Governor signs smoking ban, 17 other bills(Idaho Smokers Alert!)

Spokesman Review ^ | 04/03/2004 | Staff

[writer33]

Yes in Idaho. A representation of Rhinos.

[Dan from Michigan]

You left out the biggest group of hypocrits, those that smoke tobacco, and support prisoning those that smoke other leaves.

I'm not one of them.

[Joe Hadenuf]

BOISE _ Starting July 1, there will be no more smoking allowed in Idaho restaurants.

How can this be? Isn't Idaho full of conservatives?

I suggest everyone flee Idaho while you still can, and go to???? Uh.....Go to.........????

[Joe Hadenuf]

Kempthorne signed SB 1283 into law, banning smoking in restaurants and other public places, but making exceptions for bars and bowling alleys

They bars and bowling alleys will be next year, when they attempt to legalize illegal aliens.....

[lockjaw02]

In his signing message, the governor said, "I do not believe that there is an absolute personal right to smoke at any time and in any public place."

According to the SCOTUS in LLOYD CORP. v. TANNER, 407 U.S. 551 (1972) involving rights associated with property ownership: “Held: There has been no dedication of petitioner's privately owned and operated shopping center to public use so as to entitle respondents to exercise First Amendment rights therein that are unrelated to the center's operations; and petitioner's property did not lose its private character and its right to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment merely because the public is generally invited to use it for the purpose of doing business with petitioner's tenants.”

[lockjaw02]

"You left out the biggest group of hypocrits, those that smoke tobacco, and support prisoning those that smoke other leaves."

How big is that group? Have any idea?

[writer33]

"According to the SCOTUS in LLOYD CORP. v. TANNER, 407 U.S. 551 (1972) involving rights associated with property ownership: “Held: There has been no dedication of petitioner's privately owned and operated shopping center to public use so as to entitle respondents to exercise First Amendment rights therein that are unrelated to the center's operations; and petitioner's property did not lose its private character and its right to protection under the Fourteenth Amendment merely because the public is generally invited to use it for the purpose of doing business with petitioner's tenants.”


Let's hope some good willing citizen and lawyer decide to challenge this, forcing it into the courts. And let's hope the court actually reads the Constitution.

Thank you, lockjaw. Nice one.

[SheLion]

I did get your drift, or in this case, you're second-hand smoke. :) HA!

No "pun" intended, right? hehe!

[writer33]

"No "pun" intended, right? hehe!"


Right. But if we were setting in a privately owned restaurant in Idaho, then it wouldn't be as funny. I hope a business owner challenges this. It's clearly UnConstitutional.

[swarthyguy]

Poor Osama, must be kicking himself daily for not jumping on the antismoking bandwagon.