Iowa Smoking Ban Heats up

[poppysgal]

Des Moines, IA - The Iowa House has narrowly approved a statewide ban on indoor smoking. Lawmakers approved the ban Tuesday on a 52-48 vote, sending the compromise measure to the Senate.
The measure includes bars and restaurants in the smoking ban but would exempt casinos and the Iowa Veterans Home.
Rep. Phil Wise of Keokuk said he was voting yes because "this is a life and death issue and I am going to vote on the side of life."
A House-passed measure banning indoor smoking contains exemptions, including:
-Casinos, but only on the gambling area and betting floor. Bars and restaurants in casinos would be covered by the ban.
-The Iowa Veterans Home at Marshalltown.
-Private residences, unless they are used for child care or health care.
-Hotels and motels could set aside 20 percent of their rooms for smokers.
-Retail tobacco stores, and private clubs that have no employees.
-Private and semi-private rooms in long-term care facilities.
-Outdoor areas that are places of employment.
-Limousines under private hire.
-Farm tractors and farm trucks when being used for their intended purpose
-Enclosed areas within a place of employment that provides a smoking cessation program.http://www.kimt.com/news/local/17397014.html

[LynneSin]

1. "Retail tobacco stores, and private clubs that have no employees."

So who runs these stores

:shrug:

[poppysgal]

2. you do have a point

robots?:rofl:

[msongs]

3. nicotine/smoke will contaminate the robots, they are not immune nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

7. The owners

We used to have quite a few private clubs in Kansas before they changed our liquor laws.

[madinmaryland]

15. Smokers.

:shrug:

If I didn't smoke (which I don't) why would I own a smoke shop?? :wtf:

[truebrit71]

32. I was thinking the same thing...

...:wtf:

[poppysgal]

4. Roll the dice

I found it interesting that the casinos (gambling areas) were exempt. Oh by the way I am a non-smoker who is just a little concerned about the annoying trend sweeping our nation at this moment to rob us our rights for our own good.:bounce:

[Winterblues]

5. Why do you assume you have a right to pollute the public air?

How did you gain such a "right"?

[Wizard777]

10. When legislators got off their high horses and into their cars.......

[taterguy]

11. Car pollution is different from pollution produced by cigarettes

Don't ask me how.

It just is. :)

[MadHound]

20. Yes, it's larger in quantity,

And comes with extra added nitric oxide goodness:eyes:

[Wizard777]

37. Not everyone wants to give up their particular "smoking" habit.

Like their car, BBQ grill, or woodchip smoker. Don't forget about that fireplace. Everyone smokes in their own way.

[Winterblues]

14. Seems to me like Legislation requires cataletic converters on cars

Why shouldn't there be the same on cigarettes? Legislators make litter laws and pollution laws. I wonder if you feel you have the same "right" to litter and what IYO is the difference between littering and putting smoke in the air? As far as I klnow there is no law about you littering your home or smoking in your home, but when you bring the filth into the public what do you want Legislators to do? I find no logic in your argument..It reminds me of someone saying because bank robbers rob banks we should be able to rob the corner market. It is a "right"...

[taterguy]

18. Even with converters cars pollute

So unless you're prepared to say people don't have a right to drive you're being inconsistent.

This isn't about "rights." This is about preferences.

[Winterblues]

19. This was in regards to a post which said theior "rights" were being taken away

I asked how they got the "right" to pollute. So it is very much about "rights".....You either believe you have the "right" to pollute or you don't, which is it?

[taterguy]

30. Everyone pollutes in some way shape or form

So we're not arguing about whether or not people have the right to do that.

We're arguing about which forms of pollution are acceptable.

[Winterblues]

35. Right..and people are determining that smoking in public is not acceptable.

I don't think anyone really gives a darn if you smoke, just don't do it in public..They are also saying pollution from cars needs to be cut more and from industry as well. No amount of pollution is acceptable but it appears to be inevitable at this time in history. People should be working toward a zero tollerance policy when it comes to pollution, IMO. We can eliminate it if we try hard enough. what gets me is all the people trying to justify doing it...They say because others do it that makes it okay for them to do it as well. I say the same argument could be used for stealing...

[LanternWaste]

28. Smoking vs. car pollution.

Smoking vs. car pollution.

One has a relative positive cost-benefit ratio. One doesn't.

Hmmm....

[High Plains]

23. Why do you assume you have the right to come in my bar

and tell me what to do? If you don't like smoky bars, don't go to them.

[High Plains]

24. I'm pro-choice when it comes to smoking bans.

Let the owner and the market decide. That's the American way, isn't it?

[pleah]

40. It used to be.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

33. A business owned by a private individule is not 'public air'

[Winterblues]

36. If it is open to the public it most certainly is public air.

If it is totally private and the public is not allowed then no one really cares and that is how they are legislating as well. It is only in public that anyone has any bitches...

[Echo In Light]

6. "Do-Gooders" can end up in groups bearing torches, pitchforks, arm bands, jack boots, etc

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. They are exempting casinos here too

The tobacco industry lobbied hard for the exemption.

[dflprincess]

21. I'll bet the casinos lobbied hard too

They don't want someone leaving their slot machine for a smoke break.

The casinos in Minnesota are exempt from the ban as well, but that's because they're on tribal lands and the state has no say in whether or not they can allow smoking.

[Snarkturian Clone]

9. I've hammered this point hundreds of times

but DUers will always celebrate the loss of liberties as long as it's a left-leaning loss. They're quite pathetic sometimes.

[frickaline]

17. you have to weigh the loss of smokers liberty with the loss of non-smokers liberty

Don't non-smokers have the right to not breathe in second hand smoke?

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Choice

You should be able to choose to not frequent a business that allows smoking. Let the market decide. As soon as the smoking businesses suffer from lack of customers, they will ban smoking. Or vice versa. These laws are just nanny state nonsense.

[Snarkturian Clone]

29. Bingo... that's exactly it.

:toast:

[frickaline]

39. no this doesnt work, its not a realistic option

The problem is well, 2 problems really:

1. Employees cannot escape the smoke, and they will have no choice because of #2
2. Whichever side of the fence gets more business is what every establishment will do - so no matter what, theres no choices in the end

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

34. Umm they can not go to private business that allow smoking cant they?

[madinmaryland]

16. Your "right" to give me cancer??

:wtf:

[High Plains]

25. Hey, you don't want cigarette smoke? Don't go to my bar.

Pretty simple. You're free to choose. But you would remove that right from the rest of us.

[madinmaryland]

27. It's my right not to patronize your smoky bar! But

are you implying that its your right to smoke in "public" places and give me cancer?

:wtf:

[Wizard777]

38. The bar also has a right to refuse you service at any time for any reason.

Including you don't smoke. The smokers position on the ban was that they have a right to patronize the bars. Smoking in the bars made the atmosphere inhospitable to them and that was denying them that right. The fact is they have no such right. They may be refused service at any time for any reason. Including they don't smoke.

[High Plains]

43. What I'm saying is let's have some choice.

Not nanny state authoritarianism.

Some of us like to smoke in convivial settings. Some don't. There should be room for both.

[proud2BlibKansan]

31. Your right to choose not to hang out with a smoker

No one is forcing you.

[poppysgal]

12. Just a moment

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson:think:

[UpInArms]

13. interesting take on the "pro-lifers" part

:crazy:

"this is a life and death issue and I am going to vote on the side of life."

If this is true, then why is tobacco not a controlled substance and made illegal at the manufacturing/corporate profit level?

[Fumesucker]

41. The harm, or lack of such, of any recreational substance

Has nothing to do with whether or not it is illegal.

Abusing ethyl alcohol is far worse for the body than equivalently abusing medically pure heroin.

[High Plains]

26. I'm in Mexico City, where they just introduced a smoking ban.

In the two weeks since it started, there have been at least 600 "amparos" (legal complaints) filed againt it by bar and restaurant owners, including big chains like Sanborn's and Vip's.

You can't even smoke in cantinas now! So half the crowd is outside at any given moment.

[Kat45]

42. "-Private residences, unless they are used for child care or health care"

Does this exemption mean that if people have kids, they cannot legally smoke in their homes?