M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 3:50pm
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/05/23/smoke-free-workplace-act-is-constitutional.html
Personally, I think the ban should be lifted and it should be put on the bar/restaurant owners whether they want smoking in their establishment or not.The high court’s 7-0 decision affirmed a ruling by the Franklin County Court of Appeals upholding the Ohio Smoke Free Workplace Act, approved by Ohio voters in 2006.
Raw Dawgin' it
Posts: 11,466
May 23, 2012 3:52pm
Most people don't smoke and don't want to smell like an ash tray.dlazz;1179823 wrote:http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/05/23/smoke-free-workplace-act-is-constitutional.html
Personally, I think the ban should be lifted and it should be put on the bar/restaurant owners whether they want smoking in their establishment or not.
M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 3:56pm
Then they can go somewhere else. Nobody is making them go to those establishments.Raw Dawgin' it;1179828 wrote:Most people don't smoke and don't want to smell like an ash tray.
S
Sonofanump
May 23, 2012 3:59pm
Yeah! I wish they had a law that prohibited smoking within 50 feet of a business unless in a self contained cancer room. Nothing worse than trying to have my 7 year old avoid some inconsiderate bastard puffing away at a cancer stick in front of a restaurant we would like to enter.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
May 23, 2012 3:59pm
Kudos to the Supreme Court...well done :thumbup:
Mooney44Cards
Posts: 2,754
May 23, 2012 4:01pm
The people who don't like the ban can move to another state. Nobody is making them live in Ohio.dlazz;1179832 wrote:Then they can go somewhere else. Nobody is making them go to those establishments.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
May 23, 2012 4:03pm
I'm a non-smoker and I hate the ban but I'm certainly not going to move out of Ohio because of it.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 23, 2012 4:04pm
dlazz;1179832 wrote:Then they can go somewhere else. Nobody is making them go to those establishments.
It's no different than any other statute enforced by a health department. I should have the right to go to a restaurant that is infested with rats and uses jizz as the special sauce for their burgers, but I don't. Hell, the smoke is worse for the patrons health than eating cum.
M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 4:10pm
That would be a good comparison if people often enjoyed jizz burgers, but they do not.ts1227;1179840 wrote:It's no different than any other statute enforced by a health department. I should have the right to go to a restaurant that is infested with rats and uses jizz as the special sauce for their burgers, but I don't. Hell, the smoke is worse for the patrons health than eating cum.
Also, I am a non-smoker. I feel that needs stated.
I'd be more content with a tweaked law...if they outlawed smoking in restaraunts. Restaraunts w/ Bars and plain bars could decide whether or not they want smoking.
Mooney44Cards
Posts: 2,754
May 23, 2012 4:12pm
I didn't actually mean that, just showing how ridiculous the "Don't like it? Go somewhere else." attitude is.justincredible;1179839 wrote:I'm a non-smoker and I hate the ban but I'm certainly not going to move out of Ohio because of it.
There are arguments to be made for both sides, but I think the debate finally needs to be put to rest. Until the pendulum starts moving towards smoking being OK (I don't think this is going to happen), the law is here to stay.
As a non-smoker I enjoy being able to go wherever I like and the only stench on my clothing being my own manly musk.
M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 4:17pm
It's not that ridiculous though, so the point your trying to make is moot.Mooney44Cards;1179849 wrote:I didn't actually mean that, just showing how ridiculous the "Don't like it? Go somewhere else." attitude is.
Crimson streak
Posts: 9,002
May 23, 2012 4:21pm
Sonofanump;1179834 wrote:Yeah! I wish they had a law that prohibited smoking within 50 feet of a business unless in a self contained cancer room. Nothing worse than trying to have my 7 year old avoid some inconsiderate bastard puffing away at a cancer stick in front of a restaurant we would like to enter.
Reps! I absolutely can't stand that. Considering 2nd hand smoke can cause asthma in younger kids and my daughter is 2.
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
May 23, 2012 4:23pm
As long as cigarettes are legal I think the ban is a huge abuse of govt power. But I also really enjoy going out and not having to smell smoke everywhere.
hoops23
Posts: 15,696
May 23, 2012 4:30pm
I love the ban. I hated going out to eat because the restaurant would smell like straight ass. Cigarette smoke also fucks my allergies in the ass.
If you want to smoke, fine. But respect those around you and stay at home.
You have the right to bear arms as well, but I doubt you go to a restaurant and flash your gun around.
If you want to smoke, fine. But respect those around you and stay at home.
You have the right to bear arms as well, but I doubt you go to a restaurant and flash your gun around.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
May 23, 2012 4:32pm
I thought about taking legal action because I wanted to make a non-smoking restaurant. Thanks to the state, my idea is no longer unique, costing me TRILLIONS in revenue.
Great muggally guggally.
I'm with dlazz: restaurant's choice. I'm also with sonofanump though... Common decency, you puffers!!! Sometimes I'm half tempted to go rip a big one right by their table.
Great muggally guggally.
I'm with dlazz: restaurant's choice. I'm also with sonofanump though... Common decency, you puffers!!! Sometimes I'm half tempted to go rip a big one right by their table.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
May 23, 2012 4:34pm
With credit to (IIRC) Manhattan Buckeye for the general idea, a solution that should appease everyone just isn't that hard.
The number of bars in an area is already controlled by law. Add to the licensing process a distinction between smoking and non-smoking bars and grant licenses for each in proportion to the percent of smokers. IOW, if a city has 10 bars and 20% of the population smokes, 8 of the bars would be licensed as non-smoking, 2 as smoking.
The number of bars in an area is already controlled by law. Add to the licensing process a distinction between smoking and non-smoking bars and grant licenses for each in proportion to the percent of smokers. IOW, if a city has 10 bars and 20% of the population smokes, 8 of the bars would be licensed as non-smoking, 2 as smoking.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
May 23, 2012 4:37pm
I think letting the free market decide would save the paperwork and money of finding out how many smokers a city has.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
May 23, 2012 4:38pm
I agree with you, I just think that ship has sailed.cruiser_96;1179875 wrote:I think letting the free market decide would save the paperwork and money of finding out how many smokers a city has.
justincredible
Posts: 32,056
May 23, 2012 4:40pm
How long before cigarettes are illegal?
Fab1b
Posts: 12,949
May 23, 2012 4:42pm
Never govt makes way too much $$ off of taxing!justincredible;1179877 wrote:How long before cigarettes are illegal?
Hell they is why they should make pot legal. They could tax it and people could "take" it!
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
May 23, 2012 4:43pm
No time soon. The anti-smoking movement is far too profitable.justincredible;1179877 wrote:How long before cigarettes are illegal?
M
mella
Posts: 647
May 23, 2012 5:44pm
Good. When I visit other states that allow smoking in bars I am surprised how much it bothers me now. I did not notice it too much when I was 18 - 22 and went to bars in OH but now I really notice the difference.
How do poeple feel about allowing smokers to pay for 100% of their cancer treatments if they get lung cancer?
How do poeple feel about allowing smokers to pay for 100% of their cancer treatments if they get lung cancer?
Fab1b
Posts: 12,949
May 23, 2012 5:54pm
Lung cancer is not just caused by smoking. People get lung cancer that never smoked in their life and I am not defending I hate cig smoke!!mella;1179915 wrote:Good. When I visit other states that allow smoking in bars I am surprised how much it bothers me now. I did not notice it too much when I was 18 - 22 and went to bars in OH but now I really notice the difference.
How do poeple feel about allowing smokers to pay for 100% of their cancer treatments if they get lung cancer?
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
May 23, 2012 7:45pm
Out of curiosity, why?justincredible;1179839 wrote:I'm a non-smoker and I hate the ban but I'm certainly not going to move out of Ohio because of it.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 23, 2012 7:50pm
Plus cigarettes are the easiest tax grab there is... the retards will pay whatever price is put on them. No government is going to shut that off.queencitybuckeye;1179882 wrote:No time soon. The anti-smoking movement is far too profitable.