A possible statewide smoking ban drew a yawn from an interim legislative panel recently, but at least one lawmaker is going to push the issue anyway. State Sen. Roger Reitz, R-Manhattan, a physician, said he’ll introduce a bill to ban smoking in public places, with no exceptions. “It may not be the time to do this, because it’s an election year,” Reitz said, “but it’s my take that we’re seeing the desire for this issue to be addressed at the state level. I’ll see how it sticks in people’s craws, but we should at least debate it. If it’s a bad bill, it will die on its own merits. But to dilute it is to make it unfair.”
It was interesting to read in last Sunday’s Eagle that the owner of the venerable Town & Country on West Kellogg, which allows smoking throughout the restaurant, “secretly wishes the city would pass a no-smoking ordinance and solve the problem for him.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- thomaswitt on Let immigrants run
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- minutelady on Open thread 11/23
- Phantom on Open thread 11/23
- minutelady on Open thread 11/23
- XXX on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Let immigrants run
47 Comments
I agree, ban smoking in public places, no exceptions.
They really need to take a look at the laws here in FL, they work very well. Mainly, no smoking in restaurants (but you can smoke in bars where 10% or less of their business comes from food. I think it works out great. I am (originally)from Kansas and when I come back there it’s astounding to see people smoking in a restaurant!!!!
Ban smoking in restaurants by all means. If you can’t make it through a meal without a smoke, you got a problem. But to ban smoking in public seems to be taking the issue a bit too far.
So what else shall we ban? Here’s my idea: Ban drinking in public. I think having beer gardens at the River Fest and the State Fair is tasteless. These are family venues where children are present. Do it for the children!
xxx
I really don’t see why alcohol is legal in the first place.
Tobacco, alcohol, sugar, and fat are substances that contribute to the high disease and death rate in America.
I have almost entirely eliminated those things from my life and the result has been an extremely healthy and disease free body.
Bad bills do not really die in the legislature. They just come back next session.
As XXX has pointed out a totally ban on smoking in restaurants would not truly effect me one way or another. If I am eating at a restaurant that does not allow smoking or since I am the only one in the family that smokes we generally do set in the non-smoking section anyway. I go outside after eating to have a cigarette and then come back in to talk.
BUT, it does smack of autocratic rule and is offensive in principal one has as much of a right not to smoke as I have to smoke. And it should be left to the business owner as to whether to allow smoking in their business or where. To do otherwise is to undermine the principals of a free state and though health is a consideration. So a requirement for such concerns should be met in a business that allows smoking.
It seem more a comfort issue for most, not smelling the smoke while eating or even seeing someone smoke.
Now we do as a norm takes such consideration into account, I.E. no public nudity, though it in reality it is not a public health concern. LOL I have met XXX and may find it hard to eat if he was setting naked at the table in front of me.. No offense (but wouldn’t you hate the thought of being the next person to set there? heee)! If the issue is general health is one thing, but how well should we as a free state accommodate people’s ecstatic pleasure?
Ok Dog, now you got me worried, LOL!
Golly, Roger, you’re right it’s an election year. Don’t do any thing of importance because you gut-less cowards may not be re-elected. After all, isn’t that your REAL job…getting re-elected? seems to be the only one you care about.
So, why isnt there an extreme push to put extra taxes on Beer, Wine, Liquor??? Like on tobacco??? Or on sugar, or fast food burgers???
They always say they tax tobacco because of the public cost of “taking care of” smokers and their diseases… So, let’s spread it out over a number of things that for public “caring” of the users???
Seems to me that smokers die earlier, so actually it cost much less for their healthcare. It’s those people living to their 80s and 90s who really cost money.
Nope, the whole “tax smokers to pay for healthcare” meme is a (pardon me) smokescreen. Fact is, smokers are an easily-definable non-partisan minority. Legistlators don’t tax alcohol or sugar or fatty foods because Americans *LOVE* alcohol, sugar, and fast food.
I agree LTP… Thats the way I see it too…
That’s the real cowardice, attack an easy target.
“Cowardice?!”
Politicians?!
I’m stunned.
Probably because the entire idea is nonsense. The EPA’s own study was false and was thrown out of Federal court. Thet wrote the report BEFORE the data was analyzed…heh. And it did NOT say what they said it said.
2nd had smoke simply has no proven link to increases. It may be annoying, but so is the editorial page here. But it only pisses you off, not kills you.The last pronouncement much ballyhooed by WE and the former Surgeon General was crap too and that is why he quietly resigned never to be heard of again
http://www.davehitt.com/facts/epa.html
http://www.widigest.com/html/jj101004.htm
Headline:Federal Court Rejects EPA Secondhand Smoke Study.http://www.heartland.org/archives/environment/sep98/smoke.htm
But we all know none of this will make sense to politicians or “journalists” who will use the opportunity to grandstand and use the extremely dangerous phrase “we are saving “the children”.
The newspapers use it the bash the politicians for not doing their bidding.
I do wish we could get back to some old line politicians with the big brass set of balls to tell the journalist to f**k off in more eloquent and unambiguous language.
“Now we do as a norm takes such consideration into account, I.E. no public nudity, though it in reality it is not a public health concern. LOL I have met XXX and may find it hard to eat if he was setting naked at the table in front of me.. No offense (but wouldn’t you hate the thought of being the next person to set there? heee)!”
“Ok Dog, now you got me worried, LOL!”
Yeah the whole idea as a example worried me too LOL
I guess ??? missed his/her late American history class in high school. The hypocrites have tried banning alcohol. Guess what…didn’t work. Enough said!
Bolomite,How does wanting to ban alcohol make one a hypocrite? Does that also make one who wants to ban smoking a hypocrite?
The hypocracy is that we’re so worried about the societal cost of smoking, but almost nobody worries about the effects of drinking. Even if we ignore the carnage on our streets and highways, there’s the havoc wreaked on families. How many of the homeless are that way because of the effect of alcohol? How many homeless find themselves in that condition because they smoke? How many people are in our jails and prisons because of crimes they committed under the influence of alcohol? How many people are in prison because of crimes committed under the influence of cigarettes?
With the number of broken homes due to alcohol consumption, why aren’t the “family values” people all over this issue?
Perhaps XXX, because alcohol is legal and virtually sanctioned by the government as are cigarettes (taxes on them.)
Also, the “family values” haven’t stopped their crusade against drug abuse of any kind, especially alcohol and cigarettes.
The people of Sedgwick County clearly made their voice heard with Sunday liquor sales and poo poo’d any effort by the “family values” people to restrict the sales, thus lessening the availability.
There are many companies, mostly fast food restaurants it appears, that ban smoking in their facilities and it hasn’t affect their business in the least.
There have been many TV commercials about smoking. The latest one on “light bullets” I find amusing. Where the anti-smoking advocate goes into a gun store trying to purchase a “light bullet” as he is thinking it is like “light cigarettes” and won’t kill you.
Lot’s of efforts out their against smoking, but in a free society we sometimes have to deal with those who independently go against health decisions and smoke anyway.
writerdog—going outside to smoke is very considerate of you, but if they ban public smoking seems to me that you couldn’t do that.
Kansas,My post was pretty much “tongue in cheek”. I’m not a drinker. I tried for years, but I just couldn’t get past the nasty taste and smell. I really don’t have any problem with people drinking, although I detest drunks for obvious reasons.
I guess my point is, why do we get our panties in such a bunch over one kind of “poison” and not another? Seems to me, either vice is about equally destructive in one way or another.
I gotcha now XXX. Sometimes the obvious flies run up my nose and I scratch my arm in response. :)
XXX, you could make the same arguement between booze and marijauna, and the government did outlaw booze once and it worked as well as drug prohitbiton does.
Tom Paine,Excellent point, and one I considered. I thought about using that example, but on this blog, that opens you up to a lot of accusations that I just really don’t feel like discussing.
The war on drugs would make an interesting thread, don’t you think?
It would, and I commented the other day that opposition to decriminalizing victimless crimes often comes from the very conservatives who scream and preach about small government.
…and endless whining about the nanny state.
writerdog—going outside to smoke is very considerate of you, but if they ban public smoking seems to me that you couldn’t do that.
Speaking of war on drugs, watched the CNN special on Afghanistan and how DEA agents were training Afghani drug enforcement agents to deal with their “drug” agriculture and shipping problem.
Afghanistan has a huge problem and don’t look for it to get resolved any time soon.
Was an interesting presentation though.
Smoking is absolutely the most filthy habit on earth. I’m sick of breathing other people’s cancer. I don’t want to get cancer from someone else’s decision to kill themselves, and it’s time to ban indoor smoking period! NOW!
the interesting part about the cnn afghanistan drug story was how the u.s. destroys the poppy fields.poppy is the only crop that pays enough to make a living.the taliban pays the farmer for the crop and transports it to “market” for them.
so, who’s gonna be your daddy?the people who destroy your livelyhood or the people who help you feed your children?
and, we wonder why we are losing the war in iraq and falling behind in afghanistan?
Smoking is absolutely the most filthy habit on earth.Posted by: ConservativeBushHater | September 09, 2007 at 02:57 PM
Oh, I don’t know. Picking your nose and biting your nails is right up there.But I see your point. Please feel free to hold your breath for a few hours. I doubt if you’ll have a problem afterward.
I always thought this was supposed to be a FREE country. That thought was obviously delusional. Are there not enough restaurants in this town to accomodate both smokers and non-smokers? Why should the non smokers be allowed to dictate to the restaurant owner (or any other business owner, for that matter)how to run his business?
I remember an article I read years ago about a group of people, the youngest was 101, when asked how they have lived so long answered “a pack of cigarettes and a pint of whiskey every day.”
The good news for the “ban smoking everywhere on planet earth as well as the moon” crowd is that a nice range of possibilities exists for milking the issue, not only during the next election season, but in election cycles to follow. As The Board has pointed out on more than one occasion, you can work the anti-tobacco angle from the much traveled viewpoint of banning smoking in all public places, but you can also tax the products at a high rate (Up on Mount Olympus, the Goddess Kathleen appears to have proposed it–or perhaps she’s just thinking about proposing it…I can’t remember as the smoke from a delicious Carolos Torano Virtuoso billows up from a nearby tray), thereby priming the pump of the edgy, intolerant masses along that line. And since increasing percentages of the population have thrown in the towel on the abomination altogether, the numbers inevitably work on behalf of the reluctant but ever-so-sincere politicians who only want to do what’s right for America. No question, then, that much courageous legislation lies ahead. I can only lament the reality that I won’t be in the wondrous chamber when the soaring rhetoric rains down upon us. The aforementioned doc, for example, has doubtless already conjured his sonorous opening line. Faulkner would be rapt.
Although this lovely topic comes up about once a week here at We Blog, I for one don’t care what happens. Oh, I know I’ve argued against it from the start, but the truth is that, once the practitioners of mind control get their hearts set on a meaningless, draconian measure, there’s not much an ordinary working man can do but break out his new JR Cigars catalog and contemplate what he wants this time around. The thing you have to remember if you plan to tax the stuff at a high rate locally is that the free market applies and out-of-state ordering is but a phone call away. In truth, I rather enjoy speaking with the group in Carolina. Their manners are exquisite, and they have a fine sense of humor. The fellow who writes the catalog is as funny as they come.
As I flip through the glossy that arrived yesterday via the U.S Postal Service, I’m thinking that I’ll probably go with the El Rey Del Mundos again, along with a couple boxes of five of the new “Dark, Decadent, Delicious, Nat Sherman Sumatras.” We’ll see. I aim to support the local shops as well, right up until the Deities change the pricing scheme, at which point the cheaper out-of-state option will become a necessity.
One thing I won’t be doing, though, is lighting one of these damn things up in a public place, where some nutty civilian could take a shot at me.
“I remember an article I read years ago about a group of people, the youngest was 101, when asked how they have lived so long answered “a pack of cigarettes and a pint of whiskey every day.”
Yeah right! I’ve been a nurse for 20 years and I never saw ANYONE live to be old who drank and smoked like that! Sounds like pure BS to me.
Hey…I got an idea….lets give up somemore freedom’s. I think we need to ban coffee….I can’t stand the smell of it. If people want to smoke and drink…let them. That way the population stay’s down and only the smart live on.
Smoking is absolutely the most filthy habit on earth. I’m sick of breathing other people’s cancer. I don’t want to get cancer from someone else’s decision to kill themselves, and it’s time to ban indoor smoking period! NOW!
Posted by: ConservativeBushHater
That’s easy…just stay away from them. It is still a pretty big planet.
Since when does the smell of coffee affect someone’s health? Why do smokers always come up with such stupid arguments? I don’t want YOUR smoke in MY lungs..your rights stop where mine begin. It’s really pretty simple.
Three of my children (adults) are allergic to smoke. This means there are many places we can’t go because of this. And those of you who go outside -why do you have to stand by the doorway so we have to hold our breath for quite a ways. Since this is really a health hazard, I want it banned anywhere I go. And don’t get me started on guns. There is no reason anyone should smoke anywhere the rest of us go.
Well, lets see, compared to people going down the hiway, reading the newspaper, road map, chatting on thier cell phones, dialing up thier cell phones, fidgiting with the radio trying to find a different station, turning thier head around like an owl to scream at the kid in the back seat to shutup, drinking while driving, doing drugs while driving, road rage and much more than I can think of, I will take my chances with second hand smoke.
I’m still sweet on an opt-out smoking ban.The default for restaurants, clubs and other businesses would be “non-smoking”.But, for a fee, you could apply for a smoke license, similar to a liquor license. You’d make back the cost of the fee in no time due to the smokers flocking to your place in droves, especially if you own a bar (beer and cigarettes go so well together).And then, over half (probably close to 75%) of restaurants would be smoke free and people could enjoy their meal without any smoker smelliness.
Did that even make sense, lol?
With the actions of the Health industry in health insurance policy making you can be sure that a smoking ban of some sort is evitable for the state of Kansas! Here’s why! Bars and Grill who allow smoking will not be able to hire workers because their health insurance will not pay for smoke-related illnesses! Those who work at those places will not take the chance of losing their health coverage just to make 6.50 an hour minus tips. It’s just not worth it! That alone will drive the no-smoking ban! Plus, most, like myself who want to have a drink will not infiltrate such places. Instead, we will stay home and consume our adult beverage without the clouds of smoke hanging overhead! The power of the greenback will dictate having a non-smoking ban! So look for a ban coming to your city or town in the next two to three years!!!!
One can only hope.
The irony is now so thick, I won’t even bother sifting through it.
When I open my private club, “Taliaferro’s,” in a splendid Jeffersonian mansion on top of a high hill, non-smokers are not invited.
You can keep each other company in Old Town.
Sounds good to me. That way I won’t feel like I’ve been hit in the head with a shovel when I wake up the next morning.
Done and done: a hypothetical setting where Mary’s rights do not “begin.”
Doubtless, we will be advised of other ordinances by and by.