Legislature passes smoking ban bill. Senate vote 41-9…
Legislature passes smoking ban bill. Senate vote 41-9…
|
Comment Commandments:
1) No Personal Attacks. (Debating is encouraged, but be respectful). 2) No Sexual Discussion (unless it specifically pertains to a cited story). 3) No Profanity (Let’s all behave like adults). |
GOLDEN RULE:
Be civil and statesmanlike. You can disagree without being disagreeable. Annoying trolls who break these rules will be blocked from commenting. ***Please don't disable anonymous commenting for everyone else*** |
NOTE TO COMMENTERS: CREATE AN INTENSE DEBATE ACCOUNT
|
-vote comments up or down
-email notifications when someone replies |
-pick a profile picture
-promote your website or blog |
***TOPIC FORUM: 50 STORIES LAST COMMENTED ON***
***LIST OF TOP 50 COMMENTERS***
***LIST OF 50 MOST COMMENTED ON STORIES***
***LIST OF 50 LAST COMMENTS***
.
25 Comments
Damn nannies.
They can’t run their own House, but they want to run everyone elses.
Damn them all.
(I am being nice today.)
I think its time to say goodbye to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Hello to the Peoples Republic of Pennsylvania. I hope the Supreme Court rules that the 2nd Amendment is a collective right, not an individual one, Montana secedes from the Union, and then I’ll go live there, away from Nanny and Daddy.
It should really be up to the individual facilites to exercise smoking bans, not the government. If a facility is properly designed, it can accomodate both smokers and nonsmokers. This kind of stuff is just nonsense…and I don’t even smoke!
Great. Our benevolent betters are content to pander to adults and congratulate themselves for protecting those who are perfectly capable of protecting themselves. Pandering morons…..pander this……..
I just got a landlord-tenant case…..a case of lead poisoning of a two-year old….
Perhaps PA should mandate something useful, like testing/remediation/encapsulation of all lead based paint in residential rental real estate?
I’ve never been so torn……..This kid will be screwed up for the rest of his life……YES the parents should have been on this like white on rice, but they weren’t. The duty to warn wasn’t sufficient………if the landlord even complied with the duty to warn and that’s a question. I can’t believe I’m ready to plead for regulation “for the children”…..but I’m dang close.
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/ea85f4200e869b7285257392006950b4!OpenDocument
It’s about a public health concern. My @$$!
Only a matter of time until this happened. It won’t be long until we all get our rations delivered of gov’t approved meals with no trans fats. What a joke.
A ban loaded with exceptions is the worst possible outcome. Not only will we “nanny” you, we’ll dispense with fair competition.
And, once again, the Senate GOP rolls like a cheap whore in New Orleans…
While I am not a fan of smoking, and I choose to sit in the non-smoking section of resturnants, and patrionize bars that are smoke free, I do not agree that the state should be telling private business owners what can and can’t be done in their own private business. To those who claim that smoke is bad for the workers, well that argument doesn’t fly becuase you don’t have to work there if you don’t like smoke. It’s the same thing as passing a law stating that a steel plant must operate at 68 degrees at all times to protect the workers. This is just another nanny state item like banning transfats. What a joke.
A disgrace pure and simple with the power being exercised against private business owners and a total ban being the next step down the line some time.
Hail the Nanny State!
Perhaps it’s time for a ‘Smoke In’ at the Capitol.
Dangnabbit. Consarnit!
Finally the state of PA decides to take the health of it’s citizens seriously. People who don’t smoke should not have to worry about the dangerous second hand side effects of smoking. People also should not have to worry about going into a restaurant with the suspsicion of horrible smoke smell invading their nostrils. If people want to smoke, fine. But don’t come around people in public places. You may think it’s taking a right away from smokers, but think about. People who smoke in public places take away other’s rights to enjoy a safe environment. I don’t wanna be breathing in those toxic fumes from someone who has made a bad choice in life. I shouldn’t have to pay for it!!
Well, you guys have fun hanging out in your cigar bar or small tavern. I’ll be enjoying going out and not smelling like an ashtray at the end of the night.
And what happens when the government wants to ban something you enjoy?
I hate smoking, so to avoid “smelling like an ashtray” I choose to go to non-smoking establishments. If business owners of smoking establishments don’t want my business, why should I endorse using the power of government to force them?
What happened to liberals and their “pro-choice” mantra?
C’mon Rich…..nanny knows best about everything……
research shows that smokers are LESS of a drain on the healthcare and long term care system because they die earlier…not to mention they pay for government health care programs…SO, why are we dissing these true American heroes????
Why is the government involved in the healthcare of the citizens—long-term, short-term or intermediate-term????
Where is the Constitutional authority?
Do smokers contribute more to the Socialist Insecurity Ponzi Scheme than they collect????
Where is the Constitutional authority for the Socialist Insecurity Ponzi Scheme?????
Is human life so cheap as to be reduced to net dollars and cents?
If tobacco is so bad, why not outlaw it?…..ooooo…..um…..because they would lose the tax revenue?
Ray– sign me up for a “Smoke In” at the Capitol! It is time for voters to finally realize that when you elect nanny-state legislators you get nanny-state laws. We need a part time legislature, not a smaller one, but one that only meets for two months out of the year, focuses on what counts, and doesn’t have time to do frivilous stuff like this.
Smoke if you got ‘em.
Don’t know why we bother to write to each other on these sites. This is one more freedom gone from individuals, from business owners,etc. The key phrase here: ONE MORE FREEDOM…GONE!!!!!
I have it on good authority that the PA Senate GOP is a cheap whore in New Orleans when they are not in session.
My apologies to whores everywhere.
It’s not the ‘right’ of the smoker that is our concern here although it IS still a legal product. It is the right of the property owner to run his business as he chooses that is our concern.
If the owner allows smoking, you then have the right to make a decision as to whether you will give him your business or if you want to work there. The owner affords you the opportunity to visit his establishment. You do not have the right to be there or to use the government to force your preferences and junk science on him.
If the owner’s decision turns out bad for him — no matter whether it is to allow or ban smoking — that’s his problem. He is still free to change his policies.
I am not a smoker. I consider it to be one of the dumbest things that a person can do (or at least in the top ten) but we are still supposed to be free and that includes the right to make dumb decisions.
Bob
You don’t honestly believe that this is about smoking being a public health concern do you? If it were why will no one who voted for this introduce legislation to ban the use of tobacco? I’ll tell you why because of the revenue the tobacco tax generates. It’s about this money. The legislature can’t live without the tobacco tax money because then they’d be forced to defund programs, cut funding on programs and maybe have to raise taxes. Personally I think smoking is a dirty, filthy habit, but this isnt about smokers rights its about freedom. You have the freedom to go where you like, eat where you like etc. Last time I checked no was forced to enter, work in or eat at an establishment that allowed smoking. If you choose to enter such a place or work in such a place then you have nothing to complain about. If you dont you have nothing to woory about do you?
I have no issue with a smoking ban on public property, but when freedoms are taken away I get angry. Not the freedom of a smoker, but the freedom of an individual to decide what legal activity they will engage in on their own property.
I’ve literally never smoked a single cigarette in my life, but I’m going to start smoking by tomorrow just out of principle.
Amen! I’m in.