Push for 'smoke-free state' renewed (MI)

MLive.com ^ | April 18, 2005 | FROM LOCAL AND NEWS SERVICE REPORTS

[wmichgrad]

Ping!

[John Will]

Everyone play the vacate Michigan game.

[End Times Sentinel]

I guess when you can't identify a real evil, you can get totally consumed at attacking a false evil.  Being obsessed with the ideas that you know better than everyone else and need to control the masses probably helps too.

Owl_Eagle

(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,

 it was probably sarcasm)

[Not A Snowbird]

It is nice to go to a smoke-free environment. I just don't think the legislature should be dictating it.

One of our local restaurants went smoke-free by choice. The place is packed every night.

[Wooly]

These people never learn that once enough states impose these limits it will result in a backlash that will rescind them everywhere.
Just like Prohibition made social drinking acceptable, smoking bans will renew the popularity of smoking.

[Ouderkirk]

I am a smoker and in some respects I like the smoking ban here in NY. In resturaunts I'm OK with it...but when I go to a bar to drink and socialize I hate the smoking and especially when it's 20 degrees.

I would think that the business owner should make the call as to whether he/she wants to have smoking in their establishment.

[Ouderkirk]

I am a smoker and in some respects I like the smoking ban here in NY. In resturaunts I'm OK with it...but when I go to a bar to drink and socialize I hate the smoking ban and especially when it's 20 degrees.

I would think that the business owner should make the call as to whether he/she wants to have smoking in their establishment.

[PetroniDE]

Ban Smoking ? --- FINE !! On one condition.

That state no longer recieves ANY money from cigarette/tobacco taxes. After all, those are now illegal.

[Just another Joe]

They lie, and they lie, and they lie until they actually start believing their own lies.

They base their lies on their 'feelings' and bullpap fed to them by raging anti-smoker organizations without ever researching the science themselves.

If it passes, there goes one more state from my vacation list.

[Lekker 1]

Now if they could only declare themselves a Michael Moore-free State.

[Kay]

I sure am happy that they have banned smoking on all air flights! Took long enough. Now Europe is starting to follow suit.

In Europe, they still have smoking sections on buses -- yeah, like the smoke knows where to stop. So glad the U.S. has stopped smoking on buses.

[BenLurkin]

Darn that pesky liberty!

[Dilbert56]

Good thing the Vatican can still get rid of ballots the old fashioned way.

[libertarianben]

"It was so nice," she said this morning. "I realized it was time for Michigan to be a leader and join California and other states that are smoke-free states."

Unfortunately she and Michigan isn't joining to be a leader in freedom and the constitution.

There are smoke-free states? What is this like slave and slave-free states of years ago? Will smokers have to go through a underground railroad to get to smoke?

God people truly are stupid.

[Intombe]

Maybe, but I wouldn't count on it. I don't have any problem with smoking bans. To me, smoking is like masturbation: I don't care if you do it and it is your right and business, just not at the next table when I'm trying to eat dinner.

[Peter Libra]

I sure am happy that they have banned smoking on all air flights.....

Me too. A major point though, is that one cannot walk out of an aircraft- one can pause at the door and leave a bar. I know of my old Michigan haunt. 49 years have I graced- or disgraced it's doors. Non smoker myself, I am still healthy. Smoking has been cut down so drastically in any case- it is now down to less than a quarter of the bar patrons.

Any Freeper comes up to Sault Ste Marie, Michigan just ask for the Happy Hideaway- not it's advertised name. A few sinfull freedoms are being dumped on- yep, it is too pleasurable to let be. As if the do-gooders are really worried about snot nose here. LOL.

[teenyelliott]

I have a problem with the government telling private property owners what they can and can't do ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY.

If I own a building (private property rights), and I want to allow smoking, which is legal, that is my prerogative. Would you have a problem with gubmint telling you that you cannot engage in a legal activity, whatever it may be, in your own home (private property rights)?

Why is it that people who are anti-smoking have no problem with the government infringing on property rights when it is not their property? I would bet those same people would raise holy hell if it was a property that belonged to them and the nanny state was trying to regulate their behavior.

[libertarianben]

Spoken like the frog in water. Smoking is the first to go.

[softwarecreator]

State Rep. Barb Vander Veen, R-Allendale

If I lived in MI, I know one person who would NOT be getting my vote

By the way, I am not a smoker.