|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
I don't think the same applies to the smoking rule.. that may be a moot point, but certainly the language contained is not terribly difficult.
I'm not saying it does, exactly. I was just making a general statement about how I think most people vote. Granted, I got a bit off the topic of the smoking issue with my little rant.
And, I would HOPE that if someone didn't feel educated on an issue they didn't just do an eeny, meeny, miny, moe, while in the booth. I don't know how to "fix" the problem, but I think people feel a kind of power in voting that they don't necessarily have the right to feel sometimes.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572 |
In Tennessee, bars and restaurants can declare if they are 21 and over establishments or not. If they declare they are 21 and over, smoking is permitted, food service or not.
Most classic restaurants don't permit smoking....many places that would be more a bar, though many serve great food, do allow smoking.
Choice and the freedom of selection.
If you don't smoke, but want to go to some places, you have to deal with smoke. If you do smoke and want to go some places, you can't light up.
Blanket policy on just about anything is bad policy.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
In general I agree with you. I understand that 99.9% of bars were smoking bars and it could get annoying for non-smokers. As health consciousness increases, non-smoking bars would have sprung up. This was one of those cases (like so many others) where the free market would have adapted to fix the problem, but it would have taken some time...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Sounds like Tennessee has it right. I bet you didn't even have to vote on it. 
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280 |
I am thankful that Ohio is not interested in following TN legislation.
No offence Peen...I love TN...really.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
Sounds like Tennessee has it right. I bet you didn't even have to vote on it.
Yep, giving people choices. What a novel approach.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Haha...here's a bunch of BS for ya....
Dear DawgMichelle:
Thank you for writing concerning the proposed legislation regarding smoking ban exemptions involving family-owned businesses, outdoor patios, and private clubs. I appreciate you taking the time to share your concerns and opinions with me.
At this time, there is legislation pending before Ohio ’s 127th General Assembly having to do with this issue, namely Senate Bill 346. Please be assured I will be mindful of the views you expressed. I also encourage you to communicate your views with your legislators as bills before the General Assembly are reviewed by your State Senator and Representative.
If you would like to contact your State Senator and Representative, you may call the Ohio Senate Clerk at (614) 466-4900 and the Ohio House of Representatives Clerk at (614) 466-3357.
Once again, I appreciate your writing to me. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if we can assist you in the future.
Sincerely,
Ted Strickland
Governor
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
What else was he supposed to say to you...thanks Michelle for showing me the light! I'll get right on that! 
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Yeah, that's it.  He won't even see this, that was my point.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,349 |
Quote:
I'm not going to read this thread because I'm pretty sure it's filled with posts from people who hate smoking where they go and people complaining because they can't smoke where they go.
LOL, we might as well just delete all the posts in this thread except for Jules, because she just summed up the whole thread 
KING
You may be in the drivers seat but God is holding the map. #GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 62
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 62 |
Quote:
You cannot show me one study that establishes that second-hand smoke causes cancer, but I can show you one very large scientific study (not junk science - real science) done by the World Health Organization in 1998 that showed pretty conclusively that there is no link between second-hand smoke and cancer. Google it, if you care.
done. from the WHO website link :
Second-hand tobacco smoke
Involuntary (or passive) smoking is the exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke (SHS) which is a mixture of exhaled mainstream smoke and side stream smoke released from a smouldering cigarette or other smoking device (cigar, pipe, bidi, etc.) and diluted with ambient air. Second-hand tobacco smoke is also referred to as "environmental" tobacco smoke (ETS). smoking involves inhaling carcinogens and other toxic components that are present in second-hand tobacco smoke.
Article 8 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, adopted by all WHO Member States in May 2003, reads:
“Protection from exposure to tobacco smoke
1. Parties recognise that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability.
2. Each Party shall adopt and implement in areas of existing national jurisdiction as determined by national law and actively promote at other jurisdictional levels the adoption and implementation of effective legislative, executive, administrative and/or other measures, providing for protection from exposure to tobacco smoke in indoor workplaces, public transport, indoor public places and, as appropriate, other public places.”
Quote:
Oh I see, you are only pro-choice when it comes to whatever your particular preference is. And just be clear on one thing, my "stank" (thanks for that, appreciate it) is only (possibly) carcinogenic to me. For you, smoke is just an annoyance, your desire to avoid it is a preference - no more and no less. But you don't think I should have the same rights as you do.
as you can see above, the WHO has revised its' stance since 1998, but please go on thinking that second-hand smoke is only "possbibly" carcinogenic to yourself and others. since i refuse to keep my head stuck in the sand regarding the health effects of second hand smoke, the good news for me is that you can't do it where me and my family are eating or drinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Actually, there is a lot of science going the exact opposite direction. Frankly, we can all throw up evidence from both sides. And again, lots of things are bad for us that we haven't banned.....yet.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 62
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 62 |
this isn't really like global warming or evolution where it's enough to say "well there are studies going both ways so..." among the scientific community there is really not a debate over this like you are implying. from wikipedia link : Currently, there is widespread scientific consensus that exposure to secondhand smoke is harmful.[84] The link between passive smoking and health risks is accepted by every major medical and scientific organization, including: The World Health Organization[85] The U.S. National Institutes of Health[86] The Centers for Disease Control[87] The United States Surgeon General[88] The U.S. National Cancer Institute[89] The United States Environmental Protection Agency[90] The California Environmental Protection Agency[3] The American Heart Association,[91] American Lung Association,[92] and American Cancer Society[93] The American Medical Association[94] The American Academy of Pediatrics[95] The Australian National Health and Medical Research Council[96] The United Kingdom Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health[97] The governments of 151 nations have signed and ratified the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which states that "Parties recognize that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability."[98] these alternative studies that you mentioned are for the most part either funded by the tobacco industry, or have been discredited upon further review by the scientific community. it's fine to argue that you have the right to smoke (which you are still allowed to do), but it is misinforming to imply or claim that second-hand smoke is not harmful to others.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I totally disagree with you. Many of these organizations are very political and you need only follow the money and look at the weak and manipulated stats to find that it really is quite inconclusive when it comes to studies on passive smoke. Don't tell me I'm misinforming, I believe it is you and many others who buy everything organizations tell you based on their fancy names. http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/second.htm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Willie and DC,
There is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who smoke.
People can choose to go/work in a smoking building or not. If you don't make the building ADA compliant you have eliminated any choice from handicaped people. They physically can't get into the building.
Trying to make an argument that peoples right to smoke equalls someone born with a disability to be able to get into a public building is a poor argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
In Tennessee, bars and restaurants can declare if they are 21 and over establishments or not. If they declare they are 21 and over, smoking is permitted, food service or not.
Most classic restaurants don't permit smoking....many places that would be more a bar, though many serve great food, do allow smoking.
Choice and the freedom of selection.
If you don't smoke, but want to go to some places, you have to deal with smoke. If you do smoke and want to go some places, you can't light up.
Blanket policy on just about anything is bad policy.
That's similar to Florida. Except I believe it is strictly based on food service or not. Full bars can have smoking, and smoking is allowed on outdoor patios, even if food is served. There is no smoking in public buildings, malls, government building, schools, hospitals, etc.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,960 |
What pisses me off more than anything is they wont allow smoking sections at a Browns game/ Indians game  , but the do have a smoking section at a Cavs game. 
President - Fort Collins Browns Backers
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Now, that's funny. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280 |
Free, I am not sure where you are going with this but... Quote:
There is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who smoke.
Do you mean that there is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who don't want to - or can't - work in a smoke-filled environment? If so, I see no difference.
Quote:
People can choose to go/work in a smoking building or not. If you don't make the building ADA compliant you have eliminated any choice from handicaped people. They physically can't get into the building.
Same for people who cannot tolerate, or do not wish to tolerate, the dangers of being in a smoke-filled environment. Again, I see no difference.
Quote:
Trying to make an argument that peoples right to smoke equalls someone born with a disability to be able to get into a public building is a poor argument.
That is not and never was my argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,800 |
Quote:
why are they not allowing smoking in private clubs (VFW, etc.)?
Not all private clubs have a ban on smoking. The American Legion I go to, we can smoke in the card room since it is considered a patio even though it is enclosed, some clubs are also in the process of doing some minor remodeling in order to get around the ban, but I am fortunate since I belong to a club that is setup to smoke at, and will be the place I will go to watch the Browns this year if their not televised here, just so I can enjoy the game and a smoke at the same time.
You are right though, most people who voted for this, didn't read the whole legislation, they pretty much were anti smoking and felt they needed to make decisions for people who can purchase the product legally.
I also agree with Jules, I didn't and don't plan on reading this whole thread because I am sure it is nothing more then anti smker versus a smoker thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
You are right though, most people who voted for this, didn't read the whole legislation, they pretty much were anti smoking and felt they needed to make decisions for people who can purchase the product legally.
I voted for this, and I read and understood the entire thing. I didn't feel that I "need to make decisions for people". I made a decision for me and my children. So we didn't have to be exposed to your second hand smoke when we were out and about or at a restaurant. I understood that in the process, bars and such would feel the pinch as well, and although I didn't agree with that part of it, I still voted for it, because I don't like cigarette smoke, and my daughter has asthma. So if that means you can't send my daughter to the hospital while we're at Red Lobster...SO BE IT!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Actually, there is a lot of science going the exact opposite direction.
They believe that second hand smoke is good for you? 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who smoke.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you mean that there is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who don't want to - or can't - work in a smoke-filled environment? If so, I see no difference.
Because you choose to not see the differece because it kills your argument.
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People can choose to go/work in a smoking building or not. If you don't make the building ADA compliant you have eliminated any choice from handicaped people. They physically can't get into the building.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Same for people who cannot tolerate, or do not wish to tolerate, the dangers of being in a smoke-filled environment. Again, I see no difference.
One group says "Hmmmm, there is smoking in there, I think it's unhealthy so I won't patronize that establishment even though I am free to walk into there if I chose to."
The other group says "Hmmmm, I want to go in there but I can't because there is stairs and I'm in a wheel chair."
Quote:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trying to make an argument that peoples right to smoke equalls someone born with a disability to be able to get into a public building is a poor argument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is not and never was my argument.
Then why did you bring up ADA? (Americans disability act)
Private companies should have the right to own and operate smoking facilities if they choose to. If you don't want to be around it then don't go to those places or don't work there. It's called freedom of choice. I don't need the government to tell us these things.
What's next, Red meat and fast food are unhealthy so lets out law them in public resturants. Drunk drivers kill people every day, let's outlaw the consumption of liquor outside of your home. I mean come on it's all for the public saftey!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,319
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,319 |
Quote:
It's very simple actually...if you have an employee, you cannot have smoke.
Which voters did not know when this crap passed. Did it say private clubs only with no employees...... not that I know of. Did it say family owned with NO EMPLOYEES.... not that I know of.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Sorry, but I never buy into that overdramatic stuff. You should be in the media though. I, personally, would like to see all places that serve food be non-smoking because I don't like to smell smoke when I'm eating, that's a personal preference, I still don't think it should be legislated. And, I doubt you take your daughter to bars. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572 |
Quote:
I am thankful that Ohio is not interested in following TN legislation.
No offence Peen...I love TN...really.
None taken.
Here, business owners have domain over their business decisions. If they want to allow smoking they can, it they don't, they don't.
As a customer, if you don't want to go into a place that allows smoking, you don't have to. As I said, it is mostly bars that allow smoking. You can still find bars at chain type places that don't allow smoking.
I really don't understand why non-smokes should care if smokers have places they can go and feel free to light up.
Why is that a problem??
For me...I dip Copenhagen...so I just spit in a cup. Some of the people up there don't like that either, but too bad...if they don't want to give me a paper cup and a few napkins, I just use a empty beer bottle, and don't let them take it from me when they try to collect it..
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
Quote:
Sorry, but I never buy into that overdramatic stuff. You should be in the media though.
Whatever that's supposed to mean
Quote:
I, personally, would like to see all places that serve food be non-smoking because I don't like to smell smoke when I'm eating, that's a personal preference, I still don't think it should be legislated.
And, I doubt you take your daughter to bars.
Then you obviously did not read my whole post.
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I honestly think it has a lot to do with people wanting to tell other people what they can and cannot do. For some reason, that I can't quite fathom, people get off on that. In this whole issue I've seen a whole lot of people who never set foot in a bar or those that rarely go do the "we won!" thing. That, and I think people don't really like other people all that much.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280 |
Clearly we will have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
I read it. It's for the children! LOL. Well, I hope you are getting legislation to ban perfume, dust, pollution (better ban cars), etc., out of public places then because they all can trigger asthma attacks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,887 |
Quote:
Clearly we will have to agree to disagree.
I'm fine with that, everyone has thier opinion, you have yours and I have mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,319
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,319 |
Better ban Peanuts from the bar as well
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
There is a huge difference between people born with a disablilty and people who smoke.
You don't have to be born with a disability to get to park in a handicapped spot. You could have been going 120 mph on a motorcycle at night in the rain and lost partial use of your legs when you wiped out... you could just be so overweight that it has been declared a disability...
Quote:
someone born with a disability to be able to get into a public building is a poor argument.
It's not a public building, it's MY building. I built it, I paid for it, I manage it and I lease space to companies of all sorts. So why should I be forced to pay all of this extra money to make it ADA accessible if I don't want to?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
You shouldn't. Be fair here, DC. How many business owners do you think would not at least make every reasonable attempt to make things accessible to the handicapped?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,280 |
Jules,
Ever remodel a commercial building?
The things you learn about the ADA laws and the people they are designed to help will boggle the mind.
Good stuff...but enormously costly...especially for "the little guy".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,205 |
To clarify, my statement about second-hand smoke was as a carcinogen and, to the best of my knowledge, there is no scientific proof that there is a link. The W.H.O. study was a based on a vast sample, worldwide, and it failed to show any link, much to their chagrin. They have been trying to distance themselves from the findings ever since. But it was a legit study, and facts are stubborn things.
Is second-hand smoke harmful for people with asthma, bronchitis, pneumonia, emphysema, etc? Yes, I would agree it is not good for them and they should avoid it. Neither is strong perfume, engine exhaust, and any other airborn particulate matter likely to be good for them. My point was that people often overstate their personal preference by trying to turn it into a health issue which, IMO, is not true for about 90% of them. They just don't like it ... big difference.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572 |
Quote:
I honestly think it has a lot to do with people wanting to tell other people what they can and cannot do. For some reason, that I can't quite fathom, people get off on that. In this whole issue I've seen a whole lot of people who never set foot in a bar or those that rarely go do the "we won!" thing. That, and I think people don't really like other people all that much.
Again Julie, we agree. We agree on a lot of things even if you do bust my chops now and again.
It shouldn't matter one bit if smokers have establishments they can frequent. If you don't want to go there because of smoke, don't go there.
If you don't like Broccoli, don't eat it. Don't make it illegal.
How hard is that??
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572 |
Quote:
Jules,
Ever remodel a commercial building?
The things you learn about the ADA laws and the people they are designed to help will boggle the mind.
Good stuff...but enormously costly...especially for "the little guy".
That is why nobody catered to that segment because the associated costs weren't worth the business being it is relatively small.
I see all sorts of people parking in handicapped stalls who seem to walk just fine going into the grocery store, hogging up one of the electric carts and parking stalls because they are just simply lazy.
Don't get me wrong...I am all for the reforms, but too many qualify for ADA recognition, and too many who don't need it hog up parking stalls because Mom has one.
Makes me want to slap them.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,955 |
Quote:
too many qualify for ADA recognition, and too many who don't need it hog up parking stalls because Mom has one.
My Mother and Grandmother both have handicap parking passes. My Mother has a form of MS, and I'm not certain why Grandma has one (other than she's 86 years old and has severe pain in her back).
The thing is, they park close to the building and then walk around the store for hours on end. Meanwhile, the guy in the wheelchair has no place to park because all the "fake handicap" people are in his spot.
I know this has nothing to do with smoking...just wanted to throw out those thoughts. I'll go have a cigarette now.
#gmstrong #gmlapdance
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,283 |
On a related note, all the cigarette smokers will need handicap stickers because their lungs can't stand the walk from the back of the parking lot!
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" Thomas Paine
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Ohio Senate proposal to modify
Ohio smoking ban
|
|
![[Linked Image from mypsn.eu.playstation.com]](http://mypsn.eu.playstation.com/psn/profile/Letherface.png)
