Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The smoking ban was put before a vote of the people on our state and I took it upon myself to vote yes for it. Clearly; the majority who actually voted felt the same way as I.
So; blaming the government for this so-called 'trampling of smokers' rights' is not the case.
The smoking ban was put before a vote of the people on our state and I took it upon myself to vote yes for it. Clearly; the majority who actually voted felt the same way as I.
So; blaming the government for this so-called 'trampling of smokers' rights' is not the case.
This was my post, which Castaway responded to, and you responded to my response:
"The problem is that the majority of people who voted may have been non-smokers, and many smokers probably did not vote. Apathy does not help democracy.
Also, as I've stated before, legislation is not written well. Lots of earmarks, which confuses people.
So assuming that a vote truly represents what all people want is incorrect.
But the major issue is that owners' freedom has been taken away, which seems unconstitutional to me."
I'm not blaming the government. I clearly talk about people, citizens, voting here. Regardless, it can still be unconstitutional, whether it was a vote of legislators or citizens.
This was my post, which Castaway responded to, and you responded to my response:
"The problem is that the majority of people who voted may have been non-smokers, and many smokers probably did not vote. Apathy does not help democracy.
Also, as I've stated before, legislation is not written well. Lots of earmarks, which confuses people.
So assuming that a vote truly represents what all people want is incorrect.
But the major issue is that owners' freedom has been taken away, which seems unconstitutional to me."
I'm not blaming the government. I clearly talk about people, citizens, voting here. Regardless, it can still be unconstitutional, whether it was a vote of legislators or citizens.
Artliquide ~ Once again, well said.
ArizonaBear ~ Some of those who have posted here had no opportunity to vote. Their governments made the decision for them, ergo their current predicament was the fault of their local government.
In Arizona, it did indeed come to a vote and the people have spoken, but it has been my position the vote should never have included private businesses (restaurants & bars) because the decision of how to cater to their customers should have been left in their hands.
I am in complete agreement with Artliquide when she says it was unconstitutional to put it to a vote and thereby trample the rights of the establishment owners.
Personally, I don't believe these establishments should have smoking and non-smoking sections, but rather they should decide whether they wish to be smoking or non-smoking throughout and it should be prominently posted at the entrance. In my opinion, this is fair to both smokers and non-smokers and especially to the owners themselves.
ArizonaBear ~ Some of those who have posted here had no opportunity to vote. Their governments made the decision for them, ergo their current predicament was the fault of their local government.
In Arizona, it did indeed come to a vote and the people have spoken, but it has been my position the vote should never have included private businesses (restaurants & bars) because the decision of how to cater to their customers should have been left in their hands.
I am in complete agreement with Artliquide when she says it was unconstitutional to put it to a vote and thereby trample the rights of the establishment owners.
Personally, I don't believe these establishments should have smoking and non-smoking sections, but rather they should decide whether they wish to be smoking or non-smoking throughout and it should be prominently posted at the entrance. In my opinion, this is fair to both smokers and non-smokers and especially to the owners themselves.
Once again, well said by the both of you (Arizona Annie/Artliquide). It is too bad that other restaurant/bar owners are not here expressing their opinions on the smoking ban. I tried to start a thread for hospitality workers but no takers. The owners, that I have personally talked to, are not in favor of the ban, especially the bars.
In NM, the ban was just implemented and not voted on by the general populace, only by the legislators. Do they really know their constituency on this issue? I think not. They didn't put out any survey or have question/answer meetings. They just voted based on a national trend and not what the local citizens may have wanted.
The smoking ban, at least on the NM state's website, includes $150 million to be given for a smoking cessation program for the Indian Pueblos. They don't need it. The Pueblos have more money than the rest of us. After talking with some friends (Native Americans, including some of the Pueblo Governors), they say, tobacco is a part of their culture and a big part of the revenues for local pueblos. Why would they want to change that?
Once again, well said by the both of you (Arizona Annie/Artliquide). It is too bad that other restaurant/bar owners are not here expressing their opinions on the smoking ban. I tried to start a thread for hospitality workers but no takers. The owners, that I have personally talked to, are not in favor of the ban, especially the bars.
In NM, the ban was just implemented and not voted on by the general populace, only by the legislators. Do they really know their constituency on this issue? I think not. They didn't put out any survey or have question/answer meetings. They just voted based on a national trend and not what the local citizens may have wanted.
The smoking ban, at least on the NM state's website, includes $150 million to be given for a smoking cessation program for the Indian Pueblos. They don't need it. The Pueblos have more money than the rest of us. After talking with some friends (Native Americans, including some of the Pueblo Governors), they say, tobacco is a part of their culture and a big part of the revenues for local pueblos. Why would they want to change that?
Interesting issue. I hadn't thought of that. We have several "nations" (you call them pueblos over there?) really close and even within the Phoenix area. Since they're not subject to the tobacco tax, people can easily bypass the tax by going to one of their stores. I wonder if tribes in AZ are smoke free too. I know that they have sovereignty, and that they only adopt state laws if they agree with them, but I'm not sure if the tribes chose to agree.
You should definitely get some more bar owners online if they're internet savvy. I'd love to hear more opinions.
Once again, well said by the both of you (Arizona Annie/Artliquide). It is too bad that other restaurant/bar owners are not here expressing their opinions on the smoking ban. I tried to start a thread for hospitality workers but no takers. The owners, that I have personally talked to, are not in favor of the ban, especially the bars.
In NM, the ban was just implemented and not voted on by the general populace, only by the legislators. Do they really know their constituency on this issue? I think not. They didn't put out any survey or have question/answer meetings. They just voted based on a national trend and not what the local citizens may have wanted.
The smoking ban, at least on the NM state's website, includes $150 million to be given for a smoking cessation program for the Indian Pueblos. They don't need it. The Pueblos have more money than the rest of us. After talking with some friends (Native Americans, including some of the Pueblo Governors), they say, tobacco is a part of their culture and a big part of the revenues for local pueblos. Why would they want to change that?
Thank you Castaway. I can't imagine why the Pueblos would want to change their culture or lose the revenue associated with the sale of cigarettes. They are fortunate they are not included in the restrictive bans we are subject to. I suspect the reason they want to give money to the Pueblos and encourage them to quit smoking is because they are hoping if they can get them to quit smoking and therefore stop selling cigarettes tax free, the rest of you will follow suit rather than pay the ridiculous taxes when buying cigarettes elsewhere; or it's more financially motivated and they are salivating at the prospect of getting all that additional tax money from smokers currently buying cigarettes tax free from the Native American Pueblos. I suspect the latter is true.
I wonder if tribes in AZ are smoke free too. I know that they have sovereignty, and that they only adopt state laws if they agree with them, but I'm not sure if the tribes chose to agree.
No, from what I have heard from others here in Arizona, they have not adopted the ban. They still have smoking in their restaurants/bars, so a lot of people now dine out there rather than other places if they are close enough to do so. In addition, I have heard many now go there to purchase their cigarettes rather than pay the ever increasing taxes by buying elsewhere.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You?
