Smoking issue all about ability to make choices

" The irrefutable,scientific,evidence is in. cigarette smoke is a poisonus carcinogen. I am for a total ban on indoor smoking in all public places,no exceptions.If you need to smoke,take it outside.! "

" Lets a follow this posters advice and boycot smoke filled restaurants! Non-smokers can hit the restaurant owners where it hurts - their wallets. In cities across the nation some establishments have self-imposed non-smoking rules


"

" If you want a non somking bar, then post it. Only problem is how they will tax the smoking bars?. It has to
be a fair decision either way. It seems the only way to leave its up to the business. It's just common sense. "

" Al Smith brings an interesting compromise. Allow smoking only in places where 1) Alcoholic beverages are served and 2) when minors are not permitted entry (some bars allow minors before certain times).

I fully agree that those with a habit, should not force others to participate in their habit. When I drink coffee at a restaurant, everyone at the table is not required to drink my coffee. When I have a beer, there is not requirement for everyone else to share my beer. When I decide to eat a nice think fatty chunk of prime rib, everyoen else can choose ot eat what they want. But when someone smokes, I am forced to either not enter the establishment or share their cigarette with them.

Why are some smokers so selfish about this issue. Banning cigarettes altogether is the simpleist and most logical solution, but I agree that would be going too far. The compromise is to ban it from indoor public places so not everyone is forced to share a smokers drug habit.

I'm not perfect myself. I have several habits. I exercise habitually, but I don't rub it in the face of those who don't. I consume caffine, but I don't need to take a coffee break 2 or 3 times a day. I ride motorcycles, but I always wear a helmet, jacket, boots and gloves, carry full insurance, have a quiet stock exhaust system and with a few exceptions, I ride within 5-10mph of the posted speed limit mainly to keep up with the flow of traffic and remain conspicuous.

If someone said motorcycles should not be operated between 10PM and 7AM because of noise (I hate loud motorcycles too). I'd disagree and say that a sound limit should be proposed, not a complete ban.. although EPA limits on noise alreay exist, but are not enforced. If they said motorcycles are too dangerous and cause an unfair health insurance burden on non-riders, then I'd reccomend mandatory helmet use, stricter rider licensing, reasonable HP limits, and be willing to increase my premium for medical insurance coverage to fairly reflect the statistical increase in risk.

Rational and mature adults listen to both sides and look for a fair compromise. "

" Funny, we don't hear much press about this. 'Smoke Free Illinois' has failed it's first court case where a bartender was cited for allowing smoking in the establishment. Why isn't this headline splashed across all papers like it was when the law was passed?

http://www.pjstar.com/stories/031908/REG_BG3IPNK3.033.php "

" As surprising as it may be to many people, there is no such thing as a "right to smoke." Smoking is a self-destructive, addiction based behavior. There is no Constitutional right to smoke. Smokers certainly do have a Constitutional right to complain about smoking restrictions, but they don’t have a “right“ to smoke.

Read the Constitution; smoking isn’t mentioned. Neither is the much-vaunted “freedom of choice,” by the way. Look it up. You are guaranteed freedom of speech, along with many other rights, but there is no Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of choice. Neither is there a Constitutionally guaranteed right to smoke..

It is quite understandable that smokers would believe that they are being discriminated against when smoking bans are enacted. People who are addicted to any drug react negatively when the opportunity to indulge in their drug of choice is restricted. I would probably react the same way if someone tried to prohibit me from indulging in caffeine.

There is a huge difference between my caffeine consumption and a nicotine addict’s smoking, however. I can sit and drink my Diet Coke any place where beverages are allowed without harming a single soul. A smoker who indulges in his or her drug habit, on the other hand, is a danger to anyone unfortunate enough to find themselves downwind of that person’s toxic cloud. This is especially true for young children and people of any age who suffer from chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma.

I agree that there should probably be places where the small minority that smokes should be permitted to gather and poison their own lungs. Bars and casinos are reasonable candidates.

Smoking should absolutely be banned, however, from public place where children are permitted to be present. Sounds like a reasonable compromise to me.
"

"

I read all the comments about our elected officials and going outside to smoke .First I would like to say our elected officials swear an oath to support the constitution .But how many of them pass laws that violate it all the time .We are to have the freedom to do what we want as long as it doesnt infringe on the rights of others.I might not mind if our officials respected our liberties .With me its not as much the smoking as the right to smoke if I want too .Just as some of these people are already talking about people in cities smoking out side bothered them .Farmers not being able to smoke in their fields .I read about people not being allowed top smoke on the beach. Just as with all our rights and freedoms have been steadily eaten away by government .This is just the start and before you know it they will be putting you in jail or prison for smoking cigarettes We have the (freedom of choice) it is the owner of the properties right to choose what he wants to do in his buisness that he ownes and pays the taxes on ,no one elses .Government has alredy enslaved us by taking our wages with out us having a choice .Controlling what we can put in our bodies with out us having a choice .Now controlling what we can do with our property with out us having a choice .Slavery >to be controlled by an outside force Slavery is just illegal for private persons now as we have all been committed to slaves by government .If we refuse we are imprisoned to to be enslaved to a greater extent .(Land of the free) Something is terribly wrong .Look at our prisons "

" So, just to check things out, I went down to our local bars Saturday night to see if the majority of the customers were smokers or nonsmokers. To my surprise---the MAJORITY of the customers were smokers. I even started a conversation in several bars asking people how they felt about the new upcoming smoking ban. The non-smokers and the smokers agreed that it should be up to the business owners! I agree that there should be smokefree bars and regular bars but that the choice should be up to the owners. By the way, NO I do not drink so my opinion is not based on a drunken state. LOL "

" When smoking is related to serious health issues, can smokers put the greater good ahead of themselves? In enclosed environments, isn't smoking a selfish choice? Can't someone go one hour without a cigarette when visiting a restaurant. We nonsmokers have put up with smoke-filled restaurants for many, many more years than smokers now feeling the pinch. There are local restaurants that have two non-smoking tables and 30 smoking tables all in the same room. Lets vote for a cleaner indoor environment. Smokers can smoke in their cars and homes. "

" Because some people are taking advantage of the smoking law and not paying their bills, we should abandon the law. Thsoe watresses that don't feel safe are free to change jobs or quit smoking. My mother can;t stop breathing and should be allowed to FREELY go to any restaurant she wants.

I decided to start stealing gas because I can't afford my speeding tickets. Let's lift speeding laws.

Almost 100 years ago someone might have said....
My family owns a farrier business, these mecahnized tractors and automobile inventions have hurt our business, all motorrized vehciles should be outlawed.
-or-
My family owns a candlemaking shop. This electricity invention has killed our business, I propose we ban electricity.


I once had a girlfriend that didn't like going through the self check-out lines at Walmart because it took away the job of a cashier. I told her computers put millions of people out of work, but allows average salaries in the US to grow. We wouldn;t consider banning computers becase draftsmen and file clerks were now more effecient at their jobs. We didn't last long, I couldn't date someone that ignorrant. "

" I've said it before on here: IL casinos have reported a 17% decrease in profits since the smoking ban took effect in January. Also, as a small sampling, businesses in Carbondale, IL have reported a marked increase in "dash-n-dines" from people just stepping out to have a smoke and not returning, waitresses are having to take breaks in groups to feel safe when they're forced to go outside at night for smoke breaks, patrons are having their tables cleared before they're done eating because they were just outside smoking. These are just a few of the things that no one thinks about when cheering for more of this legislated morality.
To the woman with a mother who has asthma, I feel bad for you but should we tailor all of our laws to suit her needs? This is all about choice. If people are so passionate about wanting a smoke-free environment they should lobby their favorite eating/drinkning establishment to go smoke-free. This is the American way to do things. You think Hy-Vee just went smoke-free cause it was a nice thing to do? No, they received enough complaints and realized they needed to do this to keep the majority of their customers happy. So vote with your wallets, support an establishment that suits your needs, and boycott those that don't. Just LEAVE YOUR LAWS OFF MY CHOICES. "

" So let me get this straight, what some smokers are trying to say is that if you can't tolerate smoke, due to health reasons, don't go inside.

So if I'm disabled and can't walk up stairs, instead of requiring a business to build a ramp, I should just turn around and go home? That's the same thing as saying that a non-smoker with a sensitive reperatory system should simply go home instead of being FREE (we love that word don't we) to enjoy a meal where they choose.

Fine, I won't disagree that the government exagerates the health risks to prove their point. But fo a less than scientific test, lets take a 30 year old non-smoker and a 30 year old smoker of similar size and both are out of shape. Lets have both of them start running up a set of stairs until they are coughing so hard they cannot continue. Being out of shape, both will struggle with this contest. Which do you think will stop first? What would this say about hte health issues related to cigarette use compared to other substances such as caffine, alcohol, and chewing tobacco.

My mother has asthma and is sensitive to cigarette smoke. She cannot enter any bar, and many restaurants without having the risk of going to the hospital because her airway has closed. She does not have thsi reaction from car exhaust, dust, polloen or other allergens. Only strong chemical odors or smoke. A colleague at work has a wife with the same problem.

Gasoline engines do not emit particulates, if they are a 6000lb SUV, or a 2500lb compact car. Smokers do. Burning leaves does (I also think that practice should be banned inside city limits).

You don't light campfires or burn leaves indoors. That would be rediculous. There are large fume hoods over fryers and open grills in the kitchen areas for a reason. Filling a room with smoke from a grill would be unhealthy. Yet it's tolerates when individuals need their chemical fix.

Perhaps restaurants should allow smoking if large dust hoods are mounted over the designated smoking tables. Seriously, that would be good enough to satisfy me. This is how OSHA handles other hazardous chemicals in workplaces such as labs.

Even smoking outside can be a problem. I visited NYC several years ago. On a busy street, you might see 1 in 10 or even just 1 in 20 people smoking. Due to the number of people on the street, you constantly had somebody wihtin 10-15 feet of you smoking. It was one of the many reasons that I decided not to consider living there after college. "

" Paula,

Take a moment to read what you wrote. "Well, if you know there are smokers in there, you have the choice not to go in."

Non smokers aren't the ones causing the health issue, right? This law needs to be passed, and soon. Whenever I come back to Keokuk, I cringe when I have to go somewhere to eat, and there's people lighting up all over the place. I shouldn't have to worry about fresh air while trying to enjoy a meal. "

" O.K. Let's put this to bed, #1 several years ago the United States Government sued the tabacco companies for$100's of
BILLIONS, that money was used for everything from schools to roads to pork barrel spending. Only %1.1 was used for smoker sessation programs. Even though th U.S. Govornment concluded that tabacco company's manipulated the content of tabacco in order to increase addiction. Why would the government NOT want us to quit smoking you ask? #2 Because smokers paid $2.3 billion in taxes last year that nosmokers didn't pay. #3 The "fact" of second hand smoke is a falacy. Any study in order to be deemed efficient requires "%2.5 of any population to abtain a specific out come of %95 of participants,(United State Sergion General), however when the scond hand smoke testing was done they lowered the standards to %1.5 of %85 of participants. 20 times more strict than the testing used to determine if Sacarin was cancerous!!! And finally #4, as people complain about my second hand smoke and I dutifully step16 feet away from the entrance to have my smoke, I watch them cruise away in thier SUV and ingest thier exhaust with my niccotine, I wonder...should we have an exhaust tax too??? "

" I think one thing no one has touched upon is that SMOKERS paid $2.3 BILLION in taxes last year that non-smokers didn't pay. Apparently I have allready paid for my health care problems of the future. Besides most people complain about second hand smoke, then go jump in thier SUV and cruise away....what choice do I have but to breathe those emitions....hmmmm "

" Check out these websites for sources of data showing hte positive economic impact of smoking bans in workplaces including restaurants and bars.

For
http://www.tcsg.org/sfelp/economic.htm

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/newsroom/200603/20060320-nr_SmokingBanStudy.asp

Against
http://www.forces.org/writers/kjono/files/economic_impact.htm

http://www.tlw.org/public/content/Documents/Smoking%20Ban/MN_Smoking_Ban.pdf


There's acutally more articles to be found against smoking bans. Although I think this blog proves that those against the smoking ban are more passionate about lossing a privledge they currently enjoy. I have trouble seeing smoking as a right. Clean drinking water is a right. Breathing clean air is a right. Safe food to eat is a right.

Look a prohabition in the 1920's. Although there was marked increase in organized crime in hte cities. Data supports that the primary goal to reduce domestic violence was sucessful outside the sities. There were fewer drunken husbands beating their wives. Although many breweries and alcohol manufacturers went out of business, the stronger ones survived and moved on. Bars and resturants that cater more to smokers or are mor efrequented by smokers may see a decline in revenues. I challenge that any business that failed due to the smoking ban was marginal already, or wasn't flexible enough to ride out the initial drop in revenues or attach a new mix of patrons.

Should we feel bad for Tobacco companies since revnues of cigraettes continues ot decrease? No, those companies have smart executives. they started diversifying ot other industries over 20 years ago. They knew there was an inevitable decline, so they moved on to other markets.

Like most arguments, you're not going to convince the other side to change their minds. I'm sorry if some small businesses close due ot lost revenue from smokers. But who's fault is that? The smokers could choose to continue ot support the establishment that they act so loyal to. If they had true conviction and sympathy, they would help patronize bars to support them after the ban, rather than sulk like a spoiled child.

If I had a bar in Koekuk, I would be making plans to build a covered outdoor smoking area 15' from the entrance now before the ban takes effect. Some restaurant owners in staes that passes smoking bans reported that they had difficulty obtaining the required zoning changes or building permits to build a covered area after the bans.

As a concession, the legislature, in conjunction with existing small business programs might consider making matching funds available for bar and restaurant owners to build covered outdoor areas for the purpose of accomidating smokers..

Ultimately nobody is going to change the opinions of either side. People do not like ot be told what they can or cannot do, but ultimately in poltics, public opinion and the majority rules. 75%+ are non-smokers, so while many have been accomidating in tolerating smoke for years, the time has come to do the right thing for employees and patrons in all public places. "

" You know what SUCKS about all these smoking laws, etc? The study that linked second hand smoke was thrown out!!! look it up. The anti-tobacco group conducting the health study skewed the numbers because they didn't get the results they had hoped. Three separate independent research teams found the study to be biased. I myself have always been a polite smoker, realizing that it does bother some people. But I'm sick and tired of our government telling me what I can and cannot do. George Orwell had it right. Big Brother is watching, and he's a menace "

" Won't hurt business ,I've explained my side of the issue on several occasions.You,nor anyone else has answered my questions.I'm done debating the issues.You people are DEAD WRONG and you know it.All you want to do is treat smokers like second class citizens.I hope the government doesn't decide to someday outlaw something that is legal that you enjoy doing.It would serve you right if they did,but I'll defend your right to do it because, unlike you folks,I believe in freedom for everybody.. "

" Under the smoking ban, smoking is premitted at a public place, just not within 15 feet of the door. While you cannot sit at the bar and chain smoke, it is permitted to walk outside and get a quick fix.

I got back form dinner at the Warsaw Brewery tonight. Business seemed about the same I remember form last Fall for a week day evening. I ordered 2 beers and enjoyed dinner and a nice conversations. I previously would have only ordered 1 beer, and left much earlier. I didn't need to change my clothes and take a shower when I got home. The group I was with normally meets at a bar in Keokuk.

The hazardous waste anaology made a good example. A individual living in rural area might want to dump toxic chemicals and waste on their property. A company might even pay them to take the waste. It's theri property, why not? Why, because those chemicals will find their way to public water sources and impact the community. Absolute freedom is called anarchy. We live in an organized society with restructions on freedom for the benefit of the majority. The difference between a Nazi dictatorship or Communism, is that we have the ability to elect the oliticians that elect us. You can meet with thsoe politicians, write them letter and otherwise plede your case. In a police controlled state, they simply throw you in jail for disagreeing with the government.

The US was founded on the freedom to GOVERN OURSELVES, not on the freedom to do whatever you desire. Our disagreement was that the colonies were controlled by a Monarchy, Nobility and a Parliment where we had no elected representation. "

" To: Mike Byrne

I appreciate your reasoned opinions. You carry on a good debate.

To reverse your argument, why can't smokers understand that non-smokers want a clean environment in which to eat, drink, etc.?

What does the non-smoker do to infringe on the rights of the non-smoker? Nothing. But what does the smoker do to the non-smoker? Fouls the air with smelly, deadly carcinogens.

Why can't smokers take their habit outside, in the wide open, where it won't foul the quality of indoor air? Many states are requiring it, and you would be surprised how few problems it really has caused. "

" Won't hurt business,I'll concede that just because a person drinks doesn't mean he smokes.However,it's been my experience that one hell of a lot of drinkers do smoke,also.I fully understand and agree that nonsmokers want and need nonsmoking enviroments.Why can't nonsmokers understand and agree that smokers want and need seperate but equal smoking enviroments?Why do they insist that EVERY bar and restruant be smoke free?It doesn't make sense,at least to me,why nonsmokers want to treat smokers as second class citizens.Maybe you or someone else can explain that to me because I'll be damned if I understand the concept.I honestly believe that a person who owns any kind of business has the right to run that business any way that he chooses.If a person chooses to disagree with the way he runs his his business,they have the right to take their business elsewhere.Tell me,why is this an invalid argument,if you can?Pasing a law that will potentially make criminals out of honest,hardworking business people makes absolutly no sense to me.You don't need this law. As I've been saying all along,most smokers will and do respect nonsmokers right to breathe clean air.I know I did when I was a smoker.All I'm saying is that smokers are people, too,they aren't monsters that are going around with murder on the installment plan in their minds.They are your friends and neighbors and maybe your family.Don't make second class citizens out of them. "

" To: Mike Byrne

You make some rather brash statements that simply are not true. You say that non-smokers are non-drinkers. This is not true.

This from WebMD: Americans are drinking alcohol more often, and beer is back on top as the beverage of choice, according to a new Gallup Poll....The poll, conducted July 6-9 among a national sample of 1,007 people aged 18 and older, showed 64% of Americans say they drink alcoholic beverages.


And this from the American Lung Association:
In 2005, an estimated 45.1 million, or 21.0 percent of, adults were current smokers.

So if 60 percent of Americans drink but only 20 percent of Americans smoke, there are a lot of drinking non-smokers.

As someone in the latter category, I would love to be able to go out for a social drink without coming home smelling like an ashtray.
"

" I am so glad I will be able to go where I want and not have to smell nasty smoke from your cigs....now I'll just have to hear you all complain about it every place I go! For all you smokers, better get a head start on kicken the habit or plan on spending lots of time at home. "

" KKS,I wrote all of my posts BEFORE the post by Mr.Smith was posted.He makes some good arguments,but he still doesn't get the point.Business owners should have the right to allow smokers to smoke in their establishments if they want to.This issue is not entirely about the health of nonsmokers.It is also about the state bullying people to behave in a certain way.In an earlier post of mine I pointed out that the government is chipping away at Americans rights.When I first started school back in the 50's,children could and did pray in school.Now they can't pray in school thanks to an athiest that appealed the law all the way to the United States Supreme Court.In the 60's the government decided that they would force the American public to wear seatbelts in their cars.To this day people still scream about this law.In the 70's the federal government blackmailed the states into passing the 55 mph speed limit.They also required that all motorcycle riders to wear a helmut.A few states,Iowa is one,repealed this law.Do you see a pattern here?The government,whether it be local,state or federal wants to control our lives in ways that unnessacary.Most business' already bar smokers from smoking,NO law is needed.Most smokers respect nonsmokers rights not to have to breathe second hand smoke.NO law is needed.A law forcing ALL business' to bar smoking will do nothing but drive certain bussiness' out of business!Those of you that want to spend your money in a smoke free enviorment have plenty of places to choose from,90% or more of restruants DO NOT allow smoking,WHY do you insist that 100% of restruants be smoke free?It makes no sense to me why a person that smokes is treated like a second class citizen.Why do you insist that bars be smoke free?Most of you nonsmokers will not set one foot inside a bar in your life because you are also nondrinkers.How will you like it when the government decides that its your turn to be discrimanated against?Don't laugh.it can and most likely will happen in the near future!America is turning into a socialistic country at very fast pace. "

" If so many bar customers are smokers, do you really think they will stop going to the bar if they can't smoke there? Get serious. It won't stop them from going and it won't hurt the bar's business. "

" My biggest problem with all of this is that several of the smoking establishments locally were opened several years before this new law was even an option. The local bars and alchol serving establishments WILL SUFFER if they have to now discriminate against their current customers that smoke there. Let's be honest here, how many non-smokers honestly frequent these bars as much as they claim too? I worked in a bar for a long time and I can tell you that the MAJORITY of the customers are smokers. If a bar does not sell food then there is NO reason for children to be there and if you don't want to smell smoke in a bar then don't go to the bar. Smokers will stop going to the bar if they can't smoke there. I lived in Florida when this law was passed down there and it was devasting on the bar business. All of the people who claimed that they would frequent bars more often if they didn't allow smoking seldom ever came to the bars and the local bar owners were facing closing down due to NO business. What happens to those business' when the state decides to outlaw drinking in public establishments in the future? That is where this is all heading. If you want to sip tea and be in a smoke-free enviroment then stay out of places where you know smokers will be!! If you want a smoke-free bar then open one!! Why should the current customers of business establishments have to suffer? I am NOT a Smoker so I personally don't go where I know smokers hang out. It is not that hard to do the math! "

" Mike Byrne -

You need to read the post from Al Smith. Business owners have all sorts of regulations that they must adhere to. This is nothing new. There's no law against eating expired meat, but restaurants still aren't allowed to serve it to their customers. There's no law against cockroaches, but if a restaurant is filled with cockroaches, they're going to be fined. There's no law against being naked, but business owners aren't allowed to have naked dancers on their sidewalks. We can't live in a world without regulations. You wouldn't like it. That doesn't mean that we live in a NAZI society. "

" I agree that people have the right to breathe.I agree that smoking is a nasty habit that some people have.I agree that nonsmokers should have places to eat and drink and shop that are smoke free.What I don't agree with is not allowing a business owner to decide if HIS business will be smoke free or not.You smoke NAZIS don't need to have EVERY business to be smoke free.What is wrong with letting business owners decide if HIS business goes smoke free or not?Most business' will go smoke free,but those that prefer not to,should be allowed to make that decision,NOT THE STATE!!The next thing on your agenda is most likely fobidding people to smoke in their cars and homes.You are starting to overstep your bounds.You can't take away peoples freedom of choice and continue to call this the land of the FREE.You smoke NAZIS just can't understand that! "

" We have laws that require restaurants to maintain prescribed levels of cleanliness. If they don’t, they’re shut down – in the interest of public health. We have laws that prohibit people from urinating or defecating on public streets and sidewalks – in the interest of public health. We have laws that prohibit companies from dumping hazardous chemicals into rivers, lakes, and streams – in the interest of public health.

In each case, someone’s liberties have been restricted, but not their rights. Why? Because there’s no such thing as a right to serve tainted food, to urinate or defecate on sidewalks, or to dump chemicals into waterways – just as there’s no such thing as fundamental right to indulge in a toxic addictive drug in a public place.

Each behavior has been tolerated in the past. Each is now prohibited - in the interest of public health. And the time has finally come for the restriction of smoking in public places - in the interest of public health. "

" People have to breath, they don't have to smoke. I could not care less if people smoke - just not around me or where I have to be. If it had no affect on me, it would be fine, but the fact is it makes ones eyes water, their clothes stink and of course we all know the more serious health issues. If smoking is ok, I think that passiing gas should be accepted in public. Nothing better than "lighting one up after a meal", but let's be serious here. Many states have been smoke free in public places for some time now and the bars and restaurants are still full. It is wonderful to be able to walk into a public place, going home and not having to throw your clothes in the garage or hang your coat outside to get rid of the smell. (And of course the burning eyes and other ill affects aren't hard to live without either)

"

" Here is my question to nonsmokers that insidt on having a law passed to end smoking in public places.What gives you the right,via the Iowa legislaters,to tell a person that owns a business what he can and cannot allow in HIS place of business?You smoke NAZIS are overstepping your bounds,you have NO RIGHT to tell a business person that he cannot allow people to smoke in HIS ESTABLISHMENT,NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER.It is HIS business that could fail because of YOUR selfishment.If yo do not want to enter a business that allows smoking,that IS your perogitive,but to force a business to not allow smoking is DEAD WRONG! "

" I think I'm not making my point clear. Let's use and anology:

If I go to a bar but I'm a designated driver, I don;t want to drink any alcohol. However, the positon that some argue would say that when I go to a bar, if other drinkers are drinking beer, then I need to also drink a beer.

When smokers are smoking, I am smoking, they are making their chose for me. When someone else is having a beer, I'm not forced to consume their beer. If someone is chewing tobacco, I don't have to chew with them.

The only argument left is that non smokers that can't tolerate smoke, should simple not patronize those establishments. Please read that sentence 3 or 4 times, and then tell me whose rights are being restricted.

I'm not saying we need to ban chewing tobacco, caffine, alcohol or other legal substances. All of those have health risks at different consumtion levels and are potentially as hazardous as smoking.

But none of those others affect me directly when I'm in an enclosed space or downwind. This is the fundamental difference and the whole point of the ban. We're not banning it because it's unhealthy for the users, we're banning it because it's unhealthy and a nuisance for those around the user that do not wish to smoke. Why is this such a difficult concept to convey to some people? "

" Folks, this is a good law. It's beneficial for everyone. Bar and restaurant patrons, employees, etc. Trust me on this one, it's been that way here in MN for about six months now. You won't believe how much of a difference it makes. Gee, I can go home, take off my clothes and they don't smell like an ashtray. You want to light up? Fine, go outside. "

" And while we are on the subject of offensive odors and the right to be able to breathe,what about my right to breathe when I enter a restruant and sit down in a booth that is five or six booths away from the blue-haired old lady that thinks she needs to pour a five gallon bucket of perfume all over herself before she decides to go out to eat?That old bird is worse than a bar full of cigar smokers.And restruants are full of these old gals,their nostrils have been burnt out for so long that they don't realize that "Aue De Toilet'" does smell like a freakin' toilet.Why don't you go after grandma with the same vengence that you go after smokers?I'll tell you why...you're afraid that grandma might take it personally and smack you upside your head with her cane,that's why!You wouldn't dream of asking her to go outside to stink up the air.You'll just hold your breath and bite your tongue 'cause you don't want to offend the old girl.So the next time you go to the old folks home to pick up granny for a sunday meal with you and the grandkids and she smells like she might have spilled a 55 gallon drum of AueDeToilet',leave her there and dine without her...I want to eat my meal in peace,I'd rather not breathe her stinking perfume! "

" Your right Mike, both sides need to have some rights, but even I, as a none smoker can see that the non smokers have more rights than those who choose to smoke, so why infringe even further on what is left of their rights as you pointed out.

There is no smoking in public buildings, work places, hospitals, stores, fast food joints, airplanes, and many other public places. There are very few indoor places left for smokers to smoke, and yet you want to take that away now. The only place I see for them to smoke after this lastest push, is outside and that is even becoming a issue now.

You try to make this smoking issue sound so innocent and the smokers are to blame for not wanting to work this out. Well I would say they have done their part and now you are not only infringing on their last rights as smokers, the last places they have to smoke without distain and ridicule, but you are also infringing on the rights of private business owners taking their rights away from them concerning their own establishments. Only they have the right to choose if they want their private business they pay for non smoking or smoking.

I don't like drinking and I personally don't want to be around people who are drinking, so I don't go in bars and when possible I choose resturaunts that don't service alcohol, that is my choice and my freedom, or does that mean I have to right to tell you or anyone else that drinks, you should not be allowed in public places either.

No matter how you spin this, it is wrong, not legal and not just, but like so many in power and with the money to control these days think they can spoon feed the masses into slavery or servitude for the better good. Where have I heard that before in history and what is going to be the next better good and the next, next, and next.

That is the scarey part what is next!. "

" This is a pretty heated discussion. Good luck arguing to the end! "

" Smokers can choose to not smoke for 1 hour while they are inside a restaurant, or step outside for 5 minutes to get their fix. Tisi is really an issue of respect. All smokers need to respect the others around them. Just one smoker can "pollute" the air of an entire room. For a single smoker to have their "freedom", others are having their's taken away. We're not banning smoking altogether as some in this country would lik. Non-smokers just want the same freedom smokers have now.

Be open minded and honest and consider who is being selfish? The smokers or non-smokers?

Hospitals, airplanes, fast food restaurants, government buildings and many other public places have been non smoking for a long time. They all recognized that smoking was a nuisance and/or harmful and banned it from their buildings. Bars and larger resaurants are hesitant because they are more heavily patronized by smokers. "

" We have to wear motorcycle helmets,
Car Seats for our children, I would do that anyway, but I don't like being told I have too.
We can't buy cold medicine unless we sign for it.
We have to pay taxes for things we don't recieve
Our tax dollars are spent for abortions, that is not my choice.
now they are going to give our social security dollars to people who have earned it in anyway and aren't even American, then what happens to us who counted on it, the ones who did pay it when it is all gone.

Yes it is time we stop this type of governing before we aren't free anymore and our children and grandchildren are forced to live a life of slavery or die to be free. "

" This really comes down to a kindergarten argument. Everyone is saying non-smokers should choose to eat somewhere else. Why should we have to eat someone where else because the person in the next booth wants to impose THEIR bad habit of choice on me. It is not the same as alcohol as some say because the guy in the next booth isn't pouring his beer down my throat and the fat kid eating his third helping of dessert is not shoving fried twinkies in my mouth. Smokers adversely effect everyone around them and that is imposing on our rights. Once person mentions the constitution, maybe you should read it, it states that ones right ends when it begins to impose on the rights of others. Give me a break. If you want to smoke with your meal then that is your choice, go outside, don't use the juvenile argument that if we don't want our health effected then we should eat somewhere else. And the government was elected by the people to make choices for us if you forgot. Like I said above, ones right ends when it imposes on anothers right. "

" Our goverments have already turned into dictatorships and are inching towards creating for all of us, a full blown communist country. When are people going to wake up and make a stand for our freedoms? This is the United States of America. What is it going to be tomorrow? "

" Are you kidding me! Comments like BOO HOO are what is goiing to lead us into a socialism in this country. Sure Boo-HOO you don't like smoking you don't want to be around it and you don't want your kids to be around it...As a Non-Smoker I understand this, it is my choice to stay away from it as it is your choice to stay away from it. So don't go where they smoke it is a simple as that. You already cannot smoke in state or government buildings, you already can't smoke in most public places, the only true places left to smoke are bars and resturaunts. I don't think you are taking your kids in bars are you...and if they smoke in a resuraunt find another one that doesn't.

We are loosing our Freedoms inch by inch, do you actually think the government won't hit on a freedom of yours, the way the are governing now we are headed into socialism now. I would expect this if I lived in China but I don't I live the land of the free, the United States of America.

Look at the record, First is was,
Seatbelts
then
Pray in school
then
Pray in public
then
it has been religious freedoms
then
smoking
now it is
fat

would any of you or your family happen to be overweight, well don't go to Mississippi because if your BMI is to high you will not be allowed to eat at any resturaunts or the Resturaunt owner will loose his license.

We are Americans, we can make our own choices without the government telling us by law what we should or shouldn't be doing, we are not a heard of dumb animals that have to be hearded through life or is this what the majority of this country wants.

Cry Freedom, before we don't have the freedoms we have fought for and died for, or would you like to do that again only this time instead of reading about it, you live it and all it's horrors. "

" I am shocked by the childish way that adults are acting over this smoking issue. I am a smoker but I would not object to not being able to smoke in restaurants. I choose to go outside to have a cigarette or to wait until I get home so that I don't bother other people with my bad habit. I do feel that at certain places like one's work that there should be designated smoking areas away from nonsmokers. As far as bars go~~I don't drink but I don't see the point in making them nonsmoking because I feel that it would hurt the bar business and cut into their revenue. As far as to say that someone should have a short, miserable life because of having a bad habit does disgust me. Should the same horrible request be made to all bad habits like people that get all hopped up on caffeine from coffee or even to those families that choose to have a beer in their own backyard at a barbeque? Of course not. If you want your opinion to be taking seriously then I feel that you have to be willing to be flexible on some points and not so judgemental apon others. As it goes~~" Let he who is free of sin cast the first stone." "

"
Complainers ,some people just have to complain about something .To make some one else miserable .That's why even though I don't smoke i set in the smoking section . Just because smokers seem like sociable people . The comment about the person at the next table affecting your health or making your clothes smell bad .How long has it been since you been in a restaurant that doesn't have another room or at least section away from smoke Nazis . But that's not good enough . They have to be completely out of the building and 10 feet away from it . Whats next smokers wont be able to go in places because they make nonsmokers clothes smell bad. Its more laws that are illegal ,Because slavery was made illegal by the constitution.Thats what our government has come to .Until 1914 we owned our bodies it was unconstitutional for government to tell us how to care for them .Or to take our money or property .Now they take what they want from our wages .They tell us what we can put in our bodies .They take our right to drive .They tax our property and take it if we refuse to pay The constitution says travel is an unrestricted right and he who takes nothing from the state owes nothing to it .All these things constitute a slave to the master .But what is a slave but some one controlled by an outside force .Every thing our government does is opposite the constitutional principles .These idiots that keep wanting more laws because it makes some one else miserable .Have no idea what kind of tyranny and oppression they are installing on the lives of their children .Who will either be totally enslaved not knowing what freedom is growing up enslaved and being told they are free .Or be lucky not to be killed when people try to revolt and cast off the chains of tyranny .Cant any of the brain washed idiots read the declaration of independence and see we are in a similar state of government now. Only the people have little chance of breaking free now days with out massive casualties being inflicted and the longer we idly accept our fate the worse it will be "

" Smoke Nazis ???...Fat Nazis ???...What a joke, the government is elected by you, me and every citizen in the USA over the age of 18....Maybe you decided your vote wasn't important or you had other things to attend to...The way I feel is that if it is a law, it's there for a reason and you got to obey the laws....If you don't agree with the law, write your represenitives in congress and Washington to complain, but sometimes the law is there and that is the end of it, so you got to live with it...And there is a majority who feel that public places shoukd be smoke free, otherwise it would not even be up for a vote... I remember when the helmet law was passed for motorcycles and the riders out there banded together and got the helmet law repealed, now that was seen as an impossibility at the time but they got it done...So if you feel that your rights are being trampled on, do something about it, but don't expect the nonsmokers in the state to sit back and watch as their rights are trampled either !!!... "

" BOO HOO.......GET OVER IT!!!! Go ahead and kill yourself, your families and most of all your CHILDREN, but you're NOT kililng me or mine. You do have the freedom and choice to do that, so go ahead a do it, it's your right-BUT NOT AROUND ME! You are so selfish! You are acting like it's NOT a proven FACT that smoking and second hand smoke KILLS. Slowly kill yourself, I could care less and yes, we are all going to eventually die in one manner or another and I see you have chosen your way wisely. Most of us would like to go have a nice peaceful dinner at a restaurant WITHOUT having to deal with our food tasting like cigarettes from the jerks at the next table (who don't have enough sense to LEAVE when done eating), or for our sinuses painfully burning or for our clothes not to reak of the raunching smoke, for just a few examples. I also hope they raise the price and taxes on cigarettes so high no one can afford them any more. It's kind of funny smokers boo hoo when they want to smoke places it's banned and then they STILL boo hoo when they are dying of cancer and suffer from all the effects of smoking and have to drag around a tank behind them every where they go. So BOO HOO - YOU GET NO SYMPATHY FROM ME, SMOKERS! Have a nice short, miserable life. "

" I agree with this lady.The government is spending way to much effort telling free Americans what they can and cannot do.I smoked for 40 years,but two years ago I quit smoking.Not because the government told me to,but because I wanted to.I was tired of telling people that were in my face for smoking where they could stick their opinions.Unfortunatly,the government is going to have their way,just like they did with seatbelts in cars and motorcycle helmets.Personally,I don't want the government saving my life for me.I'm going to die someday,the same as everyone else is,and how I die is nobodys business.If you "smoke nazis" want to pretend that you'll live forever if only smoking is outlawed,go ahead and deceive yourselves.When you "smoke nazis" finally get smoking outlawed you can go ahead and join up with the "fat nazis".The "fat nazis" have already started their attacks on Americans rights to eat what they want,but I'm sure they will welcome you "smoke nazis" to their cause with open arms,they need all the help they can get! America is supposed to be the land of the FREE. "