A matter of rights
I DON’T UNDERSTAND the proposed smoking ban. The argument that “other cities are doing it” doesn’t fly. I live in Emporia and I think we are better than those other cities. Why lower our standards and compromise our freedoms in order to “join a movement?”
There is already a fair and effective smoking ban in Emporia. Smoking is banned in all public buildings, retail stores, offices, government buildings, schools, arenas and stadiums. Restaurants are currently permitted to choose to allow smoking in their establishments or not, and 90 percent choose to be smoke-free. Most bar and tavern owners choose to allow smoking, and some don’t. That’s the owner’s choice, as it should be.
I doubt that many of the ban proponents have read the proposed smoking ban. If they had, they would understand why so many smokers and non-smokers alike vehemently oppose it.
The ban is an over-reaction to a non-existent problem. It eliminates the right for adults to make choices. It forces the disabled and elderly into dark alleys in rain, cold, and snow to enjoy a smoke. It reduces an entire segment of our population to second-class status. It takes away the right of proud veterans to smoke a cigar in the confines of private clubs like the VFW or American Legion. The ban turns honest citizens and visitors into criminals and forces our fire department to be a law enforcement agency. It sends a message to visitors: “You aren’t welcome here if you smoke”.
The proposed new ban will create hardship, loss of freedom, inequality, loss of business and revenue, loss of jobs, discourage tourism and allow “Big Brother” to intrude further into our personal and private lives.
This smoking ban has little to do with health and everything to do with freedom, individual rights, and the fundamental core of what makes America great---the right to make personal decisions and choices.
Vote “No” on April 7.
John Atkisson
Emporia
•••••
For the ban
MANY SIGNS around town urge us to vote down the smoking ban in order to “protect our rights.” This reminds me of an incident that I experienced many years back. I was in a movie theater and a woman behind me was talking constantly throughout the film. Finally, someone asked her politely to be quiet. The woman responded with indignation, “I paid for my ticket and I have a right to speak!”
Unfortunately, the exercise of her “right” interfered with the right of everyone else in the theater to enjoy the movie.
In a perfect world we would not need to implement a ban on smoking in public places. Those who choose to smoke would recognize that those of us who do not smoke also do not want to breathe in smoke. To most nonsmokers the presence of smoke in the air at a restaurant or night club is just as offensive as the sound of someone chattering during a movie. It ruins the experience. Unfortunately, too many smokers in Emporia either are not aware of this or choose to ignore it.
Of course, some will argue that the rights that need to be protected are not the rights of individual smokers but the rights of business owners. This is a legitimate point, but, in my opinion, not decisive. There are many ways in which we, as a community, restrict the rights of business owners in order to protect the public. For example, an owner of a business does not have the right to serve unsafe food or to serve alcohol without a license. It is not unreasonable to add to these restrictions the requirement that a business should provide clean air to breath for its employees and patrons.
I will be voting in favor of the ban.
Joe Yanik
Emporia
•••••
Why no inspection?
MY BUSINESS, (open to the public), is regulated now. At least once a year I am inspected on:
Building codes: including electrical, mechanical, structural.
Fire codes: exits, emergency lighting, fire extinguishers and occupancy limits.
Health codes: food preparation, safe food handling, rodent/pest control, temperature controls, employee hygiene, restroom cleanliness, and heck, we even have to have self-closing trash dumpsters outside to protect the health of our customers.
My insurance company: checks all of the above.
Why then, do none of these at least yearly tests by the government include an air quality test for second-hand smoke?
Could it be the government doesn’t really consider second-hand smoke a health risk?
Joy Morgan
Emporia
•••••
Special interests
WHY DO SPECIAL interest groups think they have a “right” to special treatment? Illegal immigrants, pro and con death penalty, single parents, pregnant teens, obese people, homosexuals, religious and non-religious all think they need an ordinance or law to protect their “rights.” These groups don’t seem to realize what they desire are “special privileges” and accommodations.
Private ownership of a business, however, is one of our rights as American citizens. Isn’t that what Veterans Day is about, honoring those who serve and died to give us that Freedom? Patronizing a business is a “privilege or a choice,” not a right!
Having traveled 48 continental states, it’s been my privilege to patronize many establishments. Over the past 35 years, I’ve encountered signs that exercise policies and rights of proprietors: No shirts, No shoes, No service; No Swearing; No Glass; No Food or Drink; No Whining; No Trucks; No cars; No Alcohol; No Smoking.
With all the toxins and chemicals in the air we breathe, the food we eat, in the products we import daily used in homes, autos, schools, daycares and jobs, I find it hard to believe that second-hand smoke is a priority on the list of products that are “Bad for ya!” We get to breathe the pollutants from the world every 24 hours.
Why the need to make proprietors of private business the policemen of one item that’s “Bad for ya”? What’s next, banning overweight people from fast food restaurants? I think some of these special interest groups are what’s “Bad for us”!
Use grant money to educate youngsters about the hazards of smoking enlighten them to the right of private ownership.
It’s a shame the entire county isn’t involved, as many work and spend their money in the county seat and this will affect them, also.
Rather than the sheep following the goat to the slaughterhouse, show some Independence, Emporia, and vote “NO” on the private business smoking ban.
Barbara Dill
Hartford
•••••
Vote ‘yes’
I’M PUZZLED. Why is it that smokers who are promoting the defeat of the smoking ban in restaurants with signs in their yards have no problem smoking outside their place of employment, often in terrible weather, AND are courteous and thoughtful enough of their own spouse, children and/or grandchildren to only smoke outside their homes/cars but believe that’s it’s OK to smoke in a restaurant? In listening to those who want to defeat this smoking ban, it certainly comes across that THEIR rights are more important than the rights of the majority, non-smokers who frequent or work in those restaurants. Surely since it’s assumed that they go several hours without a smoke during their sleeping hours, they can forgo lighting up for the short time it takes to eat a meal.
On a recent trip to Bobby D’s for lunch, I was pleased to see the ‘no smoking’ symbol on their door and asked my waitress to thank Bobby and Debbie for taking this step. She agreed wholeheartedly and said she was equally grateful as the smoke from patrons there had really bothered her. There are other restaurants in town I might visit but won’t because of second hand smoke. Please vote YES for the smoking ban in restaurants on April 7.
Chuck Frazier
Emporia
(a former smoker who has held the hand of family members with emphysema as they took their last breath and died)
•••••
Speak with a vote
THE ELECTION IS upon us. It’s your chance to make your voice heard.
So often voters feel that their vote doesn’t count or that they can’t affect change. Here in Emporia you have your chance now!! When you vote — vote NO on the smoking ban and remember the commissioners who voted for taking away your rights by voting against them. But above all, get out and vote.
Rick A. Hebeler
Emporia
•••••
Stop Big Government
TIRED OF GOVERNMENT bail outs?
Tired of Big Government not responding to your wants and needs? Are you tired of the slow but steady erosion of your rights?
Vote NO on the smoking ban and stop Big Government here in Emporia.
Orin Madden
Emporia
•••••
Whose rights?
THIRTY-ONE YEARS ago, I was a patient at Newman Hospital. I was 14 years old and had been hospitalized with a pretty serious case of pneumonia.
I had a roommate who was a little younger than I was. She was in the hospital because of complications from asthma. We were both receiving oxygen to help us breathe. One evening, several members of her family came to visit and promptly lit up their cigarettes. My father was horrified. He spoke to the attending nurse, pointing out that both of the patients in the room were having difficulty breathing, and that surely second hand smoke was only aggravating the situation (not to mention the dangers of smoking around oxygen!). Her response was, “Sir, I’m sorry, but those people have their rights.”
Our family recalls that time as one of the more absurd ironies we’ve experienced. Whenever people talk about “rights” in the same sentence as “second hand smoke,” we are brought back to that surreal scene in a hospital room. We can only hope that in a few years, we can look back as a community and see how ridiculous it is to debate the rights of business owners over the health of our community.
Janell Jensen Neer
Emporia
•••••
Just the first step
HAVING CONVERSATIONS with friends is reported to be healthy for you and add years to your life. Most people go to their favorite bar to relax and shoot the breeze with their friends and have a few beers. This is their time to relax and reduce the anxieties and frustrations of the day and to discuss and solve the problems of the world. The majority also like to have a smoke. This has been a pastime of men for centuries.
If the current smoking ban is allowed to pass restricting smoking in bars and private clubs, people will leave the bars and the presence of their friends, go home and nurse their frustrations in private. This will lead to depression, family problems, high blood pressure and other health problems. It will also lead to business closing, loss of jobs and tax revenue, and tension among members of the community.
Remember, once the do-gooders accomplish their goal, they will go after bans on other things. What’s next — bans or high taxes on sodas, doughnuts, sugars, fat frams? You get the idea. They will not stop. There will be none of the things that people enjoy because “They are bad for you.”
Be vigilant and Protect our Rights. Vote NO on the smoking ban.
Dale Nuessen
Emporia
•••••
Other dangers
I JUST RECEIVED my 2009 “Water at Your Service” brochure from the City of Emporia Water Department.
In it I noticed several dangerous chemicals/contaminants that are present in Emporia’s drinking water. Some are the same chemicals found in second-hand smoke. However, the brochure stated “the presence of these contaminants in the water does not necessarily indicate that the water poses a health risk.”
Does this also mean there is a safe level of the contaminants found in second hand smoke? Please set me straight, I’m afraid to shower and I’m not making any new friends.
Bob Rankin
Emporia
•••••
It isn’t broken
AS AN EX-SMOKER I am going to vote early and VOTE NO on the proposed smoking ban. I will vote when my son has time to drive me to the courthouse. He is busy all the time now because his time has been spent lately organizing the fight against this ban. He is a business owner here in town.
There is already a smoking ordinance in this town which has served us quite well and I see no need to change it.
The proponents of this new ban (and it is a ban) have done nothing but waste time and tax-payer money. How are pitting smokers and non-smokers, friends and neighbors and family members against each other making Emporia a healthier place to live?
Naoma Walker
Emporia
•••••
Right to choose
EMPORIA, KANSAS— Founding City of Veterans Day!
Your vote in April could also make us proud to proclaim: Emporia, Kansas — First City TO NOT GIVE UP ITS CITIZENS’ RIGHTS TO CHOOSE.
Gaylord E. West
Emporia
driveonby (anonymous) says...
The people, besides business owners that this will hurt, are the vets, in their clubs, and the elderly ladies at bingo. What little fun there is in life anymore, a small group of drug money funded busybodies can buy out a town and a newspaper. The current ban is sufficient to protect children and dining families. If you think the ban people will ever stop, you are wrong. Their money supply is endless, as long as pharma can come up with a pill they want to push. Nicoderm and Chantix today, what tomorrow? Fat pills, skinny pills, sex pills, too much sex pills, sad pills, happy pills, JEEZ Scuse me I forgot ADHD pills. When those were approved ADHD diagnosis went from about 300,000 kids to 10 million.
April 6, 2009 at 2:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksgram (anonymous) says...
If I counted right, thats 3 for the ban & 9 against. Let's hope it comes out the same way at the polls!!!
April 6, 2009 at 3:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
A note to Chuck Fraizer;
Those yellow signs are in quite a few NON-SMOKERS YARDS.
I guess they can see through all the SMOKE & MIRRORS and know it's a rights issue.
Steve
April 6, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lookup (anonymous) says...
According to Chuck's letter, my theory is true. No mention of taverns or clubs. Only restaurants. Would have all of this been an issue if Bruff's were non-smoking? That wonderful steak there has all the CAE friends and followers upset. They can't eat it without SHS. Darn it Bruff's. It's all your fault! Vote No
April 6, 2009 at 5:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
emporiateacher (anonymous) says...
Mr. Nuessen, Are you aware that smoking CAUSES high blood pressure? I am not sure how or why you are insinuating that not allowing people to smoke in a public place is going to cause higher blood pressure. If anything it may even lower blood pressure.
This is rediculous. Those who are campaigning to Vote No there is absolutely NO evidence to back up anything you claim. There are years and years worth of studies to prove that second hand smoke kills. In fact, tobacco companies will tell you that it does. So why is there such a debate over this? As a person concerned with my health and the health of my small children I think the right to live and be healthy somehow is a little more important than a businesses right to allow smoking. Come on people. There are bigger issues out there.
April 6, 2009 at 6:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MisterO (anonymous) says...
emporiateacher posted, " Mr. Nuessen, Are you aware that smoking CAUSES high blood pressure? "
Sorry, teach...but the issue is the supposed health effects of 2nd hand smoke. Not smoking. Your above comment is irrelevant.
"This is rediculous. Those who are campaigning to Vote No there is absolutely NO evidence to back up anything you claim."
Wrong.
The results of a 38-year long American Cancer Society study (Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Tobacco Related Mortality in a Prospective Study of Californians, 1960-98) may be found here:
http://www.data-yard.net/43/1057.pdf
The results of another long-term study (Mortality from Cancer and Other Causes among Airline Cabin Attendants in Germany, 1960–1997) may be found here:
http://www.data-yard.net/39/cabin.pdf
A third long-term study by the World Health Organization (Multicenter Case–Control Study of Exposure to
Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer
in Europe) may be found here:
http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/re...
The EPA's report (The Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders) may be found here:
http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.g...
The Congressional Research Service's analysis of the EPA report may be found here:
http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/...
The results of a Federal Lawsuit over the EPA report may be found here:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fa...
A partial list of the chemicals in second hand smoke may be found here:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/fa...
OSHA has determined that limited exposure to many chemicals (including those found in 2nd hand smoke) is considered safe. The list of chemicals amounts of each that OSHA has determined to be safe may be found here:
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/pel/recognit...
"There are years and years worth of studies to prove that second hand smoke kills. In fact, tobacco companies will tell you that it does."
No there aren't and no they don't. There is evidence that active smoking kills, not 2nd hand smoke. Ask any doctor of your choice if he or she knows of ANYONE who had died as a result of exposure to 2nd hand smoke.
"So why is there such a debate over this? As a person concerned with my health and the health of my small children I think the right to live and be healthy somehow is a little more important than a businesses right to allow smoking. Come on people. There are bigger issues out there."
It's sad that even a teacher is unable to think for himself/herself. I would recommend you choose not to patronize establishments that allow smoking if you are concerned about your health or the health of your children. It's very easy to do - I do it all the time.
One would think that a teacher would have the common sense to realize that.
April 6, 2009 at 7:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
emporiateacher (anonymous) says...
Check out this website. http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/healthef...
April 6, 2009 at 7:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
emporiateacher (anonymous) says...
By the way MisterO, I do think for myself and I know that I don't like to be around smoke. I do however like to eat at Coach's or Applebees or other appropriate family establishments.
April 6, 2009 at 7:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksgram (anonymous) says...
Emporiateacher,
There ya go
" I do think for myself and I know that I don't like to be around smoke. I do however like to eat at Coach's or Applebees or other appropriate family establishments."
It's not about health to you or rights it's about what YOU like. I understand where you are coming from because I used to feel the same way. I don't like the smell of SHS either & would be happy to never smell it....but as I have stated in here before...IT'S NOT ABOUT ME (or you). You don't pay the bills & the taxes on those privately owned business. No one forces you to patronize them. By the way Applebees went non-smoking a couple years ago, so it's safe to go there now, & Coaches only allows it in the back, Carlos O'kellys in the front....etc....see it's easy to avoid it if you want.
April 6, 2009 at 8:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksgram (anonymous) says...
All this reminds me of the old joke.
Do you smoke after sex?
Answer: Don't know, I never looked.
April 6, 2009 at 8:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Tell me emporiateacher;
What's the difference betwee the chicken strips at Coach's and Micky d"s?
Steve
April 6, 2009 at 8:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
generalsn (anonymous) says...
Any tax exempt "charity " that has become a political action committee that, instead of doing research and educating, their primary function, now spends huge sums of money to hire lobbyists to make laws using GESTAPO tactics using LAW ENFORCEMENT, THREATS, INTIMIDITATION, , and SNITCHING to FORCE people to OBEY their guidelines with draconian smoking bans will get NO DONATIONS from me, Since becoming a political action committee, they need to have their tax exempt status investigated by the IRS. Contributions to PACs are NOT tax deductable. All my donations are going to local events and groups that depend on local businesses and bingo halls, that the bans are affecting, for their support, Here are the groups taking that money away from them, all fed by big pharma through their Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Fundamentals...
April 6, 2009 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MisterO (anonymous) says...
emporiateacher posted, "Check out this website. http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/healthef...
Yeah...did you even bother to look at the links I posted? Not only did I post a link to the very same EPA article you did, I also posted two reviews of the EPA article.
One is a review by the Congressional Research Service which concluded, "The process at every turn has been characterized by both scientific and procedural irregularities. Those irregularities include conflicts of interest by both Agency staff involved in the preparation of the risk assessment and members of the Science Advisory Board panel selected to provide a supposedly independent evaluation of the document"
The other link is to a case report issued by a Federal judge in a lawsuit regarding that EPA study. Among the court's findings: "he Agency disregarded information and made findings based on selective information... deviated from its own risk assessment guidelines; failed to disclose important (opposing) findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers."
and
"Gathering all relevant information, researching and disseminating findings were subordinate to EPA's demonstrating ETS was a Group A carcinogen... In this case, EPA publicly committed to a conclusion before research had begun; adjusted established procedure and scientific norms to validate the Agency's public conclusion, and aggressively utilized the Act's authority to disseminate findings to establish a de facto regulatory scheme... and to influence public opinion... While so doing, [it] produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes cancer."
emporiateacher also posted, "By the way MisterO, I do think for myself "
As evidenced by your post, you obviously don't. Like most of the ban supporters, you are content to accept someone else's interpretation of a flawed report that you didn't even bother to read.
Some teacher.
April 6, 2009 at 9:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
homewrecker (anonymous) says...
I don't think I need this TEACHER teaching my kids. Anyone that takes their young children into a bar or club must not be TWISTED STRAIGHT.
April 6, 2009 at 9:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
Hey Janell, The hospital is non-smoking!
April 6, 2009 at 10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
DO YOU HAVE A LEGITIMATE RESPONSE
emporiateacher?
April 6, 2009 at 10:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
77flint (anonymous) says...
You tell 'em STEVE!!!!!!!!!!!YUC YUC
April 6, 2009 at 10:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
Emporiateacher: I fail to understand your argument. Where are you and your children being victimized by all the toxic second-hand smoke? Every public building in Emporia is currently smoke-free under the smoking ordinance of 1987. Only some bars, a couple of private fraternal organizations, and a handful of restaurants still permit patrons to smoke. So, where is it you and your kids hang out? Town Royal? VFW? Just curious.
By the way, teacher. As a guy who is not a teacher, but did major in English, I find it ridiculous that you don't know how to spell ridiculous. No wonder so many of our young people are functionally illiterate nowadays.
April 6, 2009 at 11:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
You got it,YY4U. If you want to find out where the stink is coming from, follow the money.
April 7, 2009 at 12:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MrCmonkeeDo (anonymous) says...
"We've seen the enemy and it is ODD.
It's easy to forget that most of the BadThings that happen to people are anomalies It's important because, a whole bunch of folks seem to believe the odds are probable that they will get cancer in one form or another.
The truth is, the odds are that most people won't contract or die from any kind of cancer, ever.
Just as, the odds are that most smokers will NOT contract or die from lung cancer or any other smoking related illness.
And, the odds that any of you peeps will contract lung cancer from 2ndHand smoke has got to be astronomical--if such a thing could even be measured.
However, smokers do increase the odds that they will contract and die from lung cancer, or heart disease or what-have-you. Likewise, obsessive compulsive "clean freaks" increase their odds of contracting and dying from immunodeficiency disease or liver damage or the common cold. The mechanic who works on your automobile increases the odds that s/he will die from some form of cancer, (apparently there are enough known carcinogens in used motor oil to kill a rat,) as do the peeps in those turnpike toll booths breathing exhaust fumes everyday. Both of whom, dramatically increase the odds that they will be crushed by an automobile every time they show up for work; as do we all every time we step into the big-wide-open that constitutes life. Let's face it folks, just gettin' up out of bed is death defying. But there seems to be this idea that the odds are somehow stacked against us, almost as if the "odds" are the thing we fear most.
Oddly, most mechanics and toll booth peeps don't die from some form of cancer or getting crushed, even the ones who smoke, but some do.
And contrary to popular opinions, most folks don't get caught driving while drunk; because, they don't do anything wrong to justify being "pulled over," but some do.
Most folks don't give their babies and toddlers too much children's cold and allergy medicines "to make them sleep," but apparently some do.
Most drug addicts lead normal lives, go to work, pay their taxes and raise normal happy children, some don't.
Most folks will do something really stupid with a wobbly 6 foot stepladder or a fork at least three times in their lives, some folks only once.
Most folks take more than the recommended dosage of over the counter pain medications, (i.e. Ibuprofen, Acetaminophen, Aspirin) for years and years and never suffer any ill effects, some folks die of liver failure.
Most tobacco users will NOT contract or die from any smoking related illness, but some will.
The odds are all of these statements are true today and will be true tomorrow.
To be fair MrCmonkeeDo is no expert on this subject an' some of these statements could be wrong; however the odds are that most of these statements are true.
No odds were harmed in the writing of this opinion.
April 7, 2009 at 12:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
April 6, 2009 at 8:41 p.m. ( permalink )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
MrC,
I liked your post. There are too many things in life to ban all of them that are unhealthy. Right now, a small meteor could come crashing through my roof and kill me. Are the odds against it that it will happen, absolutely. Could it happen? Absolutely.
Here's the thing. Once people find out they can start banning stuff they don't like/understand, they keep on doing that. Today might be SHS. Tomorrow might be trans-fats. Then after that, what? Non-diet sodas, tanning beds, salt, energy drinks, toe-in surfing, certain video games, single cigars, swearing, incandescent light bulbs, handguns...This doesn't end. All of these things I mentioned are banned or restricted in a place that went non-smoking.
April 7, 2009 at 10:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sassyone (anonymous) says...
I was driving to work the other day and I was smoking a cigarette. The car in front of me stepped on the gas and drove off. But the messed up thing was that when he pushed on the gas, a huge cloud of smoke came out of the exhaust pipe of this car. I was exposed to chemicals I dont even know the names of. Were they the same chemicals that were in my cigarette? Possibly. Is the government trying to take this car off the road? No. How many cars in town have this problem? How much second hand smoke do we breath every day from the cars we drive or drive around? Second hand smoke isn't the problem. I was raised in a smoking household from the time I was a baby. As were my sister and brothers. Im not saying it was right or that it is healthy. But I'm 32 years old now. I'm healthy as are my siblings. I know smoking isn't good for me but this group is telling us that we can die from second hand smoke and I have yet to see conclusive evidence of this. Sweetners, coffee, incense, air freshners, video games, exhaust smoke, alcohol, the list goes on about items that are bad for us. They cannot go through this list and ban everything that is bad, it just won't happen. Banning smoking will not solve anything. It will cause so many more problems because people will stay at home, drink, smoke, turn their aggressions on their loved ones, not to mention driving while they are drunk. Life will not be all peaches and cream if this ban passes. There is no quick fix. Take away a freedom, you take away the right to be an American. Are we ready to go down that road?
April 7, 2009 at 11:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
crack,
The reason I keep saying the smoking ban will lead to other things is because it does. New York banned trans-fat, and put a 15% "fat tax" on non-diet sodas. A city in CA tried to ban toe-in surfing, another banned trans-fat. San Francisco is banning the selling of tobacco products in drug stores (while trying to legalize marijuana, mind you), a (smoke-free) city in Idaho banned individually-sold cigars because they didn't want people stuffing them with weed. Riverside, CA is banning smoking in apartment buildings. Cleburne, Texas banned certain energy drinks. California banned incandescent lightbulbs. Jacksonville, Florida (smokefree) is putting a ban on tanning beds. The UK (completely smoke-free) banned handguns, Grand Theft Auto IV, and now has more cameras than people.
I will bet you $20 that within 2 years from today, another ban on a legal product is attempted in the City of Emporia.
I do agree with you on Sunday liquor sales, but I bet the guy who owns the liquor store in Olpe doesn't! haha
April 7, 2009 at 1:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAlVKg...
Sorry, I had to.
April 7, 2009 at 2:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
crack
"Why do you people keep saying the smoking ban will lead to other things? Do you honestly think the majority would vote in favor of such ridiculous bans?"
The people pushing this ban didn't want the people to vote on it so who's to say that "the majority" would even have a say in the next ban. Are you starting to see why people are concerned about this? Probably not. Never mind.
April 7, 2009 at 2:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
crack; I have no doubt that the next ban imposed on smokers will be a ban on outdoor smoking !
Will you support such an illogical ban ?
If you think for one minute that these ban advocates are going to stop or will stop at just a smoking ban in all public places you are much more naieve and gullable than even I thought your were or possible could be !
Folks, this whole ban crusade is about nothing but control and power !
April 7, 2009 at 2:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
77flint (anonymous) says...
i love the bloggers here
they should start a holythanthou.com website for the ranters so that discussion could actually occur.
if you do not not agree with me post away
April 7, 2009 at 4:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )