N.J. lawmakers misstep with smoking ban

Philadelphia Business Journal ^ | January 20, 2006

[SheLion]

[SheLion]

It's easy for lawmakers to make decisions for others, especially when they aren't held responsible for the consequences.

[Sunshine Sister]

Never truer words said. Legislators are such jerks for the most part. They don't give a damn about people who really earn their living.

[Niteranger68]

How long will it be before some state (like Kalifornia) decides to ban meat in restaurants to keep from offending vegetarians?

[Pessimist]

"..lawmakers also relied on studies indicating that smoking bans are actually good for the restaurant and bar business."

You find a study to show whatever you want these days.

[newgeezer]

If restaurant employees are concerned about smoke in their workplace, for once they're fortunate to be in a transient and fluid industry where there are other places to work for qualified staff.

But, the same could be said of mine workers. If they don't like the conditions, they're free to find other work. The government has no business telling mine owners how to run their mines. Right?

(Don't get me wrong. I think the second-hand smoke argument is questionable at best. Since worker safety is the ONLY possible justification for such government intrusion, opponents should focus on debunking the second-hand smoke claims.)

[davisfh]

"How long will it be before some state (like Kalifornia) decides to ban meat in restaurants to keep from offending vegetarians?"

Shhhh! Don't give them any ideas.

[Fielding]

I remember visiting City Hall in Los Angeles as a boy. When we passed through the front door, my senses were assailed with smells; shoe polish, newspapers, hot dogs, sweaty wool suits, and cigars. The smell of power. :)

[OldFriend]

The smoking ban like the Highlands Act will be the beacons of corruption that mark this state for a long time.

Of course the Mt. Laurel decision is part of a long line of suspect laws passed in this state.

[CSM]

"But, the same could be said of mine workers. If they don't like the conditions, they're free to find other work. The government has no business telling mine owners how to run their mines. Right?"

Um, yes, at least at the federal level. The only thing government intrusion has done is caused a sense of security that just can not exist. It is impossible to make mines 100% safe for the worker, but with government intrusion the worker, and society, can think they are safer than they are. As a result, they don't get true market driven wages. Wages that reflect the risk they take.

Government intrusion has harmed the mine workers, more than it has helped them. The same will happen in the restaurant/bar business.

[I still care]

Democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.

[digger48]

shoe polish, newspapers, hot dogs, sweaty wool suits, and cigars. The smell of power. :)

Musta made the same impression on Bubba Clinton, too.

[SheLion]

Never truer words said. Legislators are such jerks for the most part. They don't give a damn about people who really earn their living.

They really don't. 

I remember one place in Mass that kept asking the City Council were was all their friends and family now that a forced smoking ban was in place?

The City Council members said businesses would INCREASE when there was no smoke.  Well, business did not increase and the restaurant owner kept asking them why didn't they come now that they got what they wanted???!!!

[SheLion]

How long will it be before some state (like Kalifornia) decides to ban meat in restaurants to keep from offending vegetarians?

Hard to tell.  But Kookifornia is already doing their own research on second hand smoke.  LOL

Trying to twist the truth to fit their bill.  What a state!

[SheLion]

You find a study to show whatever you want these days.

That's the truth!

And most of the general public believes this garbage and takes it at face value.

After all, WHY WOULD THEY LIE TO US???

[NaughtiusMaximus]

If they were really interested in reducing public health hazards and expenses they would pass strict anti-sodomy laws and enforce them vigorously. The so-called gay lifestyle is infinitely more destructive and expensive than burning leaves in little paper tubes. But that's politically incorrect and laying punitive taxes on the backs of smokers is moronically easy tax farming. Of course, as smokers stop paying taxes by rolling their own or buying on the black market, the generalized tobacco tax revenues will drop, creating a void in the budget. The result, higher sales, income and property taxes for everyone to make up the new "deficit." Beware, putting tax money in the hands of politicians is like handing whiskey an carkeys to teenage boys. The taxes you favor increasing will turn into your own.

[SheLion]

(Don't get me wrong. I think the second-hand smoke argument is questionable at best. Since worker safety is the ONLY possible justification for such government intrusion, opponents should focus on debunking the second-hand smoke claims.)

It HAS been debunked.  Over and over again.  And even by the WHO!

WHO Abstract

and:

Oak Ridge Labs, TN & SECOND HAND SMOKE 

Statistics and Data Sciences Group Projects

I think any anti who tries to dismiss the findings of the U.S. Department of Energy labs at Oak Ridge, should be confronted with the question: "Are you saying that DOE researchers committed scientific fraud and that their findings on ETS exposure are untrue?"

[SheLion]

Of course the Mt. Laurel decision is part of a long line of suspect laws passed in this state.

And the "appointed not voted in" Governor is going to play his power to the hilt before he is thrown out!

[Eastbound]

" . . . opponents should focus on debunking the second-hand smoke claims.)"

It was debunked a long time ago by the Supreme Court, but tyrants never let the facts get in the way when someone drags a hundred-dollar bill past their door.

[SheLion]

Democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner.

Funny you should mention that. haha!