Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Watching As Personal Freedom Goes Up In Smoke

Watching As Personal Freedom Goes Up In Smoke: "  


      I am just about up to my eye-teeth in this whole smoking ban thing.   St Louis county just voted yesterday, by a whopping 65% to ban smoking in public locations such as bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and those sorts of places.  St Louis city had already passed aldermanic resolution to follow suit, should such a bill pass in the county.  As of October, 2009, 24 states have banned smoking in all enclosed public areas even to include some areas and those states are:   Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin (effective July 5, 2010). Still, all but Utah, Vermont, and Washington exempt tobacconists, and many also exempt or do not cover casinos, private clubs, and/or cigar bars.

  Then you have states such as  Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, and Tennessee who are more concerned with the revenue dollar than public health.  In those states, smoking is banned except for in "adult venues" such as bars and casinos.  If that's not bad enough, here are some other states with "interesting" smoking banning laws:




* Georgia bans smoking in restaurants where persons under 18 years of age may enter, but allows most anywhere else either to designate smoking areas indoors or allow smoking freely; local governments in Georgia can and have passed stricter smoking bans than the state.

* Idaho bans smoking in restaurants, but exempt both bars (which can be 100% smoking) and small workplaces (which can have a designated smoking area); local governments in Idaho can regulate smoking more strictly than the state.

* New Hampshire bans smoking in restaurants and bars, schools, and certain common areas open to the public, but not anywhere else, and state law prohibits local governments from enacting local health-based smoking bans.

* North Carolina (effective January 2, 2010) bans smoking in all restaurants and bars (excluding cigar bars and private clubs), as well as government buildings and vehicles, but does not regulate smoking anywhere else. Local governments may regulate smoking more strictly than the state beginning July 5, 2009, except in the places exempted from the state law, tobacco shops, private residences/vehicles, designated hotel/motel smoking rooms, and theatrical performances involving smoking.

* South Dakota generally bans smoking in all enclosed workplaces, but exempts all bars, restaurants, retail tobacco stores, hotel/motel rooms, liquor stores, and casino gaming floors. The South Dakota law prohibits local governments from regulating smoking more strictly than the state.

* In Virginia (effective December 1, 2009), smoking is banned in schools and certain common areas, but not anywhere else; in restaurants (including bars), smoking is relegated to designated smoking rooms. The state law prohibits local governments from regulating smoking more strictly than the state.

     Okay, so here's my point.  I think that no one knows their business better than the business owner.  I think that it's unfair for a non-smoker to cut into the revenue of a business that makes a large part of their revenue from the smoking public.  I don't think it should be up to the state to regulate smoking in private establishments.  I think all of this needs to come down to personal choice.  I think a system should be in place where the business owner can decide if they want to be a smoking or non-smoking establishment based on the clients.  Should an establishment choose to be a smoking establishment then it is the right of the non-smoking public to not patronize the business.  If a business chooses to be a non smoking one, then smokers can patronize if they choose but of course would have to follow the policy of the establishment.

     I think that the states and cities should only have the right to legislate the areas that are considered to be public areas such as government buildings and areas controlled by the city or the state.  I am not a fan of the non smoking population trying to dictate where other grown folks can smoke.  I am a casual smoker, I can smoke or not, it's no huge deal to me but I don't think that legislation should tell me if I can or not. 


"

No comments: