Skip to comments.New poll: Kentuckians would favor statewide smoking ban
Posted on 12/13/2011 9:46:57 AM PST by TSgt
CINCINNATI, OH (FOX19) -
A new poll shows that a majority of Kentucky residents favor a smoking ban in public places, a law which the Kentucky legislature is considering.
According to the 2011 Kentucky Health Issues Poll (KHIP), 54 percent of Kentuckians say they would support such a law; 43 percent are opposed to this law; and 4 percent had no opinion. This is an increase from 2010, when Kentuckians were split about the law at 48 percent in favor and 48 percent opposed.
"Secondhand smoke exposure poses significant health risks, and smoke-free environments are the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from these hazards," says Mary Francis, director of the Assistance for Substance Abuse Prevention Center.
KHIP, conducted annually, identifies what residents think about residents think about various health issues that affect communities, the state and the country.
"It's not surprising that those who have never smoked are much more likely to support a band than current smokers," says Francis. "It's also interesting that a majority of former smokers are in favor of a non-smoking law."
Support among registered voters is significantly higher than among nonvoters. A smoking ban is supported by 58 percent of registered voters. Meanwhile, women (64 percent) were more likely to support the law than men (43 percent). Democrats and Republicans reported an equal level of support (55 percent each) for a statewide smoke free law. Support also increased as age, income and level of education increased.
My youngest daughter went to Kentucky last year.; She had a boyfriend in the army she wanted to visit. Now, we live in Washington State. She is a smoker.
She was shocked at the freedom allowed smokers in that state.
Which band do they support? Wussy bands like REM?
Seems to me that this old chestnut was debunked years ago....
SURPRIZE SURPRIZE ...A Kentucky anti smoking group publishes a poll claiming Kentuckians are against smoking and statis media rallys to their cause (because it makes em feel good)...
We will be moving there in a few years to a farm we bought. I hope Kentucky bans public smoking before then.
I never cease to be amazed at conservatives who whine about minority rule yet when the majority clearly decides they do not want public smoking they scream tyranny!
You can’t have it both ways...
Majority rule is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.
If Kentucky had any balls...they would just make ALL smoking illegal. Period.
What is not Constitutional about a group of elected leaders following the will of their constituents and enacting a law against public smoking?
There was a time when one could smoke on a plane too...
You would be very comfortable in any of the larger Kentucky cities where they already enforce your own personal wishes.
But why is it again that you decided to move to a farm in a tobacco state where the folks still prefer to make their own choices?
How about when the majority decides you can't have guns?
So when the majority decides that you can't eat butter, meat, or eggs....Will you be fine with that?
When the majority says you must hand over 70% of your income...will you be okay with that?
When the majority says you need a smaller "carbon footprint", will you be okay with that?
Unfortunately, freedom of any sort is getting rare...
It ought to be totally up to the property owner if anyone smokes there or not.
One of the quirks about our Republic is the concept that the rights of the few are protected against the consensus of the many. Otherwise, we would have a "Democracy", aka mob rule.
The question becomes one of whether or not you consider a business owner's right to decide whether or not to permit smoking on their premises a right.
If you don't, then you have trouble with property rights. Think about it.
Non-smoking establishments can advertise for the business of those who would prefer a different environment, and let the market decide. That's the American way.
I can just see the "elected leaders" following the will of the OWS anarchists.
That's because most people wouldn't know freedom if they tripped over it.
They think they're more free if they get a choice of what color chains they wear.
To Kentucky: Then make the goddam things illegal and suffer the consequences of no collected taxes on them, diminished businesses, lost jobs - all increasing YOUR taxes and increasing the payouts for medical costs - this will not decrease healthcare costs. And when you find out, you can start on your next ‘unhealthy’ product, practice or trait you dislike...nothing but damned NAZIs...
I don’t call a 54% tally a ‘clear’ majority....likely within the MOE - additionally, this country is a country of laws, not mob rule. If you want smoking banned, ban the damned cigarettes alltogether then and then figure out how you’re gonna replace all those taxes paid on them in your state.
I have no problems with people making their own choices as long as it does not impact my health.
I am a non-smoker. I never have smoked. My dad got lung cancder from smokikng when he was 35. It was just a fluke that it was caught before it killed him.
If a business owner has a property, or a free association has a club, I see no reason why it is any of my business whether they smoked or not. If necessary, they could hire only smokers to work there.
I find that a majority most vociferous anti-smokling crusaders:
1. have no problem with permissive abortion laws, and at least have used their anti-smoking zealotry a replacement for other, more serious ills (e.g. out-of-wedlock relations).
2. are after my bacon cheesburger next.
I don’t want my country to become one big Bloombergville.
Actually slavery was constitutional, being protected (Art. 4, Sec. 2) and institutionalized (Art. 1, Sec. 2) in that document. That's why it required an amendment to end it.
Our media and even our Government have become so successful at fragmenting our society on hyped-up topics and 'issues' that we seldom see they are banning chickens even as we call for bans on cracking the 'wrong' end of the egg.
Consider that a study found only 7% of Americans to have common sense, and fewer than half practice critical thinking (or we wouldn't have the Pres__ent we have), we permit mob rule at our mutual peril.
Even assuming the second-hand smoke studies that show harm were true, a restaurant owner's choice to allow smoking in his establishment does not impact your health one iota. Your choice to go to that establishment would.
My problem with it is government violating private property rights.
I DO NOT believe that any government, or group of private individuals, has the right to dictate what legal activities I choose to allow on my own property. That is at the sole discretion of the property owner.
If I own a restaurant, a bar or any other non-residential property it should be up to me whether or not I want to allow smoking, and up to my customers to vote with their feet.
Government can control government buildings and public property, nothing else.
I never cease to be amazed at conservatives who want to dictate the behavior of others based on their own preferences. Do you want a nanny state or do you not?
You can't have it both ways.
We do not live in a majority rule society and God willing we never will.
“It ought to be totally up to the property owner if anyone smokes there or not.”
But that would be freedom! Crazy talk!
There is nothing conservative about supporting “majority rule” ie rule by the mob. Majoritarianism is for populists and mouth breathers, but I repeat myself.
Not only would there be lost revenue from taxes and lost jobs for farmers and manufacturers, but there would be the additional financial burden for the cost of fighting the crime that would start due to black market tobacco. People would go to jail for selling and buying cigarettes (more money for jails and more cases clogging the court systems), and people would die running what would become yet another illegal drug.
Good Lord, does anyone remember Prohibition? Do any of you really think that making cigarettes illegal would be a good thing?
Holy cow it drives me crazy when people, who consider themselves lovers of freedom, advocate infringing on the rights of others just because the demonized behavior of the week is something they personally don't like.
My comments are in general and not to you personally, Gaffer.
So if I open a PRIVATE business I can allow smoking in it correct? It would be privately owned but open to the public.
I am sure they will be just as successful with this as they were in ending the Moonshine trade
Unlike 2nd hand smoke, it is reality that some folks can actually die in reaction to peanuts or bee stings.
So far in Ky both peanut butter sandwiches and bee-keeping remain recklessly permitted.
Just so you know.
Apples and oranges. Nobody is banning smoking. All that is being proposed is the prohibition of the activity in public places.
Define “public places”.
(sarcasm tag on) It’s about time that you uneducated goobers and rednecks in Kentucky or whatever flyover state followed the example of your enlightened betters in the NE and CA. Anti smoking is a brilliant money making scam. Front groups like ALA, ACS for big pharmaceutical companies get rich by selling nicotine replacement products like patches and gums. Grant junky “scientists” get millions in grant money to produce bogus studies on 7th hand smoke. The STATE gets rich from MSA payments and tobacco taxes. The bar owner can go broke and the factory worker who enjoys a cigarette and a beer after a 9 hour shift get screwed. As long as we get money to pay for the lease on our Mercedes Benz E350.(/sarcasm tag off)
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.