Hooray....Smoking Ban Compromise Reached! (Madison, Green Bay: hotel, neighborhood, buying)

[rso092]

Originally Posted by FormerCaliforniaGirl

WRONG.

Restaurants and bars are open to the PUBLIC. Therefore, they are public establishments whereby the PUBLIC has a right to be free of pervasive, carcinogenic second-hand smoke.

Your argument is petulant and childish.

Open to the public, yes. That doesn't mean through some magical force of nature that same public owns the establishment and can dictate what they can and cannot do.

Hey, I hate the menu at McDonald's. Since it's open to the public, I'm going to round up a big group of idiots so we can all whine and complain and make McDonald's change their menu to suit my tastes.

You and people like you are directly responsible for the great expansion of government power and abuses in the last 90 years or so. You people are directly responsible for the eventual outcome of these policies. You continually push and push and push and push. Eventually, people will push back. And when they do, it will not be a pretty sight.

[UpNort]

As a PRIVATE business owner----YOU have the free will to walk into my place KNOWING there is smoking there. If you don't like it --DON'T COME IN. Now the governer has taken my right to use a LEGAL product in MY BUSINESS THAT I OWN AND PAY TAXES ON. NOW I CAN SELL CIGERETTES LEGALLY BUT I CAN EVEN GIVE MATCHES BECAUSE THATS ILLEGAL.

HOW STUPID!!!!

Why aren't the states going after the cigerette makers who put poisons and very addicting things in them. Its legal for them to do that to milllions of Americans. Why not force them to clean them up and stop putting addicting product in them thats causing the health problem?

MONEY MONEY MONEY

Thats what its really all about.
When the smokers quit--ALL that tax money has to come from somewhere so all the do-gooders be prepared for higher everything.

All the energy spent on this issue--when drugs are running rapid in every town in Wis--sex crimes against children are out of control--the list is endless--WAKE-UP!

Please don't tell me its not in your city or town--cause thats the bubble you live in along with too many others.

[quickdraw]

Originally Posted by zz4guy

Defined how and by whom? Where is the statistical data from the a study that proves this.

And you still don't get it. This is about PRIVATE business. PRIVATE establishments that you eat at. If the majority wants to rule out public smoking at a hospital, DOT, or city hall, then I have no problem with that. Your drinking and driving analogy is false because we HAVE to share roads. It is a public right. But walking into the corner bar is NOT YOUR RIGHT. And working there IS NOT YOUR RIGHT either. If smoke bothers you get the hell out and find something else to complain about (I'm sure the list is long).

When you're dining at a restaurant, would you mind if I walk over to your table and blow a long fart all over you and your food? You would? Too bad, I have the right to fart where ever I want. If you don't want me to fart on you, stay the hell out of the bars I'm in. I enjoy farting in bars and who are you to tell me not to.

Sounds stupid, doesn't it?

Actually, it's not even a good example. The fart goes away and doesn't stay in your clothes and hair.

[JDCATONSVILLE]

Boy these whiney smokers opinions are as about as tired and annoying as their second hand smoke is. The staying out of establishments goes both ways, if you don't like the ban then you can just as easily stay out of the bar or restaurant as well. I'm not sure why you smokers think that you were given the divine right and that your rights to smoke are any more important then those who wish to breath smoke free air. And maybe you should wake up if you think that this was the first law to be passed that has taken away your rights, this might actually be one of the first laws in a while that was actually passed for the betterment of the people and not just some monetary political gain. And as far as child sex offenders and drugs well they have no place in a civilized society either. But does that mean that you would categorize smokers in the same class as the other two aformentioned? Wow! Well let the record state that you said it and not us.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by quickdraw

When you're dining at a restaurant, would you mind if I walk over to your table and blow a long fart all over you and your food? You would? Too bad, I have the right to fart where ever I want. If you don't want me to fart on you, stay the hell out of the bars I'm in. I enjoy farting in bars and who are you to tell me not to.

Sounds stupid, doesn't it?

Actually, it's not even a good example. The fart goes away and doesn't stay in your clothes and hair.

Simple solution to this too: don't patronize businesses where people are openly permitted to fart at each other.

[FormerCaliforniaGirl]

Originally Posted by quickdraw

When you're dining at a restaurant, would you mind if I walk over to your table and blow a long fart all over you and your food? You would? Too bad, I have the right to fart where ever I want. If you don't want me to fart on you, stay the hell out of the bars I'm in. I enjoy farting in bars and who are you to tell me not to.

Sounds stupid, doesn't it?

Actually, it's not even a good example. The fart goes away and doesn't stay in your clothes and hair.

Oh god...I'm cracking up at this. PERFECT analogy.

[Drover]

Originally Posted by JDCATONSVILLE

Boy these whiney smokers opinions are as about as tired and annoying as their second hand smoke is. The staying out of establishments goes both ways, if you don't like the ban then you can just as easily stay out of the bar or restaurant as well. I'm not sure why you smokers think that you were given the divine right and that your rights to smoke are any more important then those who wish to breath smoke free air. And maybe you should wake up if you think that this was the first law to be passed that has taken away your rights, this might actually be one of the first laws in a while that was actually passed for the betterment of the people and not just some monetary political gain. And as far as child sex offenders and drugs well they have no place in a civilized society either. But does that mean that you would categorize smokers in the same class as the other two aformentioned? Wow! Well let the record state that you said it and not us.

I like how you ascribe our opinions to "whiny smokers." Some of us are non-smokers who simply don't like government diktats from on high. So let's first dispense with the issue of your assumptions: your assumptions suck.

Next, even you have to recognize the cognitive dissonance of claiming smokers have a "choice" to not patronize businesses that don't permit smoking and the government removing that choice altogether. Smokers already have that choice right now and are not complaining about it one bit. Smokers are not demanding government use the blunt of instrument of force to compel their choice on others. The smoke Nazis are. Smokers are perfectly comfortable with businesses saying "your smoke is not welcome here, go somewhere else if you want to smoke." And they're perfectly comfortable going somewhere else. The smoke Nazis are trying to take all those "somewhere elses" away because they can't tolerate the idea that someone, somewhere, might be smoking in a place of public accommodation whether they ever intend to step foot in that place or not. Or in the case of the Illinois smoking ban, even in places of private accommodation.

Meanwhile, my original post in this thread still hasn't been answered: what, exactly, is the "compromise?" Will smoking still be allowed in some places of public accommodation? If so, which ones? And if not, it's not really much of a "compromise," is it?

[FormerCaliforniaGirl]

Originally Posted by UpNort

As a PRIVATE business owner----YOU have the free will to walk into my place KNOWING there is smoking there. If you don't like it --DON'T COME IN. Now the governer has taken my right to use a LEGAL product in MY BUSINESS THAT I OWN AND PAY TAXES ON. NOW I CAN SELL CIGERETTES LEGALLY BUT I CAN EVEN GIVE MATCHES BECAUSE THATS ILLEGAL.

HOW STUPID!!!!

Why aren't the states going after the cigerette makers who put poisons and very addicting things in them. Its legal for them to do that to milllions of Americans. Why not force them to clean them up and stop putting addicting product in them thats causing the health problem?

MONEY MONEY MONEY

Thats what its really all about.
When the smokers quit--ALL that tax money has to come from somewhere so all the do-gooders be prepared for higher everything.

All the energy spent on this issue--when drugs are running rapid in every town in Wis--sex crimes against children are out of control--the list is endless--WAKE-UP!

Please don't tell me its not in your city or town--cause thats the bubble you live in along with too many others.

Oh puleeeez. What dribble.

The great thing about democracy in the U.S. is that legislation reflects the will of the majority. The majority of people in the U.S. are non-smokers. The majority of non-smokers want your pervasive and nasty cigarette smoke out of our lives. The majority speaks, and the majority makes legislation.

Hey...if you can't beat 'em, why not join 'em?

[Drover]

^^ And if the majority of the people want to be able to come and go in your living room, well hey, this is a democracy and this is the will of the people, right?

Not everything is or should be up for a vote. Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.

[UpNort]

Some of the compromises were:

1. Statewide ban would be July 5,2010 instead of August 1st,2009
No local ordinance regarding smoking-only the state law.

2. Outside smoking will be allowed outside your premises and may not be regulated at local level.

3. Enforcement will be done by local law enforsement.

4. No fine may be issued on 1st offense. Nor will there be a fine on the owner/bartender if they summon authorities. Second violation would result in a fine of $100.00 for any or all violations occurring on a single day. Regardless of how many fines a license holder may recieve it can not be used as a reason to not renew his/her liquor license. (Governer wanted us to lose liquor license for smoking violations)


The 17 page original smoking ban is very harsh to business owners, so these are considered compromises.

Remember reservations in WI, DO NOT have to follow our laws.
Who controls who in WI?