Skip to comments.
20 Bars Agree To Enforce Smoking Bans After Judge Threatens Jail Time
Copyright 2003 by NBC4.tv. ^
| September 24, 2003
Posted on 09/26/2003 9:50:21 AM PDT by CSM
LOS ANGELES -- Twenty Los Angeles-area bars have agreed to comply with the statewide smoking ban after a judge threatened their owners with major fines or jail time if failed to enforce the law, an attorney said Wednesday.
Attorney Michael Linfield filed several lawsuits representing BREATH, the California Smoke-free Bars, Workplaces and Communities Program, on behalf of the general public to force some bars to enforce the law.
BREATH is an acronym for Bar and Restaurant Employees Against Tobacco Hazards. The program is statewide project of the American Lung Association of the East Bay and funded through tobacco tax revenues.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbc4.tv ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: privateproperty; pufflist; smoking; smokingban; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 next last
To explain the excerpt, they have the following (I felt I would rather be safe than sorry).
"All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed."
1
posted on
09/26/2003 9:50:22 AM PDT
by
CSM
To: CSM
Urge to kill...rising.
2
posted on
09/26/2003 9:55:35 AM PDT
by
Grit
(Tolerance for all but the intolerant...and those who tolerate intolerance etc etc)
To: Gabz; Just another Joe; Flurry; SheLion
"force some bars to enforce the law."
Confiscate their private property then force them to police it!
"The program is statewide project of the American Lung Association of the East Bay and funded through tobacco tax revenues."
Steal the money from the people, hand it to the breeders of the attack dogs to kill those same people!
"Now they have to say, `if you want to smoke, you can't do it here,"' he said.
Government mandating what speech should be used!
"Failure to comply with the injunction could lead to "major fines" and perhaps being cited for contempt of court and a possible jail term, Linfield said."
Pass enough laws and eventually most of society becomes criminals. Society is then a lot easier to control!
3
posted on
09/26/2003 9:56:36 AM PDT
by
CSM
(www.banallfun.com - Homepage of all Smoke Gnatzies!)
To: *puff_list
This is getting quite ridiculous.
4
posted on
09/26/2003 9:56:50 AM PDT
by
Grit
(Tolerance for all but the intolerant...and those who tolerate intolerance etc etc)
To: CSM
What is needed is a thing called "civil disobedience" on a large scale.
5
posted on
09/26/2003 10:04:13 AM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: CSM
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Irving S. Feffer routinely dismisses thousands of cases a week against illegal aliens, but today he took the time from his busy schedule to threaten bar owners who fail to enforce the smoking ban.
6
posted on
09/26/2003 10:07:13 AM PDT
by
Joe Hadenuf
(I failed anger management class, they decided to give me a passing grade anyway)
To: Just another Joe
What is needed is a thing called "civil disobedience" on a large scale. I'm sure that would be considered contempt of court as well.
7
posted on
09/26/2003 10:12:24 AM PDT
by
Orangedog
(Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
To: CSM
That's ok! They can do without the stubborn smoker's money then. Fork em all!
8
posted on
09/26/2003 10:14:49 AM PDT
by
SheLion
(Curiosity killed the cat BUT satisfaction brought her back!!!)
To: CSM; *puff_list; Just another Joe; Great Dane; Max McGarrity; Tumbleweed_Connection; ...
Puff
9
posted on
09/26/2003 10:15:09 AM PDT
by
SheLion
(Curiosity killed the cat BUT satisfaction brought her back!!!)
To: Just another Joe
What is needed is a thing called "civil disobedience" on a large scale. AMEN!
10
posted on
09/26/2003 10:17:40 AM PDT
by
SheLion
(Curiosity killed the cat BUT satisfaction brought her back!!!)
To: CSM
"Smoke 'em if ya' got 'em."
11
posted on
09/26/2003 10:21:45 AM PDT
by
onedoug
To: CSM
Why anyone would want to live there is beyond me. The only people with any rights are illegals.
12
posted on
09/26/2003 10:22:03 AM PDT
by
Cobra64
(Babes should wear Bullet Bras - www.BulletBras.net)
To: Orangedog
I'm sure that would be considered contempt of court as well.Perhaps, but contempt on a massive scale breeds caution in the ones that being foolish. (The judge)
13
posted on
09/26/2003 10:26:58 AM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: Grit
Urge to kill...rising. LOL...I'm thinking the time is right to start to push for a ban on fat people in bars as well.
14
posted on
09/26/2003 10:39:10 AM PDT
by
BureaucratusMaximus
(if we're not going to act like a constitutional republic...lets be the best empire we can be...)
To: Just another Joe
Civil disobedience is the only way,there doesn't seem to be a politician or newspaper with the balls to stand up and fight this insanity.
15
posted on
09/26/2003 10:39:26 AM PDT
by
Mears
To: Mears
there doesn't seem to be a politician or newspaper with the balls to stand up and fight this insanity.Doesn't it seem that 20% to 30% of the vote would be worth fighting for?
16
posted on
09/26/2003 10:42:18 AM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: Mears
there doesn't seem to be a politician or newspaper with the balls to stand up and fight this insanity Yeah...the fight for utopia marches on...all based on junk science from government sponsored (and manipulated) studies about second hand smoke, the governments will to grab more land, more money, and more power; and the liberal dogma of "some people can't make decisions for themselves...lets step in and make those decisions for them...that way we'll feel validated!"
17
posted on
09/26/2003 10:44:14 AM PDT
by
BureaucratusMaximus
(if we're not going to act like a constitutional republic...lets be the best empire we can be...)
To: Just another Joe
I always had the fantasy of one national politician speaking up as a pro-smoking candidate. I'm sure every smoker,regardless of political affiliations, would vote for him(I'm sure it would be a "him").It's one guy that would get my vote and,as you say,it's a large voting bloc.
Full disclosure:I'm a "she" so no sexism accusations,please.
18
posted on
09/26/2003 10:47:14 AM PDT
by
Mears
To: Mears
Full disclosure:I'm a "she"I knew that.
But no sexism accusations? Where's the fun in that?
19
posted on
09/26/2003 10:50:53 AM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: Just another Joe
"Doesn't it seem that 20% to 30% of the vote would be worth fighting for?"
Only when the issue is the do not call list. Smoking is evil so they don't want to be associated with those constituants.
20
posted on
09/26/2003 10:59:56 AM PDT
by
CSM
(www.banallfun.com - Homepage of all Smoke Gnatzies!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson