Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nonsmokers on the move
Rocky Mountain News ^ | 05/22/03 | Dick Foster

Posted on 05/22/2003 10:12:56 AM PDT by Drew68

Nonsmokers on the move

Pueblo vote buoys alliance for bans in Denver, other cities

By Dick Foster, Rocky Mountain News
May 22, 2003

Buoyed by an emphatic victory in Pueblo, Colorado's smoke-free advocates are turning to proposed nonsmoking ordinances in Denver and other Colorado cities, an organizer said Wednesday.

"We're hoping the Denver City Council will act on this soon," said Chris Sherwin, executive director of the Colorado Tobacco Education and Prevention Alliance, CTEPA.

Similar ordinances may be appearing soon in Greeley, Broomfield and Grand Junction, said Sherwin.

The Denver law would prohibit smoking in restaurants but allow it in bars. Sherwin is hoping the Denver City Council will be encouraged by the Pueblo voters who approved a tougher law banning smoking in all bars and other places of public accommodation.

Pueblo was the 10th Colorado locale to pass a strict nonsmoking ordinance that includes restaurants and other places of public accommodation. But only Pueblo and three others - Snowmass, Fort Collins and Louisville - extended the ban to bars.

"Our hope is that Denver will look at what happened in Pueblo, and decide to act on this," said Sherwin. "We hope that the council will go further than what Councilwoman (Happy) Haynes and the mayor have supported, which is covering restaurants but exempting bars. We're hopeful that the final product will be something to protect all restaurant and bar workers."

Haynes' position hadn't changed after the Pueblo vote Tuesday. She said there wasn't adequate support on Denver City Council for a broader ban to include bars.

The alliance includes Colorado chapters of the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association of Colorado and other health organizations concerned with the health effects of smoking.

"There's a growing recognition that the most heavily exposed workers are bar workers," said Sherwin. "A bartender can inhale the equivalent of a pack and a half of cigarette smoke in just one 8-hour shift."

"People are waking up to the fact and asking why a bar worker would deserve less protection than others," he said.

Sherwin said the ordinances are not intended to infringe upon smoker's rights but to protect the workers and others who do not smoke.

"The big fear and the myth is that everybody goes to a bar to smoke and that bar business will suffer," he said. "In communities that have passed these laws, people just step outside and smoke, and bar business isn't hurt as a result."

Sherwin hopes other Colorado cities will be encouraged by the Pueblo vote.

"The momentum is definitely in the direction of communities going 100 percent smoke-free," he said.

fosterd@RockyMountainNews.com or (719)633-4442


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: andscorpions; pufflist; smoking; tobacco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-457 next last
Followup story to yesterday's Voters embrace ban on smoking

Seems it is only a matter of time.

1 posted on 05/22/2003 10:12:56 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: *puff_list
Ping to the Puff List for smoking related articles.
2 posted on 05/22/2003 10:13:57 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
"There's a growing recognition that the most heavily exposed workers are bar workers," said Sherwin. "A bartender can inhale the equivalent of a pack and a half of cigarette smoke in just one 8-hour shift."

LIAR!

Go take a look at the study by the Oak Ridge National Labratory. Get the TRUTHTM.

3 posted on 05/22/2003 10:18:45 AM PDT by Just another Joe (FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
Let's just sit back and watch Colorado tourism fade out.
4 posted on 05/22/2003 10:20:28 AM PDT by EggsAckley ( Midnight at the Oasis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drew68; SheLion
Why don't they just mind their own d*mn business?
5 posted on 05/22/2003 10:20:43 AM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
He Said: "In communities that have passed these laws, people just step outside and smoke, and bar business isn't hurt as a result."

I'd step outside alright and get in my car and go home. Many barworkers smoke. If they don't smoke they usually do something else for a living. (ANALOGY) "Most carpenters drive nails. Nails have sharp ends and hammers can mash the S##T out of your thumb. Carpenters deserve the same protection as everyone else. Lets bar hammers and nails. It's for the children."

6 posted on 05/22/2003 10:20:56 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (If you're looking for a friend, get a dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
PING
7 posted on 05/22/2003 10:23:29 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (If you're looking for a friend, get a dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EggsAckley
Let's just sit back and watch Colorado tourism fade out.

I'm hoping that Hickenlooper wins the Denver mayoral race. He has not publicly stated his opinion on a proposed smoking ban for Denver, but as a resturaunt owner, I doubt he is for it.

8 posted on 05/22/2003 10:30:25 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Flurry
If they don't smoke they usually do something else for a living.

This is my argument as well. Many occupations have hazards associated with them. In leu of these potential health risks, these workers are usually paid pretty well.

Guess what? Bartenders tend to make fairly good money. I know. My brother is one (and a smoker to boot).

9 posted on 05/22/2003 10:35:03 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Flurry
"Most carpenters drive nails. Nails have sharp ends and hammers can mash the S##T out of your thumb. Carpenters deserve the same protection as everyone else. Lets bar hammers and nails. It's for the children."

The difference is, the carpenter can control the danger of the nails and the hammer. The bartender or waitress can't control how much smoke they inhale at work.

I find a lot of smokers to be incredibly selfish. If somebody wants to give themselves cancer, fine. Don't force me to suck up your smoke.
10 posted on 05/22/2003 10:39:53 AM PDT by Modernman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: facedown
Why don't they just mind their own d*mn business?

That's positively Un-American.

11 posted on 05/22/2003 10:41:29 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
Three years and the nation's bars and restaurants will be smoke free. Too bad the smokers won't be able to come out and play.
12 posted on 05/22/2003 10:46:09 AM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Three years and the nation's bars and restaurants will be smoke free. Too bad the smokers won't be able to come out and play.

Why would I enjoy the company of a bunch of nanny, condescending busybodies who treat me like a pariah.

F' em! They can have the bars (the few left that haven't closed down).

13 posted on 05/22/2003 10:50:00 AM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
While I'm not a strict Libertarian, this really is a property rights issue, i.e. it should be up to the owners of individual businesses to set their own policy. If there was a huge market for non-smoking establishments, then there would BE non-smoking restaurants, bars, etc. already. Similarly, if a bar owner wanted to cater to patrons who smoke the nastiest smelling cheap cigars out there, that's his right - and the marketplace would dictate whether or not it was a good idea.

Penn and Teller exposed the lies behind the secondhand smoke health myth in a recent episode of "BULLS**T!"
14 posted on 05/22/2003 10:51:17 AM PDT by Growler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
A PACK AND A HALF!!!" Bull!!! A recent study by the british medical journal found that workers inhale the equivalent of one cigarette per day in second hand smoke. This results in a negligable increase in cancer risk.

The natural rights protected by out constitution (in this case, personal property rights) were supposed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority trampling their freedoms, as in the case of smoking bans. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court hasn't done its job since the Second American Revolution (better known as the Roosevelt administration).
15 posted on 05/22/2003 10:51:36 AM PDT by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
F' em! They can have the bars (the few left that haven't closed down).

The smoker owned bars will close, so who cares ?

16 posted on 05/22/2003 10:51:43 AM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
Why would the SC interfere with state laws ?
17 posted on 05/22/2003 10:53:32 AM PDT by VRWC_minion (Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
The smoker owned bars will close, so who cares ?

Maybe the proprietor, employees, and customers? Does it ever occur to you that these people need to make a living? Sheesh!

18 posted on 05/22/2003 10:54:10 AM PDT by Liberal Classic (Quemadmoeum gladis nemeinum occidit, occidentis telum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Drew68
Just another step in the slow creep of this. This is like a steamroller just let loose on the downhill.

No need to outlaw tobacco if they can restrict its use everywhere.(like 100 yards from any entrance to a residence/place of business, ANY land capable of catching fire, your car[Gas tank HIGHLY combustible, dontcha know]) They'll try the same thing with bullets in time.....tax the hell out of them and then require some kind of waiting period/psych profile check, etc.

Gonna happen...just watch.

19 posted on 05/22/2003 10:59:10 AM PDT by Range Rover (Karma is a boomerang...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
No one forces you to go into a place that allows smoking. Just as no one forces me into a place that doesn't. You, the militant non-smoker is the selfish one here bucko. DU is at a different WEBSITE. Take your government ban fanaticism there where you'll find good company.
20 posted on 05/22/2003 11:01:41 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (If you're looking for a friend, get a dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-457 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson