Posted on 07/02/2005 4:39:25 AM PDT by SheLion
A civil lawsuit is now on file against the Tropicana bar. The lawsuit says the owners' disregard for the county wide smoking ban is: "...creating a public nuisance and health hazard for which the Wheeling-Ohio County Board of Health has received complaint."
The bar is owned by Ohio County Delegate Chris Wakim. Wakim told News9 he would not comply with the smoking ban regulation.
"Until and at such point as I feel that they work this out, I am not going to be in compliance, absolutely not, said Wakim.
The county health officer says Wakim's public defiance is influencing other bars. A hearing will be scheduled and next week a judge will consider a temporary restraining order against the Tropicana bar. The health officer, Dr. William Mercer, wants restaurant and bar owners to continue to follow the regulation.
"We're expecting people to enforce this. The regulation is in effect. I advise them not to follow one person, said Mercer.
Ya see? Without saying so in so many words the antis reveal the truth via their fear over non-compliance. That it undermines a ban by catching on and making enforcement difficult.
When people in a town are descended upon by the Anti-smokers whose only paid job is to spread their lies… most people don't take the time to research the situation, and tend to believe what they hear from people who appear smarter then them. It's only natural and I don't blame them. But by pointing out that you are not allowed to enslave citizens as your army, this situation can and will be rectified.
Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here
Three cheers for 21st century civil disobedience.
Those bar owners should stick together on this and maybe even close their doors for a couple weeks (if they can afford the loss in revenues). I think that ALL their customers would get a wakeup call on this issue if they had no place to dine out or drink for a while....
Simply another example showing that citizens don't own their property.
Instead property is regulated for the Marxist common good and the individual rights to use property, develop property and bar others entry to property, are thrown out in favor of the collective, meaning government.
I expect the owner to lose this case to the fascists and face a heavy fine. And this is only the beginning. They will be busting into homes next to regulate legal behavior that fascists don't like.
Those smokers prove again they never read Dale Carnegie.
I hope that guy's not too attached to his liquor license.
Well, I'm not too versed on Ohio specifics, but in Kentucky (and I would presume there is not much difference in the area of liquor law) that a liquor license can only be taken away for violating regulations concerning serving to certain groups precluded by age, preexisting intoxication, as well as losing license for ducking the pre-approved suppliers (KY requires LBD licenseholders to go through distributors, not get themself from producers). But assuming the differences are not too divergent, I don't think the state can take his liquor license away merely for thumbing his nose at anti-smoking ordinance. Fayette County (Lexington) hasn't been able to do that yet.
Never underestimate the wrath of a a petty bureaucrat.
The smoking Nazis prove again they never understood the Constitution.
Without saying so in so many words the antis reveal the truth via their fear over non-compliance. That it undermines a ban by catching on and making enforcement difficult.
Freedom bump!
It just means they're going to ramp up penalties. You don't actually think they're just going to say "Gee, folks aren't obeying, guess we'll just drop it" do you?
BTTT!!!!!!
I have been told this Ohio County West Virginia.
Sorry for the confusion!
In response to the filing of the petition for injunction and its subsequent motion, Wakim reiterated his opinion that elected officials, who are accountable to voters, should be the ones who dictate and create public policy.
"This is not the Soviet Union," Wakim said. "The Soviet Union collapsed from oppressive dictates from non-elected people.
"I have never in my entire, adult life seen anything in the realm of jurisprudence as patently absurd as the health officer's motion," Wakim added. "The citizens of Wheeling should be scared to death that a fanatical board can remove private property rights through the simple passage of a regulation, which is the most draconian regulation in the state."
Wakim said the board should look to the example set by the less restrictive regulation passed Monday in Brooke County. He added that he believes the only other regulation in the state as restrictive as the one in Ohio County is the one in Braxton County, and he said only one citation has been issued there in the six months since the regulation's passage.
"Since the health board has refused to address the concerns of private property owners and private businesses in Wheeling, there are only two courses of action," Wakim said. "One is a vote, which we will have, and two is a court of law. It is unfortunate that Dr. Mercer chose to be as single-minded and stringent with regard to this regulation."
Rest of story at http://www.news-register.net
Drip, drip, drip.
The regulation prohibits smoking in all enclosed public places in the county with the following exceptions: freestanding limited video lottery rooms, private residences when not used as a child care or health care facility, designated hotel and motel rooms, bingo operations distributing more than 100 cards or sheets, retail tobacco stores and conference or meeting halls being used for private functions and areas of gaming and entertainment establishments that are devoted to the placement of wagers and gaming.
Ironic that they want to enforce "no smoking" laws yet have no regard for "immigration" laws. Typical government.
Lesson 7.
Rolled up newspapers and I'm mad as hell and ain't gonna take it anymore?
Did you say something?
Better link to news story in Wheeling newspaper: http://theintelligencer.net/news/story/072202005_new1injunction.asp
Wouldn't it be wonderful if every business owner harmed by the ban demanded a jury trial and compensation for business losses?
I have been told this Ohio County West Virginia.
Sorry for the confusion!
He's facing a lose/lose situation. Either he complies with the ban and sees his business dry up or he resists the ban and sees his business shut down.
He may as well go down fighting! I hope his loyal customers show some solidarity.
You better believe it!
After all, it's not like they're free or sumthin' ...
A Modern Day Founding Father.
The hatred of freedom In America must be making the Founding Fathers turn in thier grave.
Freedom from tyranny.
Isn't that what America is all about?
It's not a country.
It's an ideology.
Do YOU think you get YOUR rights from the Constitution? If so, you've been (up until now) an unthinking collectivist.
[The purpose of the Constitution is to] “keep the government off the backs of people.” -- Justice William O. Douglas
"Rights do not come from governments nor their Constitutions. They come from man's nature/his Creator. Thus governments should be instituted among men to protect rights, not to grant them or to violate them." -- Rick Gaber, here.
| "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." -- Jefferson et al, The Declaration of Independence |
In other words, THE CONSTITUTION WAS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT RIGHTS, NOT to "create" them. (Duh).
The right to smoke is in the 9nth Amendment, which says that the enumeration of some rights should not be construed to exclude rights not enumerated.
| "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- United States Constitution, Amendment XIV, Section 1 |
Somebody better tell the DEA.
bump
Truly ignorant statement. The federal constitution does not provide rights, period. It provides limits on government power. That is a crucial distinction.
I have been told this Ohio County West Virginia.
Sorry for the confusion!
Oh, the seat of corruption (Wheeling is Sheets Byrd's home) in a backward corrupt state??? They practically make the law up as they go along... This guy is screwed...
That being said, petty burecrats need to be stood up to. I am having a fight with codes enforcement in my hometown over a vehicle in my backyard, out of view from the street, not exactly drivable right now, but still registered. He cited that vehicle, plus one in my driveway that is driven daily and not only runs but runs like a scalded dog. But the former of the two cars is legally protected by a piece of legislation signed 4-1-5 by Gov. Ernie Fletcher (HB 345 not sure the specific spot in KY revised statutes that it is located) concerning car collectors and DIY auto repair says that as long as vehicle is out of ordinary direct view from the street, meaning that you don't have to go out of your way to see all or part of the vehicle, that city code enforcement ordinances do not apply because it is Out of Public View. I know the car itself is not really worth a fight (its a 91 Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera--but we have two other running cars of the same model, a 92 Ciera SL wagon and a 96 Ciera SL sedan--not exactly a desirable model, but under state law I qualify as a collector, because of those and my other two cars either are made by oldsmobile, have oldsmobile engines, or both), but I have come by things difficult in my life, so I fight every battle put in front of me for that reason Well i informed the Codes Enforcement Officer that and he said he "wasn't interested in state law" which was specifically written to deball municipal codes enforcement officers and he went by city law.
If anyone wants to, please PhoneFreep City Codes Enforcement Officer Corby Lambert at (270)393-3546 (I live in Bowling Green, KY) and tell him to obey state law (which supercedes local law under state constitution supremacy clause, similar to US constitution supremacy clause regarding the states). I'm being fined $50 already and ordered to get rid of the car by July 11th and I'm simply not willing to comply with local codes tyrants because I'm legally protected by state law, although I'm not sure who to go to w/ the state on this.
And it provides no limits on government power over smoking tobacco.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
And the pertinent parts of the WV Constitution are quoted earlier in this thread.
nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively
Right, or the people. And I added that the pertinent document, the WV Constitution (which limits WV power in this area) was quoted earlier in this thread.
Absent a revolt, the state is sovereign over its citizens unless the state constitution protects those rights. To date, only Florida seemed to have difficulty enforcing the smoking ban without a amendment. Therefore my original stands. You do not have the constitutional right to smoke.
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.