MelissaE (anonymous) says...

crack, you said ""take away more of our rights". What would their motive be for doing such a thing? Besides, you said you don't smoke, so how are they "diminishing more of [your] rights"?"

1. What are the motives of most special interest groups? To raise awareness for THEIR cause and solicit as much money as possible in order to get THEIR cause acknowledged or signed into law or whatever else they are wanting to do with their special interest.

2. Diminishing rights: There's the problem. You are not seeing the slippery slope of this argument. Because the city commissioners allowed a special interest group to get a vote on something that takes away a choice, we have therefore set the stage for more choices to be taken in the future. Right now, the choice of how to operate has been taken from the open-to-the-public businesses. Since that is now okay to do, the slope is that in the future, some special interest will petition to remove your choice of what you want to do in private.

It cannot be both ways.

December 11, 2008 at 1:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MelissaE (anonymous) says...

crack, you also said:

"A new, enlightened way of thinking is sweeping our country. It's sad that some people just can't get with the times. Maybe you should move to a third-world country if you want to keep your old-school way of thinking."

I'm perfectly fine with old-school thinking when it comes to removing rights...the Constitution is pretty old, too.

December 11, 2008 at 1:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

MelissaE, you have valid points, but I think you missed mine. Yes, I do have "old-school way of thinking". Sorry, I was just brought up that way. By taking away our rights, I'm talking about a private business owner who should be able to decide what goes on in their business. If smoking bothers you so much, why would you go into a bar that allows it? Simply choose another bar. You are not forced (nor are the employees) to be there, but yet you are forcing the owner to abide by your standards and beliefs.

I have no idea what you do for a living, but if you owned a business, how would you like it if I came in a complained about foul language being used? I would claim that you are corupting my delicate mind and this would damage my feelings forever. I realize this is nothing as serious as SHS, but it's the same principle.

If the government decides that smoking is bad and SHS is even worse, let them pass a law banning it. This is not something for local governments to decide.

Also, I'm curious what you think about my other comment about non-public business' being next?

December 11, 2008 at 3:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

Sorry MelissaE, I intended my reply to go to crackinsack.

December 11, 2008 at 3:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Go into any restaurant or bar and tell me there are not rules aobut what they can and cannot do. Maximum capacity, food preparation and handling, etc. There are laws everywhere. Go check into towns that have passed and see if it went any furthur before you jump to conclusions, you be surprised.

December 11, 2008 at 3:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

cracknsack Ok. enough already.

Go back to the ordinace on kvoe radios web page and read it crack. Smoking shall be banned in all places of employment. Employees mean working for wages or non paid workers such as volunteers.
Before you spout off such ridiculous replies to support your side you should re-read the ordinance.
Steve

December 11, 2008 at 4:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

The author of the letter states his problem. Government intrusion into his life. He is mad as hell and want's to let his supposed city commisioners know how he feels. Thanks Delwin Burton for your letter and having the stones to sign your name to it, unlike some of the sheeple who post here & remain incognito.
Steve Corbin

December 11, 2008 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Dear naive Crack: You said:

"I don't think they'll go after what you call "non-public businesses". The difference is that those people are being paid to be exposed to that environment. Think of it as hazard pay."

Read the ban. It bans smoking in all private clubs such as VFW, Eagles, and Elks and includes even volunteer unpaid workers in such clubs.

This ban is social reform gone mad.

Thank you, Mr. Burton, for pointing out the REAL problem with this ridiculous elitist smoking ban and the reason the vast majority of Emporians, including many non-smokers, oppose it.

The uproar isn't about smoking. It is about oppression and freedom from same.

December 11, 2008 at 5:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

Said it before, will say it again, I only wish folks here were as concerned about the Patriot Act as they are this ban, it pales in comparison to the freedoms and rights that can be taken from you on a whim with that travesty.

December 11, 2008 at 5:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

If you walked into a bar in Timbucktoo and saw everyone smoking including the bartender, would you really start telling people they need to put their cigarettes out because it was not a safe work environment?

I like to come back to my hometown and visit quite often. When I am back, I always go out to one of the local watering holes with a good friend. This particular one has bartenders that smoke. A lot of the times when I get there, all (yes ALL) of the patrons have a cigarette lit. Do you still think this is wrong? Yea I don't smoke, but I also made the choice to go in there knowing it would be pretty smokey in there. It's ok, PLEASE don't worry about me. I assure you, I have made an informed decision and am totally aware of the consequences. I'm still ok with it. I like the regulars that go to this place and enjoy talking to them and catching up. I can sacrifice a few hours of what you call a deadly environment that will surely kill me to be with friends.

Next time I am in town, I just may have to go down to Town Royal for a few. I'd love to shake Steve's hand and chat over a beer with him. And Steve, if you want to have a smoke while we talk, I'm just fine with that. :)

December 11, 2008 at 6:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Goodoleboy: There are no large or small injustices. One size fits all. 96 stab wounds by a psychopath or an accidental bullet to your head by a drunk idiot are different degrees of injustice, but both have the same end result: you are dead.

The same applies to our local smoking ban or the Patriot Act. Different degrees of injustice, but the same end result: Emporians lose freedoms and rights.

December 11, 2008 at 6:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

USNretired (anonymous) says...

I am proud to say I have enough intelligence to control where I go in Emporia, without some idiot civil servant acting like my lord and master. I don't smoke, so I don't feel compelled to light up. My choice. If you smoke and you are an adult, that is your choice. Any idiot who feels he/she has the authority to control my ability to think and choose is merely a barking dog I choose to ignore.

December 11, 2008 at 7:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

crackinsack it doesn't mak any difference if it's your rights,my rights or their rights. the dogooders of this country, county or state are out to take care of themselves, not you or me.every right that is lost is lost to all off us period.

December 11, 2008 at 9:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

crackinsack: I hope , I really hope by your past posts that you are just trying to stir things up. If however you truley believe what you post I feel sorry for you, and those like you who can't seem to use their power of choice and choose where they go and do business. If you truley believe what you post I feel sorry for your sad and pathetic life as you NEED the government to make your decisions for you. I only hope that most of the freedom loving people of Emporia don't feel the same way.
Regards
Steve

December 11, 2008 at 9:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

And crackinsack; I don't care who you are, I just know you don't have the stones to share with the rest of us, by your posts and your arguments I won't ban you from the Royal, but I must tell you , you would be the only socialist hanging out there. You know it's one thing to share your opinion with others and maybe try to sway others opinions, but if you don't have the balls to sign your name then bbob.
Steve

December 11, 2008 at 9:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

Dear crackinsack,
When you told me I was your "new favorite poster" I got all tingly and lightheaded. I noticed, however, that you never responded to my clarifications. I had hoped that that meant that you had relinquished your old ways and that your infatuation with me had converted you to the freedom of choice group. Now, I just feel led on and used.
Okay, anticipated banter aside, I have a hypothetical for your consideration: Say you are a chiropractor. I come to your office to receive treatment. Now you are a manipulation method chiropractor and I know that, but I retain your services. Well, we go through a few sessions and I decide that I don't like it. However, instead of going to another method chiropractor or an MD, I rile up a group of MDs and their wives to get public funding to ban your method of chiropractic medicine. I can find plenty of findings to support that your preferred method is more risky than others and I get three people in town with the right relationship to the money I've garnered to force you to change, i.e. take away your right to choose. Did I really do this for public health, or did I just do it as a show of power and to satisfy my whims?
I know over the past months you have been over and over all this on all these forms, but I'll never tire of hearing it again, just because it's you. (eyes batting)

December 11, 2008 at 9:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

lisa (anonymous) says...

Point blank...if you don't like the smoke.. don't go there! If you don' like porn..don't watch it...if you don't like drinking...stay away from drinkers!! This is America. You have a choice. Your thoughts and choices are not everyones. Deal with it. The American business owner has the right to make a decision on the choices of their establishment. You pay their taxes...you make their decision. Period. Don't see your check book out. If not ...stay out of their business. There are plenty of other places to go...and your children shouldn't be in a bar anyway. America...the right to chose...the reason our troops have fought for years. The next thing you know they will be telling you...tax payer..you can't do what YOU want in your own home.

December 11, 2008 at 10:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Lothar (anonymous) says...

So, if Second Hand Smoke is as bad as everyone seems to think it is (I don't know, personally. I haven't looked at the research) then the government needs to ban tobacco products, period. Get of the tax money. After all, shouldn't they ban it if it really is bad for us, or do they simply want us to purchase, without the ability to use it? Why not pass a law that everyone must purchase 3 packs a week, after all, the tax money is "for the kids."

If you don't want to be around SHS, then don't go where there are smokers. You want a drink? Go to a resturant that offers bar service and no smoking. Stop trying to tell business owners what they have to do, and (intersting concept) let them decide what is best for their business. If they decide wrong, then they ether change their direction, or go out of business.

December 12, 2008 at 2:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

PocketKings (anonymous) says...

Crack-
"Things once legal need to be made illegal for the best interest of our society as a WHOLE"

With that kind of logic LOL- LETS BAN FAST FOOD!

December 12, 2008 at 4:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

PocketKings (anonymous) says...

oleboy-
"Maximum capacity, food preparation and handling, etc. "
Maximum capacity protects against a stampede.
Food preparation with viruses/cross contamination.

Too much of something can kill you no matter what it is. Be it Smoking, Alcohol, Second hand smoke. Food in General leads to obesity which can cause a lot of other problems that can still KILL.

The money wasted by the special interest group couldve probably been put a better use such as creating more jobs or having a fireworks show in emporia... I think smoke is created with fireworks. BAN THEM NOW!!!!

December 12, 2008 at 4:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Sad, Sad,Sad.
Steve

December 12, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

woodstock67 (anonymous) says...

I'm from new jersey. Our governor passed a state wide ban in 2006. It has caused many small eateries and bars to go under and is continuing to do so every day. Many businesses say that even though more non-smokers patronize their businesses, their business does not sustain them because smokers were every day regulars. This law has caused another slice-and-dice of the people. It has caused many smokers to opt out of socializing and stay home.

December 12, 2008 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack, please help me understand your thoughts about comparing smoking in public and chiropractor. 1) You are making the choice to go there - chiropractors office or bar. Only you are affected by the treatment or SHS, please don't be concerned with my health, I choose to be there. 2) You are paying for the treatment or drink, so you know full well what you are getting yourself into. You are not paying to breathe SHS, so don't go there.

The business owner has the right to throw you out, you have the right to not patronize that business. I will take care of myself, you take care of yourself. Believe it or not, I respect your opinion, just don't try to force it on me.

This will probably be my last response, I'm considering moving to a third world country where my old fashioned beliefs are still respected. I'm not sure why you would resort to a comment like that unless you are afraid that a good, honest discussion on this matter somehow threatens you.

And yes, I am proud to put my name on this response, because I believe in what I write and am not ashamed to listen to someone that does not agree with me. If you are afraid of going to the Town Royal because of your beliefs, then don't go! At least then I'll know that you are not sitting there agreeing with me, then stabbing me in the back by remaining anonymous.

Delwin Burton

December 12, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

HeatherBliss (anonymous) says...

I understand where the arguement of losing your rights is coming from, but if you didn't smoke you would be just as hell bent for the other side. Smoking bans are not that big of an issue. Yes, some bars are going to lose a lot of business. But just because you can not smoke, does not mean you aren't going to stand outside and smoke anyways. If you smoke, you are going to smoke, no matter what. Sorry you can't smoke while you eat, which is just disgusting and if you do, you should seriously consider cutting back. That is like pouring beer into your cereal the day after getting bombed at the bar. A little too much...

I remember when Olathe first passed the smoking ban. It was a huge ordeal. It actually works out though, I realized I saved a lot more money by not being able to light up a cigarette constantly while drinking.

Yea, I have to go outside, but all my friends are out there too, so it works out.

To top it off several bars up here turned into private clubs. Not allowing the general public to enter. Memberships are required. One time only fee of a few dollars and wow, you can smoke inside. I have only seen a few non smokers come in. All the employees smoke. Solved problem.

Aside from that, isn't a known fact that when in a restaurant, when you light your cigarette the food comes?

December 12, 2008 at 10:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

Who in the world does not understand the consequences of SHS? To me, that is not a valid argument. I will admit that it totally amazes me that all of us have been bombarded with the hazards of smoking. This has been going on for years and years, yet for some reason the younger generation will still start this terrible habit. Why is that?

Steve, or any other owner is very aware of his responsibilities and there is always a possibility of being sued. That is his risk, let him decide if he wants to chance it. I am not his mother and I have no right to tell him what to do.

As far as a bar being an unsafe enviroment, I have been going there for over 30 years. I've been breathing that same air. But if the truth be known, I will probably be killed by a jealous husband way before SHS will do me in.

December 12, 2008 at 10:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

HeatherBliss (anonymous) says...

We have the right to bare arms.

If a cigarette happens to be your weapon of choice, good luck. 20, 30, 40 years from now, I bet your enemy's will be cursing you on their death beds.

Good luck working that angle.

NO ONE has the RIGHT to smoke. YOU have the PRIVILEGE to smoke.

December 12, 2008 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

crackinsack
You said,"What about the customers who don't comprehend that SHS is bad for them?" Are you serious???!! Are you trying to enlighten the unwashed, ignorant masses with your "new, enlightened way of thinking" that "is sweeping our country"? Those people don't exist except in your arrogant mind. The problem with your new way of thinking is that it can't see validity in any other way of thinking. People that go into places with shs know what they are doing, even if you can't comprehend someone doing such a thing. I knew smoking was unhealthy when i started smoking back in 1991 and I knew the same thing when I quit in 1996. People aren't as ignorant as you make them out to be. I know it makes you feel superior to think of others this way but it tends to make people very angry when you talk down to them as if they were mentally challenged howler monkeys. Your reasons for wanting this ban are purely selfish and you need to admit it to yourself. How do I know your intentions? I can't know for sure, but your responses say a lot. I don't believe you actually believe in these ignorant people that have no clue that shs is unhealthy, I give you more credit than that. So your concern for these fictitious characters of yours can not be your real concern.

Heather
There are plenty of nonsmokers who are against this ban, myself for one.

December 12, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Heather: Yes, all Americans have the "right to bare arms". Of course, on cold days most choose to cover them. We also have the right to bear arms.

And, with all due respect, Americans have the right to smoke. It is not a privilege, as you stated. Smoking is a legal activity utilizing a legal government subsidized and taxed product.

Being a free country, you also have the right to choose not to patronize businesses that allow smoking if it offends you.

Rights. Freedoms. Choice. We are blessed to live in such a nation... unless crusading narrow-minded radicals destroy it by supporting laws that take away our rights and freedoms.

December 12, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack: You said:

"I’m not naïve; I just misunderstood the question."

Big surprise there, Crack. It has become obvious to all who post on this blog concerning the CAE/KBG smoking ban that you misunderstand more than just questions.

You don't understand the provisions & restrictions of the ban.

You don't understand the long-range implications of the ban.

You don't understand the harm the ban will do to local business and business owners.

You don't understand the legitimate arguments by opponents of the ban.

You don't understand that most of the "facts" you spout are propaganda, taken from context, or misleading, at best.

You don't understand the meaning of freedom of choice.

You don't understand the danger of government intervention and control.

You don't understand this issue is about much more than smoking.

You don't understand the concept of tolerance.

You don't understand that although most Emporians oppose smoking, most Emporians oppose this over-the-top ban, and the reasons why.

You don't understand that your inane comments hurt your cause more than they help it.

December 12, 2008 at 1:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

Crackinsack - are you serious? Let's face it, you have your head stuck so far up your butt, you couldn't see common sense if it kissed you! I was just trying to lighten the conversation and you, again, resorted to degrading remarks.

December 12, 2008 at 2:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

crack
You said "This is a perfect example of the poor judgment of those opposed to the ban. Common sense and decency would keep most people from flirting with another man’s wife. If only you had that common sense and decency, you’d probably be in favor of the ban and/or not smoke in public."
Here you go again!
You take one comment, made in jest, and attribute it to all who oppose the ban. You can't in all honesty tell me that my assessment of you is wrong.

December 12, 2008 at 2:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Zander,

Sounds like you found the jealous husband...

December 12, 2008 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

See you in a couple Delwin, let me buy you a beer.
Steve Corbin

December 12, 2008 at 4:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- What you, the CAE, its followers and those who support such a restrictive and biased and blatant attempt to control other persons lives and way of living, by the attempted use of " unreasonable force" by proposing an entirely new more restrictive "law", especially when there are already laws on the City books that ban smoking in certain places, is in fact not only against the U.S. Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution but is against, YES, even the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the State of Kansas, pertaining to the protection of an individuals "RIGHT" to the pursuit of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Now if you don't believe me. Check it out for yourself and while your at it check out the explaination of the concept of the meaning of "Liberty" .

December 12, 2008 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

romano1784 (anonymous) says...

you know upon reading all this i just become increasingly more angry. yes I am a smoker, yes i smoke where i please. However I have never said no to a nonsmoker who has asked me politely to put out my cigarrette, or asked me to just move away a little bit so he or she isnt breathing it.
lets do things a little differently here. pretend this isn't about rights or freedoms. everyone whining about SHS pretends like there is a smoker constantly on their shoulder just puffing away in their face. Fact: smokers and non-smokers tend to seperate quite a bit. Reason: non-smokers generally don't like the smell, or the effects of the smoke.
well sorry but to hell with everyone now who doesnt like the cigarrette smoke. I have put up with it for 9 years. 9 years of making sure my habit doesnt affect or hurt anyone who doesnt smoke. I cant smoke at sporting events, movie theatres, now basically everywhere. no one took my vote (and yes I already signed the petition) or asked me my feelings on the ordinance, so again to hell with all the offended.
I will turn the tables from now on. you dont like my smoking, you walk away. The only reason bans like this ever work is because people are to whiny, weak, and sheep-like that they dont stand up for what they believe in.
There are around 30000 people in emporia, and the police cant deal with us all. give me a ticket, and I'll rip it up in front of you, after all what are you gonna do? Take away my cigarettes? good the gas station's just down the road, and i'll have another four dollars to waste on my choice. They cant jail me for using a LEGAL PRODUCT. in essence there is nothing anyone can do to make me stop smoking if i dont want to.

December 12, 2008 at 5:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Sad, Sad,Sad
Steve

December 12, 2008 at 5:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

neighbor (anonymous) says...

"Sounds like you found the jealous husband"...

I was thinking he exposed the jealous ugly duckling that no matter how drunk you got, you would never consider it an option at closing time.

December 12, 2008 at 6:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

crack
You can't compare the smoking BAN to the mowing ordinance for a lot of reasons. You could probably more accurately compare it to the current preban smoking laws. The mowing ordinance would be more like the ban if it said you couldn't have grass on your land because of potential problems it might cause someone later if it wasn't kept at a reasonable length. The mowing ordinance is there in part because when grass gets too tall pests, that wouldn't live there if properly mowed , now live there and spread out into peoples homes. People don't like pests in their homes or businesses. Can you imagine if a pest came into your business, that would suck. Right? now imagine a pest coming into your business and telling you that you have to change things to make it more comfortable. That sounds wild huh? Unfortunately it sounds like reality to some folks.

December 12, 2008 at 6:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

romano1784 The sad post was addressed to sadsack not you. I know how you feel but lets just let the commissioners who voted for this ban be the ones who get charged with it first. There are people out there that are hell bent on making sure a certain heating and air conditioning company in town is the first business charged under this ordinance. A little civil disobedience is good though.
Regards
Steve Corbin

December 12, 2008 at 7:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

DELWIN BURTON FOR CITY COMMISSION!

Steve

December 12, 2008 at 7:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

crackinsack- I don't know whether Delwin will attempt to answer your question, "what’s the difference in the smoking ban vs the mowing ordinance? Why support one and not the other?" But you may not want me to answer, but I will anyway, the difference between a mowing ordinance and a smoking ban is. A mowing ordinance does not use "unreasonable force" to force individuals to live by someone elses life or lifestyle, however a new more restrictive smoking ban does use "unreasonable force" to force individuals to live by someone elses life, life style and beliefs, since there is already a smoking ban ordinance in effect that bans smoking in all public buildings and also allows individual private business owners to allow smoking or enforce a smoking ban of their own , which they now have the freedom of choice to do without the interference of any individual, individuals, group of individuals or government entity .

December 12, 2008 at 10:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

I have a question for the smoking ban advocates.
I don't really know how many businesses there are in Emporia, but lets say there are 500. If out of those 500 businesses approxiamately 20 are smoking allowed businesses, doesn't that leave 480 businesses for non-smokers to choose from to avoid smokers and SHS ?
And yet the smoking ban advocates are not satisfied with a choice of 480 to choose from, they(you) want all 500 businesses to choose from and leave the smokers with basically no choice, unless they want to be treated as 2nd and 3rd class citizens and have to be outside in all sorts of weather or stay at home etc., that to me is "discrimination and subjugation" in the worst sense of the meaning of the words and a violation of human rights, Bill of Rights and the Constitutional Rights.

December 12, 2008 at 10:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

goodoleboy (anonymous) says...

romano1784

People cannot drink alcohol in public can they? Can a person walk down main street with a 12 pack in one hand while drinking beer in another? Nope its called public intoxication and its illegal use of a LEGAL product. So by all means rip those tickets up, rack up late fees and help generate more income for the city, I'm right behind you lol. There are plenty of legal activities that are in fact not legal in public, your logic is unsound and your argument moot sir.

December 12, 2008 at 10:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

romano1784 (anonymous) says...

hey goodoleboy. your right drinking in public is illegal, it can be dangerous. So does that mean if I go to Josies bar, stand in the parking lot (outside the 10ft rule) that I am subject to drunk in public since I've probably had a couple? My logic is extremely sound. I bought a product, legally. I used them in a well ventilated area, generally i smoke outside at home i have a son, Or if i'm in public I move to the SMOKING SECTION. Imagine that, a whole section dedicated to smokers, while the rest of the restaurant is yours. You want to have some real fun 'olboy? why dont you sweep up all the cigarette butts i'm now going to leave in a pile on the street since there will not be an ashtray within 10ft of me. Oh sure if I flick it right I may hit a trashcan, but I can't be inconvenienced with the simple walk anymore. I think the smokers have given up enough.

December 13, 2008 at 12:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

zander (anonymous) says...

OK, looks like we might have a problem. In an earlier post, the mowing ordinance was referenced back to Zander. I read that and wondered what the heck you were talking about. So I looked up Zander's history, and there it was. Only one problem, I didn't write any of that. I don't even know the Doctor that is mentioned in the post.

Just so we're clear, I called the Gazette and they gave me my user name of Zander about a month ago. The smoking ban is my first post. If I had written about the mowing ordinance, I would take credit for it, but I didn't. Maybe one of the other readers will take credit for it.

Right now, I'm just concerned with the slow, and calculated elimination of our rights to choose. Believe me, the smoking ban will not stop with the bars. Factories and other private businesses are next. Why does the phrase "big brother" keep popping into my mind?

December 13, 2008 at 6:30 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

trainrech (anonymous) says...

I've been reading through some of the opinions, but wish I had some way to filter out personal attacks.

For some light reading, read Iowa's Smoke Free Act. Makes the one adopted by Emporia seem like kids play. Specifically says no smoking in public places, including outdoor seating area. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Regulates smoking in company cars. Need I go on?

http://www.iowasmokefreeair.gov/commo...

While I can understand concerns over someone's "right" to pollute the air I breathe, our ordinance isn't nearly as restrictive as it could have been. Doesn't make it better for some of those proponents of the ban, but I'm just saying...

Anyone, besides me, miss the smell of burning leaves in the fall?

December 13, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

A funny thing happened last night at the bar while I was buying Delwin a cold one. Three non-smoking individuals came in , (PAST THE SMOKING ALLOWED SIGNS ON THE DOOR), and bought a pitcher. Before long the ashtray on their table was propping the door open to air the place out. No consideration to the other customers and the blasts of cold air coming in. A concerned customer removed the ashtray and informed the three (politely) that the bar was smoking allowed until March 3,2009. You people have won, so far, but hold off coming into my establishment until it is smoke free if you can't handle the smoke. You left before I could reccomend The Blind.
Regards
Steve

December 13, 2008 at 7:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )