Here's the new poll.
All security features turned on.
No stuffing ballot.
No Fancy Stats.
No hidden questions.
Not open to "registered voters" only.
Not just open to voters with land lines either.
Tell your friends to vote.
E-mail your friends to vote.
Smokers and Non-smokers both welcome to vote.
Only 2 questions.
Poll is PUBLIC.
Results are PUBLIC.
Click for results.
36 comments:
In an interview, Kahn said she was not necessarily encouraging aldermen to adopt a citywide smoking ban. She was simply sharing Blessing's experience.
"I'm urging them to get all the constituents involved," she said. "I think that they need to have the forums that they're planning to have. I think they need to hear from all of the affected parties."
Where are they gonna have the debate, Beer City? How about Jimbo's Tap? Or Players 5th St. Pub, there's a class establishment! Expressway Blues has also held meetings of some sort, I'm told. Have the forum down there. Or Livermore's, and get shot dead on 10th St.!
Or, instead of the forum, we could all just get a case of beer and a Tombstone pizza, and go home.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and, at the risk of offending a few, maintain that we should not let the pub owners dictate public health policy.
That would be on the same tree going out the opposite side saying let's not let government decide the rights of a business owner.
Hello 4:45!!!!! We live in Illinois!! What do you mean "don't let government decide the rights of business owners". Hell, they already tell us everything to do. And it only going to get worse. But I'm damn tired of morons who smoke blowing their smoke in my face, polluting my air and litering my world with their shit.
But I do have a solution to the smoking in the bars. Make the bars either all smoking or all non-smoking, meaning only smokers could go in the smokers bar and only non-smoker in non-smoking bars and absolutly no smoking were food is served. That would help a lot.
Illinois Bill Targets Smoking with Kids in Car
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - A new measure in the Illinois House looks to snuff out smoking when children are present in a vehicle.
The legislation barring smoking in vehicles when children eight or younger are riding would make it a class C misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and 15-hundred dollars in fines.
Similar laws affecting motorists have been passed in Louisiana and Arkansas. West Virginia and California are considering such measures but with proposed fines of 25 and 100 dollars, respectively.
The bill's sponsor, Democratic state Representative Mike Boland of East Moline, says it's the state's responsibility to protect children from adverse health effects from second-hand smoke.
He says the effort isn't invading privacy but more of an encouragement to be responsible.
You knew something like that was going to be proposed as soon as the self-proclaimed anti-smoking folks started their song and dance.
You know what? I don't give a damn whether they think it's bad for the kids. The owner of the car's rights to SMOKE IN THEIR OWN VEHICLE trumps the anti-smoking lobby--or should.
We might as well admit we no longer have a Democratic Republic in the U.S. but are rather well on our way to totalitarian oppression with "the elite" telling us whats good and bad for us and how to live our lives.
In a post on another blog I actually held back from saying it (or maybe it was here in a previous post by the Fire) but I no longer feel constrained.
This is about power, not smoking. The power to make other people do what the anti-smoking (or heck, choose your own "anti-") crowd want done. It's about power to force your will on others who do not wish to submit to your will. It is a form of psychological rape.
It's not a power issue, it's a PUBLIC HEALTH issue, duh! Just look a where the people work who are behind the smoking ban.
If they can tell you how many bathrooms you have to have in your joint, to what temp food has to be cooked, & how clean your kitchen has to be, etc, they can (soon) tell you your customers can't smoke. Deal with it.
If you don't like it, you can choose to go into some other form of business.
4:00
It's POWER dumbass. Plain and simple, like you.
If you rack your tiny brain enough you can draw lines to just about any cause you what. Public health my ass. More children are killed on bicycles each year than total killed by second hand smoke. Will you ban bike riding by small childern ?? Hell no.
Don't get pissed at those people who stand up for their rights. These will be the faces you see last when this goverment controlled do-gooders leads you all over the cliff !
12:00
What business you gonna go into after your dump closes because of the smoking ban? Try a health food joint, dipshit.
All you assholes are freakin, pissing, and moaning, cause you won't make money off of people killing themselves slowly, think it's funny as f#ck! Join the union, get a real job! Sonething harder than, "Another one, Joe Bob?" Maybe could pick up trash instead of catering to it in bars.
F#cking pub crawlers.
Here's an interesting observation. Of all the people commenting in the various blogs on the proposed smoking ban in Quincy, the only ones that routinely resort to ad hominem and straw man attacks, insult, use foul language, and otherwise act like petulant children instead of adults...are the smoking ban SUPPORTERS.
WHO needs to grow up?
Note I'm not saying none of the anti-ban folks don't surrender to the impulse, but by far the majority of rude, asinine postings are coming from those who want to shove the smoking ban down everybody else's throat. Interesting, that.
Those who support the smoking ban are so blinded by their ideology that they cannot see the clear implications of this kind of "nanny/big brother" type action.
The new proposed ban on smoking in cars with kids present (and its 30 days in jail and 1500 buck fine) is another step on the road and brick in the wall.
I predict before I die most of what we consider individual liberties will have been taken away from us--and we'll have agreed and acquiesed to every single step along the way "for the children" or "to protect ourselves" or "for our own good".
Our forefathers would weep at what we have become, and what we have willingly surrendered.
They already are in our cars.
The Seatbelt law is already around. You also have to keep a child in a carseat up until the age of 8 right now.
So a smoking ban, seems like it is par for the course. How this would ever be enforced, is another question.
Rock ,
What it does is errode that 4th even more . The right of "search and seizure" <-----lol is a valid point when we bitch about the QPD revenue stream that is outside your office daily .
Never let the Repub's into your bedroom or the Dems on your Private Prop.
Rule of thumb says give us cheap power, safe roads, protect us with the military and the rest of it --BACK THE F*CK off gov't
Also Rock ,
I am in shock and awe that you and the Misses' left the safe and comfortable 24th and State ....
Your growing on me Rock !
Come to the Dark side of 24th and State ........ you too will find fun nights like those of the Lou'
But hart is a FICHIGAN fan and that is just not right
Again, I think this smoking issueis a matter of choice.
You can choose to stay in the bar- grill business, and go under, asi it depends on smoking so much, or you can choose to open a conveniance store and sell cases of beer and Tombstone pizza's to go. I hear that's where the money may be in the future.
QHW had some good soapbox articles on smoking tonight (3/9)
What the goal on votes here Fire?
All I have to say is prove it. They claim that 50,000 die each year from second hand smoke. Show me one death certificate to support their claim. You have to be pretty naive if you believe that bunk. The members of the coalition is financed by the company that wants to sell the patch and the gum. That is what smoking bans are all about money.
I have a challenge for Amy Shirey and the coalition, Ann Kahn and Blessing board of directors. As long as they continue to participate in an activity that threatens peoples lives more then smoking cigarettes do then they should reinstate smoking on Blessing property, the coalition disolve and they leave the smokers alone. If they do not believe they are doing this then here's what we can do. I with as many people as there is in their group will allow you to close us in a building(no ventilation) with hundreds of lit cigarettes smoldering for 30 minutes and we will see really how dangerous our cigarettes really are. Now it will be there turn to go into the same building but instead of hundreds of lit cigarettes we will have just one of their cars, starter up and let's wait 30 minutes to see how they do.
5:55
It really sucks when, within 1 week, 2 dads of two of your friends die of smoking! Right here, yes in Quincy. Death cert's didn't say smoking, probalby more like COPD, emph, etc. But what sucked ws that they had just started their retirements. In one of the cases, the guy's daughter really agonized over his health situation, specially in the end stages.
And I don't mean to supply only 2 examples, but yes, I can see where it could kill 50,000 a year. We get sheepled into smoking and dying, it seems, and sheepled into the idea that smoing is okay, cool, when it kills people, plain and simple.
11:02
Think U sidetracked here. The smoke-free members are raising the issue of ill effects of "second-hand" smoke.
I smoke and am reminded of the hazards of smoking by the label on the packs. I also notice the labels on my cold ones too.
11:32
You ever sit up all night, every night, with a damn nebulizer holding it on a kid whoose dumbass mother smoked while pregnant? I know it's mom's fualt, but who fights for the kids in this situation, 2nd hand situation in public places is identical!
I know, though, I forgot, the kids aren't worth argueing for, I know, heck with the kids & their lungs, sorry. You guys are all class, I tell ya! Argueing with the addicted is like pissin in the wind, even if it is for health and kids sake!
12:09
Once again the smoke free argument goes where they want it.
11:32 made the correction that the argument was second-hand smoke. They did not endorse smoking while pregnant. That is a whole different issue that the non-smokers like to drag into the mix to make their point.
As stated in a previous post,the only ones that routinely resort to ad hominem and straw man attacks, insult, use foul language, and otherwise act like petulant children instead of adults...are the smoking ban SUPPORTERS.
1:58
wrong, I've ben called every name in the bok, thekids I'm fighting to protect have been caled bastards, rug-rats, etc.
Lookey here, if you can't smoke at the 08 Olympics, why should you be able to smoke in publices in Quincy? I got yo ass on that one! LOL
Or we could have Quincy pub Olympics, contests involving greatest number of DUI arrests, most missing teeth, public disturbance arrests, most times spouse called from home looking for you, most divorces due to alcoholism, most instances of neglected kids due to parents sitting in pubs, most # of patrons murdered outside of a particular pub (a few 10th St. pubs currently in the lead here).
You may still be able to smoke in these Olympics, better hurry.
7:37
From the looks of your last post, I would bet your not old enough to buy smokes yet.
or that last poster is SMOKING CRACK
>You ever sit up all night, every
>night, with a damn nebulizer
>holding it on a kid whoose
>dumbass mother smoked while
>pregnant? I know it's mom's
>fualt, but who fights for the
>kids in this situation, 2nd hand
>situation in public places is
>identical!
Hardly the same at all.
1. The kid isn't going to be sitting in a bar full of smokers (or if he is then we probably need to get him taken away from his dumbass mother).
2. There is no way the kid is going to be exposed to as much second hand smoke at a restaurant as he is exposed to at home--where government writ mandating no smoking cannot run.
You have postulated a false emotional argument in an attempt to bolster your position, but instead have simply brought it crashing down around your own ears.
BTW, give the whole whiny "it's for the CHIL-druhn" thing a rest already. It's not for the kids at all, it's so a small elitist group can get their jollies from telling other people how they can behave in a public place.
Having said all that: smokers, for pete's sake, learn a little self-discipline and give up the smokes for an hour or so when you go out to eat. It won't kill you, honest.
Note I don't include bars in that--drinking and having a smoke are part and parcel of the bar experience. :)
12:09
Are CRACK babies the fault of second hand smoke too?
What happens when folks SMOKE less ?
The Gov't gets LESS $$$$$$$$$$
Dumbass
take up smoking we can afford to have everyone live to be 100
10:37
Yes. Now don't go lobbying to smoke crack in public places!
10:35
The problem is smokers will never have sense enough to not smoke for an hour while people are eating, that's why laws are needed. Same way with speeding, I know the laws are annoying, but they are needed!(is that a bad thing when you get a speeding ticket on the way to an IRL race?)
Speeding is a sum bitch for me ! My car is geared a wee bit different than a ford focus and low end 3rd is about 35 mph but high end 2nd is around 40 mph .
But a lil "paint" on the plates has worked along with the Valetine II does wonders to keep the STASSI off your ass !
For me, it was a miracle the rice burner I drive could even go that fast, as it was loaded down with three other red-necks. Also, try getting out of a ticket with a "Kansas Speedway" t-shirt on, it doesn't work, not in Linn County, anyway. Not with Bubba of MSHP, who's a major leauge asshole.At least I'm a member of the 108.00 club.
>The problem is smokers will never
>have sense enough to not smoke
>for an hour while people are
>eating, that's why laws are
>needed.
Baloney. No law is needed. The obvious solution, in the spirit of American compromise, is either to let business owners doas they please and let the market decide; or if you must make some kind of law, recognize that the smokers aren't doing anything that's illegal, and to infringe upon their rights for engaging in a legal activity is not only wrong it's immoral--therefore having "smoking hours" at businesses that want to take part. During the hours of 9-11 or whatever, smoking is allowed. You don't want to breathe it, don't go then.
But of course it's not actually about not smoking. It's about a relatively tiny group of health nazis trying to force their view of "good health" and "morality" down everyone else's throat. So they refuse to compromise.
Frankly they are unAmerican and not worthy of the protections this country allows its honorable citizens. And if that sounds familiar, it's what a couple of vociferous ANTI-smoking partisans have been saying recently in Quincy.
Kinda scary when it gets turned around to aim at YOU, isn't it?
Here's the solution: leave the whole damned thing ALONE. If you don't want to breathe secondhand smoke, don't go there, don't take a job there, don't take your kids there. Let the business owners make their own decisions. I suppose you could call the owner and tell him why you won't be patronizing their business. They might change their minds IF you're polite about it. But until you can get smoking declared illegal, lay off.
3:21
Aren't you late for your Freeman meeting? What a long winded jerk you are. Sell your bar, buy a conveniance store.
2:10
Looks like more name calling by the non-smoking crowd again.
I can see why they cry "It's for the children". They all act like one.
8:36
Everyone has an inner-child that needs to come out from time to time, you retard!
Post a Comment