josiesbar (anonymous) says...

"We’ve heard it said that it takes a village to raise a child"

I can't remember where I saw this, a bumper sticker I think, but it said,

"I've seen the village. I'll raise my own kids."

March 26, 2009 at 11:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

slvrnblck (anonymous) says...

VOTE YES!!

March 26, 2009 at 12:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Here's a fun little factoid for those of you who didn't know. After Barnett's state-wide ban was shot down in a blaze of glory, he snuck the whole bill in as an amendment to the bill concerning day-care. You know, the feel-good one that everyone votes for. I've stated before on here, I think he's trying to get the state ban pushed through before the election in Emporia.

http://www.khi.org/s/index.cfm?aid=2041

March 26, 2009 at 12:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

josiesbar (anonymous) says...

Read the above article, because after that, its painfully clear that these people will go to most any measure to push their agenda on you.

Vote this down by voting NO!

March 26, 2009 at 12:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

rabblerouser (anonymous) says...

Yes, Yes, Yes, by all means vote Yes and let the majority rule for a healthier Emporia.

March 26, 2009 at 1:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

It does NOT take a village to raise a child. Do your own parenting and stay out of my kids life!

March 26, 2009 at 1:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

supernanny (anonymous) says...

VOTE YES!

March 26, 2009 at 1:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

Win-Win opportunity for who? The people who voted for it? What about the business owner who loses money and possibly closes?

I won't argue the health aspects of this. I have never denied that it may exist. However, I feel this is targeting bars specifically. Teressa said she was sorry the ban was extended so she could go "enjoy" the Noose. Has she been there yet since they went smoke free?

By the way, how is the Noose doing since they went smoke free? I hope they are doing well. I would love to see a bar or two in Emporia that is smoke free. I just don't want them all to be forced to be that way. It should be the owner's choice.

March 26, 2009 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

"there are thousands of scientific studies published in respected scientific and medical journals that leave no doubt that there is no safe level of secondhand smoke exposure."

Really? If this were true, I would think that the Federal agency that determines permissible levels of exposure would amend their list of harmful chemicals (http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/pel/recognit...) to reflect that 'actual research'. Maybe they didn't get CAE's memo?

"I’m sure you’ve all seen the national headlines and articles about heart attack rates plummeting after communities go smoke-free"

Where is the 'actual research' that supports the claims that such declines are a direct result of smoking bans? Have those scientific studies ruled out other possible contributing factors such as:

Popluation variations (for example, a 10% decline in the overall population might reflect a 10% decline in hospital visits by those suffering heart attacks).

Changes in demographics (a shift from an aged population to a predominantly younger population).

Additional hospitals (a single hospital serving a large population might experience a drop in heart attack patients - if a new hospital is built nearby).

Better quality care from competing locations (for example if 10% of heart attack patients in Emporian decide to go to Coffe County hospital instead of Newman, then Newman would report a 10% decline in heart attack patients).

Other lifestyle changes (for example more people exercising, eating healthier, etc.)

Bottom line - there are MANY factors that might contribute to localized declines in ANY health issue. I would like to see any scientific study that supports the letter-writer's claim that the declines in those cities is a direct result of smoking bans.

"However for me, an even stronger motivation is the fact that in communities with comprehensive smoking ordinances, 40 percent fewer teens start or try smoking! Just by creating a community who values smoke-free air,we send a powerful message to our children that smoke is dangerous and apparently they listen. We’ve heard it said that it takes a village to raise a child; I believe now is the time for this village to step up."

Again, I would like to see what methods were used to determine that 40% rate. The best anti-smoking tool available is called a parent. The second best is probably a combination of peer pressure and education. I seriously doubt it has anything at all to do with banning smoking in bars or restaurants.

By the way, did you know that the first modern, nationwide tobacco ban was imposed by the Nazi Party under orders from Adolf Hitler? He also supported taking away the freedoms of the citizens "for the children"? Maybe you want your children raised by a village. I prefer to raise my own.

March 26, 2009 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

one broken record says, "You are being told not to hurt other people. ...what they're doing is harmful."

the other broken record says, "You keep saying someone is being harmed. If you think the air in somone's business is harmful, have the air tested and PROVE IT."

March 26, 2009 at 2:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

This is advocacy gone awry. When I was a kid I didn't wear a helmet while riding a bicycle on Lyon county roads with cars whizzing by me. I learned to safely handle, maintain and shoot a .32 caliber pistol when I was 5 years old. I took hunters safety when I was 7. I never sat in a child seat in the family car. My friends and I played on the frying pan hot, back yard playground equipment all summer long. We would swim in creeks without a lifeguard present.

As an adult, I damn sure don't need anyone telling me what is good or bad for me outside of my doctor, my pastor or my family. Emporia has a far reaching and equitable smoking ordinance already. You start walking into people's businesses and telling them what to do, the owners of those businesses should be able to tell you to pound sand. Non profit advocacy groups are good in most respects unless its a bunch of bored crusaders looking to fix something that is not broken. If people don't want to change then by God we are going to make them.

I don't smoke and can't vote because I live outside the city limits. If Theresa and her ilk try their ban out here I will definitely vote no.

March 26, 2009 at 2:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

deluvly1 (anonymous) says...

We’ve heard it said that it takes a village to raise a child;

Yes, I’ve heard it said, in fact the queen of liberals wrote a book using that expression as the title. It was hogwash then, it is hogwash now. What it takes to raise a child is two (preferably married) parents who care and nurture and as many loving grandparents as nature allows.

We used to call it “a family.”

But the family has been destroyed by permissive liberalism and Big Brother idealism, then indeed, by default, I reckon it does take a village.

Too bad.

March 26, 2009 at 2:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO, VOTE NO !

These control, power and dominance minded people who blindly follow the CAE and whoever tells them they know whats best for everyone, have one thing on their mind and agenda, POWER, CONTROL, DOMINATION, plain and simple, all you have to do is listen to them and read their comments !
They even tout the argument of the following "What was the life expectancy then compared to what it is now? Must be doing something right! "
Apparantly they don't consider the advancements in medicine, treatment etc., as having anything to do with the life expectancy today, they want you/us to believe everything remotely beneficial is because of their smoking ban . A smoking ban is not the soul 100 % reason for living longer today ! Even people who may have never been exposed to SHS or smoking can and do get cancer, heart disease and die from them ! What do the smoking ban advocates blame this incidence on ?
Facts stated from one of the most respected health organizations in the world states that " even if you are exposed to a risk that causes illness or cancer, doesn't mean you will get sick or get cancer !

Again I say VOTE NO to this obvious and blatant attempt at the DOMINATION of certain people, possible all people, in the future !

March 26, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

Crack,

I was raised to be very self reliant and very independent. I can take care of myself. I read your posts and you seem to want to serenely and gleefully fork over your life to government and screwball advocates. Why cant CAE invest their time and Sauder's resources into tackling causes that do real harm to a community like gang violence, domestic abuse or drug addiction? Oh I know why, because that would be hard work compared to manipulating the city commission to do their will on a ban which will have zero impact on the health status of Emporians. It would also require them to get close to the very people they despise or are frightened to death of. We have real problems in Emporia. Take your smoking ban and hit the bricks.

However, if the people speak out and approve the ban I will abide. If someone lights up in opposition to it...I didn't see nothin.

March 26, 2009 at 3:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

People, please take note of cracks last post ! Especially the first sentence of the 2nd paragraph, " My point was that laws may take away "freedoms" but in the case of slavery and SHS exposure it's worth it."

Again the comparison between slavery and SHS is incredible !
And the loss of any " FREEDOM " is definately worth it !

Do you really want these kinds of people dictating how you must live your lives to you and take away your freedoms because it is worh it !

Definately VOTE NO !

March 26, 2009 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Ole cracknsack:

YOU said "There is a lot to gain here at the measly cost of inconveniencing a few. I'd choose public health over inconvenience any day!"

And yet you refuse to stop going into smoking allowed venues.

March 26, 2009 at 3:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

Thank God you can't. Your definition of "reckless" needs revision. Tell me something. What is the name of the test your doctor can order to determine the level of SHS in your system at any given time? I am sure since SHS is so lethal and aggressively decimating populations everywhere medical science must have a test of some kind to determine the levels of SHS specifically in one's body.

We can debate the effects of second hand smoke, global warming, UFOs and area 51 until the cows come home. This is a city commission exceeding their mandate and banning a still legal activity from places they rarely, if ever, visit.

March 26, 2009 at 4 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

I didn't think you could Crack. Thanks for trying. It was weak but you tried. I have been patronizing Emporia area bars for years and while I don't smoke I have never been exposed to so much cigarette smoke that I was uncomfortable. Some of them were too warm in the summer but never too smokey for my comfort. Are you sure you aren't imposing your own sensitivity to cigarette smoke as a reason to rail against Mr. Corbin and the rest of the bar owners?

March 26, 2009 at 4:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

i don't know Mary so how do I respond?
Do you have children, or grandchildren?

If so perhaps you should sit them down and read them the following and ask their opinion.

In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist; and then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist; and then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew; and then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

Give up your rights, and smile really big for the camera, I mean really big, I went through the Holocaust Museum and that is all that is left of acceptance, pictures... It can't happen, it already did..........

The above was posted on another thread but it does pertain to this government ban on private businesses. It takes a village to raise the kids? I would just as soon do it myself and fight like hell to insure the life they grow up in has the same rights and freedoms that I once had.

Steve Corbin

March 26, 2009 at 4:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Please, to those of you who can vote on this vote NO and protect my grandsons freedoms.

VOTE NO
VOTE EARLY
I DID & I'LL CHOOSE
WHERE TO GO

March 26, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BabyGirlSissy (anonymous) says...

VOTE NO !!!
I believe the same as all of you that are going to vote no. They are so worried about smoking in restruants but there is already no smoking in them in emporia so thats no even the point. They are targeting BARS for the most part. And dont bar owners pay the rent on them. Dont they pay taxes on them. Just as we do on our houses. If a bar owner dont want smoking it there that should be up to them. NOT the government. But I have a strong feeling that even if they vote is no at the polls it wont matter. They are still goin to tell us ( WE THE PEOPLE ) to bend over and take it up the tailpipe without any lube. They continue to take away our rights one step at a time. And Im tired of it. I am 30 years old. I am not a child to be told what I can do and what I cant. Its personal choice. And if they dont want to be around the smoke that I blow out of my mouth, well then dont go to where Im at. Its plain and simple.
And to the comment I read on the vote yes page of :
"We’ve heard it said that it takes a village to raise a child"

Well I'll raise my own children. Not the village idiots.

If this ban does go thru its just another way to control us.
And if it goes thru it wont be the last of the bans yet to come.
Emporia has more important issues at hand then this but they do nothing about them.
What about jobs? Housing? Stuff like that. Its bad when we have to decide do I rent a place to live or feed my children. Tons of us are struggling just to amke ends meet. But are these people that are trying to get the smoking ban in place struggling? No they have nice houses nice cars ( that pollute ) and are living comfortably.
Its all about **** the little people.
Ok Im done with this post for now.
And I WILL see you all on April 7th to VOTE NO.

March 26, 2009 at 4:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

Mary, Mary, Mary. You said:

"EMPORIANS, we have an opportunity to join hundreds of other communities across the nation who have made their cities and towns healthier places to live"

I'm sorry, Mary. I don't give a hoot what "hundreds of other communities" do. I live in Emporia and only care about what occurs here. Cities in Nevada allow legal prostitution. Should Emporia legalize it because they do? San Francisco permits gay marriages. According to your rationale, Emporia should follow suit. New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles ban the ownership of firearms for any purpose. Should Emporia jump on the bandwagon and ban guns and hunting?

You also stated: "People who do not smoke gain the right to breathe smoke-free air wherever the public is welcome."

You mean like motel rooms, the VFW, or my home if my wife sells Mary Kay? Those places are not public, but the ban you so strongly support bans smoking there.

And as for your contention that "it takes a village to raise a chld". Give me a break! I see the children the village is raising. I prefer to raise my own, thank you. I don't need you, Sister Theresa, crackinback, the CAE, Emporia city commissioners, or anyone else telling me how to raise my children.

And therein lies the crux of this issue, Mary: Choice, and freedom from unnecessary government intrusion

This issue is not about health. A comprehensive and effective smoking ban already exists in Emporia. This issue is about freedom, choice, and preventing a few pompous a$$es from setting standards for the masses.

Vote "NO" on April 7!!

March 26, 2009 at 5:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BabyGirlSissy (anonymous) says...

you non smokers complain because SHS is bad it makes it hard to breathe burns your eyes... But a fog machine does the same darn thing. U going to ban those as well???

VOTE NO ON APRIL 7TH...I KNOW I WILL!

March 26, 2009 at 5:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

Those who can vote no. Get out on April 7th and put down this ridiculous ban.

March 26, 2009 at 5:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Oh, my goodness! Here is a real GEM from crackinsack that I hope every rational person and registered voter in Emporia reads over and over:

[begin quote]

If I stop a smoker from smoking around me, I'll likely get charged with assault even though I was acting in self defense.

[end quote]

Thank you crackinsack! Thank you for pointing this out. Can you tell me WHY you would likely get charged with assault?

I'll tell you why:

You would be charged with assault because you aren't acting in self defense because (here's the kicker) you AREN'T being harmed.

The ban isn't a health issue. It's a personal choice issue.

Please stop the lies. Vote NO!

March 26, 2009 at 5:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

allintogether posted, "Why cant CAE invest their time and Sauder's resources into tackling causes that do real harm to a community like gang violence, domestic abuse or drug addiction? Oh I know why, because that would be hard work compared to manipulating the city commission to do their will on a ban which will have zero impact on the health status of Emporians. "

My thoughts on this (and these are only my thoughts - I have no proof).

I think one of the reasons they wont' tackle gang violence, domestic abuse, and drug issues is because the results are generally invisible and not easily measured.

At the end of the year, when they have to provide reports to the grantees that fund them, I would expect they have to provide statistics and show results on what they have accomplished in order to continue receiving funding.

They can't point to drugs, gangs, and violence and "look what we did".

However, with a smoking ban, they can. With a smoking ban, they can point to the tangible result (a city-wide smoking ban) and say, "Look what we did! Aren't we special? Now give us more money."

And they will get it.

Again, those are just my thoughts, but I'm at least somewhat familiar with grant processes and requirements and this is what it looks like to me.

Vote NO.

March 26, 2009 at 5:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

I see so many postings saying there are already codes in place and enforced on private businesses, so the smoking ban shouldn't be that much different. Let's look at that a little differently for a second.

For the sake of argument, suppose there were no codes on businesses. Now, because there are no codes, a restaurant can serve food that is old and starting to rot (I think some do, ever watch "Kitchen Nightmares", but I digress). Now because of that rotting food being served, 1/2 of the people that eat there on a given night get sick. What's your natural reaction when you get food poisoning from somewhere? Not only do you not go back, you tell 5 to 10 other people and some of them don't go there anymore either. Now suppose that happens for a week straight. How much longer do you think that restaurant will be be in business? This is an example of the free market system working.

Now, lets suppose that there are no smoking bans. Wait a minute, this is already happening (if private business owners choose to allow it)! Looks like there are a few restaurants, bars and motels still operating. Must not be that bad or people wouldn't go, huh? Sure, there are some that change ownership every now and then, but you see that with restaurants that are regulated as well. (Before you tell me the smoke is hurting me and I don't know it, please let me educate myself and decide for myself. I don't subscribe to that village raising a child theory.)

But wait! All of a sudden we have a bar that decides not to allow smoking. Then, we have another. The free market system is working!

Crack - I don't know why I am bothering to respond to you. I have asked you plenty of questions in the past and am always ignored. However, I will respond just this one time. When you asked how I know business will suffer after the ban, the answer is I don't. All I can do is look at what happened at other towns and assume the same will happen in Emporia. (I do have a few connections in the industry statewide and have talked to them.) I don't see any logical reason why it wouldn't be the same there. Restaurants and motels will probably be ok for the most part. It's the bars that suffer. However, I did ask how The Noose is doing and you totally read over that part. I would think that would be a good indication.

March 26, 2009 at 5:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

The anti-smoker elitists are very well organized and backed by big bucks. They will be out in force on April 7. If you oppose this ridiculous infringement on individual rights and assault on your freedom, you must go to the polls and vote NO. We must also make sure our families, friends, and co-workers understand this issue and do the same.

Refuse to be lied to, bullied, controlled, or denied your right to make individual choices.

Vote "NO" on April 7.

March 26, 2009 at 6 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BabyGirlSissy (anonymous) says...

can someone tell me where i can get those Vote NO signs? Also some of the vote yes people keep sayin there is resturants in emporia that allow smoking. So can someone anyone tell me what resturants these are? Because everyone i have been to dont allow smoking. So why do they keep saying that?

March 26, 2009 at 6:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

allintogether (anonymous) says...

MisterO,

There are myriad reasons CAE won't tackle real threats. I agree with your reasoned assessment. Great points regarding their funding.

Vote NO!

March 26, 2009 at 6:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Bjnemp (anonymous) says...

BabyGirlSissy: They keep saying that because they don't want smoke, second-hand smoke, cigarettes, smelly smokers, or what they perceive as ignorant low-class riff-raff anywhere within their sight or sense of smell, that's why.

They couldn't possibly wage or win this war based on the truth or their real agenda, so they use the ploy of this being a health issue. They cite all the locations in Emporia where second-hand smoke decimates the general public, kills like DDT in a bee hive, and turns their children into walking corpses when no such places exist except bars and private clubs. People have the choice to patronize those locations and children aren't allowed, but just being there is like living next door to nuclear reactor according to the CAE alarmists.

The anti-smoker, anti-choice bullies don't let facts get in the way of their beliefs, BabyGirl. I'm glad you and I do, though.

Join BabyGirlSissy and me on April 7. Vote "NO".

March 26, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Pingeon posted, "Crack - I don't know why I am bothering to respond to you. I have asked you plenty of questions in the past and am always ignored."

This is what you can expect any time you try to ask rational, coherent questions that might have uncomfortable or awkward answsers that can't be condensed into sound bites. Ignored.

Many who support the ban would rather resort to distortions, sound bites, inuendos, questionable statistics, and outright lies than to engage in honest dialog.

The ban isn't necessary. Vote No.

March 26, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

Vote Yes. Don't believe all of these people claiming that this is a rights issue. Don't believe all these people who deny the research, just because it wasn't carried out in Emporia, KS bar. Do you actually believe that the results would be different in an Emporia bar than a bar in another city or state? These people don't care about anything but their possible lost profits (which may decrease for a short time, but then rebound to a higher level) and their inconvenience. Vote Yes - for our health and the health of our children.

March 26, 2009 at 7:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"We’ve heard it said that it takes a village to raise a child"
SOCIALISM! No thanks.

This US Army veteran and patriot says please vote NO. Thank you.

March 26, 2009 at 7:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Maximus posted, "Don't believe all these people who deny the research, just because it wasn't carried out in Emporia, KS bar."

I don't recall seeing anyone saying anything about research in an Emporia, KS bar. Can you reference the date and author of that post or is that just another example of CAE's dishonesty and deceitfulness?

What I (and others) have been asking is for those who are claiming the air in certain businesses is unhealthy to prove it violates the Federal clean air standards already in place. It should be a very simple thing to do, why won't you do it? Is it because you know the test result will show that the big bad scary air isn't deadly like you say it is? Is it because you know it will show that such claims are nothing but lies?

Maximus also says, "Vote Yes - for our health and the health of our children."

Ah...yet another one uttering the heart-felt cry 'we must do it for the children!'

Here's another quote for you, "As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation. Adolf Hilter, Mein Kampf"

March 26, 2009 at 7:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

MisterO-

I'm not associated with CAE. In the the past weeks there have been many who have claimed that the research is invalid because it wasn't carried out in Emporia; just as you refuse to believe that somehow a smoke-filled bar/restaurant in Emporia isn't an unhealthy environment. Are Emporia bar/restaurant air systems that superior? I doubt it, especially since many of the bars and restaurants in town don't even care enough to keep their establishments painted and in good repair.
Wow, you guys sure do like to quote Hitler, too. What's with that? Are you going to add denying the holocaust to your list of denials? Seems like you have more in common with Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

March 26, 2009 at 8:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

Has there been research conducted on the air at any bar and proved to be deadly?

March 26, 2009 at 8:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

Pingeon,

Here's your answer - took 10 seconds to find on Google - from http://www.ucsfhealth.org/adult/healt...

University of Cal. San Francisco - for those deniers who will surely want to claim that this study was biased. No it wasn't conducted IN a bar - it was in a controlled environment with bar-smoke levels (control is an important factor for any good research study).

Exposure to secondhand smoke even for a brief period is injurious to health, a new study by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco has found.

According to the study, a 30-minute exposure to the level of secondhand smoke that one might normally inhale in an average bar setting was enough to result in blood vessel injury in young and otherwise healthy lifelong nonsmokers. Compounding the injury to the blood vessels themselves, the exposure to smoke impedes the function of the body's natural repair mechanisms that are activated in the face of the blood vessels' injury, the researchers reported. Many of these effects persisted 24 hours later.

Study findings are reported in the online edition of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology and will appear in the journal's May 6 print issue.

The results showed that brief exposure to real-world levels of passive smoke have strong and persistent consequences on the body's vascular system, the researchers conclude.

For the study, subjects were exposed to carefully controlled levels of secondhand smoke in a research setting. The smoke was equivalent to being in a bar where smoking is allowed — as it still is for 51 percent of the U.S. population and in other countries, such as Germany — 30 minutes. As a control, the same subjects were exposed to clean air on a different day.

In both settings, the researchers evaluated the subjects' blood vessel health through ultrasound to measure blood flow and analysis of blood samples. In the exposure environment, this was done before exposure to establish baseline measures, immediately after exposure, and then one hour, 2.5 hours, and 24 hours after exposure.

March 26, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

MaxiMiss QuoteUs;

Why is it you say the air in A bar is no different than another one some where else. Why don't you and the others just come out and say it is toxic in MY bar, that way we can get the lawsuit started and have the court system settle it. I really do want to retire and this lawsuit windfall would allow it. Or for that matter Name any business in Emporia where the air has unsafe levels of SHS in it so we can make the lawyers some money on this. As long as the Kansas Dept. of Health & Human services doesn't inspect License holders buildings for SHS, than they must think it isn't a health problem.
Steve Corbin
Owner Town Royal

March 26, 2009 at 8:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

To crack,walters etc. I would like to know who died and made you people God?
I would like to know why you think a business owned by a private citizen who pays the taxes,hires the help,buys the inputs,sets the hours of business etc, should be considered a public entity. I have no problem calling the court house, the police station or any thing owned by the taxpayers public, but what isn't owned by the taxpayers isn' public.
Yesterday walters said on the radio that this ban was to keep people from being involuntarily exposed to shs. THEY DON"T HAVE TO GO IN THOSE PLACES, YOU DON"T HAVE TO GO INTO THOSE PLACES, THE PEOPLE WHO WORK THERE DON"T HAVE TO WORK THERE, IT IS CALLED FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
It is about personal rights,you can say anything you want but that is all it's about.
I won't argue with you about health hazards, shs probably is,but it may not be either. I won't argue with you about drinking and driving, but you people seem to want to go to a bar.
But I'm tired of big government that is run by little people telling me how to live my life. Life is between me and my God not you.
Vote NOOOOOOOOOOOO
PS if this ban does pass I'll bet you guys a beer that I never see you in my bar, and if I do I bet you won't have the brass to aknowledge me or debate me in person.

March 26, 2009 at 8:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

MisterO (anonymous) says...

Maximus posted, "I'm not associated with CAE. In the the past weeks there have been many who have claimed that the research is invalid because it wasn't carried out in Emporia"

I've been following these threads pretty closely. You've either misread something or lying. If there are indeed many such claims, you should have no trouble posting a link to one of them or quoting with the poster's name and date of post.

" just as you refuse to believe that somehow a smoke-filled bar/restaurant in Emporia isn't an unhealthy environment."

Of course I refuse to believe it! I also refuse to believe in unicorns, fairies, and fire-breathing dragons. Once again, I challenge you or anyone else to prove your ridiculous claims that the air in ANY business in Emporia violates the Federal clean air standards.

"Wow, you guys sure do like to quote Hitler, too. What's with that?"

I'll be glad to tell you what's up with that. Have you ever heard the phrase 'those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it'?

Some of us are quoting the documented philosophies and sayings of Hitler and the Nazi regime because people like you, CAE, and the other ban supporters continually using those same philosophies and tactics in your efforts.

If you don't like hearing quotes from Hitler, then perhaps you should not follow his examples or subscribe to his philosophies.

March 26, 2009 at 8:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smogman (anonymous) says...

I was in a store the other day and the fumes from the lawn and garden products, mostly 2-4-D, were very noticeable. I think all herbicides and insecticides should be banned next. I just cant bring myself to love weeds and bugs, VOTE NO

March 26, 2009 at 8:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

tbluma (anonymous) says...

Just to make it clear incase you misconstured, as liberals have great tendancy to do. I don't own a bar, I just called it that because that's where I go the most.

March 26, 2009 at 8:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

You see maximissquoteus, WE DON'T LIVE IN CALIFORNIA, if you believe that study pertains to california bars, I suggest a call to United Van Lines. This vote is for the people of Emporia to decide. And there has been no study in Emporia Kansas stating that business here have dangerous levels of SHS. About the only thing elevating my bartenders blood pressure is a bunch of feel good nut jobs living on tax free grant money screwing with their livelyhood.

Beware the ides, oh wait, the ides are over:>)

March 26, 2009 at 8:45 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

MisterOh!

While you were writing your post, rbow took care of your question for me so I didn't even have to search past discussions.

rbow states, "Why is it you say the air in A bar is no different than another one some where else. Why don't you and the others just come out and say it is toxic in MY bar, that way we can get the lawsuit started and have the court system settle it."

I rest my case. Court adjourned! Maximus Rules!

March 26, 2009 at 8:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

Posted by Maximus (anonymous) on March 26, 2009 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Pingeon,

Here's your answer - took 10 seconds to find on Google

What are you trying to say? You're better because you looked it up and not me? Gee, thanks.

This study did not prove the air was deadly though. No one died as a result from this "experiment". Blood vessels constricted. Big deal. They only checked it 24 hours after exposure. Did they check it at measured times after that? According to what you posted.....No.

I said I wasn't going to debate the health issue before. I apologize for even delving this far. I spent a hell of a lot of time in bars while I was attending college. Now, I am probably in the best shape of my life. I still go to bars when I come back to Emporia. I still go for my run the next day. How is this possible when the smoke is so deadly I shouldn't even be able to walk the next day?

March 26, 2009 at 8:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smogman (anonymous) says...

You just dont get it Max, what freedom or right is next????

March 26, 2009 at 8:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

another one posted, "Vote Yes - for our health and the health of our children."

If you are concerned about your health stay out of bars. It's that simple. If you want to take your kids to bars............... well you are just wrong. With the current restrictions on tobacco and the fact that the demand for more smokefree restaurants has and continues to be filled in our free market system the ban is not needed. How is it that simply avoiding it is so dificult if you feel it will surely be the death of you. I personally don't smoke and have no dificulty staying away from shs. There is no need for this ban if you are concerned about your personal health or the health of your children(If you're a good parent and don't let your kids frequent the bars, I really hope you don't but if you don't have enough discipline to stay away from something that you believe is going to kill you maybe you do let your kids go to bars. I'm asking you please don't. It's just not a smart thing to do.). If however you are concerned about the health of other adults then can we assume that their will be more bans to "make Emporia healthier"? Quite honestly this ban won't affect my personal life one way or another but the next ban for health or public safety or the kids or the kittens and puppies or what ever other tear jerking label you want to put on it might. The current tobbaco restrictions work fine, this ban adds nothing to them but it does step on the toes of business owners so please vote NO. And come on seriously get some parenting classes if you allow your kids to hang out at bars.

Vote NO.

March 26, 2009 at 8:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

(Warning: Sarcasm follows)
I guess you guys are right. If this ban passes, we will become another Nazi Germany, just like those other oppressive KS cities that have passed similar bans - Olathe, Overland Park, Manhattan, to name a few - all horrible places to live, where all freedoms have been stripped - and it all started with a smoking ban.

March 26, 2009 at 9:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

Pingeon,

You noticed the "study" wasn't conducted IN A BAR.

It is amazing to me that these anti-freedom supporters throw out all kinds of claims half-truths and scientific studies, this study was done here and that study was done there, so it must be gospel.
When EOB stated the FACT that no business in Emporia had been shown to exceede OSHA pel limits you would have thought we had murdered someone.
They have been smart enough to not name a business in Emporia, because they know it can't be proved and they would loose that lawsuit in court.
Emporia is the town voting on this ban and I truly hope Emporian's know Bull---t when they see it.
Steve

March 26, 2009 at 9:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smogman (anonymous) says...

I just hope i am dead from lung cancer before they tell me to take that train to the " Special Smokers Camp" I guess that would be an SS Camp,,,,,,,,,,LOL

March 26, 2009 at 9:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

Steve - I was headed there in my postings, but didn't come out and say it yet.

When I was in town for the St. Paddy's activities, I got so sick of the radio and all the "Smoking is poisonous" ads. My CD player is broke, so the scan button got quite a workout that day. I feel sorry for you guys that have to hear it every 2 minutes.

March 26, 2009 at 9:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BabyGirlSissy (anonymous) says...

Im so fed up with this Health Issue BS. It has nothing to do with being a health issue. So if it does then the next on the list is fast food because grease is unhealthy, Or how about tv, because it can cause problems with the eyes. Or what about soda pop and candy. All you yes people are so full of it! Theres people out that that dont smoke and is not around SHS that still get the same health issues as some who does. This ban is nothing but a bold face lie. And a slap in the face to the Emporia people that smoke! And Im sure there are more of us that smoke then those that dont. So if you yes people are so upset by my smoking come tell me to my face. Or do you not have the guts to debate this person to person face to face. I will not let the government keep taking things away from me. So i will be voting NO. Then after I vote i will light up a cig. And give you all a big F*** you smile. Hows that for honesty? At least I have the guts to be honest.

VOTE NO APRIL 7TH

March 26, 2009 at 9:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

BabyGirlSissy - you're one classy lady. You better get back to the TV and finish watching the Larry the Cable Guy Roast on Comedy Central.

March 26, 2009 at 9:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smogman (anonymous) says...

LOL Sissy, UGO girl

March 26, 2009 at 9:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

BabyGirlSissy,

I thank you for your upcoming NO VOTE.
As a smoker, and business owner I also VOTED NO.

I am worried about the response of a lot of smokers the past couple of days though. While working on this stuff I've been going to different locations where smokers congregate. Yeah a lot of bars! When I have asked a smoker if they are going to vote no on this I have been shocked to hear, "Well
I would but I forgot to register to vote. I have heard this more times than I care to admit. However I am happy from all the support I have heard from Non-smokers who are tired of the slow loss of rights. It's a good thing we don't have to rely on just smokers to get this thing overturned, because if a smoker didn't get registered for this vote, they don't deserve to bitch about it. To all you smokers who didn't register or don't vote you don't have the right to bitch come April 8th when you can't light up anymore in your favorite dive.
Steve Corbin

VOTE EARLY
VOTE NO

March 26, 2009 at 9:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Maximus (anonymous) says...

Steve (rbow) and others:
Thanks for a good debate tonight. Although we may disagree with this vote, I think we can all agree that we are delighted that we live in a country where we can speak our mind about such issues. Take care and I hope to jump into the fray sometime later :)

March 26, 2009 at 9:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

smogman (anonymous) says...

Steve, if worse comes to worse, couldnt you call the old west back bar your office and friends have a smoke in your office???? Better than looking like gangs are smokin pot outside of your private property....LOL

March 26, 2009 at 10:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

SISSY;

CALL 343-1232 LEAVE YOUR NAME & ADDRESS & WHEN OUR SIGNS ARRIVE WE WILL PUT ONE UP FOR YOU. WE NEED NAMES AND PHONE #'S AS TO VERIFY WE ARE PUTTING THEM ON YOUR PROPERTY.
We would hate to have a practicle joker call and request a sign for Steve Sauders house.
Steve

March 26, 2009 at 10:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

Wow, for a letter to editor posted just today, there is a ton of comments on it. Gwen will throw this to a forum first thing when she gets to the office. :)

March 26, 2009 at 10:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

smogman; it has been suggested, but it still would be against the law, and you know there will be some smoking snitch there to set thing right.
Steve

March 26, 2009 at 10:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

BabyGirlSissy (anonymous) says...

Thanks Steve I just called and gave my name number and address for a sign...
Thanks so much.
VOTE NO APRIL 7TH

March 26, 2009 at 10:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Steve_Corbin (anonymous) says...

REMEMBER EVERYONE.

VOTE EARLY
VOTE NO
AND KEEP THE CHOICE, TO WHERE YOU GO!

GET ER DONE :>)

March 26, 2009 at 10:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

hogan77 (anonymous) says...

My question for the day is this. If the ones wanting the ban are doing it "for the children", explain to me just why in the hell a child is in a bar to begin with.

Smoking is not allowed inside schools, retail stores, restaurants, hospitals and most places like the library, museums, etc. You say you do not want teenagers to start smoking Mary, but what is going to stop them from seeing it when they walk by Mr. Joe's house, and he is on his front porch lighting one up?

As far as the health issue part of it is concerned, I believe that it is pretty well taken care of. All of the important places are smoke free. And really, I fail to see how someone standing 5 feet away is going to catch SHS- especially outside. In bars, we are all adults. It seems as though Emporia is offering a couple of smoke free establishments already. For those not wanting to get an iron lung due to someone else's habit, go to the smoke free bars. It is a pretty simple fix really.

Everyone, use your own common sense and vote however you want. But seriously, can we just move on already? There are more important things in life than worrying about a smoking ban- whether it passes or not. Spend that time with your families, instead of on here arguing like a bunch of small children.

March 27, 2009 at 1:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

glarson (Gwen Larson) says...

moving to a forum:

http://www.emporiagazette.com/forums/...

March 27, 2009 at 5:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )