wiseup wrote on Jul 14, 2008 11:33 AM:
" Every week there is a story about a motorcycle accident killing or injuring rider. Today there is a story about 2 riders hurt when they hit a deer. I am tired of reading obits re this dangerous product and I have NEVER read obit re non-smoker dying from 2nd hand smoke exposure from time at a bar! I don't ride, and I don't think others should because of HEALTH AND SAFETY issues with thousands injured or dead, unlike 2nd hand smoke! "
wiseup wrote on Jul 9, 2008 11:25 PM:
" I think it is time to ban bad gas. Not gasoline but butt gas! Talk about a health and safety issue. Some gas smells so bad that I get nauseous and probably get cancer of the nose! Letting loose inside a confined area in a packed bar should be ILLEGAL! I abhor smelling anyone's odor and I think THEY should get a TICKET TOO! "
momothree wrote on Jul 8, 2008 4:03 PM:
" Dear RUserious, I usually wouldn't dignify your babble with a response...but you make me laugh. It takes all kinds. Good day for a good laugh. I hope someone is paying you for your banter on all the blogs, if not what a tragic waste of time. "
enuffalready wrote on Jul 8, 2008 8:40 AM:
" Probably the most self-serving nonsensical, piece of non-scientific garbage, I've ever seen. And this coming from a non-smoker. "
High Plains Drifter wrote on Jul 8, 2008 6:11 AM:
" i'm starting a petition to force the health department to release information on ANYTHING taking our lives or making life hazardous. EVERYTHING must be shut down at once or stop letting ANYTHING on the streets. i'm requesting all citizens of this fine city to boycott EVERYTHING till we get some answers. EVERYTHING needs to be outlawed at once! we must stop the senseless deaths and pain caused by ANYTHING immediately! do the right thing wisconsin, lead the charge, ban ALL ACTIVITIES anywhere, anytime. " "
AngelaE8654 wrote on Jul 7, 2008 10:30 PM:
" It isn't just the air inside restaurants. In our state, we have a "25 feet" law; you are not allowed to smoke within 25 feet of a building's entrance or openings. Yet, people in drive thrus smoke all the time at the window. I don't care if people smoke. I just don't want their smoke anywhere around ME.
Angela "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 7, 2008 1:10 PM:
" Asthma shmasthma. I was diagnosed with Asthma when I was five years old. You know what it did to me? It affected my thinking. It made me think I couldn't do sports. I took inhalers all through elementary and middle school. Thank God I got past that mental limitation. I never thought I would run a mile faster than 8 minutes. Once I stopped taking my inhalers and stopped letting the disease control me I joined Cross Country running and Track and Field in high school. I ran a 5:26 mile and 18:26 5k. Some days when I am sitting quietly I can hear myself wheezing. It only affects me when I think about it. Learn to use you mind to control your body and say goodbye to expense drugs. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 7, 2008 1:03 PM:
" re: momothree "No one should have "the right" to effect another's health in a negative way," First, define "health". Second, define "negative". Third, no one effects another's health. They affect another's health. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 7, 2008 12:59 PM:
" re: momothree "Why should the non-smokers who choose not to endanger those around them have to stay at home so those that do choose to endanger others can actively do so?" Non-smokers don't have to stay at home. If you stay home because breathing dirty air outweighs the benefits of a business' offerings that is your choice. You don't have a right to a meal in a restaurant. What's next? Banning loud music? Some bars blair their music to a point where it is probably damaging people's ears. Guess what I do when it gets too loud... I don't demand or tell the owner they must turn it down. I inform the manager the music is too loud and ask them to turn it down. If they don't, I leave! "
nana3 wrote on Jul 6, 2008 9:40 AM:
" we better ban cars and trucks, they create a lot more pollution than smokers. I am sure all of you who are worried about breathing in bad air would never drive a vehicle! Maybe there should be a law that makes it mandatory to have at least 4 passengers per vehicle, especially on the freeway. Now that would make a difference in air pollution. "
momothree wrote on Jul 5, 2008 10:36 AM:
" never suggested it was the cure all. but living with your head in the sand isn't the answer either. just don't think it's fair to conciously harm those around you with something that has proven to be so very harmful. thanks for your thoughts :) "
nana3 wrote on Jul 5, 2008 9:39 AM:
" re:momothree, Cigarettes are 50% more a pack than a gallon of gas.
Do you keep bleach in your home? Do you put bug spray on your kids? Do you ever sit around a campfire? Does your city spray for mosquitoes? All of these things can damage your lungs or poison your children, there are too many common everyday items to list.
Do you use sunscreen on your kids, they say the first burn determines if they will get skin cancer. To those of you with asthma/lung problems, do you complain about others wearing perfume? People we live in a chemical society, but banning cigarettes isn't the answer for everything. "
momothree wrote on Jul 5, 2008 8:01 AM:
" p.s. I am an asthma sufferer. Have had it since infancy. I grew up with both parents being smokers. As soon as I moved out of my parents my asthma condition improved greatly. I have never and will never smoke. Lost my g-ma to lung cancer, she smoked. Oh, and my asthma meds cost $330/mo. "
momothree wrote on Jul 5, 2008 7:49 AM:
" No one should have "the right" to effect another's health in a negative way, yet the government continues to allow it to happen regularly. 2nd hand smoke should be banned. Why should the non-smokers who choose not to endanger those around them have to stay at home so those that do choose to endanger others can actively do so?? Redneck democracy maybe? If enough of us support the legislation to ban it, it will finally pass. The tax on tobacco should be raised X4+. Tobacco accounts for how many $$ in medical expenses (smokers or non-smokers). Let tobacco foot the $$bill. Anyone else see a problem with a gallon of gas being more expensive than a pack of cigarettes? Madison, WI restaurants and bars certainly didn't loose business when smoking got banned. Are we just mad we didn't set the trend?! "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 5, 2008 12:41 AM:
" donatello: If this country were a democracy and not a republic, we would have national health insurance already and so much more. Our government would fear its people more than they do because the poor would actually have a voice beyond the ballot box that would offset the wealthy's ability to buy off. The elite would have something to fear from potential uprising. Wealth would be more properly distributed through benefits and equality for all including investors and workers alike. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 4, 2008 10:54 AM:
" Wake up donatello and smell your stupidity. Cig butts are as bad a problem as fast food garbage, but they aren't lit on at least one end. I agree that both cigheads and fast food chompers must keep their garbage to themselves until placed in proper containers. Littering is bad and the fine should be increased to $500 minimum instead of the $200 joke it is today. Police seldom if ever ticket these bozos because too many people litter and need to be caught. Cleaning up America starts with ourselves and then everyone within the community helping enforce the littering issue. Finally, do you rent movies? The movie industry isn't losing any sleep over theaters loses of you not being there just because you can't smoke. Many parents and kids are still going to theaters and don't mind that you aren't there puffing on a cig. Thanks for not coming. "
donatello wrote on Jul 4, 2008 6:12 AM:
" I'm concerned about the millions of tons of fast food trash tossed along the road from non-smokers filling their faces...not the minuscule butts, by comparison.
Blaming road fires on smoking is a cop out, when there is no obvious reason for the fire. "
donatello wrote on Jul 4, 2008 6:09 AM:
" People in hell want ice water.
This isn't a democracy people, it is a republic...stop telling business owners how to run their businesses...their customers vote with their feet.
You are just too lazy to look for non-smoking places.
I haven't seen but two movies since they banned smoking in theaters...Thats thousands they have lost just from me. "
joeemt wrote on Jul 3, 2008 3:19 PM:
" Along with what others have mentioned, there is also the smokers that mindlessly toss their butts out the car window. This is littering and is already not legal. Also tossing these butts out the windows have caused some very large grass and forest fires. If you wish to smoke, please keep the butts in your car. Your litter, you keep it. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 3, 2008 1:51 PM:
" Can anyone find the pend up legislation on the statewide smoking ban? I think we should vote on it as statewide referendum. This gets it out of Mikey's hands and puts it in ours. We could have a smokefree state like those who defined marriage. That shows we have the poitical will to act. "
Mr. Miagi wrote on Jul 3, 2008 8:29 AM:
" To Wiseup: It's not Governer Doyle's smoking ban, it's the people of Wisconsin's! The majority of people in this state do favor the ban. How dare our governor speak on behalf of his people! "
wiseup wrote on Jul 3, 2008 1:01 AM:
" Too many people want to CONTROL other people's lives. If you don't go to bars now and won't go later, you should not have ANY say. ANY dangers are widely known, so let the owners decide based on THEIR customer base. Please report on the thousands of names that signed petitions AGAINST the smoking ban. Please report the story on DOyle bribing opponents with big jobs to get them out of the way for HIS smoking ban! "
rserp1 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:43 PM:
" Some people have too much time on their hands.
Sue Lynch has hazardous Air in her Bathroom but you don't see us smokers trying to shut it down.
Get a life.
Next she will be out trying to ban Beer at Octoberfest.
Facists with nothing else to do but tell you how to live your life. "
Darwin wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:33 PM:
" The two government-endorsed drugs, alcohol and cigarettes, are only legal because the government knows how to control them and TAX THEM. You're fooling yourself if you think the government is endorsing them because they're safer than other drugs like... weed. Cigarettes and alcohol are responsible for more deaths than weed, but here you see all kinds of their addicts standing up for their rights to use them. Please, help yourself. But no one else wants to breathe your smoke or deal with your butts. If your need to self-medicate is that important to you (really - take a look at why you're doing it), have at it. But please purchase an apparatus to keep it self contained. And drag a little ash can behind you. "
tax payer wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:36 PM:
" To Catmom: You are 200% right! I have said that so many times in the past. Where are all of these people that know what's best for everyone when it comes to people that work in a factory. I guess that kind of health risk is OK. "
random annoying bozo wrote on Jul 2, 2008 6:52 PM:
" let's see if i have this right. the big whoop tee doo seems to be ban smoking in bars because some people don't like the smoke, whether it is for health or whatever reason. so the argument is, we need to ban smoking in bars so we have some place unpolluted to go drink our alcohol? trading one 'sin' for another i guess, huh? "
Athenry wrote on Jul 2, 2008 6:52 PM:
" The big problem is that States are enacting legislation to ban a legal product. Whatever your feeling on smoking maybe, it is still a legal substance. "
catmom wrote on Jul 2, 2008 6:49 PM:
" I am more worried about being in a workplace with the coolants from machines and the welding smoke for twelve to sixteen hours a day than the contaminants in a bar. I do not go to bars, probably never will, but I go to a factory everyday. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 6:21 PM:
" If public health is the issue then ban smoking in PUBLIC places such as on sidewalks and parks. I'm all for that. Leave private businesses alone (I'd prefer if they all smoke inside and contain the smoke there). "
tax payer wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:51 PM:
" Okay, this was a local study that was done. Why are the not places named in the paper? Will someone get the proof from Madison on these so called readings and post them? This story seems very biased. Smoking in bars should not be banned. We have enough government control in every part of our every day lives. Let the business owner make their own decisions. Yes, put a sign a on the door saying if they allow smoking. If you don't like it, that should be your warning not to go inside. Smoking has been going on for centuries. I'm amazed that there are any humans living today if second hand smoke is everything you try to say it is. Everyone would have been wiped out long ago. Get real!!!! "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:43 PM:
" Government that has the power to say you aren't allowed to smoke in an establishment has the power to say you have to allow smoking in an establishment. Why do you want to give up your freedom of choice to the government? "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:33 PM:
" vicky: Health does not (at least should not) trump individual and property rights. If health is the most important issue then avoid the smoke! Or are you going to make employment the issue now? The smoking ban is about rights and not health. Does a smoking ban mean we will be healthier? NO, not if we are already health conscious (if health truly is important to us) and avoid unhealthy places. Does it weaken individual and property rights? Yes, it erodes our rights. A smoking ban might help improve some people's health (those that don't care for their health anyways) while eroding the protection of everyone's rights. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:33 PM:
" ryeguy: Are we suppose to feel sorry for the employee who knowingly chooses to work in an environment that they know may be unhealthy? Did they not know that they would be working in an environment where smoking would take place? Are we suppose to feel sorry for the young adults that take up smoking today... do they not know smoking is unhealthy. "
Vicky wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:59 PM:
" The smoking ban is not a RIGHTS issue, but rather a HEALTH issue. Period! End of argument. "
ryeguy wrote on Jul 2, 2008 4:36 PM:
" I am a non-smoker. I started going to the Bodega again when he went smoke free, and I encourage all the posters on this site to support him. But here is the deal: private property is not the issue. Workplace wellness and worker health and safety are. I have no problem with a ma and pa bar allowing smoking - until the hire an employee. Now they are no longer a "private property" but an employer. This changes everything. The government has regulated worker safety since the 1800's and the railroads. Taverns are workplaces for the employees. Their health is the concern. See my 8:33 am post. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 3:57 PM:
" ruserious: I might consider your idea except La Crosse has one too many bars at this time and the city which deals with liquor licensing is trying to reduce the number of bars. So unless those already in business go smokefree, no new ones will pop up. Besides, this would also mean I would have to con some bank into loaning me the money to start up a tavern. So unless I was to tear down the downtown of La Crosse for a Funhouse with a bar and more entertainment, what's the use in doing it? "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 3:48 PM:
" I had proposed that businesses that want to permit smoking on their premises be required to comply with the following: 1) post a sign on the door stating whether they permit smoking inside the building; 2) the employer will provide all employees with health insurance for the life of said employee without deductibles, copayments, or premiums charged to employees regardless of length of employment or reason for termination; and 3) require employers to upgrade and properly maintain exhaust systems to remove smoke for all patrons and be subject to lawsuits if failing to do so. By doing this and raising the tobacco tax as I've previously posted, the profitability becomes significantly on the loss side that businesses would be see smoking as costly as the general public does. When in doubt, always hit the problem in the pocketbook. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 3:35 PM:
" fishingpro: The reason taverns are against the smoking ban isn't about freedom or choice, but PROFITS. Taverns sell the very poison sticks, usually at higher prices than at stores. Taverns owners want smokers to smoke at their businesses so as to sell more of those cancer sticks at their inflated prices. The Tavern League is responsible for the negative campaign which lines certain GOP candidates pockets like Mikey Huebsch. BTW, the losey $1.75 per pack is still too low to cover the actual costs of pollution, littering, and health care inflicted upon the general public. By raising it to a minimum of $20 per pack, the costs will only begin to reflect the impact on society. "
kamikazefaase wrote on Jul 2, 2008 3:22 PM:
" First to nana3: The smoking and cancer issue has been known since the 1950's, but the tobacco industry has kept that information from being publicized for the purpose of protecting their profit margins. Failure to become educated today results in foolish choices. Smoking is the most preventable means to prevent cancer, yet there are fools who think they are invincible. While cancer deals with DNA and cells, its preventable in certain cases. Smoking is one of those cases. Because of second-hand smoke contributes to the problem and employers who want smoking as a choice issue, these employers fail to accept responsibility for such. I've propose in other blogs a comprehensive proposal in dealing with this issue. I ask that those supporting smoking to read my proposal. "
fred wrote on Jul 2, 2008 2:22 PM:
" Smoking bans generally do not have long term negative impacts on the revenues of bars and restaurants.In a 1997 study conducted by Stanton A. Glantz, PhD and Lisa R.A. Smith, the following conclusions were drawn:
Smoke-free ordinances generally had no statistically significant effect, either on the fraction of total retail sales that went to restaurants or on the ratio between sales in comparison to other cities. Also, the linear model indicates that there were no significant effects of the smoke-free ordinances on bar sales in cities with ordinances and sales in comparable cities [without such ordinances]
Thus, bar and restaurant owners who are worried about losing revenues because of smoke-free ordinances need not worry anymore. "
ruserious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 2:02 PM:
" To those that complain about smoking in bars and claim that bars [will] make more money when they go smoke free: then open your own smoke free bar! What's stopping you? If it'll be so profitable and you have the stats and facts to show it then writing a business plan and obtaining financing shouldn't be that difficult. "
ruserious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:59 PM:
" God_himself: This isn't going to be great. Instead of being able to avoid the smokers in the bars they will now congregate outside on the sidewalks. We will now all have to endure walking through the smoke rather than having it contained in the bars. Additionally, expect to see more cigarette butts making our streets and sidewalks dirty. "
totbom wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:52 PM:
" Ruserious - You make a good point. Providing them a place to congregate would speed up the thinning of the herd. "
GOD_HIMSELF wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:44 PM:
" the gresat thing is, no matter how much smokers cry and whine, it's almost over. there's really nothing they can do about it. wisconsin will be smoke free like the rest of the civilized world before you know it. i guess they can all stand around outside smoking and whining about not being able to blow smoke in my face. it's gonna be sweet. "
ruserious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:44 PM:
" totbom: While you are on your Natural Selection and good riddance kick, why not allow smoking in bars so that those who are too stupid or weak to avoid the bars can also go the way of smokers? Don't get me wrong, I agree with Natural Selection. I wish we allowed for more of it... why do I (we) have to chip in for the hospital bill to pay for idiots that make stupid choices, whether that's smoking, drinking too much, or going 120mph down the highway. Humans love to interfere with nature. "
IAmRight wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:38 PM:
" At work this morning when it was storming there were some smokers standing outside in the rain and hail just so they could get their tobacco fix. I dont know if thats funny or sad. "
totbom wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:27 PM:
" People who smoke are either stupid or weak. Eventually all smokers will be killed off by their own stupidity or lack of will power anyway. Darwin wins again. "
Im Still Jackson wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:22 PM:
" Ruserious: I absolutely HATE smokers who throw their cigarette butts on the ground, sidewalks, parking lots, or streets.
Good point, ever notice when it first rains in the city you smell cigarettes in the air? Thats from all those butts getting wet lying on the ground. Smokers show their mentality when they throw their butts on the ground or bar floor.Maybe if they had to carry around those stinking butts in their pockets they would get an idea how dirty smelling it is of a habit!My daughter was staying with us it lasted a week before she had to go for her and her BF smoking had no place in my home and the disrespectfullness that most smokers share came and went with them! "
Im Still Jackson wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:14 PM:
" I believe in respect is as respect does and some things are out of our control and thats where the bar owner makes the call.It is a proven fact though that smoke free facilities do better business then smoke filled bars. Even smokers get bothered when its so bad you cant see through the smoke for not everyone smokes the same brand and when that second hand smoke is combined with all those different brands its toxic smelling and tasting like a grass fire is.I come home and can smell my clothes the next day from across the room not to mention the nausious buzz it gives me being around it. I dont have drinking hangovers I have second hand smoke hangovers. I avoid it when possible but thats not always an option for me. "
Im Still Jackson wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:05 PM:
" My senario was a dining one for I cannot stand smelling cigarette smoke when Im eating a good meal it takes away from the flavor and experience.As for in a bar I simply choose to accept it or go elsewhere. I believe in majority rules to a point but I also believe in my right to leave and go elsewhere. "
Im Still Jackson wrote on Jul 2, 2008 1:01 PM:
" I dont smoke cigarettes but if I were to and I have been known in the past to do this light up a joint and blow smoke in you smokers faces how would you feel? Ist you would respond with its illegal right? Your missing the point its still smoke! I would no more consider forcing my second hand smoke on you cigarette, cigar, pipe smokers so why should you do the same to me? The whole or half joint theory works great for you pot smokers who want to do this for by the time the cops show up you swallow the roach and its GONE!Check please! "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:52 PM:
" And for the record, I am a nonsmoker and I don't like smelling like smoke when I leave a bar (so I don't go to smoky bars unless I am willing to accept the consequences of my decision to do so) and I absolutely HATE smokers who throw their cigarette butts on the ground, sidewalks, parking lots, or streets. Smoking should be banned on public sidewalks and streets, not in private establishments. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:49 PM:
" To Seriously Now: No one is demanding the right to smoke. We are however demanding the right to determine what happens under our privately owned roofs. To IAmRight: You would be asked to quit or leave if you brought an air horn into a restaurant and used it. It is the restaurant owner's right to determine if such behavior is allowed in his establishment. "
conscience? wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:47 PM:
" I get really annoyed with all the non-smokers complaining that they are going to die of lung cancer from second hand smoke. Alcohol kills way more people every year. It seems to me that they should be trying to shut down the bars if they were really concerned about public health. The latest stats that I could find (2006) state that you are more than five times more likely to get killed by a drunk driver than to die from second hand smoke. I don't smoke and I hate smelling like an ashtray when I go home. I could respect peoples demand for a smoking ban if they were truthful about they're reasons for it. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:43 PM:
" Seems people don't know the difference between a publicly owned place/accommodation and a privately owned public accommodation. Why are we dismantling private property rights? What would happen if all the bars changed to being membership only "clubs" that required you to signup/pay to enter? Rather than avoid or leave such establishments alone the anti-smoking nazis would still complain. "
Im Still Jackson wrote on Jul 2, 2008 12:26 PM:
" Good grief instead of a smoking ban how about getting to the real problem and making these pits upgrade their air systems. If you go to any modernized bar today you dont even notice the smokers. I been in some nice clubs that are really comfortable and clean air joints.
Remember even some of these sweat boxes they call bars go smoke free your still breathing dilluted poor germ filled low oxygen air. "
ACE wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:51 AM:
" Ah, excuse me but did i read that the "DNR" was involved? They can't even get the right count on the deer population. And as for you spoiled control freak anti's...get a life already. "
Seriously Now wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:22 AM:
" I demand the RIGHT to fill a public room, filled with people, with my toxic fumes, some of which have been inside my lungs!
After all, there's radiation out there from 1950's a-bomb tests. Doesn't that justify my addiction? "
wiseup wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:58 AM:
" If they ban smoking in our bars, ONLY THE CASINOS will benefit because they will remain smoking allowed! "
wiseup wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:56 AM:
" Like it or not people will become criminals because the smokers will continue to light up regardless of the penalty. See seat belt and firework laws. Do we want to spend law enforcement resources to police the bars for smokers? Do you want undercover sting operations for smokers? Ticket for ashtrays? We can't keep people for smoking illegal drugs and YOU think YOU can control tobacco? "
onawom1 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:55 AM:
" Get over it....the smoking ban is happening, state by state, city by city in Wisconsin....we can't live in the 50's forever...pathetic how some hang on to their right to stain their teeth, empty their wallets, and stink up their clothes and hair...oh, and hang on to that sweet phlegmy smoker's cough.... "
onawom1 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:53 AM:
" I AM RIGHT...you are right! I'd rather hang out with a drug addict (you know, the illegal kind...heroin, cocaine)....at least it's not bothering my ability to breathe. You know a great non-smoking bar to check out with great food and good drinks and CLEAN air?? Bruiser's up on Cass Street. GREAT place! "
wiseup wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:51 AM:
" Places left that allow smoking(less than 1% of buildings), have a clearly posted SMOKING ALLOWED sign. Do not enter if you are paranoid re smoke. Do not tell the business owner or their customers how to live. Show me 1 obit where casual 2nd hand cigarette smoke from a weekend warrior killed anyone! This article is the most blatant one-sided piece of trash the Trib has ever printed and I am a non-smoker! "
PicklesPlease wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:28 AM:
" well said, IAMRIGHT "
IAmRight wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:55 AM:
" Smokers are drug addicts. The only difference between them and any other junkie is that smokers think they have the right to pollute everyone around them. But it's not a right. Just Like I don't have the right to bring an air horn into a restaurant and create noise pollution. "
blogger wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:52 AM:
" Nana - no one is taking away your "right" to smoke. If you or any other adult wants to poison yourself that way go for it. You DONT have the right, however, to poison others because of a self-centered idea that no one should tell you where you can do it (or more to the point where you CAN NOT smoke). You are free to do whatever is legal until it affects someone else and influences their rights. If you want to smoke at a bar, go outside. Doing so inside influences others who may not want to share your addiction. "
mom_at_home wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:30 AM:
" I refuse to take my family to restaurants or pubs that allow smoking. I will not put my health or the health of my family in danger. I grew up in a home where both my parents smoked, now I have to live with asthma for the rest of my life. There are plenty of good eating establishments that do not allow smoking and I am more than happy to give them my money. Lets move this smoking ban along. The longer we wait, the more damage is done! "
please wrote on Jul 2, 2008 9:22 AM:
" Something that people and bar owners need to understand is that for as many people as establishments may lose due to a no smoking ban, they will gain in people who would normally not visit such bar because of the smoke. Believe me, it's happening in Minnesota. Even in the dead of winter, folks put on their coats and the bartender brought a tray of drinks outside. It's not much more than an inconvenience. You have to see to believe. Of the Minnesota bar owners I have spoken with, not one has said they have lost business. "
nana3 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:49 AM:
" Don't worry nonsmokers, the government is taxing tobacco so much that it will be a rich man's habit. I am a smoker, have been for 45 years, back then it was not known what a hazard smoking was to your health. I remember my OBGYN bumming cigarettes from me when I was in the hospital with my newborn. Movie stars smoked on TV and in movies. Cigarettes were the thing, and they only cost 20 cents a pack. Given the fact that there are so many resturants that are smokefree, why keep pushing smokers. We are losing our rights to do a lot of things, being taxed out of our homes, what happened to freedom? Really there aren't many places left that allows smoking, why can't you just leave it alone. "
lets face it wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:46 AM:
" Like it or not the SMOKING BAN is going to happen! Oh happy day! "
andy k wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:37 AM:
" Ryeguy is exactly right. Taverns are a powerful special interest group that has gotten special treatment for years now. There is finally some organized opposition to them, and it's only a matter of time before they will be forced to go smoke-free. "
ryeguy wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:33 AM:
" Indoor air quality is one issue. Workplace safety is another. Would OSHA say that workers in a nuclear plant or chemical plant could be exposed to pyridine, anthracene and other PNAs, carbon monoxide, benzopyrenes, nitrosamines, and other hazardous chemicals because the plants would be hurt economically by regulation? Or would they report that workers seem to be willing to put up with it so why regulate it? "If they don't like it they can leave" is not a valid argument. Smoking is a voluntary activity that pollutes the workplace. Almost every workplace has banned indoor smoking. Taverns are next. Only a matter of time. "
fishingpro wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:26 AM:
" Free Speech,
You are absolutely right. Pickles and God_Himself have no idea what they are talking about. Why can't people understand that if someone wants to smoke in a bar then let them. Why is it that 95% of all bar owners do not want to go smoke free? Maybe because they are worried about lost income. If you can handle the smoke stay out the bars. Man people wine way to much. Ooh you smoke , so if turn you are less then me. Well for all you dems out there, Mr. Obama was or still is a smoker. I suppose you are going to vote for McCain now. Works for me!!! "
free_speech wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:13 AM:
" They should ban pickles on this board. "
PicklesPlease wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:07 AM:
" You're all wasting your breath...er,key strokes. The smoking ban is coming whether you like it or not. Just hopefully sooner than later.
Go Iowa and Minnesota! We're getting closer, Wisconsin. Woot woot! Madison and Eau Claire take the lead... "
mtdew101 wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:04 AM:
" People need to shut up about the whole indoor smoking. If you don't want to smell cigarette smoke the don't go to that place its that simple. I'm not a smoker so if I don't want to get a headache from the smell I just wont go there. Its not that big of a deal and they should be able to smoke in places too. I'd rather not see or smell then when I'm walking down the street rather than having a huge group of smokers standing out on the street corner throwing the butts on the ground. At least if they are in a restaurant they will use an ashtray. "
free_speech wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:54 AM:
" No smoking ban for me facial boy. I have the freedom to go wherever I want. If I don't want to be around smoke, I can leave if it is bad. If the people who actually go to bars wanted a smoke free environment the market would have created smoke free bars. It is people trying to force their will on others. No thanks. "
lets face it wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:37 AM:
" Our elected officials have really dropped the ball on this one. The people of this state want a smoking ban. Shame on you Mike Huebsch! "
totbom wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:22 AM:
" RUSerious - the major flaw in your poor attempt at sarcasm is that automobiles serve a purpose, cigarettes don't. Smokers are stupid people. Why must smart people be exposed to the foolish behavior of stupid people? Then again, I guess smoking is one way of cleansing the gene pool of idiots. "
Mack wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:19 AM:
" The public has a right to know which establishments are toxic. But then any place that allows smoking is toxic. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:15 AM:
" I made one minor mistake... here's the corrected version:
i'm starting a petition to force the health department to release the names of automobile makers taking our lives. they must be shut down at once or stop letting vehicles on the streets. i'm requesting all citizens of this fine city to boycott ALL roads and streets till we get some answers. driving needs to be outlawed at once! we must stop the senseless deaths and pain caused by vehicles immediately! do the right thing wisconsin, lead the charge, ban driving anywhere, anytime. "
RUSerious wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:14 AM:
" i'm starting a petition to force the health department to release the names of automobile makers taking our lives. they must be shut down at once or stop letting vehicles on the streets. i'm requesting all citizens of this fine city to boycott ALL roads and streets till we get some answers. driving needs to be outlawed at once! we must stop the senseless deaths and pain caused by vehicles immediately! do the right thing wisconsin, lead the charge, ban smoking anywhere, anytime. "
blogger wrote on Jul 2, 2008 7:02 AM:
" Yes Mr. God_, in spite of your cynicism, it is sad to see the health effects of smoking. Emphysema and cardiovascular disease rob people of their health and vigor - but it is their choice. Being forced to being exposed to smoke by OTHERS choice, whether during employment or enjoying a meal out or drink at a bar is another matter. It is a public health issue, just as it would be if someone was polluting our drinking water yet maintained they had a "right" to do so. "
GOD_HIMSELF wrote on Jul 2, 2008 5:48 AM:
" i'm starting a petition to force the health department to release the names of the establishments poisoning our lungs. they must be shut down at once or stop letting smokers pollute the air. i'm requesting all citizens of this fine city to boycott ALL restaurants and bars till we get some answers. smoking needs to be outlawed at once! we must stop the senseless deaths and pain caused by cigarettes immediately! do the right thing wisconsin, lead the charge, ban smoking anywhere, anytime. "
Athenry wrote on Jul 1, 2008 11:59 PM:
" Wow, how much was wasted to conduct this study? Noting surprising in the report. But, I wonder, with the camping season in full swing, what is the comparable level of airbourne polutants released, and centered, around the typical campfire? What's next? A study to indicate that loud motorcycle exhausts are actually damaging to hearing? "
Advertisement
