Emporians voiced their opinions in the voting booths Tuesday on the question of whether there should be a citywide smoking ban. But the final word won’t be spoken until Friday morning.
When the unofficial results were tallied Tuesday night, those wanting a ban on smoking in public led those opposed by a mere 11 votes. With 86 provisional votes left to be decided and at least 61 of those from city voters, the final result could still go either way.
Throughout the debate, those who wanted a ban on smoking stood on the health issues they believe are caused by secondhand smoke and the need to protect workers in businesses where smoking is allowed. Those who opposed the ban, for the most part, pushed the point that a ban took away the rights of owners to control their properties and businesses.
As the election neared, the debate became more and more heated, degenerating into vitriolic criticism and name-calling. By Election Day, we heard a number of voters say that their planned votes for a particular argument had turned into votes against whichever side made them most angry.
In the end, 29.5 percent of registered Emporia voters cared enough about the issue to cast a ballot. But the final outcome will affect the other 70.5 percent of registered voters as well as all of the unregistered voters in the city and those living outside the city who could not vote but frequent or own Emporia businesses.
It is time to move beyond the arguments and name-calling and learn to live with the outcome — whichever way it ends. Spokesmen for both sides have said they don’t anticipate asking for a recount if the result gives victory to the opposing side. They could change their minds, however, and that is fine.
If the smoking ban fails, it likely will be business as usual. Customers who don’t want to frequent restaurants, bars and other businesses that allow smoking will continue to stay away.
If the smoking ban goes into effect, however, business will need to change. Business owners who opposed the ban have said it would hurt them by turning away many of their regular customers who desire to smoke. Those people who supported the ban can now show their support for these longtime businesses by patronizing them and trying to ease the pain in the owners’ pocketbooks.
madpoet (anonymous) says...
Well said, Gwen!
By yesterday I was to the point of not looking at the paper or listening to the local radio station to avoid the ads for or against. It frustrates me when people don't vote. How sad that a minority gets to decide issues because people can't be bothered to take 10 minutes to cast a ballot.
April 8, 2009 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
Hmm Gwen I would still love an explanation as to the dribble that you put in the paper four days before the election. The study had more holes than swiss cheese, would care to enlighten us about where and if you verified the facts before putting a loaded peice in the paper.
Did not think so, so how did you vote Gwen.
Sorry that article in the paper with no facts just alot of misinformation to scare the voters to vote the way of CAE and T Waltes and it still chaps my hide.
April 8, 2009 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
driveonby (anonymous) says...
Oh NO, Gwen, for MANY people what YOU and the Emporia Gazette did to try and influence this election will NEVER go away. You have pooped in your own nest, and now you will live with it. I'm sure you DO wish everyone would just forget about it and move on. As businesses suffer losses, and people sit home alone without their friends, they'll be thinking of you. Maybe you should just move on, since MANY people see you as a bought off, influence peddler. YOU created MUCH of the vitriol, and the name calling. The newspaper will still receive the ad money from your buddies. SAD SAD SAD
April 8, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
Darn cracky what facts. That worthless peice of horse hockey on Saturday had no facts in it. If Gwen and the gazette folks were journalist they would have seen what it was as garbage and not worthy of page one.
Also there was no way to verfiy the studies if you can pseudo science scientific, especially on a weekend. It also was funny Gwen and the rest of the staff did not print a retraction or try to verfiy the facts after they wer called out.
Gwen who pays your paycheck maybe you need to go back to journalism school and learn what is worthy of page one. I bet ol man White is rolling in his grave right about now.
Just my opinion of a upset citizen and voter of the this burg know as screwville err emporia.
April 8, 2009 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
If just eleven (11) Emporia citizens would have lifted their lazy apathetic butts off the sofa and taken ten minutes out of their boring unproductive day to go vote, this ban would have been defeated. More importantly, CAE, the evil witch, and all her flying monkeys would have been sent back to their delusional worlds of perceived superiority and unchallenged power with their tails between their legs.
Bottom line: If you didn't vote, you have no right to complain.
We'll see how it turns out on Friday. Either way, it was a heck of a fight. Too bad one side was so sneaky, dishonest, and void of character. Their antics may have forever divided our city and done irrepairable harm. Too bad. I used to actually respect some of those folks.
April 8, 2009 at 4:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
Gwendolynne, When you say "learn to live with the outcome", that isn't so easy for some of us. Some of us believe that the Constitution and Bill of Rights was created to protect us from our government. Some of us believe that a limited govenment is best as opposed to people that believe we need to have government tell us what we can and can't do (for our own and other's good). I believe limits need to be placed on government. There are more and more laws and mandates being made everyday. There are what I call do-gooders ready to jump on the bandwagon for everyone. I did not spend my time in the military to support a government that wants to tell me more and more how to live my life. I don't smoke and don't even like smoke, but even more, I don't like the government telling us what we can or can't do. I am old enough that I don't need the government to be my "big daddy". More than that, I resent it.
April 8, 2009 at 4:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
Oxen: Cheer up, buddy. We live in Emporia! We don't need government, "Big Brother", or "Big Daddy" to tell us what to do, how to live our lives, what is good or bad for us, or what choices to make. Heck, man! We have Walters, Sauders, and Grimwood to make all those decisions for us! All we have to do is wake up in the morning, go to work, and find our way back home in the evening. CAE and the silver spoon platoon will make all our other decisioins and choices for us!
Lawd, we sho is lucky dat we haz such wize and mercful massahs.
April 8, 2009 at 5:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
crackinsack, Thank you, oh lord, for telling me what I need to do.
April 8, 2009 at 5:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksnewsie (anonymous) says...
The Constitution was designed to protect us from an OVER-REACHING government. It has long been established that government has the right AND obligation to protect its citizens from known health hazards such as second-hand smoke.
April 8, 2009 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
ksnewsie,.........and our government just keeps taking, taking, and taking, aided by do-gooders. There are plenty of you that know best for us, and I'm sure you'll be the first to know if they are over-reaching, and I'm sure you'll be the first to tell us if they are. We can count on you. Not.
April 8, 2009 at 6:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
esu42 (anonymous) says...
I had planned to vote but unfortunately was downed by a head injury and could not. I guess we'll see what happens!
April 8, 2009 at 6:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justamarine (anonymous) says...
This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.
April 8, 2009 at 7:50 p.m. ( permalink )
Tell (anonymous) says...
Gwen
Why don't you just explain the trash you printed on Saturday . What you have done affected peoples lives, now you and Saudey what all of us to just have a great big group hug and move on. No one cared who this may hurt they just wanted their way like most brats do.
April 8, 2009 at 8:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
ksnewsie
Weren't we well protected from shs already? It seems to me that with a little good judgement anyone could easily avoid shs without this ban. Many feel that the government is OVER-REACHING with this one.
April 8, 2009 at 8:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tell (anonymous) says...
you are right serious if I knew something was bad for me I would make the choice and avoid it.
April 8, 2009 at 9:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
goodoleboy (anonymous) says...
If only people were as fired up about the patriot act...... this ban does not hold a candle to the travesty of that bill. Least we actually got to vote on this. One thing does stand out here though that I do not think many of those complaining are grasping:
This came to a VOTE
People VOTED on this ban
sounds like democracy to me, amendments are made, laws change with the times, the government is not dictating anything here, the voters of Emporia are.
April 8, 2009 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tell (anonymous) says...
Come on Gwen please tell us the rest of the story...........
April 8, 2009 at 9:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tell (anonymous) says...
This may be a job for the ACLU our rights were clearly taken away.
April 8, 2009 at 9:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
goodoleboy, Yep it's democracy at work. Isn't it nice that we have so many do-gooders. They've about do-gooded this ole country into the gutter. Too many George Bush's, Bill Clinton's, Kathleen Sebelius', Ted Kennedy's, Barney Frank's (ugh). etc., and now we have a savior, Barrack Obama. Doesn't it give you a good feeling? Let's just let a few more people sneak across the border. We can afford it. Maybe they'll bring us some drugs.
April 8, 2009 at 9:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mistyblue (anonymous) says...
Is this ever going to end? The snide comments come from both sides of the fence and it is quite simply out of hand. This issue has really divided the community.
I am a smoker and not proud of that. I truly see both sides of the issue (since I quit for many years and detested smokers) and now once again I am a smoker. But enough bantering and bickering. It is time to deal with the final outcome (whichever way the vote goes) and unite as a community.
Enough is enough..........lets move forward - whichever way this ends.
April 8, 2009 at 9:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
railroadhorn (anonymous) says...
jmcmannis is so right on! Publish that mess with only one day's publication left (Monday) before election day and now you're saying let the results stand. You should all be ashamed of yourselves!
April 8, 2009 at 9:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
goodoleboy
I am glad it went to a vote. I am however disappointed that so many people think that they need the government to do something for them that was so easy to do themselves beforte this ban. It's a sad commentary on our society.
April 8, 2009 at 9:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ksnewsie (anonymous) says...
Let me see if I got this straight:
-->A group of citizens got together and asked the government to approve a ban on SHS.
-->After much discussion, government approved the ban.
-->Another group of citizens banned together and work to get the residents of the community to vote on the ban.
-->The public votes and the results are.....yet to be determined.
Pass or Fail, isn't this exactly how government is supposed to work?
April 8, 2009 at 10:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
wyse_guy (anonymous) says...
This entire issue is a bunch of crap so its in the right hands now the people who put out more than a herd of cows. Print this BS just like the cae with no backup right before the vote not hard to figure out whos paid off in this town.I think this was a set up from the get go making it look good letting it go to a vote when the out come was obvios .Does it make you feel good putting the screws to everybody you dont like?
April 8, 2009 at 10:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
mistyblue, I don't smoke and don't detest any smoker. Sometimes I don't like the smoke, but there's a lot of things that I prefer or don't prefer. We all have our likes and dislikes. Again, I don't detest anyone for smoking or not smoking and I certainly hope nobody else does. I hope nobody detests me or hates me if they disagree with me. I, like goodoleboy, do vehemently disagree with government controlling our lives in so many ways. I thought I'd addd that old railroadhorn's tooting is certainly not going to make me ashamed of myself
April 8, 2009 at 10:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
driveonby (anonymous) says...
Gwen, YOU are one of the spokespersons for the CAE. The paper gets a LOT of money from them and their private corporate funders. No matter HOW much you want people to forget this, they WON'T. EVER NEVER
April 9, 2009 at 8:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
slvrnblck (anonymous) says...
driveonby, jmcmannis, wyseguy--
The EOB's whole arguement was that this issue is about rights.
The article that the Gazette posted was about health.
What is your problem? It should not matter to you what that article said because your side did not care about the health side. You argued that your rights were being taken away.
For your argument you shouldn't care what the article said, because it wasn't about health to you....right? Please explain why you all have your panties in a wad about the article.
April 9, 2009 at 9:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DJrocksthemic (anonymous) says...
Well said Slvmblck, I totally agree, if it was never about health, and never about money, why does everyone argue about health and money.....hmmmmm.
Oxen, you're right, the government does take and take and take. So let's repeal speed limits I'm sure we all could get by and Drunk Drivers, yep they can drive, I mean wouldn't want to take away there rights, I'm sure nothing bad will happen. And registered sex offenders can live in school zones, I mean I'm sure it's there right to live wherever they want. See what happens when you start going the other way, balance is important, but don't act like this is an attrocity of personal rights, unless...you plan to be pro drunk driving, pro gay marriage, pro no speed limits. Rights can't be used as an argument only when it's convienient to you, if you're going to fight with the constitution in your hand fight with it for all the people who's rights are taken away, not just your own. I'm sure the ACLU is looking for more people to work with them.
April 9, 2009 at 9:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
What I am wondering is how many of the citizens of Emporia truely believe that, which ever way this ban issue finally turns out, that the onslaught of those who think they know whats good or in the best interests of everyone, or simply have the desire for more power and control, will not propose another ban on something, anything that they do not like or think is bad for us and them and do so with the help of the government ? I for one believe that more bans will be proposed in the near future. And the very next ban will be an outdoor smoking ban, proposed by the CAE and its followers and supporters !
It would be interesting for a public poll to be conducted and see just how many local citizens believe that more bans are imminent in the future !
April 9, 2009 at 9:57 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
history_nerd
No. The government should have told the CAE that there wasn't a problem that the citizens couldn't easily handle themselves and then they should have got back to more important business like enforcing the laws that are already on the books. That's how it should have worked. Why go through all this when it was already so very easy for people to avoid shs on there own?
April 9, 2009 at 9:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
Slvrn
The reason I was so incensed by that article is that it came four days before the vote on a hotly contested rights vs health issue. Gwen and her merry band of journalist did not print any information in that worthless peice of page one dribble.
Which makes me think they were paid to put in their to sway voters to vote for CAE, T. Walters, Sauder and Tobacco Free KS stupid and unecessary ban.
Witout providing evidence as to what business was tested, or Gwen refusal to provide a rebuttal has made this article stink worse than the Tyson plant when it was slaughtering.
That is why I was in an uproar because it may have swayed voters to vote another way than they may have.
April 9, 2009 at 10:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
Meth I agree. Give a mouse a cookie and he will want a glass of milk. Or give them an inch and they will take a mile.
We have seen so often throughout history what happens when we allow the goverment to dictate our private lifes, sometimes it turns out ok and other times not.
So Meth keep preaching it brother I am listening, this is just the begining of the end.
April 9, 2009 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
slvrnblck (anonymous) says...
jcm--
The article was based on a report from Tobacco Free Kansas. Gwen posted info directely from their report she didn't put her own feelings into the article. She noted that they did not release the names of the businesses and why, which came directly from the report. She posted a reaction from someone on the "other" side. She did her job. And, just an FYI, Gwen is not the boss. I am sure that someone else decided where that article went. The smoking ban is the number one story in Emporia why would they not put that on the front page. They needs sales just like any other business. They posted something to get people to buy their newspaper with an article that really didn't say anything other than what we all know....Smoking establishments are more unhealthy than Non-Smoking ones.....DUH!
Once again, I have to ask, if you are all about the rights why does a health article bother you? Do you really think it swayed the voters? If you were on the health side, you voted yes, the rights side, you voted no. I have a real hard time believeing that the article suddenly swayed someone who didn't realize SHS was bad for you.
April 9, 2009 at 10:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
DJrocksthemic,
Did you ever think that there should possibly be some point where the government gets too intrusive? I think they are at this point. You don't, so you go on a rant, comparing my opposing this smoking ban to the ridiculous. I have pulled enough bodies out of cars to have a healthy respect for what can happen and wouldn't dream of opposing most of the traffic regulations. The government has become intrusive there too, but I'm not going into that right now. The only body I have pulled out of a bar was one that had overdosed to the point of death. Laws and regulation are necessary and important, but we have become over regulated to where it is tearing down our economy and is very intrusive on our people. There are many carcinogens out there. Should we just stay home and brave what is there as opposed to living life? I have said it before. Living is the only sure thing that will kill us. Should we have a law against that? See, I too, can be ridiculous.
April 9, 2009 at 10:56 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DJrocksthemic (anonymous) says...
Yeah, I took it to extremes I'll admit, but I go back to the question of gay marriage, which is at the heart of it a question of rights....not dependent on your moral stance (I'm against it, but still think it's right from a rights stand point)....isn't the government being a little intrusive on their rights by banning them...just as you say here, I'm just saying play it both ways...many of my friends who are vocal against the smoking ban are also vocal that gay marriage should be banned, I'm just saying, how far do rights indeed go?
April 9, 2009 at 11:36 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
weneedsomechanges (anonymous) says...
I am truly sad when I look at the state of our country. America was founded on the idea of personal freedom. There should have never even been a vote on this issue. It should not be the decision of the majority as to what a business owner allows in his or her place of business. Its the RIGHT OF THE BUSINESS OWNER to make these decisions.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
-Benjamin Franklin
April 9, 2009 at 11:40 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
SHS is not bad for you I have not seen one shred of proof beyond a resonable doubt slvrn. Hell all the grass burnings going on is more toxic than SHS smoke. The moon was turned colors from all the smoke and fire, if you were outside at all last night the whole air smelled of smoke and someone with sinusitus that is bad news. My gf smokes but I do not dictate to her to put it out, I just open a window. When I come from the club I hang my clothes out and take a shower.
I have inhaled more toxic chemicals than what you all are supposedly saying that is coming from people smoking.
So this is a rights issue and granted Gwen may have gotten the report from Tobacco Free KS but the report was not posted on their website until after several Emporians called about it.
The other issue I have is why in the heck did they wait almost a month to publish the finding in the paper, that is what makes me and others to think it was a political move to sway voters to vote in Favor of the ban. It is the oldest political ploy in voting history, screw with peoples mind and they will belive anything, even it is horse.................
So I am going to go out know and breath in the smell of burning grass so the cows are nice and fat when they bring them to market.
Dont Tread On Me
April 9, 2009 at 11:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
jmcmannis,
Yesterday my wife mentioned to me (she was relating to the smoking ban) that she was sure that the smoke (from the burning grass) had affected her sinuses. She was not even considering trying to get a ban against burning pastures, but I'm thinking that could be something the do-gooders might get into. I suppose we should not be giving them ideas.
April 9, 2009 at 12:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
had not thought of that way oxen I was just stating my opinion on the toxic fumes in burning grass.
I wonder what T Walters, Sauder and CAE will try next if this ban fails (which my gut tells me it will)
April 9, 2009 at 3:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
bdprotheroe (anonymous) says...
The following editorial, “Give It Up, Smoker,” was written by one of my favorite columnists, Mark Morford. Quite humorous, but also very relevant to the topic of the proposed smoking ban in Emporia. Enjoy!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article...
Brian Protheroe
San Francisco, CA
April 9, 2009 at 3:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
dalelinn (Dale Linn) says...
jmcmannis,
The title of Gwendolyn's letter is very appropriate.
April 9, 2009 at 3:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jmcmannis (anonymous) says...
Yep now that I look at that title your right Oxen Whats Next for Emporia
April 9, 2009 at 3:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bjnemp (anonymous) says...
YY4U: Stop it! You are making me laugh! I am an old grump and laughing is bad for my image.
April 9, 2009 at 4:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cookatwork (anonymous) says...
This really is getting out of control. EVERYTHING is bad for you - even some bottled waters are bad for you. Your tap water has chemicals in it, when you pump gas into your car and breathe the fumes you are inhaling dangerous chemicals. There ARE smoke free bars in town - if you don't want to smell the smoke while you are drinking then go to the bars that offer what you are looking for. There are MANY smoke free eating establishments in town and if the one you are wanting to eat at has a smoking area and that bothers you go to the smoke free one that offers the same foods - hello... we have MORE than one chinese place, mexican place, burger place, sandwich place. I remember a comment being made about a lawyers office being smokey - hello look in the phone book we have a large amount of lawyers to choose from also. There are choices for BOTH sides of the fence.
Somebody looking for a job HAS the choice whether or not to work in a smoking evironment - they don't HAVE to apply there or accept the job.
Be pro active in your own life and make the choices that you deem safe for you and your family.
This is just rediculous. If the smoking ban does go through.... seriously... are the non-smokers that don't frequent these establishments NOW going to START frequenting them more often? Doubt it!
I worry about the drunk driver swerving across the road at my vehicle. You want to save more lives CAE? Switch your cause and stand outside the bar and offer to be the DD.
April 9, 2009 at 5:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
Wow!
cookatwork
That is the same thing I've been saying but sadly it has fallen on deaf ears. Thanks for saying it again anyway.
April 9, 2009 at 6:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
driveonby (anonymous) says...
Good, cracky's back, and now kscrusader has disappeared. You, pro ban people are just so nasty and self righteous, that is part of the problem. You guys brought his up because of your grant funding. 60% of people don't care about this, at all, not bothered in the businesses that they frequent. They make choices about where they want to go. It's called the free market. Without the grant money, and the ad money that accompanied it, NO ONE from Emporia would have started this in the first place. Follow the money. If the health Department Employees apply for a grant to dance the watusi in the full moon light, they will be doing it. They will do ANYTHING for a grant handout. Only the County Commission can ask questions about this private lobbying by County employees on YOUR tax paid time. Since one of their members is on the Commission, I guess you are just screwed.
April 9, 2009 at 7:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lookup (anonymous) says...
But who is protecting the 'provisional ballots' so they won't be tainted??? Maybe Vopat has been paid off??
April 9, 2009 at 9:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Has anyone taken a good look at the close proximity to one another the businesses are in downtown Emporia ?
I was wondering if this ban passes and since the businesses and their door are in such close proximity to one another, most are probably at least 10ft apart, where is a smoker going to go to not violate any one of these businesses 10ft from the door or window rule?
Stand in between parked cars ? Run to a Parking Lot ? Stand in the intersections on either cross street ? Stand out in Commercial street ?
Shoot most of the time, just walking down the sidewalk in the downtown area, and smoking, you will possibly be violating the 10ft., rule, justing walking past businesses !
What is a smoker going to have to do on their break, in order to smoke, and not violate the 10 ft. rule, jump in their car and drive out past the Emporia City Limits ?
And it has been said that this ban is fair, imparshial and violates no ones freedoms, rights, liberties or civil liberties and doesnt force anyone to change their life style or impose a hardship on anyone ! BALDERDASH !
And will the Welcome To Emporia signs be changed to include Strict Smoking Ban-Strictly Enforced, Violaters Will Be Fined From $100.00 to $500.00 or More ! Or, possibly If You Are A Smoker Or Smoke Take the By-Pass !
April 9, 2009 at 10:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
justthefacts (anonymous) says...
A wise man once told me that it is not wise to start a war with someone who buys ink by the 50 gallon drum and paper by the roll. Seems to me a good paper includes information that provides thoughtful discussion and so be it. I didn't the get the impression they were taking sides, merely printing the information available. I read the stories and information and took them for what they were...stories and information that impacted my community. There was no magical brainwashing effect on what was there. I could pick and choose what to believe or not believe. The paper is not a non profit organization...never has been. If you want that, watch or listen to PBS.
Seems to me that the process has worked, and will continue to work. IMHO.
April 10, 2009 at 12:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
biscuitboy (anonymous) says...
The pro-smoking-ban forces have told us repeatedly that this is all about health, and the government has a long held right to protect us from ourselves even if we don't want its protection. Fine. What I don't understand then is why the band-aid approach. If smoke...and secondhand smoke...are harmful to the smoker and non-smoker as well, then OUTLAW SMOKING. What's so hard about that. Oh, I forgot, its the taxes...the one's that fill our government's coffers, and provide funding for our self-appointed health police, and provide revenue for local radio stations (one), and put other wise old and respected newspapers in the tank. Gwen....I worked for a short period of time in the news business...and I know the pressure that can be brought by "community leaders" to print this or that RIGHT NOW! But lady, weather you were pressured, duped, or bought into it you blew it with the Saturday Night Massacre story. And you owe us an explanation.
April 10, 2009 at 7:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
77flint (anonymous) says...
The majority of people are hilariously ignorant!
April 10, 2009 at 8:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
oxen and jmcmannis, you're right about pasture burning. Anyone who has been outdoors can see that the entire area is awash with a haze of smoke. Just within the past week, I have developed a sinus headache and am all stuffed up. No amount of SHS has ever done that to me; in fact, I used to smoke and never developed sinus problems like this. But there's a light at the end of the tunnel because before long, the grass burning will be over and I can go back to breathing again. However, I'll lay money that the next group to be attacked will be farmers and ranchers who burn pasture, complete with a breakdown on the content of those toxic fumes and how damaging they are for those poor helpless cattle who can't choose to go to another area.
April 10, 2009 at 8:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
alfalfa (anonymous) says...
I am sure that pasture burning will be banned. Get ready folks, because once the practice of removing old growth every year is illegal, we will get to have wildfires in Kansas every bit as devastating as those in California.
April 10, 2009 at 9:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
josiesbar (anonymous) says...
Crack,
Would you care to tell me just how in the hell you avoid smoke from burning pastures?
April 10, 2009 at 1:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Well, Folks there you have it from the mouth of the all wise and all knowing " Sage " , crackinsack, "
For the last time, burning pastures will not and should not be banned. This, unlike SHS, serves a useful purpose to our society. Smoke from burning pastures can also easily be avoided. (like the pro-SHS say about SHS) The benefits of burning pastures outweigh any harm caused by it. Furthermore, this is done outside, in the open air."
FYI, crack, it makes no difference whether the burning of bio-mass materials is done outside in the open air or in a telephone booth, it still has the same effect and toxins as cigarette smoke or SHS and I have posted test results and facts to prove it ! According to the logic of you and all of the smoking ban army, anything that produces smoke or SHS that is or may be a health hazard should be banned ! Yet you insist on having a double standard when it comes to tobacco smoke or bio-mass smoke, why is that after-all hazardous smoke is hazardous smoke isn't it and isn't everyone exposed to bio-mass smoke ?
And isn't your comment concerning how to avoid bio-mass smoke, " Simple! Stay inside where the air is filtered and recirculated. " , just a bit hypocrytical ? I mean isn't tobacco smoke/SHS just as easily avoided by staying away from it ?
Again a double standard ! No this was not completely a health issue but a control, power and dislike of a certain group of individuals and certain group of businesses !
And I am convinced that the next ban proposed by the Tobacco Free Kansas Coalition and CAE and its army of whacky zealots will be an OUTDOOR SMOKING BAN" !
Simply because that is the next ban called for in their play book !
April 10, 2009 at 2:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
crack, Also the amount of smoke, toxins and shs created by just one season of bio-mass burning, creates more smoke and SHS than a whole year of tobacco smoke and shs exposure !
Have you ever seen the whole area blanked by a thick haze of tobacco smoke like happens with pasture or cropland burning?
Have you seen tobacco smoke so thick and heavy that it absolutely blocks vision on road and highways and cause fatal vehicle accidents ?
Boy, now that a necessary and purposful act, now, isn't it ?
April 10, 2009 at 2:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
glarson (anonymous) says...
Moving to a forum:
http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...
April 10, 2009 at 8:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )