Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ohio Supreme Court Oral Arguments In Smoking Ban Challenge streaming live
Ohio Channel ^ | 10/19/11 | OSSC

Posted on 10/19/2011 6:59:56 AM PDT by Pontiac

Ohio Supreme Court Oral Arguments In Smoking Ban Challenge streaming live

(Excerpt) Read more at ohiochannel.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Extended News; Government; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: lawsuit; nannystate; ohio; ohiosupremecourt; pufflist; ruling; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-142 next last
Important property rights case
1 posted on 10/19/2011 7:00:04 AM PDT by Pontiac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Dave

Ohio Ping


2 posted on 10/19/2011 7:03:59 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

Any background on this case? Did the OH gov’t try to outlaw smoking in homes or cars or something?


3 posted on 10/19/2011 7:08:32 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

” Important property rights case “

Yeah - and the courts have such an excellent track record, lately, for protecting property rights from the nanny state and the bureaucratic hegemony...

/s


4 posted on 10/19/2011 7:08:42 AM PDT by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

Good example of the dangers of “democracy” vs. a representative republic.

This monstrosity got passed at the ballot box with majority approval. It made smoking rules in Ohio even more restrictive than in liberal cesspools like Maryland. I was amazed to find smoking rooms at a hotel where we stayed recently near Baltimore. They are strictly verbotten in Ohio.


5 posted on 10/19/2011 7:09:35 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

No, only in restaurants/bars, etc.


6 posted on 10/19/2011 7:09:58 AM PDT by Reddy (B.O. stinks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

Been like that in Florida for a while. Any establishment that sells food cannot allow smoking. That’s a little flexible; for instance, my cigar shop is allowed to sell soda, coffee, and snacks, and we’re allowed to smoke outdoors at restaurants if outdoor seating is available.


7 posted on 10/19/2011 7:13:48 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac; Tolerance Sucks Rocks; Eric Blair 2084

Nanny State Ping needed!!!


8 posted on 10/19/2011 7:15:09 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
Did the OH gov’t try to outlaw smoking in homes or cars or something?

The no smoking in bars, restaurants and private clubs law was passed on a state wide referendum.

To my knowledge there has been no state wide proposals to ban smoking in homes or cars.

9 posted on 10/19/2011 7:19:52 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

The voters of Ohio, through a democratic process, decided overwhelmingly that they did not want smoking in public places.

Get over it.


10 posted on 10/19/2011 7:22:29 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TSgt

Since when is a private club a public place?


11 posted on 10/19/2011 7:29:05 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

It’s been a comedy of errors. You might call it “Statism Without The State” since Ohio had almost no one to enforce the ban and in many cases it was actively ignored, even flouted.

Of course, statist types don’t like being mocked so they decided to make an example of a few establishments.

As for the ‘democratic process’ argument, I hereby propose a ban on tan indoor carpet. If it passes, can we assume that all affected will be redecorating?


12 posted on 10/19/2011 7:29:48 AM PDT by relictele (Pax Quaeritur Bello)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TSgt

” Get over it. “

And the voters of the United States, by a comfortable majority, decided that they wanted Barack Obama to be President -

Get over that, too???


13 posted on 10/19/2011 7:30:04 AM PDT by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Shh...don’t upset the black-or-white types. Shades of gray upset them.


14 posted on 10/19/2011 7:31:01 AM PDT by relictele (Pax Quaeritur Bello)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; Gabz

The voters of Ohio, through a democratic process, decided overwhelmingly that they did not want the production of the dangerous greeenhouse gas, dihydrogenmonoxide, in public places.

Get over it.

You can breathe in, but you cannot exhale.


15 posted on 10/19/2011 7:35:41 AM PDT by patton ("Je pense donc je suis," - My Horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: relictele

Believe me, I know. It never ceases to amaze me how many FReepers actually support these laws.


16 posted on 10/19/2011 7:36:23 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
The voters of Ohio, through a democratic process, decided overwhelmingly that they did not want smoking in public places.

Some things are not open to the Democratic Process.

Some things are simply Rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Things like personal property rights are guaranteed by the takings clause.

Anything you can legally do in your home should be legal to do in a bar or restaurant if the owner wishes to permit it.

Do you wish the people of your state telling you what legal activities you can and can not do in your home?

If they can do it to a private club they can do it to your home. They have already done it at the federal level by outlawing flush toilets that use 5 gallons and scheduled the incandescent light bulb to be banned.

IF you don’t like a particular vice don’t so easily surrender that vice to the nanny state because someday they will get to some practice that you do care about.

By the way I do not smoke and I typically only went to non-smoking restaurants before the ban. So I do like the effect of the ban but I still fight the ban on the principles of FREEDOM.

17 posted on 10/19/2011 7:40:49 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

This is a health issue however we will never get past that so there’s no use debating it.

I’ll agree I believe the law went a tad far. I would have been happy with a smoking ban in any place where children could be present however it is what it is.

Again, we’ll not get anywhere with each other on this thread because folks believe second hand smoke isn’t a health issue.

Queue the inane “My grandpa smoked and lived to be 100” and “perfume bothers me.” comments...


18 posted on 10/19/2011 7:45:15 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: patton; Gabz

Does inhaling the smoke clean it and strip it of all carcinogens before it is exhaled?

Two people sit in a closed garage with a car running, which one of them dies?

I never cease to be amazed at those who ignore simple physics and logic.

I’ll support your right to kill yourself only if you support my right to live.


19 posted on 10/19/2011 7:50:41 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: patton

Good one, Pat!!!

How ya been buddy?


20 posted on 10/19/2011 7:51:13 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

Bravo! Well said. The Food and Exercise police are making headway because once they gained an inch under smoking, everything became fair game “for the public good”.

If only the mob of the “Democratic Process” could do away with that pesky “Constitution”, just imagine what they could do for the public good.


21 posted on 10/19/2011 7:53:59 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Ike
And the voters of the United States, by a comfortable majority, decided that they wanted Barack Obama to be President

I don't think you understand. The State Constitutions and the Federal Constitution have provisions for certain things. The election of a President by indirect vote is one of those things that is provided for.

None of these Constitutions, SFAIK, provides for any enforceable vote to be taken to deny any person's right to life liberty or property absent a crime of some sort. Governments here cannot vote to ban the color red or performances of operas in parks even though some people walking by might really detest the operatic sounds.

ML/NJ

22 posted on 10/19/2011 7:54:16 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; patton

you really should look into the facts of this matter, not the propaganda coming from the pharmaceutical backed anti-smoking industry.


23 posted on 10/19/2011 8:00:08 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
I’ll support your right to kill yourself only if you support my right to live.

I'll support your right to live. If you choose not to frequent my private business where I choose to allow smoking, then that is your choice - live long and prosper. It is my right as the property owner and proprietor to determine what activity I wish to allow in my establishment and your right to decide whether you wish to patronize it or not.

My neice goes into anaphylactic shock at even the mere passing of a peanut or peanut product. This is a health issue for her. Can the electorate at large vote in a ban on peanuts, or is it the responsibility of her parents, and later of her own, to frequent places where she is not at risk?

24 posted on 10/19/2011 8:00:10 AM PDT by RobertClark (It's better to look goofy with a rifle, than civilized with an exit wound.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Reddy

Pennsylvania has very quietly been backing off their smoking ban in bars. They appear to be issuing numerous Obamacare style waivers to various bars, giving them the right to reinstate smoking, in whole or in part, for various convoluted reasons.

Part of this I’m sure is that it dawned on one of these schleps that 2/3 of PA’s drinking establishments were likely to go under as a result. And Pittsburgh and Philly were relying on alcoholic drink taxes to fund their mass transit systems.

And I’m sure a bar owner has to support the “right” political candidates in order to obtain his waiver.


25 posted on 10/19/2011 8:00:46 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TSgt

“The voters of Ohio, through a democratic process, decided overwhelmingly that they did not want smoking in public places.Get over it.”

That’s Brilliant! This is what democracy looks like?

Nothing about the Constitutional rights of Private property owners and the infringement without just compensation by mob rule?

I think you should get back to your tent at the Occupy Wall St. rally. I heard they just decided, through a democratic process that it’s your turn to clean the crap off the streets, police cars and other public places. Get to it.


26 posted on 10/19/2011 8:01:26 AM PDT by toofast2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

The Gubmint will never ban cigarette sales - because of the tax revenue.

The only approach is to ban the use of the purchase. i.e. you can buy it - but don’t try it!!

Much like banning the use of pesticides, drain cleaners, paint strippers, propane, gasolene, fertilizer, herbicides, mattresses. Better read those rules and follow them.

Bees still sting, snakes still bite, poison ivy still causes rash and marijuana is a medicine;)

Nonsense in nanny land.


27 posted on 10/19/2011 8:01:49 AM PDT by sodpoodle (Cain - touching the better angels of our nature.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TSgt

Good point. Restaurant owners force people into their establishments where they permit smoking. You have no choice and are forced inside with your children in tow as well.


28 posted on 10/19/2011 8:02:07 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

I gave a simple scientific example and posed some simple physics questions that you cannot answer.

The smoke doesn’t get “cleaned up” in a smoker’s lungs.

Or are you saying that smoking isn’t harmful even to the smoker?

Logic fail...


29 posted on 10/19/2011 8:04:03 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Missing you. LOL.

Pretty good, actually - but I owe you a letter, to explain all the details. Same address?


30 posted on 10/19/2011 8:05:19 AM PDT by patton ("Je pense donc je suis," - My Horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; trubolotta
Again, we’ll not get anywhere with each other on this thread because folks believe second hand smoke isn’t a health issue.

Health is not the issue, the issue is the rights of citizens to do what they like with their personal property.

Citizens can choose to patronize or not patronize bars or restaurants, as they like. They can vote for or against smoking in a bar or restaurant with their dollars.

I did before the ban. If the government had stayed out of the issue more and more restaurants would have had non-smoking policies. Eventually non-smoking bars would have popped up in large urban areas and they would have shown up in suburban areas.

The trouble with the nanny state types is that they are not willing to wait for the market place to give them what they want or they think they have to protect people from themselves.

We need to curb government before it curbs us.

31 posted on 10/19/2011 8:06:43 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
I’ll support your right to kill yourself only if you support my right to live.

i support your right to not patronise an establishment that allows smoking.
32 posted on 10/19/2011 8:08:35 AM PDT by absolootezer0 (2x divorced tattooed pierced harley hatin meghan mccain luvin' REAL beer drinkin' smoker ..what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RobertClark
It is my right as the property owner and proprietor to determine what activity I wish to allow in my establishment

There are plenty of examples that prove that untrue. One can't yell fire in a crowded theater and many businesses like those that are sexual oriented are restricted. You need a liquor license to serve alcohol, the list goes on...
33 posted on 10/19/2011 8:11:13 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: toofast2

See my reply:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2794980/posts?page=33#33

There are many activities that aren’t permitted or only permitted under license.

Nothing new here.

It’s only mob rule if you don’t like the outcome. Otherwise it’s called democracy.

You can’t have it both ways...


34 posted on 10/19/2011 8:15:03 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle
The only approach is to ban the use of the purchase. i.e. you can buy it - but don’t try it!!

Actually the Health industry may be the end of smoking.

This past year the company I work for added a $40 per month surcharge on the premiums of smokers.

I can see that surcharge increasing yearly.

I also see states raising more and more taxes on tobacco as the years go on as fewer and fewer people smoke.

Eventually the only people who smoke will be buying black market cigarettes and smoke their cigarettes in secret.

35 posted on 10/19/2011 8:15:12 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
What scientific example?

Or are you saying that smoking isn’t harmful even to the smoker?

Where did I ever say any such thing? And you claim my logic fails?

I asked you a question earlier which you failed to address - since when is a private club a public place? By what right should you be permitted to determine what legal activities i permit to take place on my private property?

36 posted on 10/19/2011 8:20:14 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
Citizens can choose to patronize or not patronize bars or restaurants, as they like.

And under Ohio State Law citizens can also make changes to the law where they feel necessary. Don't like it, change the law. Far more than half, almost 60%, of Ohio voters voted for the ban so you are in the minority.
37 posted on 10/19/2011 8:20:30 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; Gabz

“Does inhaling the smoke clean it and strip it of all carcinogens before it is exhaled?”

No - that is why I don’t take my kids to smoking bars, nor smoke in my house. On the other hand, the largest study ever conducted on ETS (Second-hand smoke) concluded that it had a prophylactic effect - it boosted the immune system against cancer. Good luck finding that one, the government buried it.

“Two people sit in a closed garage with a car running, which one of them dies?”

Is this a reference to the old joke, you sit in your garage, withe the door closed, and the car running, and I will sit in mine, and smoke a pack of cigs? Let’s see who dies first?

You loose, the guy with the running car dies.

“I never cease to be amazed at those who ignore simple physics and logic.”

Ibidinum. Et tu?

“I’ll support your right to kill yourself only if you support my right to live.”

Go for it. Stay out of smoky bars. I support your living in a cave, without the benefits of my efforts.


38 posted on 10/19/2011 8:23:17 AM PDT by patton ("Je pense donc je suis," - My Horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
This past year the company I work for added a $40 per month surcharge on the premiums of smokers.

Sounds to me like the free market is tackling this issue or do we want to bitch about this also being unfair? You can't have it both ways...
39 posted on 10/19/2011 8:23:17 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

When only the rich can afford to smoke - it will become a status symbol - reserved for the aristocracy - i.e. those in Hollywood and DC.

Are there prohibitions for smoking in the White House??? It is a ‘public’ building!!!! Banned in all other public buildings in DC & MD. Don’t know about Virginia.


40 posted on 10/19/2011 8:24:15 AM PDT by sodpoodle (Cain - touching the better angels of our nature.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
There are plenty of examples that prove that untrue unless you submit to taxation on the acts, your rights are diminished. One can't yell fire in a crowded theater and many businesses like those that are sexual oriented are restricted. You need a liquor license to serve alcohol, the list goes on...

There, I fixed it for you. Besides, what's one more right?

41 posted on 10/19/2011 8:24:56 AM PDT by RobertClark (It's better to look goofy with a rifle, than civilized with an exit wound.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Gabz

Does inhaling the smoke clean it and strip it of all carcinogens before it is exhaled? Two people sit in a closed garage with a car running, which one of them dies?

Private “clubs” are restricted from selling alcohol without a license and are also restricted from various other activities.

This is nothing new.


42 posted on 10/19/2011 8:25:01 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: patton

you’ve got FReepmail.


43 posted on 10/19/2011 8:26:02 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: patton
No - that is why I don’t take my kids to smoking bars

So you do agree that secondhand smoke is harmful! This is a great first step! I'm proud of you!
44 posted on 10/19/2011 8:27:27 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac
If the government had stayed out of the issue more and more restaurants would have had non-smoking policies

You've got that right.

When we were fighting the ban in Delaware, one the most vocal opponents to the ban was the owner of a very popular bar and restaurant that had gone non smoking. He had found his niche market, was doing very well with it, and did not want the government messing with his business plan.

On the other hand, the owner of another popular spot wanted to go non smoking, but was afraid he would lose business to places that permitted it and so wanted the government to step in and force everyone to go smokefree to protect his business.

We need to curb government before it curbs us.

BINGO!!!

45 posted on 10/19/2011 8:33:54 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
There are plenty of examples that prove that untrue. One can't yell fire in a crowded theater and many businesses like those that are sexual oriented are restricted. You need a liquor license to serve alcohol, the list goes on...

These are fallacious arguments.

Yelling fire in a theater is creating a public danger.

Sex related businesses are typically controlled by zoning requirements and are do not have blanket restriction.

The ability to regulate alcohol was granted the to the States by the 21st Amendment. And is typically used primarily to ensure the state gets its taxes.

The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

The 21st Amendment has been generally viewed by the courts to give the States broad powers to regulate alcohol

46 posted on 10/19/2011 8:34:24 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
Sounds to me like the free market is tackling this issue or do we want to bitch about this also being unfair? You can't have it both ways...

I wasn’t bitching about it.

I was responding to a comment and making an observation.

47 posted on 10/19/2011 8:40:35 AM PDT by Pontiac (The welfare state must fail because it is contrary to human nature and diminishes the human spirit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Pontiac

And the Ohio Constitution allows citizens to bring referendum issues to vote, which they did and you lost. :)


48 posted on 10/19/2011 8:41:41 AM PDT by TSgt (Legal Disclaimer: View my profile at your own risk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: TSgt
Many of these “surcharges” are not free market based on actuarial studies but on popular sentiments. People with bad dietary and exercise habits consume far more in health care costs and pay no penalty because it is not supported by popular sentiment, yet! There are many health risk factors that are averaged over premiums, and some such as age, which are group averaged. If these were all broken out, many people would be paying what they consider unfair surcharges. Free market forces will eventually play out, but artificially inflated surcharges are just a passing fad to make people feel good that smokers are being forced to “pay their fair share”. Where have we heard that before?
49 posted on 10/19/2011 8:48:41 AM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: TSgt; patton
Does inhaling the smoke clean it and strip it of all carcinogens before it is exhaled?

2 scientific truths come to mind with that irrelevant question: Correlation does not equal causation and the poison is in the dose.

Two people sit in a closed garage with a car running, which one of them dies?

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I do believe patton laid out the proper analogy, as yours is meaningless.

Private “clubs” are restricted from selling alcohol without a license and are also restricted from various other activities.

We are not discussing alcohol, thus it has no bearing on the discussion. I asked you since when is a private club a public place?

50 posted on 10/19/2011 8:49:16 AM PDT by Gabz (Democrats for Voldemort.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-142 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson