Fargo Smoking Ban

[Slamdance]

Children do not have a choice. It's their parents' choice. I don't think siouxjoy made the decision to have a lifelong respiratory condition. That was his mother's choice.

Saying your not responsible for choices people make for their own children makes me sad. I see people making dangerous choices for their childen frequently. My choice is to report them to the police/social services. My choice is to spend an extra 15/20 minutes, making other patients wait longer, to tell them exactly how they are endangering their children's health. Heard it already? Too bad, you're going to hear it again because obviously you weren't listening the last time someone warned you about the adverse affects you actions have for your children. My choice is to not accept children suffering because of their parent's 'rights' to do whatever the hell they please inspite of the damage to their children. My choice is to get involved. To look the other way because it's not my problem is not my choice.

But, we're getting off topic. You have the choice to go to an establishment that allows smoking (kittie payment) or to go to an establishment that does not allow smoking. The choices for non-smokers is now greater.

As a health care provider who works mainly in emergency room/ Urgent Care settings, a helmet law is always the better choice, IMO. I wish they were stricter. I wish that a helmet law could take away the right to drive a motorcycle or could put the driver in jail rather than losing a life or limb or living with the fact that a passenger died because she was allowed/given the right to ride without a helmet. If it were my child whose organs I had to donate because of a 'choice', I would forever wonder why things had not been done differently so my child would still be here to outlive her parents. So the right to ride a bike without a helmet is being trampled, well, society isn't as free as we want it to be. Look around and you'll see it's never been as free as you think it was. When taking away 'rights' for the betterment of public health is an issue that comes to a public vote, I know which way I'm voting.

Fine. You choose to get involved. I commend you. In fact, if I were an uneducated parent and you took the time to politely educate me, I would sincerely appreciate it.

However, I am so effin' over self-righteous people forcing their choices upon me and forcing me into the position of a lawbreaker, where in the not-so-distant past I would not have been. With the smoking ban, smokers and owners of establishments that still allow smoking are now in the position of being criminals. How fair is that?

Seat belt laws

Helmet laws

Smoking bans

Artificially low speed limits

Etc.

Some of these are just common sense, why do they need to be laws?

Just because common sense isn't so common?

Why is that my fault?

Why can't I choose to smoke in a place that the owner allows smoking? Why can't drive my truck without a seat belt and suffer the consequences if I am in an accident? Why can't I ride my motorcycle without a helmet and, again, suffer the consequences if I am in an accident? Why can't I drive at a higher speed than 70 mph on flat straight surface from GF to Fargo?

I don't care if you do it. It doesn't affect me. It's none of my business. Stop making my business, yours.

[Sioux-cia]

I don't care if you do it. It doesn't affect me. It's none of my business. Stop making my business, yours.

If your actions didn't affect me or 'innocents', I wouldn't care either. In none of your examples could I see where the consequences of your actions would not affect others.

But, one factor that keeps getting overlooked, you can still smoke. You just can't smoke in certain venues. There were bars that became 'theaters' in Minnesota. For a small fee, a patron become an 'actor' and the whole bar scene was suppose to be the 'play'. I think the State has or is going to stop this 'dance around the law' practice.

Private smoking clubs may be the answer for smokers.

[Oxbow6]

If your actions didn't affect me or 'innocents', I wouldn't care either. In none of your examples could I see where the consequences of your actions would not affect others.

But, one factor that keeps getting overlooked, you can still smoke. You just can't smoke in certain venues. There were bars that became 'theaters' in Minnesota. For a small fee, a patron become an 'actor' and the whole bar scene was suppose to be the 'play'. I think the State has or is going to stop this 'dance around the law' practice.

Private smoking clubs may be the answer for smokers.

Exactly. Seems like the smoking crowd can't figure that one out. But slamdance is right one one point: Common sense isn't so common.

[Sioux-cia]

.. slamdance is right one one point: Common sense isn't so common.

Absolutely!

[Slamdance]

Perhaps I'm a little slow. It is Monday, after all.

Explain to me why it is fair that if I am a smoker or the owner of an establishment that allows smoking, I am now relegated to the position of a criminal?

Example: I own a restaurant/bar. I inform my employees and clientele that I allow smoking in my establishment. You do not have to work here nor do you have to patronize my place of business.

What the hell is wrong with that? Who are you to force your morality/health care issues/disgust with smokers/smoking down my throat? That is not fair. That is not freedom.

Because of this smoking ban, previously innocent people are now criminals.

Hell, I don't smoke, and this legislating of morality really pisses me off enough to start.

[Sioux-cia]

Hell, I don't smoke, and this legislating of morality really pisses me off enough to start.

It is not about MORALITY. It's about PUBLIC HEALTH!

[Slamdance]

It is not about MORALITY. It's about PUBLIC HEALTH!

Nice avoidance of the question.

Who are you to tell me how to run my place of business? If you don't like it, don't give me your business.

You can coat it in whatever buzzwords (public health, for example), but it still comes down to my rights as a business owner being trampled by the self-righteous telling me how to live and conduct my life.

Get off your high horse.

The smoking ban is unfair. Period.

[redwing77]

Perhaps I'm a little slow. It is Monday, after all.

Explain to me why it is fair that if I am a smoker or the owner of an establishment that allows smoking, I am now relegated to the position of a criminal?

Example: I own a restaurant/bar. I inform my employees and clientele that I allow smoking in my establishment. You do not have to work here nor do you have to patronize my place of business.

What the hell is wrong with that? Who are you to force your morality/health care issues/disgust with smokers/smoking down my throat? That is not fair. That is not freedom.

Because of this smoking ban, previously innocent people are now criminals.

Hell, I don't smoke, and this legislating of morality really pisses me off enough to start.

I understand where you are trying to go, but I think you are a bit extreme by the use of the term "criminal." No one is throwing anyone in jail because they smoke or because they operate a business that allows smoking.

Other than that, I understand your position completely. I do think that the point of notification that the premises allow smoking and that all employees and patrons of the business understand this position and the risks that go along with it would be a reasonable position to have.

I do not support smoking establishments even if the cost of treating the end result of smoking (lung cancer) has largely paid for my parents' lifestyle and my education (my father's specialties as a cancer specialist are lung, blood, and breast cancers), but I do think that there should be equal opportunities and incentives for business such as bars to be smoke-free. I like going out and listening to local live music every now and then, but I usually couldn't do that without reeking of smoke when I got home. I don't see why having smoke-free and non-smoke-free bars and nightclubs would be so unworkable.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

This whole smoking thing is nuts! Smoking is a legal thing to do. Period. There should be no government restrictions on something legal that is done by adults. Smoking is legal, no matter what anyone says about the side effects. The government needs to get out of our lives! Businesses are private. The owner should be the only person with a say in what legal products are allowed in it and what aren't. If he wants to ban smoking, fine. If he wants to allow it, fine. Same goes for shirts, shoes, backwards hats, bubble gum, pop corn, cans of paint, and anything else you can think of. No one forces me to go into the business. I decide where I want to go. If I don't like smoking, I won't go there. If I want to have a smoke, then perhaps I will. WE are being stripped of our freedom.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

Fine. You choose to get involved. I commend you. In fact, if I were an uneducated parent and you took the time to politely educate me, I would sincerely appreciate it.

However, I am so effin' over self-righteous people forcing their choices upon me and forcing me into the position of a lawbreaker, where in the not-so-distant past I would not have been. With the smoking ban, smokers and owners of establishments that still allow smoking are now in the position of being criminals. How fair is that?

Seat belt laws

Helmet laws

Smoking bans

Artificially low speed limits

Etc.

Some of these are just common sense, why do they need to be laws?

Just because common sense isn't so common?

Why is that my fault?

Why can't I choose to smoke in a place that the owner allows smoking? Why can't drive my truck without a seat belt and suffer the consequences if I am in an accident? Why can't I ride my motorcycle without a helmet and, again, suffer the consequences if I am in an accident? Why can't I drive at a higher speed than 70 mph on flat straight surface from GF to Fargo?

I don't care if you do it. It doesn't affect me. It's none of my business. Stop making my business, yours.

That is for sure. You are right on. I decide what I want to do.

[Sioux-cia]

Get off your high horse.

The smoking ban is unfair. Period.

In all of our discussion, I don't recall being abusive to you. I don't agree with your take on the smoking ban and you don't agree with mine. But, telling me to get off my 'high horse' because my opinion differs with yours just shows your frustration and inability to continue discussing the matter civilly. Gotta admit though, this is the first time I've heard public health is a buzz word. It's my reality.

The smoking ban is fair. Period.

[Oxbow6]

For those of you who talk about "your rights", you again missed the point. 4 people who don't smoke didn't just show up at Starbucks in Fargo and decided this issue. It was put to a vote of the people of Fargo who had the "right" to vote if they were eligilbe. The vote of the people who exercised their "right" to vote decide the smoking ban was fair and passed the measure. Again the measure didn't ban smoking altogether. If you live in Fargo and voted and are expressing your opinion on this issue, like DaveK, I'll respect your opinion even though I disagree. If you didn't vote, but had the "right" to, not so much.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

In all of our discussion, I don't recall being abusive to you. I don't agree with your take on the smoking ban and you don't agree with mine. But, telling me to get off my 'high horse' because my opinion differs with yours just shows your frustration and inability to continue discussing the matter civilly. Gotta admit though, this is the first time I've heard public health is a buzz work. It's my reality.

The smoking ban is fair. Period.

How in the world can you say it is fair? It is totally unfair that the government can tell me that I can not have a legal product (smoking) in my place of business?

[Cratter]

As a health care provider who works mainly in emergency room/ Urgent Care settings, a helmet law is always the better choice, IMO. I wish they were stricter. I wish that a helmet law could take away the right to drive a motorcycle or could put the driver in jail rather than losing a life or limb or living with the fact that a passenger died because she was allowed/given the right to ride without a helmet. If it were my child whose organs I had to donate because of a 'choice', I would forever wonder why things had not been done differently so my child would still be here to outlive her parents. So the right to ride a bike without a helmet is being trampled, well, society isn't as free as we want it to be. Look around and you'll see it's never been as free as you think it was. When taking away 'rights' for the betterment of public health is an issue that comes to a public vote, I know which way I'm voting.

Why not just outlaw motorcycles? Then no one could die with or without a helmet on one?

Would you vote to outlaw motorcycles? Because when i reread you statement replacing "helmet" with motorcycle you get the same arguement.

The "choice" to ride a (motor)bike should be taken away because its for the "betterment of public health"?

Like I said earlier, this country is/was great when we don't pass laws because we personally don't believe the same way as others (smoking, helmets, drugs, gay marriage, abortion, gun ownership).

[Sioux-cia]

How in the world can you say it is fair? It is totally unfair that the government can tell me that I can not have a legal product (smoking) in my place of business?

Uhm, did you not see the 'wink'? My comment was made in response to Slamdance's comment.

You can no longer smoke in a bar in Fargo. Not fair to smokers who go to bars in Fargo. But no one is stopping anyone from smoking. Smoke your lungs to black goo. That is your right!!

Where was all this public outrage before the polling booths opened? How many of you were out campaigning a NO vote to this new regulation? You don't want to be dictated to by what has been described as a "few, self-rightious non-smokers', where were you? Waiting for someone else to carry the torch? How the heck did this pass??

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

For those of you who talk about "your rights", you again missed the point. 4 people who don't smoke didn't just show up at Starbucks in Fargo and decided this issue. It was put to a vote of the people of Fargo who had the "right" to vote if they were eligilbe. The vote of the people who exercised their "right" to vote decide the smoking ban was fair and passed the measure. Again the measure didn't ban smoking altogether. If you live in Fargo and voted and are expressing your opinion on this issue, like DaveK, I'll respect your opinion even though I disagree. If you didn't vote, but had the "right" to, not so much.

It is wrong that the government should have this kind of control over my life. It doesn't matter if it happened in a "legal" manner. It is still wrong and shouldn't happen. Don't forget that Hitler came to power in Germany legally. Yet, most would agree that what he did was wrong.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

Uhm, did you not see the 'wink'? My comment was made in response to Slamdance's comment.

You can no longer smoke in a bar in Fargo. Not fair to smokers who go to bars in Fargo. But no one is stopping anyone from smoking. Smoke your lungs to black goo. That is your right!!

Where was all this public outrage before the polling booths opened? How many of you were out campaigning a NO vote to this new regulation? You don't want to be dictated to by what has been described as a "few, self-rightious non-smokers', where were you? Waiting for someone else to carry the torch? How the heck did this pass??

Well, for me personally, I don't live in Fargo. But have no fear, I am working hard when it comes to politics. And no, I am not waiting for someone else to carry the torch. I run my own colors up the pole and carry my own torch.

[Cratter]

You can no longer smoke in a bar in Fargo. Not fair to smokers who go to bars in Fargo. But no one is stopping anyone from smoking. Smoke your lungs to black goo. That is your right!!

It is not just bars, it is any public place (I believe).

SO, actually, yes, someone is stopping someone else from smoking.

.....all in the name of safety. (War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on Immigration, War on Stinky Poop)

[Sioux-cia]

Why not just outlaw motorcycles? Then no one could die with or without a helmet on one?

Would you vote to outlaw motorcycles? Because when i reread you statement replacing "helmet" with motorcycle you get the same arguement.

The "choice" to ride a (motor)bike should be taken away because its for the "betterment of public health"?

Like I said earlier, this country is/was great when we don't pass laws because we personally don't believe the same way as others (smoking, helmets, drugs, abortion, gun ownership).

So where do you stand on welfare? Valid question. How long is health insurance going to pay for the brain damaged, the chronically ill (lung disease/heart disease/bladder cancer/premature babies, etc)? Not forever, there is a limit to what private insurance will pay. So, who ends up paying? State medical assistance.

How many brain damaged citizens make a salary? For that matter how many citizens with advanced cancer, heart disease, strokes make a salary? State assistance.

How much does it cost to nurture the product of someone's choice?

Honestly, you don't have a problem paying for other people's right to choose?

Do you really believe that anarchy is the answer?

[Sioux-cia]

It is not just bars, it is any public place (I believe).

SO, actually, yes, someone is stopping someone else from smoking.

.....all in the name of safety. (War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on Immigration, War on Stinky Poop)

You can still smoke. You can still buy tobacco products.

[Cratter]

So where do you stand on welfare? Valid question. How long is health insurance going to pay for the brain damaged, the chronically ill (lung disease/heart disease/bladder cancer/premature babies, etc)? Not forever, there is a limit to what private insurance will pay. So, who ends up paying? State medical assistance.

How many brain damaged citizens make a salary? For that matter how many citizens with advanced cancer, heart disease, strokes make a salary? State assistance.

How much does it cost to nurture the product of someone's choice?

Honestly, you don't have a problem paying for other people's right to choose?

Do you really believe that anarchy is the answer?

I guess before I can answer you questions, I should get an answer to my question:

Would you be for outlawing motorcycles all together? (in your case in the name of safety)

Based on your answer I assume, you would.

[Sioux-cia]

I guess before I can answer you questions, I should get an answer to my question:

Would you be for outlawing motorcycles all together? (in your case in the name of safety)

Based on your answer I assume, you would.

I was a motorcycle owner. Loved riding down the PCH when I lived in California. I always wore a helmet. It messed up my hair and I looked like ET wearing it but I always wore it. No, I would not outlaw motorcycles. You assume wrong.

I stopped riding when I moved to Illinois. I found it boring on flat highways.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

I was a motorcycle owner. Loved riding down the PCH when I lived in California. I always wore a helmet. It messed up my hair and I looked like ET wearing it but I always wore it. No, I would not outlaw motorcycles. You assume wrong.

I stopped riding when I moved to Illinois. I found it boring on flat highways.

Why smoking but not motorcycles? They are both legal. Why should the government or anyone else tell me what risks I can and can not take? I like to decide for myself what risks to take.

[Sioux-cia]

Why smoking but not motorcycles? They are both legal.

Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking.

[andtheHomeoftheSIOUX!!]

Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking.

Why do you support a ban on smoking but not on motorcycles? They are both dangerous.