Votes
Do you support Gov. Mark Parkinson's push for a statewide smoking ban?
September 17, 2009
Phil Jenkins (Basehor Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 11499 junior vice commander in ) says...
“I would support a state wide ban on indoor smoking as the governor has proposed.”
Vicky Wheeler (Bonner Springs Elementary teacher in ) says...
“I am for some type of smoking ban but with limitations.”
William "Heinz" Rodgers (Former Edwardsville mayor in ) says...
“No, smoking is already prohibited in all state- and city-owned buildings. Let private business owners choose the patrons they want in their business, and leave the government to tend to their own business.”
Comments
generalsn (anonymous) says…
Just a reminder of the sources of the bans, RWJ Foundation, owned by big pharma, and the coalitions, more concerned with "social change" than the bans themselves:
http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?ia...
And what the 99 million dollars was going to. Note on page seven the "inside -out", provision going for patios later, AFTER business owners spend thousands of dollars to build them to accommodate their smoking customers, clearly showing that the tobacco control activists have absolutly no concern about local issues or businesses.
http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Funda...
Here's the "model ban" from page eight that many communities copied, printed, and passed. It's the "smoking ban for dummies" It only takes a few minutes to fill in the blanks naming your community, the administrators names, and blanks to customize it to your community according to the width of your sidewalks.
http://www.no-smoke.org/document.php?...
marbee (anonymous) says…
Google worlds oldest smokers, you'll find ALL the worlds oldest people are or were smokers! The benefits of smoking tobacco have been common knowledge for centuries, and big pharma knows this and would wipe out the competition. From sharpening mental acuity to maintaining optimal weight, the relatively small risks of smoking have always been outweighed by the substantial improvement to mental and physical health. Alzheimer's, parkinson's, Tourette's Syndrome, even schizophrenia and cocaine addiction are disorders that are alleviated by tobacco. Tobacco shows promise to prevent colon and prostate cancer and the endorsement for smoking tobacco by the medical establishment is good news for smokers and non-smokers alike. The revelation that tobacco is good for you is trumped by the pharmaceutical industry's plan to substitute the natural and relatively inexpensive tobacco plant with their overpriced and ineffective nicotine substitutions with 98% failure rates for quitting for 1 year or more. Big pharma has spent billions demonizing the pleasure of smoking using social engineering and profits from bans that destroys private businesses and pits one population against another. Follow the money! I read an article about a boy that OD'd on Nicorette gum given at school without parental knowledge. So, in a legal drug pushing scheme, pharmaceutical nicotine is pushed on 12 year old kids trumping parental autonomy. If anyone doubted that the anti-smoking, anti-overweight crusade leads back to Johnson & Johnson, open your eyes people!
marbee (anonymous) says…
I think using smoke as an excuse for adults to exert the preference of one group over another is shameful!
Cigarette 3 mg of nitrogen oxide (NO) and 40 mg of carbon monoxide (CO)
One single 747 takeoff/landing 115 pounds of NO and 32 pounds of CO
(That's 52 million mg of NO and 14 million mg of CO)
500 takeoffs/landings per day has the CO equivalent of over 160 million cigarettes and the NO of Eight and a Half billion cigarettes. How many people go to airports or heat their homes or simply drive their cars ?
averaged emissions of fine particles in grams per hour or day
Cigarette .4 grams/hour (0.8 grams/pack)
Gas or Propane Furnace .001 grams/hour ( 0.024 grams/day)
Oil furnace .02 grams/hour (0.48 grams/day)
Pellet Stove 2.4 grams/hour ( 56.6 grams/day)
Single Simulated Log 8 grams/hour
Certified Wood Stove 8.2 grams/hour (196.8 grams/day)
Non-certified wood stove 15.6 grams/hour
Fireplace-hardwood (36 lbs. or 16 kg burned over 3 hours.) 30 grams/hour
Fireplace-softwood (31 lbs.or 14kg burned over 3 hours.) 59 grams/hour.
Auto-with Catalytic Converter .66 grams/hour
Auto-without Catalytic Converter 3.5 grams/hour.
Auto-smoking 6 grams/hour
Diesel 14 ton Truck or Bus 36 grams/hour
Diesel Truck or Bus 70 grams/hour
References:
1986 SG Report pgs. 129, 130, 136
EPA Report "Technical Data... Commercial Aviation" 09/29/95
http://www.burningissues.org/comp-emm...
To think you are harmed out in the open by a little smoke! Airplanes put out more in one day than you will EVER be exposed to by a lifetime of smokers.
marbee (anonymous) says…
Phil Jenkins, what did you guys fight for? These anti-smoking groups are well paid lobbyists! They purposely blur the line between public place (taxpayer funded) and privately owned that is owned by an individual or corporation that receives no public funding but nevertheless opens the property to the public. Anti-tobacco proponents spend a great deal of time and an obscene amount of money to do this! The "Public" has invested nothing in this private property, and is accountable for nothing including the loss of business that results from such bans, whether its Smoking, Trans-fats, or some other politically incorrect, but legal practice or legal product being banned as a result.
You clearly don't realize what you're giving away! If we are willing to usurp the liberty of property owners simply because we personally don't like smoking, we don't deserve the liberty that allows us to cast such a vote to begin with.
snowbird (anonymous) says…
I believe that non-smokers, like anyone else, have this right.
But how far does that right extend?
Should it take priority over someone else's rights?
Court houses, publicly owned buildings and anywhere else an
individual might be forced to go should properly be included in any
smoking law.
What should not be included are places located in or on private property,
providing an individual is not compelled by necessity or law,
to frequent or work at that specific location.