New poll: Kentuckians would favor statewide smoking ban

FOX19 ^ | Dec 13, 2011 10:51 AM EST | By Dylan Moody

[TSgt]

CINCINNATI, OH (FOX19) -

A new poll shows that a majority of Kentucky residents favor a smoking ban in public places, a law which the Kentucky legislature is considering.

According to the 2011 Kentucky Health Issues Poll (KHIP), 54 percent of Kentuckians say they would support such a law; 43 percent are opposed to this law; and 4 percent had no opinion. This is an increase from 2010, when Kentuckians were split about the law at 48 percent in favor and 48 percent opposed.

"Secondhand smoke exposure poses significant health risks, and smoke-free environments are the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from these hazards," says Mary Francis, director of the Assistance for Substance Abuse Prevention Center.

KHIP, conducted annually, identifies what residents think about residents think about various health issues that affect communities, the state and the country.

"It's not surprising that those who have never smoked are much more likely to support a band than current smokers," says Francis. "It's also interesting that a majority of former smokers are in favor of a non-smoking law."

Support among registered voters is significantly higher than among nonvoters. A smoking ban is supported by 58 percent of registered voters. Meanwhile, women (64 percent) were more likely to support the law than men (43 percent). Democrats and Republicans reported an equal level of support (55 percent each) for a statewide smoke free law. Support also increased as age, income and level of education increased.

[TSgt]

Kentucky has the highest percentage of smokers by state in the U.S. at 29 percent.

Support also increased as age, income and level of education increased.

[Grunthor]

My youngest daughter went to Kentucky last year.; She had a boyfriend in the army she wanted to visit. Now, we live in Washington State. She is a smoker.

She was shocked at the freedom allowed smokers in that state.

[NRA1995]

"It's not surprising that those who have never smoked are much more likely to support a band than current smokers," says Francis.

Which band do they support? Wussy bands like REM?

[NRA1995]

"Secondhand smoke exposure poses significant health risks, and smoke-free environments are the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from these hazards," says Mary Francis, director of the Assistance for Substance Abuse Prevention Center.

Seems to me that this old chestnut was debunked years ago....

[cripplecreek]

"Secondhand smoke exposure poses significant health risks, and smoke-free environments are the only way to fully protect nonsmokers from these hazards," says Mary Francis, director of the Assistance for Substance Abuse Prevention Center.

Take a drug screen and tell them you've been around someone who smokes medical marijuana and see how far it gets ya.

[mosesdapoet]

SURPRIZE SURPRIZE ...A Kentucky anti smoking group publishes a poll claiming Kentuckians are against smoking and statis media rallys to their cause (because it makes em feel good)...

[TSgt]

We will be moving there in a few years to a farm we bought. I hope Kentucky bans public smoking before then.

I never cease to be amazed at conservatives who whine about minority rule yet when the majority clearly decides they do not want public smoking they scream tyranny!

You can’t have it both ways...

[cripplecreek]

I never cease to be amazed at conservatives who whine about minority rule yet when the majority clearly decides they do not want public smoking they scream tyranny!

Actually I want constitutional government, not mob rule. After all there was a time when a majority of Americans supported slavery but it didn't make it constitutional.

[dfwgator]

Majority rule is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

[Mr. Silverback]

Ping!

[Osage Orange]

Secondhand smoke exposure poses significant health risks

Proof?

If Kentucky had any balls...they would just make ALL smoking illegal. Period.

[cripplecreek]

Majority rule is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.

Here in Michigan they outlawed smoking in all bars (aside from casinos) when the freedom oriented thing to do was let bar owners choose for themselves whether to allow smoking. Seems to me that non smoking bars would have done a booming business without forcing everyone to do the same.

[TSgt]

What is not Constitutional about a group of elected leaders following the will of their constituents and enacting a law against public smoking?

There was a time when one could smoke on a plane too...

[nkycincinnatikid]

You would be very comfortable in any of the larger Kentucky cities where they already enforce your own personal wishes.

But why is it again that you decided to move to a farm in a tobacco state where the folks still prefer to make their own choices?

[Osage Orange]

So when the majority decides you can only use 1000 gallons of gas a year, will you be okay with that?

How about when the majority decides you can't have guns?

So when the majority decides that you can't eat butter, meat, or eggs....Will you be fine with that?

When the majority says you must hand over 70% of your income...will you be okay with that?

When the majority says you need a smaller "carbon footprint", will you be okay with that?

[Mr Rogers]

Unfortunately, freedom of any sort is getting rare...

It ought to be totally up to the property owner if anyone smokes there or not.

[cripplecreek]

What is not Constitutional about a group of elected leaders following the will of their constituents and enacting a law against public smoking?

So I'm guessing you would be OK with a law dictating that certain ethnic groups couldn't own businesses or live in certain areas if that's what the constituents want?

[Smokin' Joe]

I never cease to be amazed at conservatives who whine about minority rule yet when the majority clearly decides they do not want public smoking they scream tyranny!

One of the quirks about our Republic is the concept that the rights of the few are protected against the consensus of the many. Otherwise, we would have a "Democracy", aka mob rule.

The question becomes one of whether or not you consider a business owner's right to decide whether or not to permit smoking on their premises a right.

If you don't, then you have trouble with property rights. Think about it.

Non-smoking establishments can advertise for the business of those who would prefer a different environment, and let the market decide. That's the American way.

[Osage Orange]

What is not Constitutional about a group of elected leaders following the will of their constituents and enacting a law against public smoking?

I can just see the "elected leaders" following the will of the OWS anarchists.

[Smokin' Joe]

Unfortunately, freedom of any sort is getting rare...

That's because most people wouldn't know freedom if they tripped over it.

They think they're more free if they get a choice of what color chains they wear.