October 20th, 2008
This weekend, the Patriot-News reported on the fact that the state Dept. of Health has received approximately 3,171 applications from businesses that wish to be exempt from the recently-enacted statewide smoking ban.
Also, the Dept. of Health has received 583 complaints about the ban, and 152 violation notification letters have been sent to businesses. However, no fines have been handed down yet.
“State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf , R-Montgomery County, who fought for the smoking ban for 15 years, has said he will introduce legislation next year to reduce the list of places where smoking is still permitted,” the Patriot also reports.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
How do these senators that push their personal feelings over the wishes of their citizens stay in office? Isn’t it very clear that many people are against these draconian laws?
October 20th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Basic civics taught in elementary schools teaches that delegates are elected to carry out the wishes of their citizens, not the other way around.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Election day is coming soon.
October 20th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Bob– Thank you for posting your comments. It is our goal to have HealthPoint PA become a forum in which readers converse about important PA health topics.
In response to your comments on this article, I would like to post for your and others’ consideration two additional links:
- The results of a 2007 poll showing that 86% of PA voters wanted smoke-free restaurants and bars: http://www.pactonline.org/docs/2007%20PACT%20Survey%20Results.pdf
- An explanation by Susquehanna Polling & Research on how they conduct their studies: http://www.susquehannapolling.com/polling.html
October 20th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
The results of a 2008 Poll amongst the owners, workers and customers showed that 98 % were against smoking bans in the hospitality industry
October 20th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
It is the right of the owners to use or permit a legal product on ‘private’ property.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:45 pm
The nice thing about polls is that they can be worded or managed to get exactly what was wanted.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
So the PA State Dept of Health claims 3 million adult non-smokers die each year from secondhand smoke? Meanwhile they claim only 400,000 die from smoking. I guess by their math we’d ALL be better off smoking! And then we’ve got the 300,000 under 18′rs dying here from “direct or indirect” smoke as well too eh? With absolute nonsense like this why should anyone believe ANY of their other figures?
Antismoking fanatics get their bans passed with lies: lies about the health effects of reasonable exposures to secondary smoke in well-ventilated businesses and lies about the economic damages their bans do. In England the pub closure rate soared from a two-year average of 3 per week before their ban to THIRTY SIX PER WEEK since their ban. That’s an increase of over 1,000 percent. And yet their ASH antismoking group claims everything is fine and tells folks no one is being hurt by the ban. They lie.
To see more of their lies, go to
http://encyclopedia.smokersclub.com/257.html
October 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
A U.S. Supreme court decision during the early 1970’s
((Lloyd Corp v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551 (1992)) said a place of business
does not become public property because the public is invited in.
By using that same reasoning. A restaurant or bar is not public property.
We need to support small business and stop regulating them out of
business.”
The air inside a building is, in essence, “owned” by the
building owner. That means that the building owner, is in a
Position to control the amount of smoking (if any) that is
Permitted in the building.
Just because you invite someone into your home (private property), does not give them the right to tell you how to run your home.
Government has the right to collect Taxes and other fees. The Health Department is responsible for protecting the public from un-seen health threats such as cleanliness and infestation by rodents, roaches, etc, which are not seen by the general public.
Smoking/SHS is not an un-seen threat. Everyone has the right to walk out if an establishment does not suit their preferences. They control if a business survives by their right to spend or refuse to support that business.
Signage, at the entrance, is sufficient warning needed to make an informed decision. This supports free choice.
October 20th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Eliminating a choice available to property owners, employees or potential patrons based on the manufactured hysterics surrounding the negligible risk attributed to tobacco smoke is simply not warranted. It is counter productive, and damaging to the economy, to the liberty of every citizen, and further erodes the definition of what it means to be free in America.
Non-elected “health authorities” and their pharmaceutical industry partners have clearly enjoyed flexing their lobbying muscle to legislators that are tasked with representing every citizen in the state and our legislators have clearly, sadly… folded in response. It’s time to halt this downward spiral toward total state control of every mundane aspect of our daily lives, take back the state, and represent ALL it’s citizens, and not just the Anti-smoking zealots or their pharmaceutical funding sources. Anything less is sabotage of civil liberty, and an unwarranted restriction on private property owners.
Smoking Bans are not about the nonsensical and statistically insignificant risk of harm from a wisp of tobacco smoke. Observational common sense simply doesn’t bare this out as being true. They are about the preservation of the clearly successful Anti-Smoking INDUSTRY whose mercantile driven agenda requires the forfeiture of liberty in order to grow, and that is being allowed to spread like the cancer it purports to battle. It is in reality, the “progressive” disease causing the most immediate harm to the states economy, it is alarming, it is spreading, and no matter how you couch the term, … it is socialism.
Tobacco Control is a parasite existing at the cost of liberty and is allowed to thrive through egocentric legislative apathy.
Smoking Bans are not about the health of Non-smokers, and they are most assuredly not in the best interest of independent business when the prescribed method of protection is based on coercion through punitive measures enforced against the business owner for having the audacity to provide an environment that is specifically sought by patrons as one that will accommodate their personal preferences.
Smoking Bans are a ham-fisted attempt at social engineering through legalized discrimination against an all inclusive group of citizens that share at least one critical trait among themselves. These Citizens would prefer to make their own decisions rather than surrender their autonomy. “For their own good” is a gross misnomer, and government intrusion into their personal choices is completely unwarranted. Smoking Bans diminish consumer choice, and dramatically reduce the economic vitality of all small independent businesses whenever, and wherever they are imposed.
Citizens are not obligated to enter the property, nor accept employment at all, for any reason if the environment is not one that suits their individual preference. They have a CHOICE!
Property owner preferences are certainly no less important in maintaining the availability of that choice for those that would readily accept the invitation as opposed to those who would decline it.
America is lost, and the politically correct lunacy of Smoking Bans on private property is not going to bring it back.
October 21st, 2008 at 1:43 am
What ever happened to signs? It should be a business owners choice and then the customers choice to enter or not. If a person does not like smoke, there are other venues. If they can’t find what they want, they can spend their OWN money and open their own business and set their own rules. Free Enterprise and Free Choice is the American way !!!