Oklahoma officials to seek smoking ban
By The Associated Press
Comments 
82
Published: October 29, 2009
OKLAHOMA CITY — Anti-smoking advocates called on lawmakers Thursday to make bars and restaurants in Oklahoma smoke-free by closing loopholes in the state law restricting smoking in public places.
Dr. Alan Blum, director for the Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society, refers to an editorial cartoon while speaking to the media today. Photo by Jim Beckel
Multimedia
Officials from the
American Heart Association and the state Department of Health said they will support legislation next year to ban smoking in bars and restaurants, similar to a bill that died in the Oklahoma House last spring.
Oklahoma was among the first states in the nation to regulate smoking in public places in 2003. But the legislation allows smoking in separate smoking rooms in restaurants and stand-alone bars. When the bill died in the House last spring,
Rep. John Trebilcock, R-Broken Arrow, chairman of the House Public Health Committee, said he was not inclined to give it a hearing because of the investment restaurants had made to comply with state smoking restrictions.
Since Oklahoma's law went into effect, 27 other states have adopted comprehensive smoke-free laws that ban smoking in public places, said
Marilyn Davidson, government relations director for the American Heart Association in
Oklahoma City.
Davidson said the bill will protect restaurant and nightclub patrons from the harmful effects of second-hand smoke, which she said kills 38,000 people a year and increases the risk of coronary heart disease by 25 percent to 30 percent.
"It's just about health over money," said
Dr. Alan Blum, a family medicine professor at the
University of Alabama and director of the Center for the Study of Tobacco and Society.
Blum said smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and disease. A report released earlier this month by the
Institute of Medicine of the National Academies in
Washington said studies have shown a decrease in the rate of heart attacks after a smoking ban was implemented.
But some Oklahoma restaurant and nightclub owners have opposed an outright ban on smoking, claiming it would have a negative impact on their business.
"We view this as a health issue, not a private property issue," Davidson said.
She said anti-smoking advocates are sympathetic with restaurant owners who spent thousands of dollars to build enclosed ventilated smoking rooms to comply with the 2003 law. But they are more concerned with the health of the people who work in those rooms.
Jim Hopper, president and CEO of Oklahoma Restaurant Association, did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment on the proposed smoking ban.
Blum said the restaurant association is influenced by big tobacco companies that have historically opposed smoking bans and restrictions in public places.
"The fingerprints of the tobacco industry are all over them," he said. "We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health."
Blum held up an oversized image of a $5 bill, about the cost of a pack of cigarettes, and criticized opponents of smoking bans for putting profits over health interests.
"It's all they care about. It's their blood money," Blum said.
Copyright 2009
The Associated Press.
Leave a Comment
News Photo Galleriesview all
Prev
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
Thank you for joining our conversations on newsok. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0VNrCChPo
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Jason, Edmond - Oct 29, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or Ignore Jason
Read more: http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_comment#comments#ixzz0VOWZOQAr
name the time and place and I will stomp your ass just to make everyone here happy
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0VNrCChPo
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Jason, Edmond - Oct 29, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or Ignore Jason
Read more: http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_comment#ixzz0VOJo2YBh
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0VNrCChPo
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Jason, Edmond - Oct 29, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or Ignore Jason
Read more: http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_comment#ixzz0VOJo2YBh
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0VNrCChPo
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Jason, Edmond - Oct 29, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Report as inappropriate or Ignore Jason
Read more: http://www.newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_comment#ixzz0VOJo2YBh
--
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Sure hope scumbag "Concerned 2" isn't the last spamming savant to catch on.
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Sure hope scumbag "Concerned 2" isn't the last spamming savant to catch on.
Sure hope Oklahoma isn't the last state to catch on.
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-officials-to-seek-smoking-ban/article/3412936?custom_click=lead_story_title#ixzz0VNrCChPo
First, full disclosure: I am a non-smoker and find tobacco smoke both obnoxious and foul-smelling.
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Source: Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Secondhand Smoke Exposure and Cardiovascular Effects: Making Sense of the Evidence. Report Brief, October 2009.
This is complete BS. When I was in California in 1999 for some training for my job, I went to a sports bar and I was suprised there was nobody smoking. I was advised that there was a law banning smoking in public places. Almost made me want to move to CA.
That being said, I think I'll eat a large pile of beans before I go out this weekend, get to the bar and start farting in the face of all the smokers I see. Hey, I'm well within my rights... right?
Of course, the kind of bars I imagine you go to they smoke a lot of long, cylindrical objects, alrighty, they just don't happen to have tobacco in them....
Now, to this article. This is *inherently* a "private property issue" on several levels:
1. There is not a single stand alone bar that a minor is legally allowed to be inside in the state of Oklahoma at any time, nor one a single of-age adult is FORCED to enter period. Don't like smokey bars? DON'T GO IN.
2. Ditto for employment in such a bar: don't like working in a smokey bar? DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN ONE.
3. There is not a single "smoking" restaurant left in Oklahoma: almost all of them are simply non-smoking. But I have been in a few in the hickier regions of this fine state where the owners have gone to the trouble to build a smoking "enclosure" - ate in one in northeastern OK just a few months ago. I'll be darned if I could smell a trace of tobacco smoke in the section of the restaurant I was in, the non-smoking part, even when I walked right by the "smoking room" on the way to the men's room. So there is no problem there - these smarmy little savants proposing this further intrusion of the government into our lives simply don't like ANYONE smoking, PERIOD.
4. Still on restaurants for a second: Don't like being employed in a restaurant with a smoking room? (A) Specify to managment before your hiring that you will not work the smoking room, or (B) DON'T APPLY FOR A JOB IN THAT RESTAURANT.
5. ""We want to make it much harder on restaurants that don't care about public health." - And I want to make it harder in this life - much harder - on arrogant little scumbags like Dr. Blum. I think smarmy pieces of filth like this who make it their life's work to strip people of their private property right and freedom of association rights should be hauled before a tribunal, and stripped of their citizenship first, and deported to Greenland second.
Listen to the unmitigated arrogance of that statement - the self-righteous preening in the name of "public health." Dr. Blum, you make decent, liberty-loving people everywhere want to vomit.
Smoking is a choice and if you dont like it then dont go somewhere where they allow smoking inside or get over it. I guarentee just because you inhale some second hand smoke occasionaly it will not kill you.
How about banning everything else thats bad for you like taco bell?
Nowhere in this country does a medical examiner or a coroner report list cause of death = smoking. Causes of death are things like heart disease, blunt force trauma, gunshot wound, etc. They also do not list manner of death = smoking. Manners of death include things like accidental, natural, and homicide.
I've been asking people for a couple of years where the data supporting their claims can be found & so far noone is talking! Even the folks at the state health department can't tell us what data was used to justify the expense of changing & enforcing all these laws. They cite the flawed EPA study most often.
If people want to say these laws are necessary because smokers overburden the healthcare system, they need to read up on the recent research that says smokers are less of a burden than fit seniors. It's for one reason... smokers die too quickly for the insurance companies to make much money off them.
As many have noted here, the anti-smokers have long been on this band wagon. Recently I've seen commercials of a young mother asking congress to not tax sodas. Well, if consumption of one product can be taxed &/or banned based on its bad health effects, so can a WHOLE lot of others.
I would far rather deal with health effects of smoking than I would the health effects of morbid obesity.
That's the only reason to own a small business, to make money, cause it sure isn't easy or fun.
Neill, Bethany... can you cite the source of scientific data that supports your statement? I don’t mean a politician or health official making a statement to the effect that “Studies show…” I mean real scientific studies of control populations & experimental populations.
“Second hand smoke is worse than first hand, second hand you don't have a choice but to inhale it! ALL FOR THE BAN!
Neill, Bethany - Oct 29, 2009 at 1:01 pm”
I’m beginning to think THIS is the biggest hoax perpetrated on the American people.
Oh well...brb gonna go have a smoke
Heres a little helpful advice for you guys... you look like a total jack ass with that fag in your mouth and since your sense of smell has long burned away, I will remind you that you smell like the ass end of a menstruating skunk.
Idiots who think they have the right to ruin other peoples air...
Second, "we non-smokers have to pay for smokers"---When will Americans wise up & realize this asinine logic will soon be applied to every aspect of your life courtesy of the insurance companies that own our country?
Why don't you anti-smokers play at VZD's, leave the smoking bars alone, and let your neighbor smoke in peace? I would think you would rather BAN tobacco, rather than further restrict its use.
VZD's
Nicholas, Oklahoma City - Oct 29, 2009 at 11:41 am
If their is a high enough demand for a bar that doesn't allow smoking that it would be profitable then I guarantee someone will put it into practice. If you want a bar that doesn't smoke, don't spend your money their. Eventually we would have a healthy balance of bars that allowed and did not allow smoking - without a law forbidding it.
Out of work as well.