Smoking Ban?? Update??

[dcsnomo]

Oh durn your hide firecatguy, after all this writing you went and edited the private property section out of your post! Arrrgh!
*************************************
Ok, one more for me, too.
Firecatguy...good post, I know MN has been tough about it.

One issue though that I think you are overlooking with your discussion of "property rights". "Property rights" really have nothing to do with this, it is about USE. Let me clarify:

I own a large building in Wisconsin. It is, as you say, PRIVATE property. That means I can use this building relatively unencumbered as long as the USE of the property is PRIVATE. And, as the owner of this large building I can choose how to use it. The government cannot tell me that I must open a motel, or a warehouse, or a bar.

However, I have chosen to use this building as a motel. While the building is still PRIVATE PROPERTY, the USE has now changed from PRIVATE to PUBLIC. By changing the USE of my property from PRIVATE to PUBLIC I have agreed to the rules concerning PUBLIC USE.

This building is no longer a residence where I can smoke in every room, keep a dirty kitchen, stop changing sheets, and pee in the pool. No, I now have customers coming and going, I have employees, I have suppliers. And the government is very upfront about it. Every year a health inspector comes in, inspects my place, and gives me a license renewal that says, basically, if you apply for this license for public use of your property you agree to follow our rules. If I don't follow the rules I must convert my building back to private use. But, as long as the use is PUBLIC I gotta change the sheets and quit peeing in the pool.

And as a person who has PROPERTY RIGHTS, it is my free choice to determine the use of my property.

Now please, please, I urge you, do not drag us back through the "it's my business and I can do what I want" argument again. We have been there 100 times and 1000 different ways. The purpose of my post (which was one more than I planned on after leaving this thread) is to specifically address your private property issue. Who owns the property has nothing at all to do with it. If the owner chooses freely (by exercising his property rights) to convert the use of his property from private to public he is subject to the rules of public use. Those are different than the rules of private use.

Private property is NOT the same as private use.

 

[dcsnomo]

ok

I wounder what the lawsuit would be like of the gal in Bar#1 as you all know she will sue the bar and its owner and WIN as the bar did nothing to make her reasonably safe when patronizing that establishment and you know some nanny state loving lawyer will take that case on any-day....kinda leaving the bar owner open to lawsuits

Interesting question...hmm...
If she has left the bar (gone outside) is she still a patron?
Did she make the choice freely to go outside on her own?
Is there any requirement for the bar owner to provide protection for people on the street in front of his establishment?
Did she ask for the bouncer to go with her?

Interesting question, it will surely happen, especially in that level playing field of society known as Minnesota.

Hey, when the Vikings get mugged by the Packers could they claim they were outside a bar having a smoke?

 

[Firecatguy]

Interesting question...hmm...
If she has left the bar (gone outside) is she still a patron?
Did she make the choice freely to go outside on her own?
Is there any requirement for the bar owner to provide protection for people on the street in front of his establishment?
Did she ask for the bouncer to go with her?

Interesting question, it will surely happen, especially in that level playing field of society known as Minnesota.

Hey, when the Vikings get mugged by the Packers could they claim they were outside a bar having a smoke?

hahah I think i like you.....

the MN law of Dram shop was never heard of in MN till my Uncles bar in Rosemount(cant remember the year 70 or 80s I would guess) had a patron leave and hit a motorcyclist and dragged them under his car mile or two.......good or bad???but another part were they (govt) has to step in and save us from us!! so yes it will happen lawsuit for smoking parton getting hurt----then some ins company will make a dram-smoke ins and it will be out of reach for most small bar owners.....writing is on the wall

read this!!you as homeowner is liable for a drunk leaving your house......smoking is next..if someone gets cancer and can prove they were in your house when YOU was smoking!!BAM lawyers and big money wont help you........




http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/issinfo/dramshop.htm

 

[cat_man_mike]

Firecatguy- That sucks about the MN law. In IL you are alowed to have a shelter for the smokers as long as it is a a specific (not sure exactly what the number is) distance from the main door. A lot of places have a set up like you sugested, tables, chairs, heaters. The wait staff is not allowed to go out there and serve, it is just for smoking. I am not sure how the MI or WI laws read, but hopefully, they allow for something like this. I understand your feelings about allowing smoking in adult only establishments, but adults are suseptable to second hand smoke just as kids are. The law is not about protecting kids, it is about protecting everyone. As far as getting sued for someone inhaling second hand smoke at your house, it would be next to impossible to prove that that specific time was the event to triger the cancer cells in that persons body. It would be a pretty easy defense since there are so many places to be exposed to airborne carcinigens.
Thank you John for bringing up another great point. This is not a "Big government" law as so many are upset that they think it is. It is a law decided upon on a state by state basis, which is a good example of states rights and small government in action. If you want and example of big govenment, look at what is going on in Arizona with the U.S. government trying to control what the state government has decided upon. (Oh, boy, here we go. Please start another thread for that one, let this one stay about the smoking ban.)

 

[russholio]

I knew you would go there, but with all due respect, your logic is backward. In the US we value safety of the worker, and while we understand that different jobs have different risk factors we strive, through government policy, to minimize those risks. Why? Because for decades the unions have fought hard battles to ensure worker safety.

You cannot just dismiss worker safety by saying "if you don't like it, quit". While some jobs are inherently more dangerous than others one should expect that employers and the government will try to remove these safety hazards.

If you work in a loud factory you get ear protection.
A construction zone requires hard hats
Machinery requires guards and interlocks.

You can't just dismiss workplace hazards with "oh, just quit." For crissakes, America would be populated with unemployed workers missing half their fingers.

No, workplace safety is important. Smokers emit a known carcinogen into the air in enclosed spaces that is dangerous to those that work there.

They are not considerate enough to step outside on their own, so now the government had to tell them to step outside.

You knew I would go there because the analogy you make to slave labor is ridiculous. There's a HUGE difference between slave labor and somebody working of their own free will, for pay (likely well in excess of 35 cents an hour), in less than ideal conditions. I will grant you that a smoke-filled environment is not the best place to work, but I sincerely doubt that anybody working there has scars on their backs from being tortured into or while working there.

Great working conditions? Absolutely not. Slave labor? Not even close.

 

[dcsnomo]

You knew I would go there because the analogy you make to slave labor is ridiculous. There's a HUGE difference between slave labor and somebody working of their own free will, for pay (likely well in excess of 35 cents an hour), in less than ideal conditions. I will grant you that a smoke-filled environment is not the best place to work, but I sincerely doubt that anybody working there has scars on their backs from being tortured into or while working there.

Great working conditions? Absolutely not. Slave labor? Not even close.

It was not an analogy, it was statement, meaning that workers in the US are treated better and are given safer working conditions than in undeveloped third world countries.

An analogy requires inference of similarity, my statement had no such inference.

 

[98panther]

Go to a Twins game at Target Field.

Outdoor baseball - no smoking

no smoking - outside on the plaza

There is a little area for smoking before you go in, right off seventh street where the buses drop everyone off. You get some bus fumes with your nicotine. And one other place along the trains tracks.

After you get inside the park, your only option is to get in line at ONE gate where they have a little pen set-up outside. They only let so many in there at a time so you wait in line, once 20 are ready to come out, they can leave and 20 others can go in. In a little pen like little piggies, I think it's hilarious

 

[qber]

No problem here in Illinois - bar business got better. I had a problem because it became harder for me to bum a cigarette. I agree that in a confined space smoking can be a problem for non smokers. It's like letting off gas in a confined area - its better to do it privately.

 

[russholio]

It was not an analogy, it was statement, meaning that workers in the US are treated better and are given safer working conditions than in undeveloped third world countries.

An analogy requires inference of similarity, my statement had no such inference.

Thank you for the English lesson. My apologies if I used the incorrect terminology.

Call it what you will, I still believe it was unnecessary, as most of us are aware that slavery was abolished by the 13th Amendment.

 

[xcr440]

Go to a Twins game at Target Field.

Outdoor baseball - no smoking

no smoking - outside on the plaza

There is a little area for smoking before you go in, right off seventh street where the buses drop everyone off. You get some bus fumes with your nicotine. And one other place along the trains tracks.

After you get inside the park, your only option is to get in line at ONE gate where they have a little pen set-up outside. They only let so many in there at a time so you wait in line, once 20 are ready to come out, they can leave and 20 others can go in. In a little pen like little piggies, I think it's hilarious

Awesome! I didn't see the pen when I was there, but I did take notice to nobody smoking ANYWHERE I was there......

 

[cat_man_mike]

You knew I would go there because the analogy you make to slave labor is ridiculous. There's a HUGE difference between slave labor and somebody working of their own free will, for pay (likely well in excess of 35 cents an hour), in less than ideal conditions. I will grant you that a smoke-filled environment is not the best place to work, but I sincerely doubt that anybody working there has scars on their backs from being tortured into or while working there.

Great working conditions? Absolutely not. Slave labor? Not even close.

No scars on their back, but I bet if you get a look at their lungs it will be a mess. A cut from a whip will heal, but the dammage done to your lungs is forever. I think everyone here would agree that they would rather get 20 cracks from a whip than die from lung cancer...

 

[russholio]

No scars on their back, but I bet if you get a look at their lungs it will be a mess. A cut from a whip will heal, but the dammage done to your lungs is forever. I think everyone here would agree that they would rather get 20 cracks from a whip than die from lung cancer...

I have no doubt you're right. Difference is, a slave wouldn't be given the option of choosing.

And with that, since this thread has gotten so far off from its original intent, I will follow the lead of some of the others and exercise my right/privilege of opting out of further participation.

 

[qber]

Don't worry - all threads seam to wander a bit -At least this one got thru 7 posts before it started getting political- thats not so bad.

 

[cat_man_mike]

I have no doubt you're right. Difference is, a slave wouldn't be given the option of choosing.

And with that, since this thread has gotten so far off from its original intent, I will follow the lead of some of the others and exercise my right/privilege of opting out of further participation.

If your occupation is bartender/waiter and every resturaunt or bar in the state allowes smoking, how are you giving them a choice? Here comes the "they are free to move to another state that has the law." comment.

 

[ezra]

the only up side to the gov meddling in our day to day life is that they have the time to do it. most countries smoking indoors is so far down on the huge list of probs it will never make the list.

 

[bryan t]

Like I said...all u nasty TWO SMOKE ridin goons...stop polluting my trail!!!

ALL SMOKE IS NASTY!!! UR MAKING MY EYES WATER...AND I CAN'T BREATH!!! it's all ur fault john (you and ur two stroke posse)

 

[wilson]

Ouch!!!!!

 

[Firecatguy]

Like I said...all u nasty TWO SMOKE ridin goons...stop polluting my trail!!!

ALL SMOKE IS NASTY!!! UR MAKING MY EYES WATER...AND I CAN'T BREATH!!! it's all ur fault john (you and ur two stroke posse)

um...when was the last time you ran across John on the trail????

 

[Admin]

Aw... I'm willing to bet that Bryan was just giving out some good natured ribbing.

At least I hope so, or I might have to post some incriminating photos of him stuck, going DOWN HILL, in a field on a 2 stroke mountain sled!

Besides I owned a 4 stroke and they don't stink all that much less than current 2 stokes- especially the e-tec.

-John

 

[hiawatha]

Guess bans are good as long as they benefit "you"... what happens when they stop benefiting "you" and affect your lively hood or your hobbies ... We don't need more bans.. or policing for god sake (ooops.. probably shouldn't say "god" it might offend some). Here's some bans already in place either by city or by state.

Ban while talking and driving.
Ban on trans fat (coz your fat)
Ban on plastic bags
Ban on "hand weeding" (coz bad for back)
Ban on McDonalds Happy Meals (promotes child obesity)
Ban on Plasma TV's
Ban on Sodas & junk food in schools
Ban on Residential ozone purifiers.
Ban on white t-shirts (to help prevent crime with gangs)
Ban on mandatory overtime
Ban on woodburning fireplaces (pollution)
Ban on salt on food cooked in restaurants
Ban on 2 stroke motors on lakes
Ban on snowmobiling in yellowstone
Ban on Sale of all pets (coz its impulse buying)
Ban on sale of black cars
Ban on crossing the street while talking on a cell phone (public safety)
Ban on Strong perfume
Ban on tossing candy in a parade
Ban on SUV's in California in the works
Ban on Copper auto brakes (to save fish)
Ban on Trail cams
Ban on "Ladies Night" (discrimination)
Ban on smiling in new drivers license photos
Ban on fast food restaurants opening in poor neighborhoods
Ban on Christmas/Easter/Halloween functions
Ban on nudity in strip clubs and serving alcohol..
Ban on playing beer pong.
Ban on Prison Visitors From Wearing G-Strings
Ban on serving a boilermaker or any other drink mixing beer w/alcohol (Nebraska)
Then of course religious bans...bible, god, Bans Prayer "In Jesus Name"

You don't think all these bans won't effect you negatively... think again.. coz your livelyhood or hobby might just be the next ban