Semi overturns on 75
State of the School
Accused doctor in court
Strickland challenges smoking ban at private clubs
Friday, May 25, 2007
> Comment on this story
It may take up to 5 minutes for your posting to appear
COLUMBUS — The legal battle over allowing smoking at private clubs isn't over.
On Friday, Gov. Ted Strickland said that he has asked Attorney General Marc Dann to appeal a May 17 decision in Franklin County Common Pleas Court that said the state overstepped its authority with a rule that exempted private clubs, including veterans' groups, from the statewide indoor smoking ban approved by voters last year.
Extras
"I am troubled that many citizens, including veterans, voted for the smoking ban last fall with the understanding that it included an exception for private clubs, only to be told later that the ban doesn't include a real exception," Strickland said in a press release.
In his decision, Franklin County Common Pleas Judge David E. Cain said that smoking at clubs would be against the intent of the ban to protect workers from exposure to secondhand smoke.
Many veterans' groups had campaigned to be excluded from the ban.
The lawsuit to block the exemption was brought by a restaurant and bar owners' group. Some bar and restaurant owners complained that the exemption for private clubs was unfair.
Contact this reporter at (614) 224-1608 or whershey@DaytonDailyNews.com.
Comments
By Shay
June 8, 2007 6:17 PM | Link to this
When Ohio’s Smoke Free and Smoke Less issues were placed on the ballot, I read both of them several times. I voted against Smoke Free as the wording seemed vague. I also voted against Smoke Less. Issue 5 passed, and Ohioans were told Thank-You!, now we will come up with rules. Was that not a backwards way to a law passed?! Why weren’t they more forthcoming with the rules and how it would be enforced before it was voted on?
By Linda Chapman
June 1, 2007 1:55 PM | Link to this
I am an asthmatic and I voted against the smoking ban. As any asthmatic knows, certain smells can trigger an asthma attack. I have had to endure the god awful scents from certain perfumes, aftershaves and men’s cologne. And yes sometimes those scents brought on an asthma attack. Am I supposed to avoid flying because i am enclosed in an airplane with every scent known to man, avoid department stores because they sell it, restautants, movies, etc. Hhmmm maybe we should ban that also.
By kay
May 29, 2007 10:44 PM | Link to this
I share a cigar with my husband 1 to 2 times per month. Smoke a cigerette once per month with a friend at a bar. I am a self-employed, educated at Harvard business professional. The smoking ban has gotten way out of hand in a country, which was once free. What about the rights of smokers ? Criteria should be established to allow certain establishments to smoke. Area establishments have lost the business of myself and many friends. I am sure we are not alone.
By Dave
May 29, 2007 7:26 PM | Link to this
Pam, we all pay taxes. When you went into the bar business, you knew your business was subject to a greater amount of regulation than any other small business. You made the choice to go forth anyway, and I admire you for that. But the fact remains, none of you were willing to go smoke-free without a law. What if we suddenly made it legal for ten year-olds to drink beer. Would you serve them or stand on principle? Sometimes it takes legislation to get people to do what’s right.
By Pam
May 29, 2007 5:56 PM | Link to this
My husband and I own a bar..the business and the building. I don’t give a rat’s butt who voted on what. Voters do not get to vote on everything. How about WE vote to tell you what you can do in your homes? Why not? We pay a mortgage, business loan and more taxes than any of you anti smokers will ever dream of paying. How would YOU like that? You want smoke free? Go in debt like we did and buy your own bar. THAT’S America. What’s been done with this smoking ban is ANTI American.
By DS
May 28, 2007 2:06 AM | Link to this
One day the deceit behind the no-smoke issues will come to the front. Grants and fudged reports by a large foundation are behind it. Free Enterprise, Free Choice and Free Country should rule.
By Nikki
May 28, 2007 1:46 AM | Link to this
Hello. I want to comment on this. I live in Florida, born in Springfield, and we voted for the smoke ban in public places. I voted for it, I smoke. If 1. You can not go out to eat for 1hour without smoking then stay home and eat..SORRY!! 2. Our establishments down here have built out-door eating areas. Now to sit outside and enjoy the fresh air is good for you..don’t be afraid of this new idea. The temperature up there is better than down here, so enjoy the outside. Find the good in this. Enjoy!
By Dave
May 27, 2007 10:40 PM | Link to this
You folks seem to focus a lot on veterans. I guess that’s because it sounds more dramatic to say people are denying veterans their “rights.” But the majority of private clubs are not directly related to veterans or the military. Who’s speaking up for them?
For the record, I’m a veteran, and I don’t smoke. From what I’ve read here, I’m not alone.
By Ann
May 27, 2007 10:03 PM | Link to this
It has become a sad day in Ohio when we start telling a Veteran, someone who is and has been willing to die for there country that they cannot smoke in the very club that they pay for. I am a member of one of these clubs and business has been effected by this ban which means less money coming in which means less money to charities that these Veterans post support. Also, less tax money to Ohio and yes we do pay Taxes on our revenue. This will eventualy effect the bottom line for Ohio.
By Chris
May 27, 2007 1:53 AM | Link to this
I know people have been complaining about business being affected by the smoking ban, but I want to say this I acutally went out tonight, and without the smoke it really was a much nicer time, it’s great not to hack and snort on the way home, and my clothing, skin, and hair don’t reek of smoke. Thank you Voters of Ohio, even if ‘some people’ feel they were misled, you did the right thing.
By Dave
May 26, 2007 11:58 PM | Link to this
If you don’t like the way we eat, stay home.
By atleastmyarteriesarehealthy
May 26, 2007 10:22 PM | Link to this
Funny how most of the people I know who criticize smokers don’t think twice about eating fast food 3+ times a week. I have my one vice; I’m working on quitting but it’s hard as hell, but I do eat healthy and work out 5-6 days a week. You know what I think is gross and looks worse than smoking? Obese people slurping special sauce off their fingers after polishing off a big mac. Ban disgusting eating habits in public places!
By me
May 26, 2007 10:18 PM | Link to this
I guess private clubs aren’t private anymore. What’s next?
The bill is to protect workers, eh? How about those workers who can’t do better than a bartending job get some education and go to work somewhere else? You know what you’re doing when you apply for a job. It’s like being offended because the job subjects you to having to put up with obnoxious drunk people.
So smokers look stupid, Judy? You’re probably not a sight for sore eyes yourself. Grow up.
By karon
May 26, 2007 5:17 PM | Link to this
in lexington kentucky there has been a smoking ban for several years. it did not hurt business there!
By Phil
May 26, 2007 5:13 PM | Link to this
By karon
May 26, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this
in lexington kentucky there has been a smoking ban there for several years.
By Lureen
May 26, 2007 12:21 PM | Link to this
I used to be able to smoke when i did work, now i cant and I cant produce the way i used too. it’s no fair. Fridays at the lounge i used to clear almost 100 bucks now i cant, and the bills is gettin hard to pay, al because I cant smoke at work. Its all comunists.
By Geo
May 26, 2007 12:16 PM | Link to this
To all you whining smokers who think that business’ should be free to choose whether their workplace will be smoking or non-smoking: We had “The Vote”. You live in America and in Ohio. The people voted, you lost. Its called democracy, not communism (see dictionary) as some of you claim. Get over it. Winters coming. Get a warm coat, a ski mask, and a good pair of winter gloves. You’ll feel much better dressed in those while you smoke outside. Enjoy!
By Day
May 26, 2007 11:28 AM | Link to this
As someone who has asthma that’s triggered by cigarettes, I appreciate the smoke-fee law. I can go out to eat and not have to use an inhaler to breathe. I can NOW go listen to my husband play at clubs and not have breathing attacks. Why is it wrong to want to breathe? Breathing is a necessary part of life. I hope no one ever feels like they’re suffocating because they can’t breathe. You are terrified that you’ll die. It’s a very scary feeling. I know. Been there, done that, hated that.
By Dennis
May 26, 2007 11:19 AM | Link to this
And how about he heighth of hypocrisy?? The restaurant and bar association fought tooth and nail against the passage of this inane law, (albeit an inept and half-hearted fight) and are now 100% behind it. The self-righteous do-gooders have met their enemy, and they are theirs.
By Mick
May 26, 2007 11:06 AM | Link to this
The comments posted here illustrate the essential problem with our legal system today - there are too many judges and too many members of the public who believe that a law should be applied according to their personal beliefs instead of what the law actually says. We now have a nation not of laws but of men. And we wonder why politics has become some caustic and polarized. It has become more important to have the “right” people elected rather than the right laws enacted.
By Choices
May 26, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this
What is missing here is the smoking ban is not about rights or control. It is a health issue. I have had smokers tell me to stay home if I don’t like it and now I can go anywhere in public and not have to leave because smoking is adversely affecting my health. I do not smoke yet have breathing problems due to others. There is smokeless tobacco if you must use and it will only be your choice not others near you affected by your decision except for the higher insurance premiums.
By Dennis
May 26, 2007 10:58 AM | Link to this
Evidently Dave is the one being ignorant. (And add gullible.) He and man others have been fed the unproven “second-hand-smoke” line for so long they all believe it to be driven by facts. Go read some FACTS about the subject, and the bloated stats put forth by the EPA. As far as private clubs are concerned, they are operated BY their members. Why shouldn’t their members be allowed to set their own regulatory operating procedures? To protect their employees health? Many don’t have any employees.
By Judy
May 26, 2007 10:27 AM | Link to this
APPLAUSE TO BILL!!! I agree.
By Judy
May 26, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this
And Vonda…like I said before in my post, go back to Kentucky. You can’t even spell. Go back to Kentucky and smoke yourself to death.
By Bill
May 26, 2007 10:22 AM | Link to this
I found out yesterday of a friend of 35 years has inoperable lung cancer. He quit smoking a good 15 years ago, though he worked in an office where others smoked. He is the 3rd friend to be diagnoised with smoking related cancer in the 3 weeks I’ve been home from an extended trip. This anti-smoking law is to protect patrons and employees from harmful smoke. I feel as a member of both the VFW and AMVETS I also have the right to a smoke free visit to these places. My fellow Ohioans agree.
By Judy
May 26, 2007 10:21 AM | Link to this
HAPPY HAPPY JOY JOY….I get to go places and not come out smelling like a cigarette butt. Smoking is a horrible habit. It makes your clothes smell, your body smell and your breathe horrible. And smokers, do you realize how stupid you look with that white thing dangling out of your mouth and smoke coming out of your mouth and nose. Go look in the mirror…what a sight!! I laugh at people who smoke. But now, NON-smokers get to go places and enjoy themselves without breathing in poison.
By Rhonda
May 26, 2007 9:49 AM | Link to this
I thought the smoking ban only applied to any business that was open to the public, i.e. restaurants, office/government/hospitals, etc. It also covers private homes that conduct business where clients visit. So it seems to make sense that it include private clubs who rent out their facility to members, who are non-members attend or holding functions where the general public is invited. As a former smoker (10yrs), I deeply appreciate the smoking ban. Thank you OH voters!
By Geo
May 26, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this
To all you whining smokers who think that business’ should be free to choose whether their workplace will be smoking or non-smoking: We had “The Vote”. You live in America and in Ohio. The people voted, you lost. Its called democracy, not communism (see dictionary) as some of you claim. Get over it. Winters coming. Get a warm coat, a ski mask, and a good pair of winter gloves. You’ll feel much better dressed in those while you smoke outside. Enjoy!
By Geo
May 26, 2007 9:19 AM | Link to this
To all you whining smokers who think that business’ should be free to choose whether their workplace will be smoking or non-smoking: We had “The Vote”. You live in America and in Ohio. The people voted, you lost. Its called democracy, not communism (see dictionary) as some of you claim. Get over it. Winters coming. Get a warm coat, a ski mask, and a good pair of winter gloves. You’ll feel much better dressed in those while you smoke outside. Enjoy!
By Geo
May 26, 2007 9:19 AM | Link to this
To all you whining smokers who think that business’ should be free to choose whether their workplace will be smoking or non-smoking: We had “The Vote”. You live in America and in Ohio. The people voted, you lost. Its called democracy, not communism (see dictionary) as some of you claim. Get over it. Winters coming. Get a warm coat, a ski mask, and a good pair of winter gloves. You’ll feel much better dressed in those while you smoke outside. Enjoy!
By Betty
May 26, 2007 9:05 AM | Link to this
As a smoker, I agree its a bad habit. As an American with all the freedoms we should have, smoking ban should be up to the business owners NOT the government. I already smoke outside, I dont smoke when in a group of non-smokers, out of respect. What happen to respect? Everyone wants to judge others but it is not your place to judge. Stop trying to run everyone elses life and make yours better.
My point - Government doesnt belong in private business!!
By Yet Again
May 26, 2007 9:03 AM | Link to this
Once again, I see people all ‘fared up’ because that can’t subject us to their poor decision making skills, and to people who think that it’s not addictive, and has no health effects, try to quit.. Also, look at the decline in URI’s you will have, and a lot less sinus issues. Also don’t give me the arguement that it’s no worse than car or factory emissions.. We are breathing those in the same doeses..
By dirk sniggler
May 26, 2007 8:31 AM | Link to this
There will be equity in America insofar as smoking is concerned when tobacco user’s homes are raided in the middle of the night by swat teams and their property confiscated. After all, they are users of an addictive drug, so why should they be allowed to get off of the hook from the drug war?
By Dave
May 26, 2007 7:59 AM | Link to this
D, anybody with half a brain knows smoking causes life-threatening diseases, and that includes the unfiltered smoke rolling off the end. It doesn’t matter who paid for the studies —- the facts have been there for more than fifty years, and still people die from smoking-related illness every single day. And the “mindless followers” you refer to —- they account for 78% of the adult population in this state. Yet you’re surprised this issue passed? Who’s acting ignorant?
By daniel
May 26, 2007 7:13 AM | Link to this
the ban should be in all places of buisness!!!! why exempt in some clubs??? either have it or dont have it at all !!!!!!!!!! why would it matter what kind of place it is ??? if so maybe we should redo the whole vote on the matter
By D
May 26, 2007 7:09 AM | Link to this
Wake up America! Just because you hear something on the radio, tv, etc. and they tell you that it was proven by a “study” doesn’t mean that it’s fact. Find out who paid for that study and advertising and ask yourself if there is an agenda behind it. This smoking ban is just proof that the citizens of Ohio who voted for it are just mindless followers who will believe anything they hear.
By Richard Dorsten
May 26, 2007 7:09 AM | Link to this
I bet if the truth was known, most of you that are gripping about this law passing, didn’t even bother to vote.
By Non Smoker#1
May 26, 2007 6:58 AM | Link to this
Selling smoking tobacco in the state of ohio is a big mistake IF, 2ND hand smoke is as bad as it is described, why do we permit it to be sold?
I am sorry, I forgot the tax money it brings in to help pay for social assistance programs. 2nd hand smoke is 2nd hand smoke wherever it is at!!!!!
By Rev6pk
May 26, 2007 6:57 AM | Link to this
Having lost both parents and two brothers to the lung cancer and emphysema (all were smokers), it wouldn’t bother me if I never saw another cigarette again. Having said that, if your choice is to smoke, have at it. Just don’t expect me to breathe your poison when I go out in public. What a disgusting habit. Just look at all the cigarette butts on the sidwalks and street corners.
By larry
May 26, 2007 4:13 AM | Link to this
i think it should be up to bussiness owners weather or not they want to be smoking or non smoking as for private clubs why should they be different then any other bar or nightclub.when they say it don’t hurt bussiness who are the lying to there selfs,are bussiness has dropped badley over this,why are church people so worried about this there not in the bars-for that matter we pay are sales tax-property taxes-every month how much does the churchs pay $0000.00000 and yes i do belive in god.
By Cammy
May 26, 2007 1:46 AM | Link to this
Vonda, as someonsaid earlier, go back to the hills..
By ang
May 25, 2007 11:59 PM | Link to this
All of you guys need to realize that smokers have as many rights as non-smokers. My husband owns a business and is losing valuable time to give his employees time to go and smoke OUTSIDE. It’s his business, not the government’s, and he should be able to say yea or nay to whether it is smoking or not. And by the way, he is a non-smoker, I am the stay at home smoking wife. Let the businesses set their own rules, and if you don’t want to be around smoke, don’t go to them. Change the channel!
By Vonda
May 25, 2007 11:20 PM | Link to this
I agree with bobbi, if you don’t like it don’t come to them places where we can smoke. I am tired of people tellin me what i can and cant do. I think i can just go to them bars in Indyana, or back home in Crittenden, them is places for real folks not the fake non smokers with their perfect rich lives.
By Tired
May 25, 2007 11:14 PM | Link to this
God forbid you can smoke in your favorite tacky-a** nite spots, and ho-hum eateries. Too bad you have knowledge in front of you and you choose not to read it, too bad you didn’t vote. Too bad you don’t get the basic premise of a democratic system, even sadder you thought you were free prior to this… Silly Rabbit….
By Concerned Taxpayer
May 25, 2007 10:47 PM | Link to this
I am for the businesses being able to ban smoking, if they so choose. I use to smoke, but have not for over 8 years. I don’t like being around smoke very much, but think that each business owner should have the right to ban, not our wonderful government. To me, the only thing that should be regulated is alcohol, but, as others have said already, since this is more acceptable amongst our government (lawyers, judges, governors and many others doing it), it will never be regulated, as needed.
By jim
May 25, 2007 10:21 PM | Link to this
The people gathered signatures to get this issue on the ballot. The people passed this by about 60 % margin. The politicians should now stay the hell out of it !
By DCCC
May 25, 2007 10:16 PM | Link to this
The ban against clubs will be overturned. After that the ban itself with be struck down. To the pompus holier than thou non smokers, get ready cause your time is coming!!!!
By Dave
May 25, 2007 9:55 PM | Link to this
David, I agree that we’ve done very little to actually stop drunk driving. But you asked where’s the outcry —- it’s strong, and has resulted in a lot of laws that, admittedly, fall short in the area of prevention. But the penalties are much stronger than twenty years ago, mostly because of organizations like MADD. Oddly enough, people called them a bunch of meddling crybabies, too.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 9:46 PM | Link to this
Hey Bobbi, get a grip —- stay out of places where you’re not allowed to smoke.
Doesn’t sound so nice when the shoe is on the other foot, does it? Seriously, it’s because of people like you that this law passed in the first place.
By bobbi
May 25, 2007 9:37 PM | Link to this
i think that you should be allowed to smoke if that is what u want. goverment and people that complain should not be allowed to tell u where u can lite up. get a grip miss judy stay out of places that smoke if u dont like it. we dont tell u what to do. little miss prim and no it alls like u make me sick
By David
May 25, 2007 9:12 PM | Link to this
Sorry, I have been on the same planet Nelson. We have not taken one solid step to eliminate drunk driving. Punishing after the fact does nothing to prevent the problem, not to mention the fact that most people get off with very little real punishment. Why?, because drinking is a socially excepted practice indulged in by judges, lawyers, lawmakers, and a very large segment of our population in general. Point is, it is not what is morally right or wrong that makes the difference.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 9:00 PM | Link to this
Nelson —- the “vocal minority” apparently accounted for about 57% of the voting public. And for the record, smoking has never been a “right.” It’s a legal activity, and like most legal activities, it’s subject to some level of regulation.
David, I agreed with your first post. I voted against both issues. But regarding your second post, “where is the outcry” about drunken driving —- have you been living on another planet?
By Wendy Parker
May 25, 2007 8:57 PM | Link to this
Standing up for strippers and smokers, I like the new Governor more every day. Thank the good Lord we finally got a democrat back in office. If we continue to amend the law we’ll eventually be right back where we started - it will be the choice of the BUSINESS OWNER as to whether or not they allow smoking on the premisis - as it should be - I have the same feeling for this as I do anything else(ie:Imus, rap music,Al Sharpton, etc) - IF YA’ DON’T LIKE IT, STAY AWAY FROM IT
By David
May 25, 2007 8:43 PM | Link to this
I also believe that if the state is going to legislate our health and well being, then we should also ban all alcoholic beverage consumption outside ones’ own home. People who drink and then drive are one very small step from being the murderer of innocent bystanders or motorists. Where is the outcry about this problem. Lives cut short, and these victims did not even have the opportunity to choose to be around the drinking driver or not!
By David
May 25, 2007 8:34 PM | Link to this
I have been amazed by the number of people who were under the impression that they had to vote yes for one issue or the other on the smoking ban. For some strange reason, a large number of the people I have talked to did not realize that they could say no to both issues and things would have stayed the same.
By Nelson C. McLarkey
May 25, 2007 8:30 PM | Link to this
By Nels:
Proabition did not work either, but is sure made the money for bootleggers. We are giving up more of our rights to satisfy a few of the vocal minority. Shades of 1984. Look at Columbus with its spy cameras and Springfield with the Red Light Cameras.
By scotty
May 25, 2007 7:47 PM | Link to this
all this talk about rights, whose is most important, dah da dah dah dah.. you only have one thing that no one else is going to take from you no matter what,, YOU ARE GOING TO DIE, one way or another you are going to die period… absolutely everything else can be taken away from you, including living. the privilage of living can be taken from you by someone else, but the right to die cannot, you are going to die.so quit bellyaching and wait for your one and only right to comealong DIE!!!!
By Non-Cas Fan
May 25, 2007 6:59 PM | Link to this
Geo: For you to believe that no true nonsmokers are upset with the ban is your right, no matter how unrealistic that belief. As yet another nonsmoker opposed to the ban, I assure you that we exist.
My position is that banning smoking is the right thing for a business to do; but it is the wrong thing for the government to force.
While I personally cannot stand cigarette smoke, I also dislike the direction the “ban mentality” leads.
I also firmly believe that the free market forces were working
By Geo
May 25, 2007 6:33 PM | Link to this
Paul………………………. To clarify for you. It is not the leftists that you blame for the ban who have caused the ban. Those on the right are more likely to be non smokers and have pushed for the ban. I lean left, except with finances and on that issue I lean right; of course on that same issue the right has fallen far left and cannot get up. Anyway………………. The ban is great. Ohio, don’t stop a good thing.
By katherine
May 25, 2007 6:28 PM | Link to this
if we outlawed everything unhealthy the whole social structure would fall out..mcdonalds, butter, red meat, beer, using cell phones while driving, high heels, tanning salons, loose women, starbucks, trans-fat, candy, mountain dew, television… fact is, the people voted for the exception of private clubs, so that should be the law. of course, if voting really counted, they would make it illegal too.
By Geo
May 25, 2007 6:22 PM | Link to this
Paul………………………. To clarify for you. It is not the leftists that you blame for the ban who have caused the ban. Those on the right are more likely to be non smokers and have pushed for the ban. I lean left, except with finances and on that issue I lean right; of course on that same issue the right has fallen far left and cannot get up. Anyway………………. The ban is great. Ohio, don’t stop a good thing.
By Geo
May 25, 2007 6:22 PM | Link to this
Paul………………………. To clarify for you. It is not the leftists that you blame for the ban who have caused the ban. Those on the right are more likely to be non smokers and have pushed for the ban. I lean left, except with finances and on that issue I lean right; of course on that same issue the right has fallen far left and cannot get up. Anyway………………. The ban is great. Ohio, don’t stop a good thing.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 6:18 PM | Link to this
Paul, so many big words, and you even spelled them correctly. I’m impressed! Tell me, do you know what any one of them means??? I love the way people blame all this on Democrats. To my knowledge, no survey has been done that would indicate a vote down party lines on this issue. But I do seem to remember that Ohio voted RED in the last presidential election. Excuse me, but isn’t that Republican???
By Dave
May 25, 2007 6:12 PM | Link to this
Bett, do you normally try this hard to sound ignorant? The legal age to buy cigarettes is 18. Since when does our country put weapons in the hands of people under 18 and send them to war?
By Paul
May 25, 2007 6:07 PM | Link to this
Ohio has become a “melting pot” of left coast gobblygook thought. You anti-smoking zealots are elated that you’ve pulled another one over on the “proletariat”. You elitist totalitarian RINO/Democrat/Moveon.org crazies can’t accept not invading other peoples life styles due to your belief that your way is the way!!! (“Und you vill enjoy it!!!). Align yourselves with Islam, violence will be your next tactic, learn from those who know what your intentions really are. You will be the best students.
By Bett
May 25, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
We put a weapon in the hands of our men in war and they aren’t even old enough to buy cigarettes!!!I am sick and damned tired of these “hitler” tactics to keep us under the thumbs of these bureaucrats that are retiring with multimillion pensions.What are they gonna do next,keep the gas out of our tanks so they can use it for more holocaust chambers?What happened to AMERICA,land of the FREE and home of the BRAVE?We brave people are standing around letting them take EVERYTHING AWAY from us.Why??
By Judy
May 25, 2007 5:39 PM | Link to this
Rick..for what it’s worth…you being a smoker…you judge non-smokers incorrectly. We have put up with your smell…our clothes stink and it is a disgusting habit. Finally, after years and years of having things the smoker’s way, we finally can go into an establishment and not smell that disgusting smell. You can go outside now…and now the NON-smoker can enjoy…
By Andie
May 25, 2007 5:37 PM | Link to this
Former smoker.I look at it is this way. I can see banning smoking in restaurants and places where families would be. But why adult places (bar and what not)? The people there are not there for health reasons. Special interest groups are out of hand. Madlyn Ohare comes to mind along with this too. What else are they planning to take away from the individuals of America? It’s just another way for the crybabies of America to get their way. Land of the FREE indeed!
By Bett
May 25, 2007 5:32 PM | Link to this
They have banned smoking,swearing when a family with children are present,no flotation devices in pools,no walking your dog unless you pick up the mess,( I agree with that one.We have to keep our DOGS under control and on a leash and licenced.Thats agreeable too if they would only make cat owners clean up after their cats,and keep them under control and licenced.They have taken God out of school,and courthouses.Why do we still have to swear on the BIBLE that we will tell the truth?
By John
May 25, 2007 5:24 PM | Link to this
I am a veteran and am deprived the use of American Legion and VFW Clubs due to the intense smoke in these clubs. I fought for the right to enjoy these clubs without ruining my health to do so. It doesn’t hurt anyone to go outside to smoke. I am not the only one to stay away due the hazy smoky atmosphere. My rights are important also.
By Rick
May 25, 2007 5:20 PM | Link to this
Judy,
Move to China, since you believe in communism. The right should BOTH smoking and non-smoking businesses each separate. This should be decided by each OWNER’S INDIVIDUAL RIGHT.
Thats, ok though. There will eventually be an issue that will get non-smokers in an uproar, and then us smokers will just laugh…..
By Judy
May 25, 2007 5:12 PM | Link to this
VONDA…go back to Kentucky….
The voters VOTED…NO SMOKING INDOORS…LIVE WITH IT!!!
By Rhine Mclin's hat
May 25, 2007 5:10 PM | Link to this
never even tried smoking and I say it is BS, especially in PRIVATE CLUBS!!!
One day a whole bunch of normal Americans are going to wake up and not put up with this special interest group BS, I hope its soon!!!!
By Vonda
May 25, 2007 4:37 PM | Link to this
I think our rights is all gone. I can’t do this, I can’t do that. It aint fiar. Its like Reds are everwhere. At least i can smoke and drive until i cant do that no more.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 4:32 PM | Link to this
JMC, it obviously takes more than “a little money” because RJ Reynolds invested ten times the amount on Issue 4 and it failed. You may want to just consider the possibility that the majority of Ohio voters are truly tired of breathing somebody else’s smoke.
By Geo
May 25, 2007 4:31 PM | Link to this
Funny JM: Are you a professor??? If you are then, don’t worry about double posts. Smart folks will use their brains and not read both posts. Dumbs folks, well, they’ll need to read twice anyways!
By Jim
May 25, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this
As a former smoker, (quit earlier this year)I still don’t agree with the ban. Never have never will, it should be up to the business to determine what clientèle they want to cater to. I always said Smoking would only be the first a public interest group would go after. Now they have placed restrictions on strippers and want to ban gambling. Why are we cowering to these special interest groups that are so short sighted that they only see their way as the only way? Who am I to determine what U do?
By k
May 25, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this
Strickland is right. There were tw0 issues on the ballot one with and one without the provision for private clubs. The one that passed had the exemption and should be enforced that way not regulated by personal opinion of a judge. If you want the ban changed put it back on the ballot. Doing anything else is just beating a dead horse. I think that they should outlaw putting similar issues on the ballot at the same time so the lobbiest can’t confuse those voters who are not well informed.
By Karen
May 25, 2007 4:29 PM | Link to this
I voted for the smoking ban, BUT, If the men who fought for our country want to smoke WHEREEVER THEY gather. LET THEM. They have earned that right. It’s not like they want to invade your space with it. I want a second chance to vote.
By jmc
May 25, 2007 4:24 PM | Link to this
you think this is a big deal? no smoking in a private club? gimme a braek. wait til the government really starts taking away your rights. don’t say ‘the people voted for it’ b/c all it takes is a few bucks and a commercial of propaganda to get your agenda heard in this country. the sheep in ohio obviously took heed. i cant wait til our government bans strip clubs, suvs, fat people, guns and basically anything other than white people and jesus!
hahahaha…
By jmc
May 25, 2007 4:23 PM | Link to this
you think this is a big deal? no smoking in a private club? gimme a braek. wait til the government really starts taking away your rights. don’t say ‘the people voted for it’ b/c all it takes is a few bucks and a commercial of propaganda to get your agenda heard in this country. the sheep in ohio obviously took heed. i cant wait til our government bans strip clubs, suvs, fat people, guns and basically anything other than white people and jesus!
hahahaha…
By Michael
May 25, 2007 4:16 PM | Link to this
The rationale for banning it everywhere is the same rationale for the seatbelt law. It’s economics. Do you know how expensive it is to treat injured motorists who didn’t wear a seatbelt? Ask NJ Gov. John Corzine, who nearly lost his life. Do you know how expensive it is to care for people with breathing problems? They usually linger a very long time. Do you know how many Medicaid patients have lung cancer or other serious pulmonary diseases? MANY. Do the math. NO SMOKING.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
Joebob, again, I challenge you to back up your statement. Something a little more specific than “read the Constitution.”
I don’t want to argue this issue, because it’s truly out of our hands for now. But seriously folks, gas prices are through the roof, inflation is out of control, unemployment is on the rise, and we are the most universally despised country on the planet. Why? Because politicians think we’re more concerned about smoking.
By joebob
May 25, 2007 3:59 PM | Link to this
JM go read the constituion.
By JM
May 25, 2007 3:56 PM | Link to this
joebob:go back to KY non-smoker: go back to school. i before e except after c Geo:1 post is sufficient
By Roy
May 25, 2007 3:54 PM | Link to this
And my last thought is that a “majority” should not be able to supersede the rights of individuals.
By Bruce
May 25, 2007 3:52 PM | Link to this
I am soooo sick of everyone getting in everybodies business in this country. Our rights are being taken away more and more every day! We are getting more and more like the former Soviet Union and sonn will become a socialist country. We better stop the direction this country is going soon or we will only have the right to pay taxes!!!
By Doug
May 25, 2007 3:51 PM | Link to this
If the VFWs and like can assuere the state they will ONLY be catering to actual veterans and their spouses (and not to their friends, and friends’s friends, etc) then I would say to let them smoke; however, if they cannot comply with that then they should be smoke free also.
By joebob
May 25, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
Read the constitution.
By k
May 25, 2007 3:47 PM | Link to this
Lets talk facts the only reason this law passed was because there were two issues on the ballot that split the vote. Had this been a stand alone issue it would not have passed because the people would not have been so confused by the advertising. Let’s put it back on the ballot by itself and see where it leads.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 3:45 PM | Link to this
Joebob, I’m interested in your explanation of how an issue that was placed on the ballot by voter petitions, then passed in a general election by the majority of voters, is unconstitutional.
Also, in every state that has passed similar bans (we were number 16), tax revenue from the restaurant/bar industry has INCREASED.
By John Lambes
May 25, 2007 3:43 PM | Link to this
The government did not inpose a smoking ban. It was imposed by alaw passed by the majority in a demeocratic election. The intent and terms of the law were very clear. If you cannot abide with this then do something to legally change the law or go somewhere else.
By jim
May 25, 2007 3:40 PM | Link to this
The people gathered signatures to get this on the ballot.The people passed this issue in November.The politicians now need to stay the hell out of it .
By joebob
May 25, 2007 3:38 PM | Link to this
Sorry about your losses but it does not change the fact that it is unconstitutional, period. And these laws WILL affect revenue in this state and will affect businesses.
By Geo
May 25, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
If the smokers did not understand the ballot question; Shame on them. They should have studied harder about the proposal. Their was endless info explaining the ban. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company invested more than 5 million dollars of advertising into Ohio trying to advise smokers and mis-advise non smokers on this entire issue. Sorry smokers…………. you lost!
By Geo
May 25, 2007 3:37 PM | Link to this
If the smokers did not understand the ballot question; Shame on them. They should have studied harder about the proposal. Their was endless info explaining the ban. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company invested more than 5 million dollars of advertising into Ohio trying to advise smokers and mis-advise non smokers on this entire issue. Sorry smokers…………. you lost!
By Chris
May 25, 2007 3:33 PM | Link to this
It is highly unlikely that people/businesses leave a state because smoking is prohibited in its’ public facilities, businesses, etc. There are MUCH Larger reasons than that. I don’t think it’s fair to waffle as to whether somking should be allowed in a prviate club such as a VFW ect.. If you prohibit smoking in on public place, prohibit it in all public places. It makes a level playing field and as a non-smoker who lost a parent and a grandparent to lung cancer, it’s about time this was enacted.
By Dave
May 25, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this
This makes about the sixth forum in which we’ve debated this issue. I see the same names with the same arguments, and some of you recognize me. So I won’t bore you with my opinion on the law itself.
What I do want to know is, if Strickland is so concerned with what people voted for in November, how does he feel about the racetrack casino bill the state legislature is trying to sneak in. We voted on that one, too.
By dd
May 25, 2007 3:28 PM | Link to this
Jim, the “small group” was the majority of voters.