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

Skip to comments.

County ERF Bans Smoking; Some Smokers Fume
Oswego Daily News ^ | May 29, 2002 | Heidi Rauch-Webb

Posted on 05/30/2002 7:07:00 AM PDT by Just another Joe

County ERF Bans Smoking; Some Smokers Fume
By Heidi Rauch-Webb /Oswego Daily News

The Oswego County Energy Recovery Facility has gone the way of airlines, hospitals and most shopping malls in the country: no smoking in their facility.

Deputy Superintendent Frank Visser said that though only about 10 out of 30 employees at the ERF are smokers, the issue was a serious one.

"Our lunch room was also our smoking room and it's very small," he explained. "People who don't smoke couldn't get away from the smoke."

Visser said that there had been some complaints to the health department and a few weeks ago Michael Rosen, Deputy Health Commissioner, and an assistant visited the facility and came to the conclusion that controlling the smokers was not feasible so they designated the building as non-smoking.

"The new policy is that people who want to smoke must do so 20 feet from the building," Visser said.

There were some disgruntled employees but Visser told the assembled County Department of Public Works committee last week that some of the smokers have no one to blame but themselves.

"Some smokers were smoking in non-designated areas," he said. "I told them that it takes only one person to ruin it for the rest of the employees."

Visser said the decision is final after the recommendation went to the county Legislature's Health committee.

"It's a done deal," he told DPW committee members as they offered suggestions on how to correct the problem. "As a smoker, you have no rights. If I smoked, I guess I'd just quit."



TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; US: New York; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: butts; niconazi; pufflist; rights; smoking; smokingban
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-498 next last
It's a done deal," he told DPW committee members as they offered suggestions on how to correct the problem. "As a smoker, you have no rights.

You see what it's coming to?
Smokers HAVE NO RIGHTS.
Is this what it's going to take to arouse one quarter of the population?

1 posted on 05/30/2002 7:07:00 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Puff_List; red-dawg; Fiddlstix; RikaStrom; robomatik; ladyinred; error99; Max McGarrity; Gabz...
You want to talk about a leftist?
Take a look at THIS guys comments.
2 posted on 05/30/2002 7:08:13 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Cigarettes are addictive. I am an addict. Under the provisions of the ADA I demand I be accommodated.
3 posted on 05/30/2002 7:17:58 AM PDT by Flyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
"I told them that it takes only one(whining non-smoker) person to ruin it for the rest of the employees."

There, now it makes sense!

4 posted on 05/30/2002 7:22:46 AM PDT by humblegunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: humblegunner
"As a smoker, you have no special rights.

There, now does it make sense?

5 posted on 05/30/2002 7:29:12 AM PDT by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
"People who don't smoke couldn't get away from the smoke." --------

controlling the smokers was not feasible so they designated the building as non-smoking. -------

"Some smokers were smoking in non-designated areas," he said. "I told them that it takes only one person to ruin it for the rest of the employees."

some of the smokers have no one to blame but themselves.

6 posted on 05/30/2002 7:36:22 AM PDT by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
"As a smoker, you have no rights."

As someone that has the screen name lewislynn you have no rights.
That makes just as much sense as the "Smokers have no rights" statement.
I will agree that one bad apple can spoil it for the whole bunch but if you see one bad apple do you throw the whole barrel away?

7 posted on 05/30/2002 7:41:43 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
I found it odd, as well as the rest of the story, that the smokers have to be 20 feet away from the building. That does not sound right. Often I see non-smoking building employees smoking right against the building itself.

I don't smoke but I can see that this is taking us somewhere none of us want to be~ smokers or not. Everyone should care about this whether they smoke or not.

8 posted on 05/30/2002 7:42:15 AM PDT by Boxsford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
"People who don't smoke have BO couldn't get away from the smoke people who DO." --------

controlling the smokers populace was not feasible so they designated the building as non-smoking instituted martial law.. -------

some of the smokers have no one to blame but themselves.
The rest of the smokers can blame the smoking nazis.

9 posted on 05/30/2002 7:47:19 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Boxsford
I don't smoke but I can see that this is taking us somewhere none of us want to be~ smokers or not. Everyone should care about this whether they smoke or not.

That's part of what some of us here are trying to get across to some others here.

10 posted on 05/30/2002 7:49:51 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
As a smoker, you have no rights. If I smoked, I guess I'd just quit."

Smokers have no rights, eh? This burns the chit out of me when I hear someone say this.

Those are FIGHTIN WORDS!


11 posted on 05/30/2002 7:50:25 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boxsford
I don't smoke but I can see that this is taking us somewhere none of us want to be~ smokers or not. Everyone should care about this whether they smoke or not.

Exactly, Boxsford. The American who loses the right to smoke a legal commodity: what will be next? They chip away at this Right, there will be more to fall.

This is a Right's Issue.

12 posted on 05/30/2002 7:55:06 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
You see what it's coming to?

As a smoker, you have no rights.
As a heterosexual, you have no rights.
As a hunter, you have no rights.
As a parent, you have no rights.
As a Southerner, you have no rights.
As a Christian, you have no rights.
As a omnivore, you have no rights.
As a conservative, you have no rights.
As a male, you have no rights.
As a pro-lifer, you have no rights.
As a tax-PAYER, you have no rights.

13 posted on 05/30/2002 7:55:35 AM PDT by 4CJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Visser said the decision is final after the recommendation went to the county Legislature's Health committee.

"It's a done deal," he told DPW committee members as they offered suggestions on how to correct the problem. "As a smoker, you have no rights. If I smoked, I guess I'd just quit."

Do you want to tell this little dictator what you think?
Here's the e-mail addy, Visserf@oswegocounty.com

14 posted on 05/30/2002 7:57:19 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Visserf@oswegocounty.com

Thanks for the email addy, Joe. You bet I will give him a piece of my mind!

15 posted on 05/30/2002 8:10:24 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SheLion
Here's my letter to the man,

Mr. Visser,
After reading the article in the Oswego Daily News online, County ERF Bans Smoking; Some Smokers Fume, I have a few problems with some of your statements.
I have no problem whatsoever with your making a county owned building nonsmoking. That is the county's right as the property owner.
I do take offense at some of the statements in the article and some attributed to you. " Michael Rosen, Deputy Health Commissioner, and an assistant visited the facility and came to the conclusion that controlling the smokers was not feasible so they designated the building as non-smoking."
Should this not read, "....controlling the smokers BREAKING THE REGULATIONS, was not feasible...."
Were ALL the smokers caught smoking in the non-designated areas? Were the smokers breaking the regulations punished or written up? Or is this just an excuse to demonize smokers in general?
The statement of yours that I take offense at was. "As a smoker, you have no rights. If I smoked, I guess I'd just quit."
EXCUSE ME! As a smoker I have no rights? It is thoughts such as this that will tip this country into socialism faster than you can say Jack Sprat. Do you, or did you, realize what you said? Just as easily you could say,
"As a smoker, you have no rights. As a heterosexual, you have no rights. As a hunter, you have no rights. As a parent, you have no rights. As a Southerner, you have no rights. As a Christian, you have no rights. As an omnivore, you have no rights. As a conservative, you have no rights. As a male, you have no rights."
I believe that you did NOT realize what you were saying. If you did then I really believe that you should not be holding public office in the USA.

16 posted on 05/30/2002 8:13:35 AM PDT by Just another Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: lewislynn
You, sir, appear to be addicted to posting your banalities on smoking threads.

I suggest you get help for your mental imbalance.

Perhaps a prescription from Doctor Feelgood will cure your bitterness.

Or at least mask it.

17 posted on 05/30/2002 8:20:26 AM PDT by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Great letter, Joe. I am compiling mine now.
18 posted on 05/30/2002 8:25:03 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: metesky
lewislynn is a Smoker Hater.

I added him/her to my list.

He/she is a Situation Conservative of the worst kind.

19 posted on 05/30/2002 8:27:14 AM PDT by SheLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Visser said that there had been some complaints to the health department and a few weeks ago Michael Rosen, Deputy Health Commissioner, and an assistant visited the facility and came to the conclusion that controlling the smokers was not feasible so they designated the building as non-smoking.

Is one of the requirements to becoming a mid-level tax-eating bureaucrat an inability to understand the Enlish language, or do they take a course in Orwell Speak 101?

If banning smoking in a building is not controlling the smokers, just what the hell is it?

No smoking = Double plus good.

What an (o).

20 posted on 05/30/2002 8:29:29 AM PDT by metesky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 481-498 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