[POLL] - Smoking Ban

[Kelemvor]

Here in WI the governor wants to all of a sudden enact a statewide complete smoking ban.

Would you vote for either of the two smoking bans listed above? These are the most common bans types I've seen and am just curious if the more lenient ban would have more support than the strict ban.

Question 1) Total ban meaning no smoking in any public place. Restaurant, bar, etc. No exceptions

Question 2) Based on the percentage of food vs alcohol served. This would mean that places that are your basic Bar/Tavern, who do most of their sales in alcohol and the food is just a small portion, would be exempt from the ban. However restaurants that do most of the business in food but also have a bar would be included in the ban.

Personally I'd vote for either since I hate smoking but just curious what others would say.

 

[Malak]

Absolutely vote yes. There is no reason why smoking should be legal and many why it should be. It's just as bad as illicit drugs only worse because it's legal. It has a negative impact on the health of others around, especially on those like me. Smoking is much worse for me due to my condition.

 

[AbAbber2k]

Originally posted by: Malak
Absolutely vote yes. There is no reason why smoking should be legal and many why it should be. It's just as bad as illicit drugs only worse because it's legal. It has a negative impact on the health of others around, especially on those like me. Smoking is much worse for me due to my condition.

The 1993 EPA issued report, which is one of the most widely cited studies by anti-secondhand smoke activists, was deemed, for lack of better words, BULLSH1T by a district court judge in 1998. It's pretty widely known that the EPA skewed the numbers in their favor. That said, I'm a non-smoker who WOULD support a partial ban... but I would never support a complete public ban.

 

[MetalMat]

If that would ever get passed, you might as well get a hammer and sickle and give up your freedom.

I love the ban on smoking in bars, but it should be decided by the bar and not the state/government.

 

[CKent]

Originally posted by: Malak
Absolutely vote yes. There is no reason why smoking should be legal and many why it should be. It's just as bad as illicit drugs only worse because it's legal. It has a negative impact on the health of others around, especially on those like me. Smoking is much worse for me due to my condition.

Heil, fuhrer!

 

[Malak]

You guys that think it's freedom to kill yourself just have no idea how to live. You want to support the right of people to kill themselves, and to kill yourself, because it's all about rights and not about wrongs. This has absolutely nothing to do with rights, it has everything to do with the point of having a government. To protect and serve the people. Banning smoking is within those lines and there is no logical reasoning to support allowing smoking to stay legal. It's wrong, period.

 

[n7]

Smoking is an evil vile habit that affects far too many people, often those not smoking.

I'd vote for a ban of smoking in general.

IOW, jail time for those who do

 

[DainBramaged]

It's amazing how much this country has drifted from the values instilled by our founding fathers. They would most likely be physically ill if they saw what the government was allowed to do to ones own freedoms these days.

 

[Brainonska511]

Not that I have a problem with the way the poll is set up, it may have been better to arrange it as one poll such that it looks something like this so you could compare who supports one or the other (or none of the above):

-Yes to Ban in all places
-Yes to Ban based on establishment type
-No to all

 

[Toastedlightly]

No ban on any private property.. period.

A ban on public property is slightly debatable.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: DainBramaged
It's amazing how much this country has drifted from the values instilled by our founding fathers. They would most likely be physically ill if they saw what the government was allowed to do to ones own freedoms these days.

Especially the freedom pay tax after tax after tax on the same items over and over again.

They didn't stand for it while today's American wusses gladly take it up the arse.

 

[MetalMat]

Originally posted by: Malak
You guys that think it's freedom to kill yourself just have no idea how to live. You want to support the right of people to kill themselves, and to kill yourself, because it's all about rights and not about wrongs. This has absolutely nothing to do with rights, it has everything to do with the point of having a government. To protect and serve the people. Banning smoking is within those lines and there is no logical reasoning to support allowing smoking to stay legal. It's wrong, period.

I dont even smoke and I think you are so so so wrong. Its not like you are breathing in smoke 24 hours a day and it is enough to kill you. It should be up to the place or business or the public place if smoking is banned or not. If you go to a bar and dont like people smoking in it, go find another, simple as that. I bet you and Tipper Gore were real tight with the PMRC back in the day :thumbsdown:

 

[TechBoyJK]

Originally posted by: DainBramaged
It's amazing how much this country has drifted from the values instilled by our founding fathers. They would most likely be physically ill if they saw what the government was allowed to do to ones own freedoms these days.

smoking is a man made plague that will eventually be erradicated from society through hard lessons learned by elders, education, and tougher laws. Once history has a chance to look back on smoking, it will be viewed as a deadly plague that will dumfound our future offspring as to how it ever existed.

 

[Fayd]

I would support a partial ban based on the type of establishment, but i'd rather leave it up to the establishment to determine their own rules regarding smoking vs non-smoking.


(and maybe be required to apply for a license to create a smoking establishment... free license, of course, just to ensure that there be a nonsmoker establishment in the area before a smoker establishment.)

 

[dj2004]

I don't smoke, infact I hate the smell of smokers but I don't agree with any bannage. Cigarettes give too much revenue.

 

[dxkj]

Originally posted by: MetalMat
If that would ever get passed, you might as well get a hammer and sickle and give up your freedom.

I love the ban on smoking in bars, but it should be decided by the bar and not the state/government.

I think people should be allowed to smoke anywhere it doesnt force other people to breathe it in...

I think it should be against the law to smoke anywhere it forces other people to breathe it in.

 

[dawnbug]

I'm in Madison where they've banned smoking in bars and restaurants. It's really nice to go into a restaurant and not have to worry about being seated in the "non-smoking" which is a table or two away from the "smoking" section.

Wasn't there something about a $2 extra state tax on cigarettes in Wi, too?

 

[animalia]

no and no. I accidentally voted yes to the second one so you can disregard one of the yes votes. let people smoke if they want and toughen up if you don't like it. My parent were raised in chain smoking households and neither of them smoke or have lung cancer or birth defects.

HELL YEAH BAN SMOKING. HELL YEAH MAKE KILLING BABIES LEGAL. THE ENVIRONMENT IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE CYCLE OF LIFE!!!!!!

 

[erub]

blah blah blah go to nonsmoking bar rinse repeat

bullshit, the only cities that I have lived in/visited where there is more than 1 nonsmoking bar is the ones where smoking is outright banned!! these pansy bar owners cater to the smokers.

 

[Toastedlightly]

Originally posted by: erub
blah blah blah go to nonsmoking bar rinse repeat

bullshit, the only cities that I have lived in/visited where there is more than 1 nonsmoking bar is the ones where smoking is outright banned!! these pansy bar owners cater to the smokers.

So what you want is far more important than what the /owners/ of the bar want?

 

[dxkj]

Originally posted by: dj2004
I don't smoke, infact I hate the smell of smokers but I don't agree with any bannage. Cigarettes give too much revenue.

Marijuana would give too much revenue
___ drug would give too much revenue

What is your point? Its ok as long as the government makes money off of it, even though it costs so much in medical care and treatment?

 

[vi edit]

If it's a public vote and the majority says "we don't want it", then that's a stamp of approval enough for me.

But I don't think that it's right for it to be enacted without a public majority (even though I wouldn't complain if it was).

 

[Amused]

I would vote no on both. I my opinion smoking bans are a violation of private property rights. Businesses are NOT public places. They are private property in which the public is invited at the will of the owner.

The majority have no right to vote away the rights of the minority (individual).

And no, I do not smoke and hate the smell.

 

[dj2004]

Originally posted by: dxkj

Originally posted by: dj2004
I don't smoke, infact I hate the smell of smokers but I don't agree with any bannage. Cigarettes give too much revenue.

Marijuana would give too much revenue
___ drug would give too much revenue

What is your point? Its ok as long as the government makes money off of it, even though it costs so much in medical care and treatment?

My point is that it isn't going to be banned anytime soon.

 

[Howard]

Originally posted by: Malak
Absolutely vote yes. There is no reason why smoking should be legal

DANGER WILL ROBINSON

Your wording scares me very much.