Posted by glarson (Gwen Larson) on September 16, 2008 at 8:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

More comment from the original opinion piece by Ryan Fritz of Emporia:

http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/2008/...

Posted by MisterO (anonymous) on September 16, 2008 at 10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Smoking in cars with children in there should be illegal as well. I am curious to know what the people against the ban think about that. Let's hear it BJ, Jayhawker, create, MisterO, et al ...what are your thoughts??" slvrnblck

I'll be glad to share my thoughts on this by asking you a few simple questions in return.

Do you also support taking children away from parents and punishing parents for not requiring their children to exercise regularly or not being able to feed their children a healthy, well-balanced diet?

There is strong scientific evidence that shows a direct correlation between poor diet/lack of exercise and obesity, heart disease, elevated cholesterol levels, and diabetes.

If you support punishing parents who smoke in the car with their children, surely you would support punishment for poor diet and exercise. After all...poor diet and lack of exercise is frequently identified in the media as a national health care crisis.

And what about allowing children to ride school buses without seat belts? Surely you would support bringing legal action against the school board.

Oh..let's not forget mold. Surely those people who have a mold problem in their homes are deserving of your attention, too. The airborne particulate matter spewed into the atmosphere by the tons on a daily basis by our industries.

No. Sorry. I'm not willing to freely allow government intrusion into parental decisions like this.

Maybe that makes be a bad person. I can live with that.

Posted by Pingeon (anonymous) on September 17, 2008 at 7:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

MrO,

That has been my contention all along. No government involvement. I guess I can be ranked up there with the bad person status too. The only time when government should get involved in a child's life is in times of physical abuse, and I don't mean a swat on the butt for misbehaving.

Posted by slvrnblck (anonymous) on September 17, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. O--

You bring up good points and as I mentioned to BJ, I was just bringing the topic up for discussion.

I am not a smoker so I wouldn't smoke in my car with my children but I do take my kids to McDonalds more than I probably should, so I guess that is poor parenting to some degree. So, I understand your point, basically it's where do we draw the line.

Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on September 17, 2008 at 3:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

slvrnblck: I know that you did not intend your proposal seriously, but as insidious as these things are, within a few years of the smoking ban being adopted, there will be someone who will seriously propose it. That's exactly what I mean by a slippery slope. Once we start this stuff, it has no end. Just look at California and Connecticut.

Posted by admireed (anonymous) on September 17, 2008 at 4:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Smoke signal from the west.....

http://www.dodgeglobe.com/news/x12134669...

Posted by jayhawker (anonymous) on September 17, 2008 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

admireed: Thanks. I read the article. Dodge City's is not nearly as restrictive as Emporia's "Clean Air Committee" in its scope or restrictions. For example, it doesn't apply to motels or outdoor public facilities and it allows businesses to have smoking sections, including restaurants. It has signage requirements. Actually, other than some technical requirements and formalizing it as law, it appears that there wouldn't be much change since, at least in Emporia, every restaurant has a no smoking section already. After reading it, I wonder why they passed it at all. They admitted that it was a compromise. Dodge City's "Clean Air Committee" must be more reasonable than the hard boiled one of Emporia. Of course, this way they get their foot in the door for the next ban.

Posted by slipandslide (anonymous) on September 18, 2008 at 12:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

that was a more reasonable approach, private businesses were being protected and non smoking sections are provided. emporia has a good selection of businesses that have non smoking rooms should be good enough. this conversation was getting pretty intense is it possible that when the story was moved to this link, a few folks thought it was shut down instead of moved?

Posted by rbow (anonymous) on September 19, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Everyone should remeber this proposed ban is for all buildings in Emporia, not just bars and resturants. If you are against the ban write or call the commissioners and show up at the meeting Sept, 29, 2008 at 7:00 P.M. in the little theater. And please be civil.