|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
It's a joke, you know the one about the girl scout burning down the church. It's an oldy but a goody. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
See, now THAT is a form of public humiliation I can get on board with...  Problem is, you're so used to it that it's not humiliating any more... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I'd say I'm just not as thin-skinned and as overly sensitive as you. I find it funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Yea, that must be it... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Yea, that must be it...
I think you do need your colon cleansed. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,248 |
Most commy arsonists I know are all blocked up too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Quote:
Do you mean places like in the cab of a truck, when the driver is the only one in it??? Yep that nasty truck driver all alone in his rig for 8, 10, 12 hours a day, who is not allowed to smoke all alone in the rig.
Is the law perfect? Well .. show me a perfect law.
I would say that if the truck driver isn't also the owner of the vehicle, then no sunsequent driver should have to be subjected to the smell just because they want to make a living.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yea, that must be it...
I think you do need your colon cleansed.
Yea, a lot of your old posts are backed up in there.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
I think they should outlaw public restrooms so I'm not subjected to the odors of others. Yes, I like it...let's pass this law.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
I doubt that law would pass a vote of the people .... but feel free to get together enough signatures to get it on the ballot.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
I'm serious...some you guys are being way too sensitive lately. I wonder if there's a full moon....nope, just checked...we are between the new moon and first quarter moon. I have no clue what is happening around here. 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836
Steeler
|
|
Steeler
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,836 |
Quote:
Quote:
Yea, that must be it...
I think you do need your colon cleansed.
OMG, this is the funniest thing I ever read....my stomach is hurting from laughing so hard... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Quote:
I doubt that law would pass a vote of the people .... but feel free to get together enough signatures to get it on the ballot.
The problem with ballot initiatives (such as Ohio's smoking law) is that they are a result of "direct democracy", which is when 2 wolves and 1 sheep vote about what's for dinner. America is supposed to be a "Representative Republic", which depends on (or should I say "used to depend on") on the Constitution, an informed, elected Legislature, as well as an elected Executive branch to enact law.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Actually, I think it's more about the 75% or so (probably more) of the population that are non-smokers not wanting to be polluted by the other 25% (probably even less) that do smoke.
When I smoked, I became somewhat indignant about restaurants that went exclusively non-smoking ..... but relented when I thought about it a bit more. Was it really that much of an inconvenience to step outside? Not really.
With the new law, many restaurants and bars have out up semi protected "patios" ...... which is a lot nicer than just standing out in the rain or snow. (as I did for many, many years)
If this were a constitutional issue, about basic constitutional rights, then there would be constitutional recourse through the courts. This isn't a "rights" issue. It is a behaviors issue. There have always been citizens' initiatives about issues deemed important enough by the citizenry, but not acted upon by the peoples' representative for any number of reasons ...... and usually quite a few special interest dollars. Big money was aligned against the smoking issue ..... but, in the end, the people decided.
Or are you suggesting that the citizens of this country can only act through their elected representatives, even if they feel that those representatives may be compromised on a certain, specific issue?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,740
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,740 |
Quote:
I wonder if there's a full moon..
There was at my house 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
The issue is the individual property rights of the owner of the establishment, not the smoking preferences of their patrons. The free market could have, and would have, solved this. The opinion of the 75% should not be allowed to trump the individual rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. "The greatest good for the greatest number" is really more from the Marx handbook than that of Thomas Jefferson. If "majority rules" had guided us instead of the Constitution, there would still be slavery, women would not have a vote, and all of Europe would be speaking German - because the majority at the time favored slavery, opposed Women's suffrage, and opposed our entry into WWII.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644 |
Quote:
Why would you BLAME them? Are they less of a citizen than the moderates because their views are more extreme one way or the other? Do they not deserve to have legislation brought because they aren't "moderates"? Perhaps they don't deserve legislation brought because they just arrive at their opinions differently than the moderates, thus making their opinions less worthy....
Blame "them"? No, more the actual "law makers" who cater to them. The Religious Right is no more than a "lobbyist group" who panders their loyalty to anyone who will "invoke their version of morality upon an entire society".
Quote:
Peoples religous views should have everything to do with the way they vote... if they seriously believe in their religion. I would assume that those who do not believe in a religion allow that to influence their voting... so why can't I? If you believe strongly in a religion, then it is what you are about, it affects your every decision... but people are supposed to forget about that when they go in the voting booth? I don't.
Their Religious beliefs should dictate "how they live their own life", not inflicting their beliefs on others. You see, many of them need to "clean up their own back yard" before they begin dictating to others. But I'm sure they will fully understand that at some point in the future.
Once you FORCE YOUR MORALITY on the masses, it's more of a "Religious State" than a democracy. Much like in Roman times when Religion ruled nations, not govornments.
But everything goes full cycle eventually. And I think the page is about to turn. If not? Soon, mandatory Sunday School will be legislated for all children as part of their educational "requirements".
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
However ...... one could argue that any activity "should" be allowed on private property using your standard. Gambling? Bring it on. Prostitution? Absolutely. Drug sales? Well ... it's up to the property owner and those who frequent his business. After all ... the public will decide whether or not to go there.
The majority almost always rules. Protecting the rights of the majority does not mean subverting the rights of the majority in order to do so, unless there is a constitutional rights issue at the heart of it.
Smoking is not a constitutional right.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Gambling, prostitution, and drugs are illegal by statute. I keep trying to make the point that smoking is not the issue, but rather the the rights of the owner of an establishment to allow a legal behavior on his own property.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Quote:
Gambling, prostitution, and drugs are illegal by statute. I keep trying to make the point that smoking is not the issue, but rather the the rights of the owner of an establishment to allow a legal behavior on his own property.
Technically, gambling and drugs are legal under certain circumstances.
Ohio has a concealed carry law ...... but if you carry into a liquer establishment you can still be found guilty of a felony and thrown in jail.
Those who choose to smoke may still do so .... just not inside a public enclosed place.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644 |
Quote:
However ...... one could argue that any activity "should" be allowed on private property using your standard. Gambling? Bring it on. Prostitution? Absolutely. Drug sales? Well ... it's up to the property owner and those who frequent his business. After all ... the public will decide whether or not to go there.
You're finaly catching on!
Do you have ANY clue how many HUNDREDS of billions of dollars have been spendt fighting prohabition, prostitution, drugs and all these "morality issues"????
And guess what? To date, all those hundreds of billions have solved nothing, nada, zero.
Quote:
Smoking is not a constitutional right.
But it IS "legal". And all you're doing is "creating crimes,adding laws" and making it yet a bigger "nanny state" Funny how some complain about "wanting smaller government". Yet they will ALWAYS be willing to make it BIGGER if it suits their agenda.
Human nature is a strange thing to view if you just sit back and watch it for a while.....................
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644 |
Quote:
Those who choose to smoke may still do so .... just not inside a public enclosed place.
Just like smoking pot, many of us "do it anyway"!
I do know of a few places that "sneak" past the smoking laws. They get my business.
You can change the laws, you just can't force people to abide by them. See my post above for examples.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Then why have laws that are "restrictive" of any behavior at all?
Laws exist to protect the interests of society. There is a HUGE difference between the people establishing a law that restricts an activity that might be harmful to others, and an activity is NOT the societal norm, as opposed to creating a "nanny state". Our entire legal systen defines certain behaviors as unacceptable to society. This is just one other unacceptable behavior. It's legal .... just not when you subject it to others in a public forum. Much like alcohol is legal ...... but certain otherwise legal activities are not legal while under the influence. (like DUI)
We restrict the purchase of cigarettes to those 18 or older .... yet for years allowed these same "protected" minors to inhale this smoke as part of their jobs in restaurants and other service positions. Sure we can say "well, let them go get jobs somewhere else" ..... but most of the kids who take these jobs aren't sophisticated enough yet to understand their employment possibilities. The same goes for kids who have worked in stors that allowed smoking ... service facilities ..... and so on. Now, we could legislate that no children under the age of 18 be allowed to work in such an environment ..... but that would really hurt those businesses, and would also lead to a dramatic drop in employment possibilities for those under the age of 18. Seems like quite a price to pay to accomodate the (less that, and probably MUCH less than) 25% of the population who smoke.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
Quote:
We restrict the purchase of cigarettes to those 18 or older .... yet for years allowed these same "protected" minors to inhale this smoke as part of their jobs in restaurants and other service positions. Sure we can say "well, let them go get jobs somewhere else" ..... but most of the kids who take these jobs aren't sophisticated enough yet to understand their employment possibilities. The same goes for kids who have worked in stors that allowed smoking ... service facilities ..... and so on. Now, we could legislate that no children under the age of 18 be allowed to work in such an environment ..... but that would really hurt those businesses, and would also lead to a dramatic drop in employment possibilities for those under the age of 18.
So basically you're telling me ... it's for the children? After all, if it saves just one life ...
Beam me up, Y-town is channeling the Clintons.
Quote:
Seems like quite a price to pay to accomodate the (less that, and probably MUCH less than) 25% of the population who smoke.
The loss of individual property rights is a very steep price to pay to insure smoke-free teen employment, or your perceived right to go home from a bar not smelling like cigarette smoke.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Those under 18 do not work in bars.  Here's the thing...I'm a smoker. I have no problems with not smoking in restaurants. As a matter of fact, before this law was passed, I would often choose the non-smoking section instead of the smoking section. I don't like the smell of smoke when I'm eating and I certainly don't like blowing my smoke on others whilst they eat. But, it should still, IMO, be up to the owner of the restaurant to decide if they want to allow smoking. I find the bar smoking ban completely stupid and know for a fact that many are losing money over this. Some have even closed. The issue is, ADULTS should be able to decide what LEGAL activity they partake of in a bar. Drinking, swearing, SMOKING. All legal.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,164
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,164 |
Quote:
Those under 18 do not work in bars.
Here's the thing...I'm a smoker. I have no problems with not smoking in restaurants. As a matter of fact, before this law was passed, I would often choose the non-smoking section instead of the smoking section. I don't like the smell of smoke when I'm eating and I certainly don't like blowing my smoke on others whilst they eat. But, it should still, IMO, be up to the owner of the restaurant to decide if they want to allow smoking.
I find the bar smoking ban completely stupid and know for a fact that many are losing money over this. Some have even closed. The issue is, ADULTS should be able to decide what LEGAL activity they partake of in a bar. Drinking, swearing, SMOKING. All legal.
Well said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
It's funny that you would see bars losing business ..... because largely, at least the bars near my house, all appear to have increased business. If their business isn't up ..... then lots of people are just using their parking lots (as well as using other nearby lots after those businesses close for the day)
I have talked to 2 bar owners I know, and they have said that business is largely unaffected. Because it is statewide, smokers just accept that they have to step outside, and no one really complains. (OK ... a couple ... but nowhere near all, or even most) I even have a few smoker friends who have remarked how they notice a difference in the way their clothes smell after leaving a bar.
If i still smoked today, I think that I could manage to take it outside.
For those who want to rail against "big government", and complain how "government is taking away our rights" ..... bull. This is a local issue, decided by local voters. It's not some nefarious government coming down on the citizens. It is the citizens exercising their right to petition and vote, and given that this isn't a Constitutional issue, it is now established law for the State of Ohio.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,164
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,164 |
It's the citizens giving the government control of their lives. It's not going to stop with the smoking ban. It's the slippery slope people have been talking about this entire thread. The swearing ban that started this thread is an example that things will get worse. I am sorry that you can't see the path were going down. I hope not smelling like smoke when you come was worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Ah baloney.
I can't walk into a bar and pee on the floor. Why not? I mean ... there's probably no health risk involved with walking through pee with your shoes on ..... and as long as you take your shoes off when you get home you can probably keep the smell out of your house. Of course ..... you might get some on your pant legs .... I mean ... pee is a liquid .... and liquids do travel ....... but again ... probably nothing really harmful. Just take a shower when you get home to make sure there's none left on you.
Isn't it a slippery slope to forbid people from using the floor as a bathroom? Not the same thing? perhaps not ..... but i don't use your floor as a bathroom .... and all the voters of Ohio asked is that our lungs aren't used as your ashtray.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
And (probably) my last word on the subject ... though I do reserve the right to make a new decision later People set this smoking issue up as some incredibly horrific example of rights being eroded ...... yet this was a state vote, and a state issue. This wasn't a decision handed down from afar forcing legal abortions on demand on a local populace who might disagree with that issue .... or telling people to take down Christmas displays ...... or to get God the heck out of all aspects of public life ...... or any number of federally mandated issues that have overruled local decisions throughout the years. Setting this up as some example of "rights" being taken away is akin to the Biblical seeing a speck in your neighbors eye while ignoring the board in your own.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,740
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,740 |
Quote:
It's funny that you would see bars losing business
Bar owners in this area are all crying about losing business. Everybody is heading to PA, or to WV to smoke, and to go out to eat. Their business has doubled right across the state line in WV. My wife and I use to go out to eat once a week. Now we go out once a MONTH, and we go to PA or WV.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
For those who want to rail against "big government", and complain how "government is taking away our rights" ..... bull. This is a local issue, decided by local voters. It's not some nefarious government coming down on the citizens. It is the citizens exercising their right to petition and vote, and given that this isn't a Constitutional issue, it is now established law for the State of Ohio.
This would be true if the law stated that if a bar owner chose to ban smoking in their establishment, then local agents would enforce it.
Also, 'big government' or 'Big Brother' never has and never will be something that is 'nefarious'...it will ALWAYS be something that the people or voters willingly allow. ALWAYS. Only when it's too late do the people realize they're screwed and powerless.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 78,644 |
Quote:
Then why have laws that are "restrictive" of any behavior at all?
To "create criminals". Nothing more than a "money pit" for law enforcement. Nothing is solved by them. Prostitution is rampant in every major city. Kept hush hush in smaller communities, but still goes on. Same with drugs. Over 400 BILLION dollars has been spendt on the "war on drugs", yet drugs are even MORE previlant on the streets today than ever before. However, it's a giant part of the money law enforcements gets. But why? Grown adults shouldn't have a choice as to what they do or don't put into their bodies? They can't have concentual sex simmply because our government decides it's "suddenly illegal" if money is involved? Why?
Quote:
Laws exist to protect the interests of society. There is a HUGE difference between the people establishing a law that restricts an activity that might be harmful to others, and an activity is NOT the societal norm, as opposed to creating a "nanny state".
So millions upon millions of people smoke weed EVERY DAY even though it's illegal. And exactly who does that "protect" again? And when a man decides to "compensate" a woman for sex, which also goes on millions of times daily in our nation, who is exactly is that "protecting" again? Making a county "dry" only causes someone to go into the next county to buy their beer. They still get it and drink it in their own county. So exactly who is that "protecting" again?
Quote:
Our entire legal systen defines certain behaviors as unacceptable to society. This is just one other unacceptable behavior. It's legal .... just not when you subject it to others in a public forum. Much like alcohol is legal ...... but certain otherwise legal activities are not legal while under the influence. (like DUI)
In the instance of DUI's, you are 100% correct. But now you're switching directions. I've NEVER said you have the right to "risk the safety of others by your actions". My point is that many laws protect no one! They simply limit choices and freedoms of people. I don't permit my freedoms to be limited. If I buy a firearm, I buy it from a "private owner" not a gun dealer. In the state of Ohio, if one individual buys a gun from another individual who IS NOT a gun dealer, no paperwork is required. So I'm "using the laws in place" to my advantage. When I want to smoke a joint, I do it at home. Who is it that needs "protection" from me doing that again?
Between one third to one half of our prison system is filled with drug offenders. While rapists, murderers, child molesters and others are getting "early releases" due to prison overcrowding, the guys I have bought drugs from in my youth are taking up cells there. Doesn't that make you feel SO MUCH safer!???
Quote:
We restrict the purchase of cigarettes to those 18 or older .... yet for years allowed these same "protected" minors to inhale this smoke as part of their jobs in restaurants and other service positions. Sure we can say "well, let them go get jobs somewhere else" ..... but most of the kids who take these jobs aren't sophisticated enough yet to understand their employment possibilities. The same goes for kids who have worked in stors that allowed smoking ... service facilities ..... and so on. Now, we could legislate that no children under the age of 18 be allowed to work in such an environment ..... but that would really hurt those businesses, and would also lead to a dramatic drop in employment possibilities for those under the age of 18. Seems like quite a price to pay to accomodate the (less that, and probably MUCH less than) 25% of the population who smoke.
I do see a need for "an age of maturity" to be set. But here, yet again, our government sets a "double standard". Let me give you an example...................
"Well son, you're eighteen now. Now you do know that anything you do, you are considered an adult. You are, by societies standards, old enough to go to prison for your actions. You are old enough and mature enough to be armed and equipped to be taught to kill. To be sent to a foreign land and witness killing, see dead bodies scattered everywhere, to see the carnage this creates in other lands. You will have the latest and greatest technology in weaponry that we have to offer."
"Oh, BTW son, you're not old enough to buy beer or a pistol in your own country though. I know it's kind of confusing and trickey son, but try to keep up".
It's pretty simple really. You are making excuses to take away the rights of "property owners". You wish to use unproven science to take away the rights for EVERYONE in this situation to "choose". You own the property? You should have the right to "choose". You don't like the owners choices? You have the right to "choose" to go elsewhere.
Under your scenario, you wish to legislate morality at the expence of limiting personal freedoms. That's damned near "un-American" in my book. At least according to the Constitution of The United States.
Which in my world, is pretty much the bottom line. I don't permit laws contrary to that document dictate my life.
JMHO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Nice post.
I see police officers as a pathetic group of fundraisers. I've never felt that a police officer has protected, or served anyone.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
It's funny that you would see bars losing business .....
It's what I've been TOLD by the owners. One said that for the first time that sales taxes were due after the ban took effect he paid $30k LESS. That's just sales tax. (Not sure if that's quarterly or for the half.)
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
I do see them losing business. I have observed it in number of patrons as well as in actual figures as you have cited.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Over half the country is now smoke free, in every public place. From all of the doom and gloom I heard from people who know people .... bars should be closing all over the place. I haven't seen any close their doors in my general area ...... and when I drove an employee home last night, I got to see some of the bars I usually don't get to see. There is a bar on Market St that attracts a younger crowd. Packed, and out the door at 12:45 am. There is a bar on Midlothian .... that I can't quite figure out. (They are advertising a drag king revue ...... and I have no clue ....) but they had cars completely out to Midlothian. This was an old Big Lots building, with a huge parking lot. Another bar on Midlothian. Younger crowd. Lined out the door. I went down Youngstown Poland Rd, There are a couple of decent sized bars ..... never packed, but never empty either. One had a packed parking lot, and one was about 1/2 full. (which has been the norm for them as far back as I can recall) I wonder how many bars have closed since the smoking ban took effect ..... and of those, how many were just poor business decisions to start with? Anyway ..... for those who want to escape the smoking ban .... here's a list to help. http://www.restaurant.org/government/state/docs/SmokingRegulations_Jan08.pdf32 states have a smoking ban in all public places: AR, AZ, CA, CO*, CT, DE, FL, GA**, HI, ID, IL, LA*, MA, MD***, ME, MN, MT, ND, NH, NJ*, NM, NV*, NY, OH, OK, OR**, RI, SD, TN, UT, VT, WA 10 states have restrictions on smoking in public places: AK, AL, IA, KS, MI, MO, NE, PA, VA, WI ■ 8 states have no smoking ban or restrictions: IN, KY, MS, NC, SC, TX, WV, WY * Casinos are exempt from the ban ** Allows for smoking if the establishment is inaccessible to minors *** Smoking ban becomes effective on February 1, 2008
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,824 |
Oh .. and for those who "escape" to PA ........ http://www.sungazette.com/page/content.detail/id/503303.htmlSome area lawmakers are certain 2008 will bring a statewide smoking ban. The key to passing legislation will be reaching some kind of compromise between the House and the Senate, which favors a less restrictive law. “I am very confident we are going to see a smoking ban passed in Pennsylvania in 2008,” state Rep. Matthew E. Baker, R-Wellsboro, said. Baker, noting the harmful effects of second-hand smoke on people who visit and work in establishments that allow smoking, is among those who favor a very restrictive law. “I have had personal family members die of cancer. I have seen the devastation that smoking can cause.” Baker said most lawmakers seem to favor some type of smoking ban, and working out all the wrinkles is the challenge. State Rep. Garth Everett, R-Muncy, agreed. He, too, favors a restrictive law that bans smoking in private clubs as well as restaurants and other commercial establishments. “Like anything else, it seems very simple that smoking should be banned in public places,” he said. But, exemptions that may not previously have been considered can muddy the waters. He referred, for example, to walk-in businesses such as accountant or lawyer offices, including ones that are extensions of a home. Do some oppose a smoking ban simply because it amounts to government intervention? “I do hear that, but it’s in the extreme minority,” Baker said. “There’s always a minority sentiment regarding the personal freedom argument.” Everett added that it will be difficult in many cases to enforce a smoking ban. State police, he said, will have better things to do than respond to reports of people lighting up cigarettes in rural bar rooms. Like Baker, Everett said he’s certain a statewide smoking ban, in some form, will pass next year. The legislation is in a conference committee where it awaits consideration by lawmakers. “I believe it is going to come out of that conference committee. It will probably happen pretty early,” Everett said. Health organizations including the American Cancer Society are pushing for the legislation, he noted. “Seventy-two percent of people in my district who I polled support a smoking ban of some type,” Baker said. “The Restaurant Association of Pennsylvania even supports it. They actually do not support the exemptions.” Baker said the prospect of second-hand smoke, which studies have shown poses health risks, affects not only customers of establishments, but the workers employed in those places. “Workers and customers and everyone alike is exposed to second-hand smoke. Given the amount of carcinogens and contaminants, it’s clear that it’s cancer causing. When you look at raw data and what smoking does to you. It doesn’t just kill; it disables people.” State Sen. Roger Madigan, R-Towanda, and state Rep. Mike Hanna, D-Lock Haven, could not be reached for comment.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,577 |
Quite a few places that I've seen are making beer gardens and enclosed patios for smokers. In some cases, some of them are pretty snazzy. It used to take me about 5 - 7 mins or so to smoke a cig. I'm not sure I see the overwhelming burden in having the smokers step outside for 5 mins, surely they won't get frostbite in 5.. I'd as soon as limit the cancer to the smokers.
SaintDawg™
Football, baseball, basketball, wine, women, walleye
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum But if I go outside, I might
offend the smokers
|
|
