Bingo's number is up

The obvious and sensible solution to this problem is to allow smoking again! I guess the anti-smokers are totally okay with the fact that businesses will shut down and jobs will be lost. This can be seen everywhere where smoking bans are enacted; especially in England, Scotland, and Ireland. I guess they are perfectly satisfied with this just as long as the public health is being "protected." People of Minnesota should rise up and protect really what matters: their personal liberties and the right for businesses to choose whether to be non-smoking or smoking. This is a travesty and it is happening all over the world. Minnesotan legislators should wise up and repeal the ban so that the state economy and charities can go back to where they were. And also, I am sure that the number of people angry at this ban and of those who respect the right of businesses to choose far outnumber those complainers whowanted the ban beforehand! This is a democracy, where private property rights exist! What is going on!!

Nope, they won't be happy until they drain every last dollar out of the charities while the majority of the die-hard anti-smoking people sit around at home and pat each other on the back about how they feel they now have the option to go to the bars. Even though the vast majority of them aren't. Any smoking ban proponent that wants to say how they DO go to bars now, please tell me why there's been such a decline? If non-smokers who wish to go out truly outnumber smokers then the smoking ban should have meant a HUGE boom for businesses, not a ***BUST***

It has nothing to do about patting us in the back, it's about health issues. There are a number of people that are deathly allergic to cigarette smoke, and cannot go into an establishment that is riddled with smoke, as it triggers an asthmatic episode. I especially don't have time for throw their cigarettes out the car window. They didn't put ashtrays in vehicles just to hold change. You might see it in a different light when I tell you what happened last summer. I was riding my motorcycle on the highway and some idiot threw their cigarette out the window, it bounced on the highway and ended up under my full faced helmet. I wasn't speeding, tailgating, but riding legally.Have someone try to shove a lit cigarette in your mouth as that is what it felt like.Raise a pack of cigarettes to $7 a pack, it would be a great way to get rid of that deficit!

I have a question for someone who used to play bingo and smoke there. What are you doing for fun now? For example, do you go to a casino where you can smoke and play bingo? Do you go to Wisconsin? Do you just smoke at home and have friends over?

If peoplethink the economy is affecting gambling go to acasino!! People can eat,drink,dance,gamble and SMOKE all in one place. Then they can get a nice room at resonable rates for the nite. The smoking ban is to casino's what prohibition was to alcohol (best days they ever had). Oh andby the way, how much of this money do we see??????
I thought monoplies were illeagal or is that only if you are not a minority or protected class????

Before the ban all we ever heard from the "ban the butt zealots" was that only 20% of Minnesotan's smoke. True enough. In their haste to "git 'er dun," they cajoled legislators and many business owners into believing that the 80% of non-smokers would more than make-up the difference so that their businesses wouldn't suffer. My question would be: When does it start happening? The answer is it's not going to. The extremists, as extremists are like to do, went under the assumption that ALL 80% of the non-smokers felt exactly as they did. In conversations with other non-smokers I found that very few cared. As I, they felt that most bars, restaurants, clubs etc. were adequately ventilated and with non-smoking sections available there was no problem. In addition there's the idea that if a place is too smoky, leave or don't patronize it at all. Supply and demand would have worked. It's the American Way; not bans.

So, to the 2% of the 80% that got and kept the ball rolling with your lies, voodoo statistics, and rhetoric, it's time. Time to step-up. Time to do what you said you would do. Support these businesses and clubs. You got your "CLEAN AIR" now go pay for it. You "talked the talk;" it's time to get out the wallet, let the moths out, and "walk the walk."

A sterling example of government getting involved and legislating behavior. Nice work legislators.

Talk about your Law of Unintended Consequences!

Wrong, it is a control issue. I was never, never harmed by smoking establishments. I simply exercised my free will and did not frequent those establishments that allowed smoking.

The smoking ban is not about my health, it is about control, period.

Shelly wrote:

It has nothing to do about
patting us in the back, it's about health issues. There are a number of people that are deathly allergic to cigarette smoke, and cannot go into an establishment that is riddled with smoke, as it triggers an asthmatic episode. I especially don't have time for throw their cigarettes out the car window. They didn't put ashtrays in vehicles just to hold change. You might see it in a different light when I tell you what happened last summer. I was riding my motorcycle on the highway and some idiot threw their cigarette out the window, it bounced on the highway and ended up under my full faced helmet. I wasn't speeding, tailgating, but riding legally.Have someone try to shove a lit cigarette in your mouth as that is what it felt like.Raise a pack of cigarettes to $7 a pack, it would be a great way to get rid of that deficit!

Unfortunately, smokers and non-smokers were both acting like little kids who wanted to play with the same toy. Smokers who intentionally blow smoke in someone's face are as much at fault to the ban as non-smokers who can't abide any scent of smoke. Since we can't get along, a "one or the other" decision had to be made. A decision supporting the majority and health can not be faulted. I personally think a total ban goes too far, but also see the costs of creating totally separate areas that do not exchange air as prohibitive (two separate sets of restrooms, Allowing smokers and non-smokers access to the band and dance floor, etc.) Supporting one group at the total cost of another hasn't worked in any historical example I can think of (granted I'm not thinking too hard on this ;) so what compromise will smokers make to have an evening out and get back into bars. Is a reasonable shelter so you don't need to freeze to smoke enough? Would you be willing to pay an entrance fee to help offset the cost to the bar? Smokers are going to have to get involved with modifying the ban and working with non-smokers on a compromise or we'll need a generation or two before it's a non-issue (enough people have to grow up without being able to smoke in bars that it's just the way it is.)
Disclaimer: I don't smoke, but go out with people who do. If they don't want to go to bars due to the ban, we do something else. I'll go to the bar when they want to, or go with other non-smoking friends.

LCD wrote:

A sterling example of government getting involved and legislating behavior. Nice work legislators.

keep on fighting people.
I urge you all to sign the stop the smoking ban before we see anymore damage done.
here is a very reliable site for you all to sign.
------- FORWARD THIS TO YOUR FRIENDS -------
Hi,

I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:

"Stop the Wisconsin Smoking Ban"
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/stopthewib...

Where have all the people gone? Has anyone thought that a study should be done on the effects of isolating and riduculing smokers? Staying home, feeling like a reject from society because we smoke? It's a legal product...

Hey Shelly, how does an indoor smoking ban help keep cigarettes out from under your facemask or keep them from being dumped on the side of the road? There is no ban on smoking on the road or in your car. Pretty stupid post if you ask me.

Hey Shelly, I'm 47 years old and I've never seen anyone die from inhaling 2nd hand smoke. If they are "deathly allergic" to smoke wouldn't they have to wear a mask just to go walk behind a running car? Do you really believe your own overexaggeration? Do you have any common sense, at all? Are you a total idiot?

It is not a stupid post, it is about the mentailty of smokers. If smokers would abide by the laws and rules, for example "do not smoke within 25 feet of the door" while dragging a cigarette next to the door. Throwing a cigarette out the car window is littering and against the law. I thoroughly enjoy going to the grocery store only to come home smelling like smoke. Establishments provide ashtrays outside the door and we still find dozens of "butts" on ther ground near the ashtray. If smokers would obey the rules and the laws, this ban would probably be a non-issue. You may think it's a dumb post, but you lack common sense

LibsRidiots wrote:

Hey Shelly, I'm 47 years old and I've never seen anyone die from inhaling 2nd hand smoke. If they are "deathly allergic" to smoke wouldn't they have to wear a mask just to go walk behind a running car? Do you really believe your own overexaggeration? Do you have any common sense, at all? Are you a total idiot?

Could you be an idiot? By the way asthmatics should not be near cigarette smoke!!! Next time you go to the Doctor's office ask your doctor. THIS IS NOT AN EXAGGERATION!

Hey Shelly - I hope you obey all the rules. Govt. has us jumping through hoops. Yes I use ashtrays-& smoke by them figuring that's where the want the smokers to be. Pretty soon they'll put up cages & put us in there for all to see. Oh, that's right - already been done at the dome. Admit you hate smokers...has nothing to do with your concern over the "public's" health. Has to do with your control over us.

Well then it is up to the asthmatics to stay out of areas that cause the asthma to act up. These are private businesses being told to accomodate an asthmatic, and this is what you condone? What % of people are asthmatics anyway? We are becoming a society who cowtows to a very small % of the population at the expense of many. You are an idiot. Why don't you concern yourself with what happens in NC. Tired and the rest who accuse you of needing to control others are right. Here you are on a Mn board telling us how to run our lives. You are a controlling idiot, the worst kind of idiot. I'm sure NC has problems you could whine about, so take your stupid doo gooder self and screw up the people of NC. We have plenty of idiot libs who already try here.

The indoor ban has nothing to do with littering. You keep bringing up littering which leads me to believe this is totally a control thing with you. You hate smoking and are using other complaints to bolster your weak argument against indoor smoking. My best friend has asthma and he brings his inhaler if and when he goes to a bar, and he always has. He makes ADJUSTMENTS TO SITUATIONS because he is a gentleman and a realist. He is against the ban and so am I even though neither of us smoke, nor have we ever.
Society should not have to make such sweeping, punitive laws which negatively impact so many for the benefit of so few, on such a trivial issue.
Did you read the recent Wisconsin study which found that the indoor smoking ban has lead to an increase in alcohol related deaths? Yeah, they found that people were driving further to find a bar to smoke at and deaths jumped enough to be statistically significant? The researchers were so shocked at the findings they almost threw them away. True story, it was in either this paper or the Strib. Now is that an acceptable situation to you, more people dying to ensure that an asthmatic can go to a bar?
Anyway, I'd bet those smokers, who are driving around more in their cars are probably smoking more,and throwing their butts out their windows more, which means, the smoking ban has undoubtedly added to the pollution problem. Hmmm, that is funny. The very ban you support for the wrong reasons, is exascerbating the real reason you hate smoking which is the littering. Seems like you can't avoid being a hypocrite even when you are trying to control other people's actions. LOLOL

Shelly--

Why don't you and your people do what you REALLY want to do--ban tobacco completely. Or haven't you got the guts?

You and your kind gleefully gloat about how you have beaten big tobacco and how you have helped so many people out, blah, blah, blah. Meanwhile, you and your friends have collected billions of dollars and haven't got a clue as to what to do with all of it. You send kids out to try and bust store owners for selling tobacco to minors, you harass anyone who dares to challenge your righteous views.

Just remember this Shelly: if you want to ban the product, fine. But always remember that the indian reservations in this nation cannot be touched by anything that you and your arrogant, smug friends do. You will give them the corner on the market. Then you can go bust those evil bootleggers.

Why don't you try to ban alcohol while you are at it? How about red meat? That kills too.