By Reverendcrash

December 6, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

I am sure then that John Hocter will agree the voters KNEW that they were voting for a law that says it is not a violation for an individual to smoke in a public place. Of course he makes a million dollars a year. Guess stupidity is a premium product as opposed to research.

By History Buff

December 6, 2008 6:14 AM | Link to this

It is to bad Ohio has a smoking ban. Business in restaurants and taverns would pick up. Many quit bowling too. Those who promoted the ban never made up the customer loss. I think they owe a lot of people funds for damages.

By kybriar

December 6, 2008 6:13 AM | Link to this

Gracious Ann, B Rogers is really getting to you with the truth and yes, Ohio voted for the plainly stated family owned business & private clubs on the 2006 issue 5 ballot.

By Musician

December 6, 2008 1:35 AM | Link to this

FWIW, Scotsman, the downfall of AMC was the Renault merger in 1983. I still see some Hornets, Ambassadors, Gremlins, original Eagles from time to time driving down the streets with no problem. I have yet to see an Alliance or Encore. Those originals Eagles had a nice straight 6 as I remember. The “AMC” Alliance was tin foil.

By Musician

December 6, 2008 1:31 AM | Link to this

Scotsman, if you think “Birdland” as a song is jazz, you need to do some research. Birdland used to have jazz in the club. Research that. Weather Report’s version is closer to jazz, but I assume you prefer the Manhattan Transfer version. If not, just say so.

By Musician

December 6, 2008 1:22 AM | Link to this

Scotsman, you crack me up. What tartan is your kilt? If it ain’t Scottish, its crap. Just like all the Stanton Glantz..”no heart attacks after smoking ban” yarns. That lobbying grant grubbing so and so should lose tenure and dig some ditches for a living. Bet he wouldn’t last a half hour in that environment. He is no hard body. God forbid if he plays Santa this season. We all know he likes playing “dr” with that lab coat of his.

By big kahuna

December 6, 2008 1:16 AM | Link to this

yes, the voters voted this ban in, however IT WAS PUSHED BY LAWMAKERS ONTO THE BALLOT! the buck stops at lawmakers whe push and support smoking bans. lawmakers pass unjust laws for one reason…THEY DO NOT FEAR A PARTICULAR VOTING BLOC. we registered smoker voters in America number over 20 million strong. the sleeping smoking giant is fast awakening. once we unite as a voting bloc, and once we begin booting out lawmakers who support smoking bans, then and only then will the disease of smoking bans cease to exist…enjoy your offices while you can lawmakers, because the smokevote is coming. exemptions anyone?

By b rogers

December 5, 2008 10:38 PM | Link to this

Ann, this is just the beginning of the story. Too bad you thought you had it all wrapped up.

By Ann

December 4, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

I have read all comments and frankly b rogers is full of it…..I wish he would quit posting. VOTERS VOTED…END OF STORY.

By LuckeeStrike

December 4, 2008 12:13 AM | Link to this

Musicalbuck - the first rule of posting as two differnt’ peeps so as to make it appear that muey grande peeps agree with you is to use differnt syntax, terms and tenor. Rule two is don’t be posting like within 14 minutes at midnight. But seeing as how you have trod upon my areas of expertise - Scotland and music - how can I resist? I am, actually, a Scottish musician. Tha’s a wee bit ta seey abow yer “facts”, lad - If you mean to imply that Scots are having heart attacks after being forced to stop smoking - well, that’s just farty logic, sir. Your point smells like farts. That’s like saying because Big Country charted a Scottish # 1 hit with “Big Country” in 1982 (by the way - did you know the guitar break in that song is “Scotland the Brave”?)and AMC stopped building the Pacer and the Gremlin in 1982. Well, the facts are clear , aren’t they? Scottish Pop Music success caused American Motors to fail, right? Come on - that’s just stupid on stilts and you know it. There is a thing called causation - there is not actual causal relationship between those random facts that happened within proximity of each other. By the way, the Scottish report - shows an overall downward trend in acute myocardial infarctions over the past five years. Probably due as much to the fact that they stopped breading and deep frying Milky Way bars (although they call them Mars bars there) in fish-n-chip batter for take away. That’s Scot for “to go”. No lie - I ate one of those things on the way back from a Celtic football match in Glasgow. Speaking of driving - how do reckon that point? You tell me Angus is in a bar drinking a McEwan’s lager. A lot of ‘em. And then he decides he wants a smoke, so he has to drive. Because he has to leave to smoke. Ergo ipso facto - that causes him to get into a wreck and hurt people. And evidently, that would have been avoided by him staying at the bar and smoking? Check my math here - perfesser, but won’t he still be stewed or probably more so after he smokes, presuming he stays at the bar? Buckmusician - please stop with the psuedo science and the obviously stupid points - ie. Chantix killed people! News flash, Sparky - smoking kills people! A lot of ‘em. Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt, Buck - its yer zip code. You don’t have to look to hard either to find working musicians who find it much easier to blow tenor on “Birdland” without you exhaling Marlboro and menthol in their face. You are clinging to idiotic antecdotes that you made up, and it is killing the one good point you have - which is, is it really the state’s job to make individual choices for people?

By b rogers

December 2, 2008 7:33 PM | Link to this

Go to Opponents of Ohio Bans to see their latest press release.

By Fact is:

December 1, 2008 11:50 PM | Link to this

FYI: No one EVER said smoking had to be allowed in any business. It was always a business owners choice along with the customer and the employees choice concerning entry. … Beware if some radical group, one day, decides to ban hair in public. You have NO idea what the smoking ban has opened the door to!

By Musician

December 1, 2008 11:43 PM | Link to this

So many pro musicians without regular calendar this holiday season for live engagements. Was the same last year. Wall Street, gas prices, or any other excuse you would like to point to has little to nothing to do with any of this. It was never this way before the smoking ban. Do the math, antis while you listen the canned recorded music culture you helped bring in.

By b rogers

December 1, 2008 11:29 PM | Link to this

Since you are so bored, why not go out and visit one of the establishments that you and your ‘one size fits all’ blanket ban is putting out of business. Please be sure to leave a hefty tip before your bartender or server is put out in the cold to have a cigarette. Ohio isn’t just dumbing down, it is shutting down.

By beentheredonethat

December 1, 2008 8:07 PM | Link to this

quite frankly b rogers, you bore me(and everyone else on here) You give all kinds of statistics and info but the fact still remains that there IS a smoking ban in place put there by an overwhelming majority of the voting public and no mater what you say or what you do “We are informed and we are smart enough that we as a people DO NOT want you to polute our air with your smoke!!!

By b rogers

November 29, 2008 9:42 PM | Link to this

Quite frankly anti’s, your social engineering, denormalizing fear tactics are wearing thin. Shaming people into compliance (via shs) has become quite a skill for you hasn’t it? Guess what? People are waking up to your tactics and drug pushing. In some circles you are an absolute joke. To some you represent anti-freedom terrorism. To me, you are destroying businesses that are honest and upright. You are unemploying people who then lose their healthcare. There are more fires due to smoking receptacles being taken away. People who step outside to smoke are sometimes robbed, beaten or get date rape drugs in their waiting drinks. Just think about it, would you? The drug Chantix that you so proudly promote has caused death to dozens. There are more drunk driving accidents now due to people driving out of their way to find a place that will accept their lifestyle. You want to save lives? Stop taking money from anti-tobacco.

By b rogers

November 29, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

http://www.pr-inside.com/official-scotland-sees-large-rise-in-r941241.htm Official: Scotland sees large rise in hospital admissions for acute coronary syndrome in second year of smoking ban

By chet

November 26, 2008 7:18 PM | Link to this

hey MarlboroMan couldn’t have said it any better myself

By Judy

November 26, 2008 2:13 PM | Link to this

Marlboroman….applause applause…very well said.

By MarlboroMan

November 26, 2008 12:05 PM | Link to this

Buck, baby, - calm down. Here, have some Nicorette and a patch AND light up - just RELAX! I don’t know from moralisms - I don’t think that’s the issue. I don’t smoke cuz I don’t like it. Doesn’t make me better or worse than anybody. Further, I don’t care if you do. Don’t care if you do in Wal-Mart. I’m just like Dr. Suess - I would not could not care if you smoke upon a plane or on a train, or in a house or with a mouse. If that’s your thing - cool, then get on the horn to your state senator and tell hime if he doesn’t vote for 346 yer gonna empty yer ashtray in his Escalade. And if that’s not good enough, exercise your right as a citizen to draft a petition repealing the ban all together. Get enough like minded citizens to join in signature and vote - and you’ll be lighting up at Bob Evans before you know it. But for the love of Phillip Morris - STOP telling us that the negative effects “have never been proven to exist”. Because they have. Repeatedly. In independent tests. Beyond a doubt. You wanna smoke - live it up. You wanna smoke at Kroger’s - I don’t care. But STOP saying it doesn’t hurt you or those around you. It just makes you sound ill-informed, and discredits the good points you make about individual liberties.

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 9:40 PM | Link to this

Kaf, I did not write this article but this is one of the many reasons that I speak out! Before anti-smoker crusaders launched their war against smokers, personal behaviour, whether or not it might be deemed unhealthful, was considered an individual’s private business. Among the personal behavior frowned on was drinking, overeating and smoking. Through the years, these activities have been considered by many to be not only unhealthy, but immoral. But, since they were essentially private indulgences, they were generally accepted by the public as little more than a nuisance; sinful perhaps, but harmful to no one but those who chose to indulge. To be sure, the sale of some legal products has always been controlled to some degree, largely to protect children deemed too young and inexperienced to make responsible decisions on their own. Regulations on the sale of cigarettes and alcohol to minors are prime examples. Few have opposed these legitimate restrictions. The vast majority of adults understand instinctively the need to shelter children from questionable habits, at least until they can fully appreciate the possible adverse consequences of their actions. Unfortunately, the fanatics have also convinced the public that it’s not only children who need protection, but workers and the general public as well. They’ve managed to escalate a mere nuisance like secondhand smoke to the status of public health hazard. But, the agenda of the anti-smoker fanatics has little to do with protecting anyone; it’s really about punishing smokers for insisting they have a right to consume a legal product and engage in a legal activity. It’s about control. And, the agenda of the fanatics leaves no room for compassion. How else can you interpret efforts by Britain’s NHS (National Health Service) to close smoking rooms for terminally ill patients in Birmingham, England? The Sheldon Unit, a palliative care home for terminally ill patients is one of only two health care facilities in the region with smoking rooms provided on sympathetic grounds. Board members in charge of the unit, on learning of plans to upgrade the smoking room with a new ventilation system, intervened. Dr Chris Spencer-Jones, South Birmingham public health director, ranted against the renovation, determined to deny smokers one of their few remaining pleasures, even at death’s door. “It doesn’t matter if patients might be terminally ill,” said Spencer- Jones, “that is not relevant because there are other units where such patients cannot smoke. The practice at the Sheldon Unit is unacceptable.” The question is why? Why is it unacceptable to allow smokers, at Sheldon Unit or any palliative care facility, to retain a little dignity as they face death? Why is it necessary to denigrate and demean these people to the bitter end; aren’t they suffering enough as it is? What in God’s name have they done to deserve such despicable treatment? Nor can Canadians claim any superiority to the arrogant, outlandish treatment of the elderly and infirm in Great Britain. Jack Lakey, in a Dec 6, 2006 article in the Toronto Star, told the story of Suzanne Penny, diagnosed with cancer, destined to die and forced outside and into the cold to enjoy a smoke. Cigarettes may have been the cause of the cancer that ravaged her body, but they also provided some solace as she awaited death. Dennis Brown, CEO of Grace Hospital, is quoted by Lakey as saying: “When that bill was being enacted, we actually did consult with the ministry (Ontario Ministry of Health Promotion) specifically about our palliative care unit. We were told very clearly that there would be no exemptions for palliative care units.” Lakey’s article also points out the hypocrisy of the situation, noting that: “both the University of Toronto and York University recently created rooms for professors who smoke marijuana for medical reasons, but didn’t want to sneak around outside to do it.” Yet, the elderly, the infirm and the terminally ill are herded into parking lots like cattle; deprived of dignity; subjected to callous and inhumane treatment simply because they choose to smoke. And the anti-smoker bigots sit in their cushy offices and pat themselves on the back for their efforts to “save mankind” from a hazard which has never been proven to exist. There’s a name for people like them. As a matter of fact there are several. You can take your pick.

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 9:31 PM | Link to this

Kaf, controlling the lives of others is an addiction even when you think it is to better mankind. It isn’t freedom, it’s a form of slavery and it is stifling! And it’s especially sad when people become addicted as children. Perhaps it is just a personality type with which anti’s are afflicted.

By KAF

November 25, 2008 9:21 PM | Link to this

b rogers, addiction isn’t freedom, it’s a form of slavery. And it’s especially sad when people become addicted as children.

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 9:13 PM | Link to this

KAF, I also I live in a rational world that values learning, especially scientific learning. I also live in a world filled with with big pharma money and an attempt to induce fear. I also live in a world full of joy especially when freedom is involved.

By KAF

November 25, 2008 9:09 PM | Link to this

b rogers, your argument is with science and medicine, not me. I live in a rational world that values learning, especially scientific learning. Your attempts to discredit science and medicine are very sad.

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 8:48 PM | Link to this

Aahh, geez, Kaf. You forgot to mention, toenail fungus, Sids, sexually transmitted diseases and global warming. Once you have eradicated smoking and the scapegoat disappears, what will you blame it on?

By KAF

November 25, 2008 8:34 PM | Link to this

According to the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University, 89% of lung cancers,48% of bladder cancers, 24% of brain tumors, 21% of cervical cancers, 87% of cheek and gum cancers, 33% of kidney cancers, 30% of leukemia cases, 30% of pancreatic cancers, 36% of renal cancers, 35% of stomach cancers, and 71% of ureter cancers are caused by tobacco. And the most tragic aspect of all these cancer deaths due to tobacco is the fact that 8 out of 10 smokers begin smoking as children. These children are addicted to nicotine before they can even vote. A moving account of a smoker’s last days dying of lung cancer can be seen on YouTube ( youtube.com/watch?v=u_8BerrJg0M&feature=related).

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 8:14 PM | Link to this

Judy, Judy, Judy, approximately 2,600,000 nonsmokers die every year. Are you suggesting that it is due to second hand smoke?

By Non-Cas Fan

November 25, 2008 5:10 PM | Link to this

I am a life-long non-smoker and would favor a complete ban on tobacco products, but even I can see that this indoor smoking ban is a bad law. It was, first of all, not necessary. There was already a law on Ohio’s books whereby any business could declare its indoor space a non-smoking area. The new law was not necessary, and still is not. It limits American freedoms and liberties, by prohibiting a business owner from smoking in the privacy of his or her private office, or in their own vehicle if they use it at any time for business purposes. It prohibits a delivery person from smoking in his or her PRIVATE vehicle if their vehicle is used to make company deliveries. One person here pointed out that the vast majority of churches are in violation of the law, and he or she is 100% right, from my own observations. It was, and still is, a bad law. “KAF” listed all of the organizations that supported this forfeiture of personal property rights. Shame on them, and shame on any of you who supported this law. A better law, one which allowed personal property rights to be maintained, should have been written. You who voted in favor of this know darn good and well that you were mostly thinking about how nice it would be to dine out without smelling that nasty smoke. You have effectively sold your neighbor’s rights for a meal. Good going. What’s worse is that your vote has now put smokers outside at nearly every entrance that I, and my family, and you, and your families, have to walk past. We have thus been more exposed to tobacco smoke, courtesy of the ban, than we had been in the years before it. The bill before our legislators will not “overturn” the indoor ban. It will not even “weaken” it. Good grief! Learn some civics, people! The Legislators make changes to the laws all the time. And this bill will ONLY adjust the law to be more in-line with the wording of the ballot. People will not suddenly be smoking in the Applebee’s or indoors at the Mall! In fact, of all the bad parts in this indoor smoking ban, the worst parts are still intact. Take some time this weekend to make sure your church is in full compliance, and have a Happy Thanksgiving, no matter which side of this issue you are on.

By JoeKamel

November 25, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

wait a minute - wait a minute - uuhhhh - virgil k and history buff are telling me that smoking is GOOD for me? Look - I’m a non smoker but don’t go hating on me because of it. If we have a ban or not - I don’t care. Honestly. In fact, I don’t give a single rat dropping if you wanna go down to the VFW or PF Changs or Flying J truck stop and smoke your brains out. But pleeeeze don’t throw some horse hoey at me that sucking down Vantage is GOOD fer me - coz it ain’t.

By Judy

November 25, 2008 4:44 PM | Link to this

Ok..people die every day for different reasons. The voters voted for no smoking. Leave it be! To B Rogers, perhaps your father, who you say never smoked, died from secondhand smoke that caused his cancer. I think smoking is the most horrible, stinky, disgusting thing I ever saw a person do. Do they even realize how they smell or how dumb they look with smoke pouring out of their mouth??

By Judy

November 25, 2008 4:43 PM | Link to this

Ok..people die every day for different reasons. The voters voted for no smoking. Leave it be! To B Rogers, perhaps your father, who you say never smoked, died from secondhand smoke that caused his cancer. I think smoking is the most horrible, stinky, disgusting thing I ever saw a person do. Do they even realize how they smell or how dumb they look with smoke pouring out of their mouth??

By b rogers

November 25, 2008 2:57 PM | Link to this

I hate hamburgers and fries. The toxic noxious smelly cooking oils and fumes get in my hair and clothes. Then I have to shampoo and do laundry. My children are allergic to burgers and fries. It makes their eyes water. The experts say that it causes heart disease and obesity. Study after study clearly shows that the employees exposed to cooking fumes will go to an early grave. A tornado could not remove the greasy fumes and splatters that stick to people, walls and everything else. People ask why I don’t call ahead to see if burgers are served. Why should I? I am too immature. I stomp my foot and insist on my own way for everyone! I also like to harass people who make such hideous decisions with their diet. Making a responsible adult decision to go elsewhere should not be required of me! I also have no respect for business owners or their property rights or their employees choices. If they don’t serve what I want, why should I care if they lose their life savings due to lack of customers? It won’t affect my pocketbook! Do it for the children!!!! I have spoken! Go to Americans for NONBURGER Rights.com and write your legislators.

By Michael J. McFadden

November 25, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Patty wrote, “This bill gives the smokers a place for smokers only - non-smokers not welcome.” … . . Actually Patty, normal nonsmokers would be VERY welcome and many of them would probably choose to go to those places that allowed smoking. That’s exactly why the Antismokers always scream so loudly for the “level playing field.” They know that the proportion of crazies out there is actually fairly small, even if they do have a loud voice here on the net in organized press-releases… … Most nonsmokers realize that the “risk” they’d take from being in a decently ventilated smoking establishment for a few hours is probably far less than the “risk” they take in driving to and from that establishment. Driving an extra five minutes to a nonsmoking venue is almost certainly “riskier” than simply going to a smoking one even if you believe the Antismokers wacky statistics… … Michael J. McFadden, Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”

By Tom

November 25, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

I guess Tom Roberts and other elected officials for the new law forgot that they represent the majority people and not the special interests. The majority voted for the current bill and people like roberts should not turn against the people.

By Patty

November 25, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

This bill is not an attempt to take away from the non-smokers. Right now this ban is not what the majority voted for! This bill gives the exemptions that people expected thus making the smoking ban what the people actually voted for. This bill gives the business owner the right to decide what customers he wants to cater too! This bill gives smokers somewhere to go and mingle with each other besides the cold outdoors. This bill gives the smokers a place for smokers only - non-smokers not welcome.

By GERALD TAYLOR

November 25, 2008 10:57 AM | Link to this

THE ISSUE HERE SHOULD BE FOCUSED ON THE DEMOCRATIC VOTING PROCESS. ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY THE COURTS ARE TRYING TO OVERTURN THESE TYPE OF ELECTIONS. THE VFW’S SHOULD BE THE FIRST TO OBJECT TO THIS TYPE OF ACTIONS. NO DEMOCRACY HAS LASTED MORE THAN A FEW HUNDRED YEARS AND THEY USUALLY TURNED INTO DICTATORSHIPS. IF THIS IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN, WHY VOTE AT ALL? JUST LET THE LIBERALS DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT AND ASK SOME JUDGE TO MAKE IT LAW. WAKE UP AMERICA

By KAF

November 24, 2008 8:24 PM | Link to this

Go to smokefreeohio.org to send a letter to your Ohio legislators, telling them to protect the right of all Ohio workers and the public to breathe nontoxic, noncarcinogenic air.

By KAF

November 24, 2008 8:21 PM | Link to this

Check out Ann Fisher’s commentary in today’s Columbus Dispatch (columbusdispatch.com). It concerns a veteran who wants clean indoor air at the VFW.

By Michael J. McFadden

November 24, 2008 8:16 PM | Link to this

Fritz wrote, ““One person is dead, 10 occupants are temporarily displaced. The fire was caused by improperly handled smoking materials, or smoking in bed”. Any way you look at it, smoking kills. We MUST keep the ban on smoking in public places ! “ Actually Fritz, the reverse is true. Once you have smoking bans you’ve set up the absolutely ideal conditions for fires. Fire-safety devices (ashtrays) are against the law so people who DO break the law have no place safe to put out their cigarettes. They are also far more likely to hastily and improperly dispose of those cigarettes when they hear someone coming, or to smoke in secluded, out-of-the-way corners where poorly disposed of butts develop into real fires before anyone notices. Want less fires? Get rid of the smoking ban, or at least make it more reasonable. If you don’t really care about fires but are just against smoking and were using fires just to justify your hate, then you can ignore what I’ve just said. Michael J. McFadden Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”

By aldoit

November 24, 2008 6:36 PM | Link to this

Ohio voters had the chance to decide and the majority voted for a ban on public smoking. It was clear that the majority wanted the right to enjoy a smoke-free environment in public places. What an insult to all of us who voted to try to overide the majority vote with a bill that most voters won’t even be aware of. For years,non-smokers have been subjected to suffering in silence as smokers polluted the air that we breath. I can remember once as a young pregnant mother, coughing up blood because my bronchial tubes were so irritated. The doctor told me it was due to the smoky environment I was in the night before. We now frequent businesses that we avoided before. We enjoy the American Legion,local pubs and restaurants that all fall into the catergory of private clubs and family owned. I am speaking,not just for myself but for my entire extended family….Please,please do not take away our right to breath clean,healthy air again!

By Reverendcrash

November 24, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

I have to appreciate News Paper Writers as they are bound by the Directives of Editors who are reliant on Advertising Dollars.It used to be Big Tobacco, Now it is Big Pharma.As the Law is written it is not a violation for an INDIVIDUAL to smoke in a public place.As a business owner I am required to comply with regulations I AM NOT required to be the enforcemant arm of Government. The rules say there is a $100.00 fine for an individual.WRONG!If all these people are smoking why do they not get fined when Health Dept. Enforcement Investigators walk in and see them and refuse to fine them. The answer from the Health Dept. is .It is not our job.2. Merely Smoking in a Public Place is not a violation for an Individual.As a business owner I do not work for the Government and untill I am Compensated with the same Wage and benifit package as any other Stae Employee I am not going to do their JOB.I don’t have to and BY God that’s a Constitutional Protection I still Have.I do not have to be subject to forced labor with threat of legal action for saying you do your job I’ll do mine.

By Reverendcrash

November 24, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

I don’t believe people realize that as the Law is written it opensor for a law suit against a business owner if they follow the guidelines set down for enforcement.It is not a violation for and INDIVIDUAL to smoke in a public place.There are no fines or penalties for an individual for smoking.Only for refusing to quit doing something that is not a violation. All of the responsibility of ennt rest with the business owner.Untill I am an employee of the Government with the same pay scale and compensation of a Government I am not working for them for free.That By God is a Constitutional protection.

By Fritz

November 24, 2008 3:41 AM | Link to this

Dayton Daily News, Nov. 21: “One person is dead, 10 occupants are temporarily displaced. The fire was caused by improperly handled smoking materials, or smoking in bed”. Any way you look at it, smoking kills. We MUST keep the ban on smoking in public places !

By b rogers

November 23, 2008 11:49 PM | Link to this

Laura wrote “What an insult for the legislators of Ohio to think they are somehow more intelligent and informed than the voting public.” Laura, we vote them into office for a reason. They do the research that we don’t have time for. Although we may disagree with many of them, they are still there for a reason. Please don’t over estimate yourself.

By ichoosefreedom

November 23, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

Laura-do you own a hospitality business? I thought not. See, all the people like you who whined about having a smokefree place to go got your way…and you don’t patronize these businesses. There were supposed to be, according to SmokeFree Ohio, “hoards” of new customers. Well, the smokers quit coming and you and your anti friends didn’t take their places. Are hospitality businesses angry? You BET! So why should families who invested their lives and bank accounts, who second mortgaged their homes to own their piece of the American Dream, lose everything because of a law based on lies? These businesses were quite profitable until it catered solely to people who don’t frequent them. Whether you want to believe it or not, people voted for what they read and the exemptions were clearly on the ballot language at the polls. Why put the exemptions in at all if they weren’t going to honor them? TO GET PEOPLE TO VOTE YES!!!!!SmokeFree Ohio lied about no harm to business. And they lied about smokers being warned and fined. In fact, the ODH created a policy in direct conflict with the law. The only people who should be allowed to say whether smoking is permitted or not permitted are the people who invested their money into these businesses. And their customers would drive that decision. That’s how free market works. Had all you anti-smokers patronized the bars and private clubs, this wouldn’t even be an issue, would it? Why don’t YOU buy a bar and make it smokefree and see how long you’re in business? These people selling their bars can’t even get what they were worth before the ban and what lender would finance the buyer? A bar a good risk? Not in Ohio. THEIR businesses are not PUBLIC places, they belong to the people financially responsible for them. THEY pay the mortgage, the business loan, property taxes, CAT tax, RITA tax, unemployment, disability tax, FICA, Workers Comp, insurance. THEY DO. NOT YOU and NOT VOTERS. Bar owners cater to the people who patronize them, who are quite obviously the smokers and non smokers. APPARENTLY NOT THE ANTI-SMOKERS. You’re right. People vote with their wallets and if patronizing these places is a vote, let me tell you, smokefree is LOSING. How about asking family owned business owners what they want. Ask their employees what they want. You knock the senators for hearing how devastating this has been for Ohio businesses and their families and how wrong this law has been from the deceitful ballot language to enforcement. I applaud them. They CARE about the businesses in Ohio. It’s their job and it’s their JOB to revise the Ohio Revised Code when it needs to be revised and if ever there was a case, this is it.

By History Buff

November 23, 2008 9:38 PM | Link to this

A reply to ‘null’: Your comment about smoking and your patient leads to false beliefs. It is a very unfortunate circumstance that because one did or did not smoke, IF there is a medical problem, it is automatically ASSUMED ‘smoking did it’. This is not true and not fair for anyone to say such a thing. No one has a complete history of the life for anyone, not even the person with a problem. You and no one can document any radon levels thru a life, diet thru a life, various exposures or heridity factors. … FURTHER, it has been proven that smokers have LESS various illnesses than non-smokers and since smoker rates have dropped, cancers are WAY UP. … Prehaps you are a victim yourself, that being a victim of the those who promote the propaganda to keep the funds flowing into a deceitful industry, that being the medical industry!

By b rogers

November 23, 2008 9:38 PM | Link to this

Billy, I have read that having granite counter tops can produce enough radon to be the equivalent of smoking up to 30 packs of cigarettes a day.

By b rogers

November 23, 2008 9:32 PM | Link to this

Uh, Laura, the language on the ballot stated that private clubs, family owned businesses and patios were exempt. What is it that you don’t understand? By the way, I spoon fed my father too who died of cancer. He was a nonsmoker.

By Billy

November 23, 2008 9:30 PM | Link to this

I hear this smoking cost taxpayers billions in health care cost. Hmm OK then why complain about making profit? Hospitals and the AMA love money! If it were not for illness then I guess we could have starving doctor office call specials? Oh in the name of health we have to have a smoking ban but you allow a baby to breath RADON GAS in Licking County Ohio in the equivalent to 8 packs of cigarettes a day and say nothing? You warn about BIRD FLUE but force smokers outside to be the main course for mosquitoes since we cant even have a shelter to protect us from the skeeters or the weather! Get real, the ban is a punishment conditioning practice! If you threw a kid out of class in a school for bad behavior into the snow they sue ya in a heart beat! Smokers said who is next or what is next and the gays in California can tell you. Gun control coming? Land of the free we need to stop these money hungry power lusting lobbyist!

By virgilk

November 23, 2008 9:26 PM | Link to this

This crusade against smokers uses emotions of the mislead public. Truth has absolutely nothing to do with statements made by the EPA, ACS, RWJF, or any of the agencies supposedly fighting for the lives of the children. They do this for PROFIT nothing more. Their target is control of the Nicotine market worldwide. Not one study has found more than a slight increase in risk. Anything more than this is a lie backed by fraud funded by those who intend to profit. If everything said of SHS were true, very few people over 40 would be alive today. It depends on making people believe their children are in danger. Even OSHA tried to put in perspective by saying; SHS is almost as dangerous as chlorinated drinking water. The World Health Organization, in their largest study said, that children raised in smoking families are 22% less likely to contract Cancer. I would think, by now, our Councils should be aware of how they are being led to false conclusions.

By snowbird

November 23, 2008 9:21 PM | Link to this

No-smoking laws that are passed based on lies, half-truths, innuendos,slanted surveys should be repealled immediately if not sooner

By snowbird

November 23, 2008 9:21 PM | Link to this

No-smoking laws that are passed based on lies, half-truths, innuendos,slanted surveys should be repealled immediately if not sooner

By Laura

November 23, 2008 9:12 PM | Link to this

What an insult for the legislators of Ohio to think they are somehow more intelligent and informed than the voting public. I do not believe that there are that many voting idiots in Ohio that they can not understand the language on a ballot and cannot understand the commercials that run for months prior to an election. I have not heard one person say that they didn’t understand what they were voting for- whichever way they voted. The fact that such a small number of people even bothered to vote does not mean that the will of the people wasn’t heard. It simply means that those who didn’t bother to vote, didn’t really care. As to the comment that “we” nonsmokers didn’t have a concern about second-hand smoke 5,10 or 20 years ago, that simply isn’t true. It just took that long for enough people to realize that non-smokers have rights, too. In the past, anyone who complained about second-hand smoke was laughed at. I have always made my position clear with regards to businesses who allowed smoking by not patronizing them. But, like smokers now claim, that denied ME the opportunity to participate in activities and eat at many restaurants. Kind of puts the shoe on the other foot, doesn’t it? I can remember the employee lounges many years ago that were so dense with smoke you couldn’t see through them. The janitor cleaned the mirrors everyday to remove the black “gunk”. I avoided them, but was told by supervisors that I was being anti-social and was told I had to eat my lunch in there and socialize. Having buried both of my parents from smoking related diseases, one from lung cancer and one from emphysema, COPD and numerous other lung diseases, I find it amazing that people are telling me I should let smokers “have their rights”. I wonder how many of you smokers out there have sat and spoon fed a parent who was too weak from chemo, bathed them and changed their depends because lung cancer had robbed them of all independence? How many of you have sat with someone while they were being intubated as their lungs slowly, slowly give out; watched the terror in their faces because no one can get the oxygen canister opened fast enough? Adult decision? I don’t think so. My father began smoking at age 12- not an adult- but long before the dangers of smoking were known. Before he died, he said he wished they would ban smoking so that no one else would have to go through what he did. The people spoke. Legislators have no right to make any amendments on behalf of any business or the Tobacco industry.

By big kahuna

November 23, 2008 8:52 PM | Link to this

great discussion! the buck stops at lawmakers. hats off to the brave ohio lawmakers willing to take a stand against blanket smoking bans. lawmakers pass unjust laws for one simple reason…THEY DO NOT FEAR A PARTICULAR VOTING BLOC. that is fast changing across the land, as the sleeping smoking giant is fast awakening. american smoker voters are a whopping 20 million strong. once we unite and begin voting these anti tobacco, anti business lawmakers out of office, the disease of blanket draconian smoking bans will cease to exist…just and wise business friendly compromises will quickly be in order…no lawmaker enjoys getting his butt booted out. smokers unite and VOTE…we got two years to prepare and unite as a powerful voting bloc…aloha from the islands!

By ichoosefreedom

November 23, 2008 8:05 PM | Link to this

Gosh, B Rogers, let me take this one. KAF - When you look at the facts, who WOULDN’T believe the “conspiracy theory”. Is it just coincidental that JnJ manufactures drugs and products for the laws for which they pay? A 446 million dollar investment for smoking bans sure didn’t hurt their stock. And 99 million dollars to the ACS, ALA, AHA in grants to get these bans (when grantees didn’t move from education to tobacco CONTROL, their grants were yanked). Yes, they bought Pfizer in the midst of the ban laws. They knew Nicorette was going to be a money maker because they were behind the smoking ban laws. They promised a per share gain to their stockholders for Pfizer’s purchase by 2009 and got there in record time. You talk about Big Tobacco. What about marketing Nicorette to kids? With all JnJ’s “tooth whitening” hype with a nicotine buzz? I find it highly suspect that JnJ (excuse me, the RWJF) pursues LAWS from which they profit. Obesity (half a billion dollar investment)..they own Splenda and one of their family of companies owns the lap band surgery. Get the cure, drug, patch or surgery, then create laws that create the market for your products. Best marketing strategy pharmaceutical money can buy. So, KAF, tell me this. If SHS was really the harm (BTW, read Geoffrey Kabat’s new book “Hyping Health Risks..”) that you claim, why when North Dakota tried to ban the sale of tobacco did the TOBACCO CONTROL GROUPS testify AGAINST it?(Belter told the House that committee members were frustrated last week with the testimony from anti-tobacco groups that testified against the tobacco ban, including the North Dakota Medical Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, North Dakota Public Health Association and North Dakota Nurses Association http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/827172/posts)? Because it’s all about the money, control and power. Tobacco Control is just the beginning “control” du jour and the RWJF is right in the middle of it. Why would people believe it? Look around you. It’s seems as plain as the nose on your face. You want people to believe it’s a conspiracy theory and it’s not about the money? Get the RWJF to dump their JnJ stock if they’re so dedicated to health. Their “sincere desire” would be more believable. Here’s another question. The ACS did a study in 2003 that showed the best success long term for quitting smoking was COLD TURKEY. In fact 91.4%. If not using them is more successful, you have to ask why they push the drugs? http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/CAFF2003PWSecured.pdf see table 3 page 25 Check mate.

By KAF

November 23, 2008 6:24 PM | Link to this

b rogers, your story about the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is a canard. This foundation isn’t the “parent” of Johnson & Johnson, but a health and medical philanthropy begun by Johnson & Johnson’s founder. Its work includes fighting childhood obesity, advocating for comprehensive healthcare for all people, ending health disparities for minority groups, and working to end the addiction, disease, and death caused by tobacco. Like the American Cancer Society, whose reputation you also impugn, they have been fighting tobacco addiction and disease for decades. J & J only purchased Pfizer Consumer Healthcare Division, makers of Nicorette, in December 2006. One would have to believe that J & J knew decades in advance that they were going to purchase this division of Pfizer and then were able to force their “evil minions” in the health and medical world to push for smoking bans to drive up their future sales of Nicorette. No rational person would accept such an outlandish conspiracy theory. In any event, J & J makes a host of products whose sales would actually rise with increased cigarette use: Rembrandt toothpaste for the smokers’ yellowed teeth, Listerine for smokers’ bad breath, Band-aids and Neosporin for those wounds that take longer to heal in smokers, Efferdent to clean dentures needed when smoking causes your teeth to rot and gums to recede. Even more lucrative are their line of cancer drugs, prescription pain medications, and treatments for heart disease. J & J would certainly benefit financially from increase rates of smoking-induced cancers, heart attacks, strokes, COPD, etc. But if you have confidential documents from J & J, the American Cancer Society, and other health and medical organizations that demonstrate a conspiracy to hoodwink the American public, by all means send them to 60 Minutes or the New York Times or some other reputable news organization- you know, like what whistleblowers did to Big Tobacco. All those documents showing how Big Tobacco lied and deceived the public about smoking and secondhand smoke are available online at the University of California’s Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. But in reality, smoking bans do not force anyone to stop smoking or use J & J’s brand of nicotine cessation therapy. All you have to do is go outside for a few minutes to smoke.

By b rogers

November 23, 2008 5:15 PM | Link to this

Referring to smokers as your “job security” on the cancer ward is quite unappealing and cold. There are a great many nonsmokers on cancer wards as well.

By Kaetlyn

November 23, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

I have a comment for b rogers…what makes you think I would be an unfit nurse for your family members just because I know smoking is hazardous to their health? I’ve spent hours feeling helpless because a patient of mine is suffocating to death and there’s not a single thing I can do to help them except hold their hand and sit at their bedside. Emphysema and other chronic lung diseases are NOT pretty…carrying an oxygen tank around on your shoulder wherever you go would not be fun. If you guys all want to continue supporting your “right” to smoke, that’s the kind of life…and death…you can possibly look forward to…but I’m NOT a bad nurse. Your family would be very lucky to have a nurse as caring and dedicated to my patients as I am.

By DEV

November 23, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

It seems utterly ridiculous to suggest that the voters of Ohio were duped into voting for something that they did not understand. Twice. The facts are that the voters overwhelmingly passed the nonsmoking laws. What’s reprehensible is that legislators, such as state senator Tom Roberts, would even consider softening the laws. How many times must the majority speak before lawmakers understand their desires. I think it is time to move on to more important issues.

By Jim

November 23, 2008 12:14 PM | Link to this

For years of sitting in the non-smoking section at restaurants, where offensive smoke drifted over our table anyway, I’m pleased Ohio has finally gotten to the 21st century with the current ban. My mother, who was a non-smoker, has COPD and cannot go to the local VFW she used to attend. Why? Because they violate the smoking ban everyday. The smoking ban needs to stay in place just as it is. Smokers can stop being selfish and make the 30 second trip outside if they wish to light up.

By Pope

November 23, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

Finally a senator is listening. Everyone I talk to was confused on what they were voting for and did not realize in a NON EATING establishment they couldn’t have a smoke with their drink.

By Double

November 23, 2008 10:25 AM | Link to this

The un-American cancer society will no doubt use all of its tax exempt millions (in its POLITICAL FUND)to fight against American freedom again.

By b rogers

November 23, 2008 10:15 AM | Link to this

I support property rights and freedom of choice. I support our small business owners to make adult educated decisions regarding their own businesses without interference from a bunch of nannies who believe in nothing short of prohibition.

By null

November 23, 2008 8:20 AM | Link to this

your in the funeral business…you see it every day and you still promote this???shame on you

By JJ

November 23, 2008 6:59 AM | Link to this

This whole two year ongoing squabble shows that the way that laws are allowed to be passed is flawed. There needs to be more time allowed to look at each of the bills put on a ballot so that there are no grey areas that will cause misunderstanding.

By Pat

November 23, 2008 1:02 AM | Link to this

I have never made any comments before but as an adult and age 67, I feel I want to comment for the first time on this smoking ban. I have always been very nice when it has come to smoking in front of ANYONE and I never say anything about what other people do, say, or THEIR bad habits. But, I was one that did vote to have a ban but it was stated that some of the private clubs and etc. would be exempt or I would have voted no. As an adult as most adults know that smoking is not healthy but it is still THEIR choice. The bussiness that have lost so many patrons have never been considered by all these no smokers, especially, the clubs and bars and privately own bussiness. Do any of you care where the people that have lost their place of business because of this. I don’t think so. When you consider the VFW clubs and others and ones that play music, no matter what, if you smoke and have a couple of drinks, it just goes hand in hand. The thing about it is that before this was passed, there was no smoking in almost all places like business, malls, and a lot of rest. plus work places, so really other then a few resturants and bowling allys, you really only ruined places that serve drinks and I think that is totally wrong. All the people that wanted this ban, all you had to do was stay away from the places that serve drinks. I can see not smoking in resturants but you are acting like you have the right to make us feel like we are commiting a crime. I do not smoke in front of others that don’t smoke and I am very aware of other people’s feelings but cannot say the same for all of you. So not only myself, but a lot of friends I have, we do not go to the clubs anymore and won’t unless it is changed. I feel bad for the owners but I am not a big drinker but if I go listen to a band or want to go to the club and can’t even have a cig. while I have a drink, then they can thank all of you.

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 11:36 PM | Link to this

Null, excuse me, but in the funeral business we accept that challenge everyday.

By null

November 22, 2008 10:34 PM | Link to this

frankly I don’t think any of us could handle that challange….or would even want to…

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 8:38 PM | Link to this

Kaetlyn, if you are in the Dayton area, I accept your challenge!

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 7:30 PM | Link to this

Kaetlyn, I definitely hope you will NEVER be the nurse that tends to my families needs.

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 7:20 PM | Link to this

There is mounting evidence that doctors and drug interactions are the leading cause of death. Unfortunately, I cannot post hotmail here.

By Kaetlyn

November 22, 2008 6:16 PM | Link to this

I’m a cancer nurse of 25 years, and to begin with, any Dr that writes on this column in favor of smokers doesn’t deserve to even be called a physician. I would challenge any one of you to take a walk with me down the hallway of my cancer unit any day of the week, and take a look at all the cancer patients suffering with lung cancers…and chronic lung diseases…many of them self-pay which means you and I pay with our tax dollars for their treatments and in higher insurance costs for us. If you think your habit doesn’t affect anyone else but you, think again. Either you’re delusional, or just plain choose to stick your head in the sand, and keep handing over those bucks for those cigarettes. However…there is a plus to all of this…job security for me ;)

By Kaetlyn

November 22, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

I’m a cancer nurse of 25 years, and to begin with, any Dr that writes on this column in favor of smokers doesn’t deserve to even be called a physician. I would challenge any one of you to take a walk with me down the hallway of my cancer unit any day of the week, and take a look at all the cancer patients suffering with lung cancers…and chronic lung diseases…many of them self-pay which means you and I pay with our tax dollars for their treatments and in higher insurance costs for us. If you think your habit doesn’t affect anyone else but you, think again. Either you’re delusional, or just plain choose to stick your head in the sand, and keep handing over those bucks for those cigarettes. However…there is a plus to all of this…job security for me ;)

By Billy

November 22, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

If you will recall the State of Ohio had a drinking age of 18 for 3.2% beer. The people voted down the increase of age to 21 but the Feds threatened to cut off highway safety money to the state, result the legislature voted against the will of the people!

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 4:21 PM | Link to this

Kaf, I would like you to know that the organizations you mentioned and thanked have received millions in grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Fdtn. who is the parent of Johnson and Johnson who makes nicotine cessation products. They are earning huge profits as a result! Follow the money!!!!!!!!

By Michael J. McFadden

November 22, 2008 4:08 PM | Link to this

It’s always interesting to see how people like KAF (two posts below) are completely incapable of answering any of the actual arguments against smoking bans and turn instead to mudslinging. Call your opponents “Big Tobacco” or “nicotine addicts” and suddenly I guess you don’t have to pay attention to the facts or the science at all eh? Just parrot the line “All the responsible authorities agree…” without ever noting that of course they’ll all agree to ANYthing that they think will reduce smoking - whether it’s true or not. Michael J. McFadden Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”

By MR A

November 22, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

Bill. Powerful factual examples of the truth, but I feel you are wasting your breath on that idiot, ” NULL “. That person is to much a coward to see the truth, the ACS hasn’t provided him/her with the proper propeganda to offer a logical reply. He/She is just following the piper, not strong enough to know much.

By KAF

November 22, 2008 11:06 AM | Link to this

I would like to thank the following health groups for protecting the rights of Ohioans to breathe clean indoor air: the American Cancer Society, the Ohio State Medical Association, the Ohio Hospital Association, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association, the American College of Surgeons, the Association of Ohio Health Commissioners, the March of Dimes, the Ohio Academy of Family Physicians, the Ohio Children’s Hospital Association, the Ohio Dental Association, the Ohio Nurses Association, the Ohio Public Health Association, the Ohio Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and many, many, others. You can either trust these respected health professionals or you can believe the lies of Big Tobacco and their fiercely loyal nicotine addicts. But if you choose to believe the lies of Big Tobacco, please be consistent and consult a witch doctor or faith healer for all your medical needs. Remember, according to Big Tobacco and nicotine addicts, doctors, dentists, surgeons, nurses, hospitals, pediatricians, and all other health professionals don’t know what they’re talking about.

By b rogers

November 22, 2008 10:54 AM | Link to this

Null, you continue to ignore the fact that the Issue 5 ballot language stated that private clubs and family owned businesses would be exempt. I posted the language on the ballot yesterday.

By Reverendcrash

November 22, 2008 9:52 AM | Link to this

Hocter and Sabetta are cordially invited to enforce the Law.1st it is not a violation for an individual to smoke in a public place.2nd I do not work for the Government and I absolutely refuse to support the efforts of grave robbing theives like Sabetta and Hocter who make money from other peoples misery and do all they can to allow peolpe to continue to suufer and die.I’ll support Bin Laden bfore Isupport the American Cancer Society. He is not as big a threat to freedom as they are.

By null

November 22, 2008 9:24 AM | Link to this

you guys all see