantly bring food to mouth and wipe it. (hand always off wheel)
6. Occasionally lick fingers of feeding hand and face your gonna need to find that soda ones in awhile to wash food down(eyes off road/hand off wheel)

7. Throw trash out window at car behind you and repeat until you reach destination (hand off wheel)

I do have to state that I don't throw trash out window. It goes home with me to my trash can. Some do though. Oh and I don't smoke either. I did up until about 5 years ago. I will say it was alot easier to smoke and drive than eat and drive. Alot less messy if ya don't have someone to help ya eat.

"Seems like quite a difference to me. I have hardly been bested, Weltha. I suppose you could have your passenger light the cig for you and assist you in smoking it in the same fashion as eating, but I doubt that would happen."

You would be surprised. I'm willing to bet if your passanger will feed you they will help ya smoke too.
See your little list can go both ways and makes as much sense with eating as with smoking.

January 15, 2009 at 12:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

I do feel I need to clarify something here though. I am not pro-smoking as it may sound. I think it stinks. I am however anti-ban. It should be the business owners who deside not the government. I can chose to go or not to go in. That is my right. I wish I lived in the City limits so I could legally have my say.

January 15, 2009 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- Boy, if one thing does not suit your argument in an attempt to win said argument or influence people, you have a penchant for throwing anything and everything into the argument. Now it is the dependence of smokers on their cigarettes ! What about the dependence of a lot of people on cafeine and can't seem to be without a cup of coffee in their hand at all times, even while driving and slurping coffee, should we ban coffee as unsafe and hazardous.
See how rediculous this ban thing can become !

January 15, 2009 at 4:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- Go to the following web-site and read the story.
www.kansas.com/new/story/651007.html
.

January 15, 2009 at 4:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack and others- Correction http://www.kansas.com/news/story/6510...

January 15, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack and others- Those of you who may think that talking or whatever on your cellphone while driving is safe, just might want to take a look at this site.
http://media.ljworld.com/flattened/20...

January 15, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Here is another web-site that might be of interest to you smoking ban activists.
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=36928

January 15, 2009 at 4:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

BACK TO THE SMOKING BAN:
We hit our Verified 762 last night, but are still collecting in case there are any challenges to OUR checked signatures. We will be taking signatures through next week and the Week of the 26th we will make an appointment with city clerk Susan Mendoza to turn them in so she can stamp them recieved and forward to the county clerks office. They will then re-check the signatures to verify them before putting the question on the ballot for the April 7th election. We will have copies of the signatures in case we have to challenge any other groups challenges. Don't laugh, it's happened. I only hope that by these signatures collected, the matter WILL go to a public vote and someone or some group does not try to squash our efforts by some means.

Can anyone here say this should not come to a public vote?
Steve Corbin, only 1 member of EOB.

January 15, 2009 at 9:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

Way to go EOB.

January 16, 2009 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof;

Great job. Out of the 50 signatures you turned in 48 were valid, 1 lived outside the city limits, and 1 had a different address. You're doing better than the rest of us, keep it up, if you can. Let me know if I can re-imburse you for the notary, and/or gas money? Thanks again
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 9:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MatthewCook (anonymous) says...

Its true that the same people who are willing to ban smoking would likely be the same people who ban cell-mobiling, but my comments were more of a strategy suggestion rather than a truth claim. Nothing diverts consensus more than clouding the issue of smoking with cell phones. This is not to say that this conflation is happening either, only that a group socially-conservative Americans want to see big government quelled.

The smoking-ban is where i "reach across the aisle". Typically, i'm for safety regulations (seat belt laws, cell phone driving laws, etc), but this particular smoking ban is one that goes beyond partisan affiliations and strikes at the core of business rights. But if i'm not allowed to use my cell while i drive, i don't see much harm in that. There is ONLY harm if you give credence to slippery slope arguments. However, new technology requires new regulations. Imagine if after the invention and proliferation of nuclear weaponry, we decided not to have the SALT talks or the START treaty. It is regulation that keeps technology fluid and manageable, and a delicate balance of liberty and responsibility is a catalyst for that.

January 16, 2009 at 10:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MatthewCook (anonymous) says...

oh, great job on signatures by the way!!!

January 16, 2009 at 10:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

OUCH crackinsack,
Awfuly bitter arn't you?
How is spending time, money, and effort to promote a popular vote a waste of time? Oh, I forgot, you are the girl who thinks government should make all of your decisions for you. Never Mind.
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 1:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack,
Ever heard of "Don't count your chickens before they are hatched" or " Your putting the cart before the horse" and so go predictions.
Here is my prediction. If this ban is passed, this will not be the only ban the self appointed "GODS OF EMPORIA", will propose in the future. The reason being, that if this ban passes the self appointed "GODS OF EMPORIA" will definately feel as though they are all powerful and have been handed a free pass to ban anything that they feel suits them and all who support the "GODS OF EMPORIA".

January 16, 2009 at 2:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Citizens of Emporia who believe that this smoking ban is not right and is in fact not only a "Health" issue, but a rights and libertys issue as well, I ask you to remember some important facts.
1. Before the CAE and its followers proposed a smoking ban, there was already a smoking ban in "PUBLIC PLACES" already in place in Emporia.
2. Exactly who gave them the right to dictate to all citizens how all citizens should live their lives !
3. Why after such a long time of living perfectly well with the smoking ban ordinance that is or was fair and imparshial to everone do we need an almost total smoking ban now !
4. The CAE and its followers say that this ban does not target certain individuals, groups of individuals or certain business. But anyone can see that it does indeed target certain individuals, groups of individuals and certain businesses. Namely those individuals, group of individuals who smoke and those businesses that allow smoking and noone else.
5. The use of tobacco products ie, cigarettes, etc. are not the only things that are unhealthy, toxic, contimnate the air or effect the general population as a whole.
So I say to you citizens that believe that this smoking ban is not right, imparshial or fair. You need to get out and vote to repeal this ban and send a signel to those who want to tell you how you can live your lives and what choices you should make that they are not the self appointed "Kings or Queens" of Emporia and that you live in a "DEMOCRACY", and as such you have the right to choose for yourselves.
And remember when anyone starts resticting or banning your right to make a choice, "DEMOCRACY" fades each time one of your abilities to make a choice for yourself is restricted or banned and your right to Liberty and Freedom goes with it.

January 16, 2009 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

WOOOHOOO!!!!!!! Steve, that is great that we have achieved the primary goal(762) and are on to the secondary one(every other available one)! It is also great to hear that my sheets were accurate, because to be honest, petitioning has been the only thing that has gone smoothly or correctly this week. There was no charge on the notarizations (perk of being a member of a place that I will tell you in confidence if you want to know) and with the gas prices being lower, I don't think I will end up spending more than $20 additional for this, so I can handle that. I will continue petitioning, as the larger the numbers, the louder the voice and I want the commissioners to hear the voice. I know they will think that they won and we wasted time and money if the citizens pass the ban because they won't want to recognize that it was about crossing boundaries, but as with children, consistency in setting and keeping the boundaries will be the key. We do have a bit of work cut out for us in teaching certain sets of people that tyranny isn't progressive in any way, but I am confident in our abilities. We need to also let people know how to vote against people on our ballots since we don't have a "no" and "yes" option and unmarked is counted as a non-vote rather than a "no" vote. I'll be asking some questions about that before I try to explain it to be sure I'm getting it right.

January 16, 2009 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crack, Why would anyone , rejoice in the needless surrendering of one of their precious rights? 61% you say? I'll bet you a pack of smokes it's not that much;)
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Knock knock, are you home crackinsack?

Do YOU think the commission should move the date of this new smoking ban back till the day after the April 7th election?

If everyone is sooooo sure of the outcome, then why not wait 34 more days and give us ALL a chance to decide?
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 3:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

oh4thelufof, rbow,
Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, what is this about not being a yes or no vote on whether to keep or repeal the smoking ban. What kind of a bogus ballot is this going to be !
No wonder the CAE and its followers are predicting a win.
Wow, somebody had better figure out a way to let people know what the voting proceedure will be and how to mark the ballot if they want to oppose the smoking ban .
Maybe some people could volunteer to be at the polling places to educate the people on how to cast their vote, either for or against the smoking ban.
You can bet the CAE will be educating their supporters on how to mark the ballot for the smoking ban !
Possibly a copy of the ballot and instructions on how to mark it, etc.could be published in the gazette. Maybe even post a copy of the ballot on this site or set up a ballot site on line with instructions or something. This is too important to just let slide without educating prospective voters on how to vote.
I may even be a little wary of the vote count, because of the influence and insiders the CAE may have in the local governments.
Having said that, is there any way that the leaders of both sides of this issue could inspect a copy of the ballot, to check and approve of the wording, etc. and agree that the ballot is acceptable to both sides.
After what the CAE and their supporters pulled with the Commission, I am a little skeptical of their practices and intentions.
In other words I don't trust them.

January 16, 2009 at 3:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

methusla- I think he/she ment when you are are voting for people. You can can only mark if you want them not if you don't.

January 16, 2009 at 3:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Ok, calm down methusla,

I didn't mean to throw anyone off and neither did oh4theluvof.

The ballots, I am told will be marked with an explination on how to vote for or against.

Like you, I don't trust some on the other side so I don't want to say how they will be worded until the ballots are approved by the Secretary Of State. Then we will start our campaign on education the voters on the ballots.
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 3:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

correct weltha, I think oh4theluvof was refering to the city commission candidates not the question. I also think maybe oh4theluvof would make a good hardworking commissioner.

But that is for them to decide.
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

methusla:

I also think that a copy of the ballot and an explanation of the question on it are required to be published in the Gazette, by state statute. The wording on the question may seem wierd but it all has to do with the wording on the petition. We will get the word out on this, take my word for it. Wow that was a lot of "words" in one sentence, wasn't it?
LOL
Your friend
Steve

January 16, 2009 at 4:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

methusla;
I am so sorry I confused things. rbow and Weltha were correct that I was talking about the commissioners portion of the ballot. We can't vote "no" for candidates on our ballots. I will explain more of what I meant later--I have to go--just don't panic yet.

January 16, 2009 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Whew ! Ok I got a little excited because I really didn't understand, Ok, I am calm now! Sorry I go excited about it, but I thought someone was trying to pull another fast one.
Sorry you all !

January 16, 2009 at 7:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

For those of you who want to ban all activitys that may be unhealty for you or the public in general, here is some information that may be of interest, go to the following website, http://burningissues.org/pdfs/WoodSmo...

As you can see, burning wood in your fireplace, etc., is just as hazardous to public health as cigarette smoke. So why don't you propose a ban on the burning of wood in fireplaces, etc.

January 17, 2009 at 10:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

P.S., Here is another web address that may be of interest to ban supporters and opponents alike,
http://burningissues.org/ws-more-dama...

January 17, 2009 at 10:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I would still like to hear from, crackinsak, irishemporia, goodoleboy, commensense for emporia, and all others an answer to my question.

Should the city commission change the date of the smoking ban taking effect until the day after the April 7, election?

I think I remember most saying that this should come to a vote of the people, so what do YOU think?
Steve-0

January 18, 2009 at 1:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Steve:
I got six more signatures at church this morning and will be able to get more there this evening--I had a job to do that didn't allow me much time to ask around. It's incredible but not surprising--to me anyway-- to hear the advocation of rights for our fellow citizens coming from this particular demographic. They are the reason I wanted to carry the petitions--they want to sign it!
And, OF COURSE the effective date on the ban should be changed--it's only logical. Oh, wait, I used the word "logical" and the word "should." Okay, I won't hold my breath that they'll do it, then.

January 18, 2009 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BigE (anonymous) says...

Are you all just concerned that if the ban is in place for a few weeks the citizens might realize how nice it is and decide to keep it? If you really want the people to decide the issue, shouldn't they be allowed to try it out first? You all keep trying to paint it as a rights issue. Surely it would take more than a few weeks of following a new policy for people to just decide to give up their rights, wouldn't it? So why such concern about having it in place for a short time?

It sounds like you may be concerned that having it in place may convince some voters to keep it. After all, you didn't really know that you didn't like your brussel sprouts until you tried them, right?

January 18, 2009 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

BigE
I believe the business owners don't want to spend the money it is going to cost to get their property up to snuff for the ban if the ban is going to be voted down in April. Why not let the people speak first and let the business owners save the expense until we know for sure it is necessary. Seems pretty simple to me.

As far as the public "realizing how nice it is", well people have what doctors call brains and with those brains come imaginations. I'm pretty sure most people can imagine what it would be like without actually having it in place. Give people some credit for cryin' out loud.

January 18, 2009 at 3:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Tell me, BigE, is it a rights issue when a defendant is held in jail for a portion of the trial time? Of course it is! In fact, the judge has to consider the risks of allowing the defendant out before ruling that he must remain jailed. And if he is sentenced, the judge has to deduct the time already served. If the judge rules that he is to remain in jail during the trial and he is found not guilty, it is considered an error. So why would we want something to be treated as a crime before it is determined to be one if there is zero risk in allowing it?
Also, as seriously said, it is unfair to the business owners to force them to put out money to comply to something they may not need a month later--or lose a month's worth of valuable business. We are not paranoid--we know how to think things through.

January 18, 2009 at 3:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

BigE,
I didn't like my bussell sprouts after I tried them. It took years of smoking to cloud my taste buds before I learned to love them, and then what, blood clots. Now I can't eat sprouts, spinach or any leafy green vegetable as the vitamin K in them will give me clots. I still sneak them when the wife says I can. Back to the issue,sorry, this ban covers every building and business in the city limits, (except private homes). Some remodling will be required by some businesses ,all will have to purchase non-smoking signs, and I am sure there will be other costs required.

Cost of lost business for one month, (READ POSTS ON OTHER THREAD ABOUT WICHITA), IN MY CASE I ESTIMATE, $14,000.00. That is a conservative estimate. Then if the ban fails at public vote, I will have to work my a_ _ off to get those customer back.

MAIN POINT;
This ordinance requires the city notifiys every business of the new ordinance. I haven't recieved any such notice yet and wonder if the city staff has the time to do it by March 3rd. And what happens to those people charged with breaking the ordinance if it is overturned?

The flip side of your argument could be after 1 month of this ban people could be so pi--ed off that all will vote against it.
Steve-O

January 18, 2009 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

also bigE

It is not my intent to convince anyone one way or another. The people I know have what you could call free-will. They can make up their minds themselves based on the FACTS given to them. A vote is the fair way to do this as you nor I can influence the voter once they are in the booth, and their vote is never revealed for you or I too know. Only by the total results of the vote will one side prevaile, and that's the way it should be. I can't beleive you said we should give it a test run for a month to see if people like it. If this was a ban on your right to free speech, would you give it a shot for a month to see if it is a good idea? You are the one who said:

"Surely it would take more than a few weeks of following a new policy for people to just decide to give up their rights, wouldn't it? So why such concern about having it in place for a short time?"

Steve-o

January 18, 2009 at 5:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I hope by the replies of seriouslyfolks, oh4theluvof, and myself have shown a couple of reasons why the ban should not take effect until after the public vote. They are just our opinions, we would never try to convince anyone to give up their beliefs or rights.
Steve

January 18, 2009 at 5:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Gosh, I sure hope bigE didn't post & run .

Hope he read our replys.

Steve-o

January 18, 2009 at 7:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

BigE- You and I and I believe every citizen in Emporia knows that there is no such thing as trying a City ordinance for a few weeks. You are very good at conning people into believing that you are all wise and right.
Here is a question for you, if smoking is not a personal right of the citizens of Emporia who wish to smoke and are allowed to smoke in certain businesses. Why then is the existing smoking ordinance listed in the City Codes, under Chapter 16 - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS AND OFFENSES
ARTICLE IX - CRIMES INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF PERSONAL RIGHTS
Sec. 16-218. Smoking in public places
Why do you suppose the City Commissioners at the time the present smoking code was adopted, placed it under a " CRIMES INVOLVING VIOLATIONS OF PERSONAL RIGHTS", section of the code, was it because they some how knew or were advised that smoking some how fell under both the U.S. Constitution, Bill of RIGHTS as well as the State of Kansas, Bill of Rights interpretation and understanding of "PERSONAL RIGHTS".
And exactly which code section of the City Code do you, the CAE and its followers believe your proposed smoking ban be placed, if it passes a public vote?
Can it be placed under a section involving any kind of "VIOLATION OF RIGHTS", since the you, the CAE and ban supporters believe it is not a 'RIGHTS" issue, I don't really believe it can, I am at a loss as to exactly which City Code section to put this bogus smoking ban of yours !

January 18, 2009 at 10:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

'BigE- I think you the CAE and supporters should be very careful as to which City Code you demand that your bogus smoking ban be place, if it passes a public vote.
If it is placed under the wrong City Code, that may just open a whole new can of worms.

January 18, 2009 at 11:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

To all citizens of Emporia- If you wish I can post the entire existing Smoking in public places, code on this web site for you to read and judge for yourselves if you think it is imparshial, fair and interferes with anyones "PERSONAL RIGHTS", it will have to be posted in to parts it is somewhat lengthy. Just let me know if you want to see it, I have it on computer disk.

January 18, 2009 at 11:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

The trouble is methusla, there are only about two or three dozen people who read these blogs and most of them have already made up their minds, and only bits & pieces of them are ever published in the paper every once in a while. But this is a good place to vent and argue none-the less.

Steve-O

January 18, 2009 at 11:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

I guess we convinced BigE on our point of view.

I'm glad our logic changed his mind on this travisty of a ban.
Steve-O

January 19, 2009 at 9:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

rbow- According to BigE and the rest of the ban smoking bunch those of us who oppose the ban don't have any commonsense or logic ! Oh, how little they know !

January 19, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Methusla;

Never underestimate the enemy. In their dismisal of us they will find out differently.
900+ VALID SIGNATURES % counting.
Steve-O

January 19, 2009 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

rbow-I am thrilled at the numbers of signed petitions, I am hopeing that the ban smoking bunch will be as suprised at the vote to repeal their idiotic smoking ban. I really think they thought that the ban opponents would get enough people to sign petitions, in the time allowed. I would like to congratulate everyone who worked so hard and long to accomplish, what others truely thought would not be accomplished, however we must realize the battle has not been won yet .

January 19, 2009 at 8:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

Congrats on all the signatures guys/gals.

methusla,
I'm just being silly by saying this. Every time I read ban smoking bunch I chuckle a bit. For some reason I keep reading like they are "smoking" the ban. I have to read it again. Maybe I'm just getting tired or its just my querky sense of humor. LOL Sorry, I thought someone might get a kick outta that one.
Steve,
Nice meeting you Friday.
anyway- congrats again EOB

January 19, 2009 at 8:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

This has truly been a great experience, meeting all you of you great people. Even though you have remained anonymous on these blogs, you have come down to my dirty ole saloon to introduce yourselves. It gives me great strength in believing the tenacity of the American citizen. Even if this effort fails it has been an honor meeting you all.
But Wait! After meeting you all I can't believe we will not prevail. Let's not give up the fight for our rights, Emporia.
Steve Corbin
AKA Steve-o

January 19, 2009 at 9:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Steve, Linda & Matt,
Meeting you all this evening was like meeting old friends for the first time--it was great! I am so thankful that you all have put the courage and work into giving the people a chance to make their voice heard. I know every person who has signed the petition has felt the same.
Fellow citizens:
I almost wish we had more petition time just to be able to catch every single person who wants the commissioners and all other government officials to understand and respect their boundaries. I learned this evening that a short time ago, the police department was given insurance carriers and policies to look through and vote on their pick but then a completely different option was chosen for them by the city commisson. I was told this happens in all the city departments. It would seem that the current commission does not understand their job and we as citizens and our public servants are paying dearly for it.
As an additional measure, I will be proposing that my kid's school's site council recommend to the school board that whenever we have another Red Ribbon Week where funds are raised, that our school children have a ceremony in which they present a money or equipment(even if it it's only enough to buy a roll of camera film) gift to the local (city or county)drug enforcement and that it be no less than the total raised. I want to see where the money goes, and I want the kids to have some follow-through that leaves a strongly positive impression on them. I encourage all other parents with children in USD253 to make the same recommendation to their site council.

January 19, 2009 at 10:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

I have 30 more signatures notarized and 15 to get notarized tomorrow. I'm going to try for five more if I can catch people right after work tomorrow (earlier than 5:00) so I'll have totaled an even 100 collected. Now, I hope they all check out, but I'm fairly sure a few of them won't. Enthusiasm got the better of a few people and they didn't listen very well to the validity requirements. See you tomorrow, Town Royal gang!

January 20, 2009 at 9:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

That last post sounded a bit like bragging, but it wasn't meant that way. I am a wallflower in this town--none of the city commissioners has ever met me or heard of me. Not everyone I've asked about the petition has signed it, but the larger percentage of them have--I think I've received ten "no"s out of 105 asked. I have only worked on this for a week--about 11 or 12 hrs. total. I'm hoping these numbers reflect how the breakdown in the vote will come out. There have been some who have told me that they will vote for the ban, but have waffled a bit when I asked them to keep in mind that the ban would refuse the possibility of even a private club for smokers to frequent. That number (the pro-ban petition signatures) in my experience can also be counted on two hands.
I am proud of ALL the petitioners who have also worked very hard to collect valid signatures for much longer and with larger results than I have. I don't know very many of the names or I would name them all, but they have my deep gratitude.

January 20, 2009 at 10:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

It's good to see that Obama has inspired you to get involved in the government process oh4. LOL

January 20, 2009 at 11:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Oh4,

Thanks again for doing this, and congratulations on a job well done! It was nice meeting you as well the other day. Thanks again, and hopefully I will see you tomorrow!

Matt

January 21, 2009 at 1:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof:

Thanks again for a job well done! You have done better than a couple of the local bar owners in getting your signatures. It's a shame they couldn't take the time to fight a little harder for something that will affect their business and all of our rights. But that's the way it goes I guess. Your time and effort are greatly appreciated.
Steve_O

January 21, 2009 at 11:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

EOB will present our petition against the smoking ban to city clerk Susan Mendoza this coming Monday 1/26/2009 at 11:00A.M. at the city clerks office.
Have a good day Emporia!
Steve

January 22, 2009 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

in the meantime Dr. Barnett, is giving Emporia a bad name in Topeka, by pushing for a state-wide ban on smoking. His home phone is 342-5387, call him and leave a message if you must , you are against this ban!
Steve Corbin, an American

January 23, 2009 at 11:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Or if you get a busy signal, call Don Hill @
342-3046 and have him forward your message to the good Doctor.

Steve Corbin, an
American

January 23, 2009 at 11:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BigE (anonymous) says...

rbow stated
"you are against this ban!"
that sounds a little dictator like, don't you think rbow? can't we Americans make up our own minds, or shall we just do as you say and follow along like sheep?
BTW, thanks for posting their numbers here, i'm gonna go ahead and call both of 'em and tell 'em that i am FOR this ban!
great idea!

January 24, 2009 at 7:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

jmcmannis (anonymous) says...

I for one am not a smoker but I am against the smoking ban. I have worked in the hospital and firedepartment industry and have not contracted lung cancer or died from second hand smoke. Shoot I have even gotten a dose of creosote smoke from burning rails durning a grass fire. I also frequent one of the clubs here in town and I know that almost everyone that works or goes there are smokers. The club go to will not be the same once you take the smokers out, because smoking adds to the ambiance of the low lights of this place and drinking and smoking go hand in hand. I am proud of the citizens of Emporia for standing up for their rights, I apologize if I did not get a chance to sign the petition to overturn this stupid ban.
From a non smoker who glady frequents the bars and clubs of Emporia where smoking is allowed. Great job to all that got this ban to a vote, I wish they would stall the date of the ban until after the vote that would be the democratic thing to do, since certain members of our community forced this ban down our throats.
Down with the Ban! I for one will vote to kill the ban on Apr 7
j

January 24, 2009 at 8:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

BigE- For you to accuse anyone of sounding dictator like is tantamount to the old saying " like the kettle calling the pot black". In other word an oxymoron !

January 24, 2009 at 11:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

bigE,
My suggestion to call the lawmakers and tell them" I am against this ban" were directed to the majority pf posters on this thread who feel that way. However I am glad you exercised your right to do the same and tell them you are for it.
What sounds more like a dictator is someone telling my customers and I that we can't enjoy a legal product on MY property because of some junk scientific studies that have never been done in Emporia.
I find it funny that you can read and believe those junk studies but you had to wait until I posted our lawmakers/breakers home #'s to Call them. There is a thing called a phone book? But then it is usually pretty factual, never mind, you only read fiction.
Steve Corbin
An American

P.S. Would you be Emporia's hereo and file a complaint against my business with the EPA or OSHA? Help protect my employees safety, PLEASE?

January 24, 2009 at 11:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

BigE- Your statement of," can't we Americans make up our own minds, or shall we just do as you say and follow along like sheep?", is also an oxymoron.
Afterall don't you, the CAE and other ban smoking followers expect everyone to follow along with your beliefs, etc.. Can't we as Americans make up our own minds, or shall we just do as you say and follow along like sheep?

January 25, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

PEOPLE, I AM SERIOUS;

I WANT SOMEONE TO GO ON LINE AND FILE A COMPLAINT WITH OSHA ABOUT MY BUSINESS AND ITS EMPLOYEES SAFETY DUE TO SECOND HAND SMOKE. If they say that the levels in my building are above the permissible exposure level then of course we would go non-smoking, law or no law. But I don't think they will.
Steve Corbin

January 25, 2009 at 12:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

bigE, the ball is in your court, don't whiffle!
Steve

January 25, 2009 at 12:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

rbow- I was going to accomodate you and get OHSA to come and test the levels of SHS in your business !
But apparantely, only an employee of a business, etc. can lawfully request or file a complaint, before OSHA will do any testing, etc.
Sorry, I was going to try and grant your wish, but I can't make it happen.

January 25, 2009 at 3:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )