Posted on 07/20/2004 8:57:08 AM PDT by buzzyboop
|
Lawmaker wants smoke-free Pa. bars and restaurants
Tuesday, July 20, 2004 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
An influential state senator is proposing to extend smoking bans into Pennsylvania’s bars and restaurants. Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery County, today announced he would push for legislation that would follow a pattern set by seven other states, including California and New York. A press release from Greenleaf said business is actually up in New York City bars and restaurants. In Florida, where smoking is banned in restaurants but not bars, restaurant business increased, Greenleaf said. __________________________________________ More details in tomorrow’s Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
|
Ping!
Next battle they will lose is children in cars followed by smoking at home around children.
Business in Bars has dropped by nearly 50% in New York.
"Too bad smokers couldn't adopt the a little courtesy they'd still be smoking in public but alas they won't because they have no clue how bad their habit affects others. "
There was a little known study about 'second hand smoke that didn't quite make it to the mainstream news.
"UK Sunday Telegraph...
Passive Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer - Official
Headline: Passive Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer - Official
Byline: Victoria MacDonald, Health Correspondent
Dateline: March 8, 1998
The world's leading health organisation has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect. The astounding results are set to throw wide open the debate on passive smoking health risks.
The World Health Organisation, which commissioned the 12-centre, seven-country European study has failed to make the findings public, and has instead produced only a summary of the results in an internal report. Despite repeated approaches, nobody at the WHO headquarters in Geneva would comment on the findings last week.
The findings are certain to be an embarrassment to the WHO, which has spent years and vast sums on anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns. The study is one of the largest ever to look at the link between passive smoking - inhaling other people's smoke - and lung cancer, and had been eagerly awaited by medical experts and campaigning groups. Yet the scientists have found that there was no statistical evidence that passive smoking caused lung cancer.
The research compared 650 lung cancer patients with 1,542 healthy people. It looked at people who were married to smokers, worked with smokers, both worked and were married to smokers, and those who grew up with smokers. The results are consistent with there being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer.
The summary, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, also states: "There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood." A spokesman for Action on Smoking and Health said the findings "seem rather surprising given the evidence from other major reviews on the subject which have shown a clear association between passive smoking and a number of diseases."
Dr Chris Proctor, head of science for BAT Industries, the tobacco group, said the findings had to be taken seriously. "If this study cannot find any statistically valid risk you have to ask if there can be any risk at all. "It confirms what we and many other scientists have long believed, that while smoking in public may be annoying to some non-smokers, the science does not show that being around a smoker is a lung-cancer risk."
Shortly after this story ran it mysteriously 'disappeared' from the Telegraph's website.
I seriously doubt it will get very far now that the slots legislation has passed. Legislators know that one of the biggest draws they will get to the slots parlors will be marketting the smokers who don't like Delaware's smoking ban. 4 of the 14 venues will be within driving distance of Delaware park, which draws most of its base from Pennsylvania right now.
Double digit declines in slots revenue have continued in Delaware since the ban....while they have levelled out to a point, they never returned to the double digit annual increases from prior to the ban.
I have it on very good authority that the majority of employees of the slots venues in Delaware have already been inquiring for positions for the new places in PA. also advertising to smokers is going to be one of their primary marketting angles.
And when Maryland passes their slots next year, the competition is going to be even fiercer.
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about.
The tide is turning on the antis because folks are waking up to the lies.
What is a public place? It's a place where a law enforcement officer can go without requiring a search warrant or an invitation from the property owner. Each business can refuse access to their premise for any reason or no reason. A business could refuse access to people without shoes, refuse access to drug dealers, refuse access to politicians and bureaucrats and refuse access to any person.
As it is, most businesses invite almost every person into their property. But no person, not even law enforcement officers have a right to trespass -- at minimum they need an invitation. Even when a business extends an invitation the recipient is by no means required to gain access to the business. No business forces any person they extend an invitation to, to enter their business property.
It's not over yet.
Well put.
No one gives a crap if SHs causes cancer. People simply don't want to smell it anymore.
Not by a long shot!!!!!!!!!
God,the way it's going the entire Northeast will be smoke-free,with the exception of New Hampshire,the "Live Free or Die" state.
You folks are in such denial.
Anywhere zoning laws allows the government to impose requirements on owners in order to open for business.
Said the Black Knight. Its merely a flesh wound.
Of course it did............can't embarrass WHO can they?
The abstract for the study has also seemed to have conveniently disappeared.
New Hampshire is over run with flat landers. The bans are not far behind.
So people use lies and junk science to scare the average person on the street into thinking that SHS DOES cause a multitude of diseases and cancers so that they will vote to ban smoking anywhere, anytime, in any manner.
Doesn't matter that it's lies and junk science as long as you don't have to smell tobacco smoke, huh.
Actually it is you and those like you who are in denial.
The lies about the so-called dangers of SHS are being exposed to a growing audience, and just because "it smells bad" is not going to cut it as a reason to infringe on property rights.
My suggestion is that all good thinking folks leave the Northeast and let all the rights grabbing lefty loons take it over.......leaving the rest of the US to normal folks.
It has worked so far. There simply isn;t going to be a massive push to make legislators change the laws back to smoking. Yes, you will get some sympathy but that an two-bits might buy you some tobacco papers.
>> children in cars followed by smoking at home around children <<
Now where have I heard this before? Hillary, is that you?
The THEORY that second hand smoke is hazardous is junk science and a great big load of steaming BS. My parents smoked around me when I was a kid and I've not suffered any ill effects.
I smoke and I'm in better shape than most of today's kids that sit around on their lazy asses playing video games all day.
The smoking bans will eventually be repealed once the money from the smokers dries up like it's doing now.
I'm sick and tired of people like you who think they have the right to not be offended. You do not have the right to not be offended. Get over it. People like you offend me every day and I don’t go around bitching about it. Grow up.
>> Next battle they will lose is children in cars followed by smoking at home around children. <<
Keep dreaming moron.
So it truly comes out........you are in favor of legislating by lies and deceit. Why does that not surprise me, coming from you?
Not from all places.
Check HERE
Neither does the government, apparently. Their statistics are based on attribution and guess work.
Two articles posted today about two new bans. I think your boat is rowing against the tide.
"Stewart Greenleaf, R-Montgomery County"
I thought Repubs were supposed to be about SMALLER LESS INTRUSIVE government???? Doesnt this clown have more on his plate then pushing through nanny-state crappola like this? I dont smoke and never have but these crazy no smoking laws just chap my hide.
Idiots like this are what keep me registered as Independent even though I vote Repub...sigh.
Honesty at last! It's always been about the smell (and control) and never about health.
The bans have not decreased taxes from tobacco. In fact the taxes have been increased at the same time more and more bans have gone into effect.
For some reason it keeps locking up on me - and locking up my computer........could you email that to me please!!!!!
By explaining reality to those in denial doesn't make me a fan of it.
You have DEMANDED I do not post to you..............I expect the same courtesy in return.
Listen to the comments from the nonsmokers after the ban. They say things like its great to be able to go out and not have to deal with the smoke. They never say I'm so glad now that my life is no longer threatened by SHS.
By your own words you have admitted you are a fan of it.
I've known for years and years that all the bans were based upon lies and deceit.....people like you have ben in denial of the reality of my position. You are just now starting to accept the truth.
The tax rates have increased, or the tax revenue has increased?
Sadly enough it isn't just a Northeastern issue anymore.
Yeh, too bad not enough of them go out to make up for the smokers that gather in their own homes after the ban takes effect.
Businesses go under, liberties are curtailed, people lose jobs - all so that you don't have to smell tobacco smoke.
I like the outcome but I don't like the process. It would have happened eventually but it seems the big chains are pushing for a quicker process. Smokers could have slowed down the process if they became polite about their smoke but unfortunately the remain clueless. The private property issue merely causes them to focus on something that in the end is wheel spinning.
I have no problem with you posting to me. I just expect that you refrain from personal attacks per the posting guidelines.
Yes I do have Acrobat, and the latest updated version.
I don't know why it wouldn't open......let me try it again.
I have seen several post here that in response to a new ban, they intend to go out and buy the biggest cigar and blow smoke in the face of non-smokers just to show that they cannot be pushed around.
I got it to open properly this time - thanks!!!!
Anywhere zoning laws allows the government to impose requirements on owners in order to open for business.
You are wrong. A public place is the property of The People and is a where any person may chose to go without invitation. All public places are owned by The People/government.
The business has in no way harmed you nor forced you to enter their business. If you think you have been harmed by a business that allows smoking on the premise then take the business owner to court and present your case before an impartial jury. So that you may gain restitution for your loss and suffering. Do your best to convince the jury that you were harmed by your choice to enter the business.
You know you'd lose the case even on the outside chance that the court would even hear your frivolous case in the first place.
Knowing you can't win that way, instead, you hire government agents to force businesses to give you access to their private property in the manner you desire -- that there be no smoking on the private property/business -- because you have no right to do it yourself yet were kindly granted permission to access the property by the business owner. You turn around and abuse the business that extended itself to you.
"The oppressor no longer acts directly and with his own powers upon his victim. No, our conscience has become too sensitive for that. The tyrant and his victim are still present, but there is an intermediate person between them, which is the Government - that is, the Law itself. What can be better calculated to silence our scruples, and, which is perhaps better appreciated, to overcome all resistance? We all therefore, put in our claim, under some pretext or other, and apply to Government. We say to it, " I am dissatisfied at the proportion between my labor and my enjoyments. I should like, for the sake of restoring the desired equilibrium, to take a part of the possessions of others. But this would be dangerous. Could not you facilitate the thing for me? Could you not find me a good place? or check the industry of my competitors? or, perhaps, lend me gratuitously some capital which, you may take from its possessor? Could you not bring up my children at the public expense? or grant me some prizes? or secure me a competence when I have attained my fiftieth year? By this mean I shall gain my end with an easy conscience, for the law will have acted for me, and I shall have all the advantages of plunder, without its risk or its disgrace!" - Frederic Bastiat
Everyone just woke up from the smokers party and took a look around at the ash trays, the smell carpet and the burn holes and said enough. Smokers are out of here. Let them smoke elsewhere.
Well at least we've established one thing - the antis have absolutely no qualms about lying in order to achieve their ends.
Which, by the way, is a despicable character trait.
"We did find weak evidence of a dose–response relationship
between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and
workplace ETS.
Simonato, P. Zambon, Venetian Cancer Registry, Padua, Italy; J. Tre´daniel, St.
Louis Hospital, Paris, France; C. Winck, Hospital Viana do Castelo, Viana do
Castelo, Portugal; R. Saracci, International Agency for Research on Cancer,"
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.