Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A novice's take on the local, state and national political scenes
Me
David Allen
- Politics 101
- All politics is local -Tip O'Neil
Best sites
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(200)
-
▼
November
(18)
- Dear Kasha, Steve, Ed, Todd, Sam, Pat, Barack
- Quote of the day
- Act fast
- Full story
- Ugh-ly
- Smoking ban part deaux
- Ark City smoking ban?
- The youth vote
- Cognitive dissonance?
- Presidential vote break down
- 32nd vote break down
- Subliminal message?
- Results
- Plan to wait
- Predictions
- 21 fliers, oodles of cash
- Counter intuitive
- Money, attack ads, etc
-
▼
November
(18)
18 comments:
Who cares? Smoke em if ya got em...
If ya don't then piss on the sidewalk
As a smoker I oppose a smoking ban. But I do not want my habit to affect others. I can understand restrictions on public smoking. It is my right to smoke, but i dont have the right to impose my habit upon others.
Whats with the letter to the editor. Somebody from Parkerfield is worried about who is smarter, Winfield or A.C. Why does he care, didnt they secede from A.C. Is Parkerfield gonna have a smoking ban. Oh ya they dont need to, nothing is out there. But feel free to use our facilities.
Why would I go the bowling alley then?
This town has a tendency to be very selfish its thinking. A smoking ban would be awesome but then it would mean we would have to understand that it really is bad for people. No one has the guts to pass anything controversial or make us look progressive. I agree with the editorial and I don't care where the writer lives. It is known to cause cancer and yet if an industry created the same pollution this town would be on them in a flash.
ummm...to bowl?
I am for the ban. I used to smoke but quit for health reasons, my husband still does and he is respectful enough to go outside or in a designated area. People need to learn that their rights stop wwhen they are imposing on someone elses and anyone who smokes and blows their smoke onto someone who chooses not to smoke is violating the rights of a nonsmoker by not allowing them the choice of ingesting it. If a person is so addicted that they can't wait a few minutes or have the curtesy to smoke in a designated area, then they have more of a problem than just being inconsiderate of others.
Why not include the ban in bars as well since people that are allergic to smoke can be affected there. Second hand smoke causes cancer everywhere and if the public can go to a bar, restaurant or club then it should be banned. Smoking costs billions of dollars each year and much of that comes in the form of higher tax dollars and insurance premiums to cover health care costs. Save all of us money and let the smokers smoke in the privacy of their home just not exposing the rest of us.
I know smokers have a right to go ahead and kill themselves. However, there are people out there that are on oxygen that can not go out to establishments (eating comes to mind) because of smokers around them. What about people with small children that do not wish to have their young ones exposed to 2nd hand smoke? What about someone with severe allergies or asthma? SOOOOOO to all you smokers do they have to sit at home and not enjoy some life because you have a right to smoke? Does your right to smoke trump their rights?
Maybe us citizens should start pushing our city commission. Sure people will fight it but what is right is right....regardless of who it upsets.
I am all for a smoking ban. And I'd be willing to bet that eating establishments that ban smoking will see an increase in business from non smokers who don't want to smell like an ashtray just to get something to eat.
why not put it to a public vote during the April commission election? what could be better than letting the people decide? it is the most democratic way AND it will get more people out to vote.
I know I'd be more willing to go to several add'l restuarants in town if there was a smoking ban. So for now I ignore them. I don't like the thought of cleaning up to go out and then come home smelling like an ash tray.
Most restaurants in Ark City DON'T allow smoking; a couple have a smoking area that is so isolated, other customers aren't affected. I can only think of one that allows smoking to the point that other customers are affected. The restaurant who don't allow smoking, or segregate the smokers, have done so to please their cusomers. Why do we have to legislate everything?
We legislate everything to pay the politicians- duh!! If they weren't making new laws or creating some new bull____ for us we wouldn't really need to pay them anymore would we?
I've lived in a few states as non smoking laws have passed. It didn't effect business as much as people thought. Most people loved it. I'm all for it.
Yes James, I'll feel free to continue spending money and paying sales tax in Arkansas City, but not at the diner where there's an ashtray on every table, or the place where the "smoking section" is three feet from the alleged smoke-free area, or the one where their corporate headquarters won't LET them go smoke-free until there's a local ordinance. As for whether Winfield is smarter, I really don't care. But I thought using that old legend might move some folks in Arkansas City to discuss the issue. Looks like it worked.
Well, since around 85% of the cost for health related expenditures that the state of Kansas has comes from smoking (or related to smoking), I think it's fair to ban smoking on a local or state level. I also do not disagree with raising the taxes on the already highly taxed cigarrette consumer either... Does the benefit of smoking justify the negative side?
Post a Comment