[Paul Atreides]

Yet, we have to go through great lengths just to get it declared murder, for someone to kill an unborn child.

[Eastbound]

"“The police department will enforce this ordinance in the same professional way we approach all of our tasks."

This has got to be the spookiest remark I've heard in a long time. I'm sure it will be repeated again when guns are outlawed in that town.

[Mears]

Here we go again.

My God,don't the police have enough to do in Fayetteville,or is it totally crime free?

[etcetera]

No Smoking on Planet Earth!

[sweetliberty]

The invasion of the smoking nazis presses on. Smile and remember it's a free country. Yeah right.

[Gazoo]

Soon we won't be able to smoke in our own homes.Oh wait
in most rentals or apts/hotel rooms you can't. Homes are
next.

[steplock]

If I'm not heard of again - this is why!

I sent this letter to the major newspapers. the governaor - attorney general and quite a few others here in the "Banana Republik of Arkansaw" ...

---

I do NOT smoke, but if this were attempted in Hot Springs, I would purposely begin in protest to an unconstitutional infringement of our liberties.

If legislators (aka lawyers and leftist activist judges) had any courage of conviction or honor or integrity (words of no consequence nor meaning to them), they would simply BRING TO A VOTE to the legal citizens of the state of Arkansas whether or not to make tobacco an illegal product - and abide by the voice of the people.

The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States.

-- Noah Webster


Arkansas Gestapo
Wednesday, March 10 @ 20:30:22
Smoking Ordinance Takes Effect Thursday
KFSM
Dena Drabek

FAYETTEVILLE - Thursday it will be against the law to light up in most places around Fayetteville. That’s when the new smoking ordinance officially takes effect and the city police department says it’s ready to enforce it.

The biggest issue the department has been faced with is determining which establishments are bars, where smoking is still allowed. They’ve come up with a list of 25 so far, but say more could be added.

Smoking will be prohibited in almost all indoor facilities Thursday. That includes public places, businesses and restaurants.

Businesses have been asked to post no smoking signs and report anyone refusing to comply with the ordinance.

For the nest 30 days authorities will issue warnings to people and establishments violating the ordinance. Repeat offenders will receive a ticket.

“The police department will enforce this ordinance in the same professional way we approach all of our tasks. We still hope and believe the great majority of citizens will abide by this ordinance and not present a large problem for the department,” Police Chief Rick Hoyt said.

Any businesses that still have question regarding their status are asked to call the police department at 587-3500.

---

One man says to a second man: "Do you believe in the First Amendment freedom of speech?"
The second man says: "Of course I do."
The first man then asks: "Do you believe in the Second Amendment freedom to bear arms?"
The second man replies: "No, I don't."
The first man insists: "Then shut up!"

The moral of the story is: you can have your rights, but you have to protect and defend them, too.

[ladylib]

"Businesses have been asked to post no smoking signs and report anyone refusing to comply with the ordinance."

Why should businesses do the cops' work?

[Just another Joe]

Such paternalistic government action is an affront to property rights and individual freedom.

Property rights are essential to the existence and operation of a free market, and, for a business, these rights include the right to determine which amenities and services to provide on your premises. If a business decides not to reimburse employees for commuting costs, the business is well within its rights to do so. If a business decides to provide a lounge for its employees, it may do so. If a business decides to validate parking for a customer, it may do so.
The freedom to smoke on the premises is like any of these other amenities-it is within the purview of the owner to provide it. The freedom to permit smoking is part of the property rights a business enjoys that permit it to serve its customers effectively in the marketplace.
The only difference between the freedom to smoke and the other amenities mentioned is that smoking is deemed socially undesirable and may pose a health risk (the carcinogenic properties of second-hand smoke have yet to be conclusively established).
The social undesirability of smoking does not give the government, municiple/county/state/etc, carte blanche to run roughshod over property rights. A free society-that includes property owners-can decide for itself what is undesirable behavior and employ its own arsenal to combat it, without the aid of state coercion.

Property owners and restaurateurs, while many times victims, are not the immediate victims, however, of smoking bans - smokers are. Anti-smoking activists support these bans ostensibly to limit second hand smoke, but the real reason is often to limit smoking itself and make it socially unacceptable.
Bans like these are predicated on the notion that smokers are incapable of deciding for themselves. Bans like these also assume that non-smokers cannot decide for themselves whether or not to expose themselves to second-hand smoke.
This paternalistic premise runs counter to the American founding principles of freedom and self-government. If non-smokers do not want to expose themselves to smoke, they can choose to dine at establishments that prohibit smoking on their own.

Public health busybodies should not dragoon the govt into social engineering for their desires.

[CSM]

The transition from "public servants" to "enforcers" is complete!