Comments by ratdog
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Posted on November 28 at 4:04 p.m.
So far, after months of debate, I have yet to hear ONE SINGLE proponent of this intrusion on the rights of private business reveal ONE SINGLE place in Emporia, Kansas where ONE SINGLE citizen is exposed to ONE SINGLE breath of second-hand smoke that that citizen cannot avoid by exercising ONE SINGLE ounce of personal choice.
Our commisioners should be ashamed of themselves if they get pushed into passing this most needless and foolish erotion of personal freedom. Not only will they take away rights from business and property owners, they will take away the right of all citizens to make their own decisions and choose what's right for themselves.
Posted on September 27 at 2:07 a.m.
At every turn, ask the question: "Can you name ONE place in Emporia, Kansas where there is ANY significant exposure to secondhand smoke that is not easily avoidable by exercising the most minimal amount of commonsense, personal choice and freedom?"
It's that simple! EVERYTHING else is unnecessary..............
Posted on September 24 at 1:35 a.m.
As this debate continues, I am saddened by the increasing number of Americans that have to rely on, and invite government, to make their decisions for them.
Anyone out there that is for this ban please explain to me why you cannot walk into a restaurant, smell smoke and turn around and walk right back out of the door. After three weeks of asking this question in this forum and in person, I have yet to get an answer to this question.
In additon, no one has been able to name a single place in Emporia, Kansas where any risk of secondhand smoke was present that could not be avoided by exercising a minimal amout of personal choice.
Over and over again, I hear, "I'd "LIKE" to go to Bruff's" or "I'd like to go to Coach's".
If this "secondhand smoke initiative" is all about banning something just because a few, or even a lot, of people "WOULD LIKE" to go eat a steak and drink a few beers without smelling cigarette smoke on a Friday night is true, the City Commission has no choice but to kill it immediately. I'm optimistic because at least 3 of the current commisioners are private business owners and understand the consequences of ANY further erotion of freedom and choice.
Posted on September 23 at 11:09 p.m.
More and more, people advocating the CAE initiative cite places in Emporia they would "LIKE" to go where smoking is allowed. This completely illustrates the fallacy and needlessness of this proposed ban. Each of us has things that we'd "LIKE" to do, but choose not to for any myriad of reasons. This is no different.
I keep hearing the opposition say this should be voted on by the public. It will disappoint me beyond belief if it gets to that point. Simple common sense dictates that this proposal should be filed in the first available trash can.
Posted on September 21 at 1:59 a.m.
Somebody PLEASE! Name one place in EMPORIA, KANSAS where you are exposed to secondhand smoke and cannot exercise your God given right of personal choice to avoid it! If you cannot answer this question, all of your arguments are invalid.
Posted on September 20 at 1:47 a.m.
Josies bar, Jayhawker, and others:
All of you understand the basic falacy of this initiative. Don't let yourselves get sidetracked. The key to winning this debate is exposing the simplicity of it all. People are going to try to make you think that it is complicated when it really isn't.
At every turn, ask for specifics of why THIS smoking ban is necessary. Ask why a law needs to be passed and ultimately financed as opposed to giving the people of Emporia the credit and respect they deserve to have it within themselves to walk into a restaurant, decide there is secondhand smoke and then make a simple decision to stay or go.
Assume that CAE is going to use scare tactics and spin available research and information to their point of view. That's what good politicians do. But effective opposition understands the following: No amount of spin and bias can stand up to the simple truth.
Stop worrying about "private clubs" and anything else that doesn't attack this initiative on its most basic terms. Every time someone says they support this ban, ask them to be specific. Ask them to name THE place where they were exposed to a risk from secondhand smoke and they could not avoid it by exercising the most minimal amount of personal choice and freedom. If they can even muster an answer, ask them why they couldn't have turned around and walked right out of the same door they came in. I guarantee you that they will not be able to come up with anything close to a reasonable answer.
Posted on September 19 at 9:25 p.m.
eiggohp:
I'm sick of listening to this crap! Please! Name ONE place in Emporia, Kansas where there is any significant threat of secondhand smoke that you cannot avoid by excercising your God given right of personal choice!
Posted on September 19 at 5:07 p.m.
Again. We should congratulate Olathe for passing a completely unnecessary law and devoting unnecessary time and money for enforcement and inspection because they don't give their own citizens enough credit to be able to walk into a restaurant, smell smoke and turn around and leave? Unfrickin' believable!
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Posted on December 2 at 10:40 p.m.
So far, after months of debate, I have yet to hear ONE SINGLE proponent of this intrusion on the rights of private business reveal ONE SINGLE place in Emporia, Kansas where ONE SINGLE citizen is exposed to ONE SINGLE breath of second-hand smoke that that citizen cannot avoid by exercising ONE SINGLE ounce of personal choice.
Our commisioners should be ashamed of themselves if they get pushed into passing this most needless and foolish erotion of personal freedom. Not only will they take away rights from business and property owners, they will take away the right of all citizens to make their own decisions and choose what's right for themselves.
On Commission sets vote on smoke ban