York County out of step on smoking

This country was founded on personal freedom and tyranny from the majority against the minority.

Fran, an obvious anti-smoker, just can't bear the thought of individuals actually choosing which establishment they wish to spend their money in. Since when is freedom of choice prohibited in America, the land of the brave and the home of the free?

If you don't like freedom, go live somewhere else! Put on a burka and live in Saudi, then maybe you will understand what personal freedom is all about.

Fran, get your head out of the sand. You are lucky to have a government that respects the private businessman's property rights. If you don't like smoking, go to non-smoking places.

Congratulations to the York County Board of Supervisors for their highly commendable action on behalf of their constituents liberty in this matter.

non smokers rights, smokers rights....what about the owners rights, Liberty...His right of choice, his property or does he not matter?

American wrote:

non smokers rights, smokers rights....what about the owners rights, Liberty...His right of choice, his property or does he not matter?

What about his employees right to work in a safe work place free of this kind of hazard?

Don wrote:

<quoted text>
What about his employees right to work in a safe work place free of this kind of hazard?

The only hazard here is the one you're promoting.

Let's put our cards on the table about owners' rights.

Realizing that smokers and non-smokers cannot co-exist, the potential owner can do one of two things.

1) Open a restaurant that is smoke-free.

2) Open a restaurant that caters ONLY to smokers.

Or perhaps the owner can open both, but not in the same locale. That way non-smokers can dine in a healthy, stink-free environment and smokers can enjoy a meal and a carcinogenic haze.

Reasonable enough?

Kent wrote:

<quoted text>The only hazard here is the one you're promoting.

What hazard is that?

It's a known fact that most drunks,degenerates and other low life type riff-raff are cigarette smokers.York county now seems to wish to cater to them ,and be a good place for them to go and live.

Fran you obviously don't have enough to do if you have all this time to sit around figuring out how to screw with other people. You do this from Yorktown of all places where our country was born be the surrender of Cornwallis. Nobody forces you to go where smoking is allowed. Why do you feel the need to impose your beliefs on those who don't think or believe as you do? I don't smoke but I do go to restaurants that allow smoking as well as those who don't. I'm not paranoid like some.

By the way Fran. Given that there are already several threads here concerning the York Supervisors not approving the smoking ban why did you feel it necessary to add even another one. Is your need so great to be in control you can't post your opinions on the threads already open?

Lex wrote:

Let's put our cards on the table about owners' rights.
Realizing that smokers and non-smokers cannot co-exist, the potential owner can do one of two things.
1) Open a restaurant that is smoke-free.
2) Open a restaurant that caters ONLY to smokers.
Or perhaps the owner can open both, but not in the same locale. That way non-smokers can dine in a healthy, stink-free environment and smokers can enjoy a meal and a carcinogenic haze.
Reasonable enough?

I like the way you think, everybody has a choice, everybody wins.

Lex wrote:

Let's put our cards on the table about owners' rights.
Realizing that smokers and non-smokers cannot co-exist, the potential owner can do one of two things.
1) Open a restaurant that is smoke-free.
2) Open a restaurant that caters ONLY to smokers.
Or perhaps the owner can open both, but not in the same locale. That way non-smokers can dine in a healthy, stink-free environment and smokers can enjoy a meal and a carcinogenic haze.
Reasonable enough?

Putting our cards on the table about owners' rights doesn't involve patrons dictating those rights. Patrons get their choice when deciding whether or not to patronize the owners' venues.

Patrons currently have an excellent means at their disposal by which they might choose whether or not to frequent any business. In fact, here's a neat test that even you, Lexxy Poo, should be able to administer to yourself: 1) Walk into the restaurant or business, 2) take a whiff of the air around you, 3) if you like what you're breathing, seeing, feeling, etc., then stay and try the food or whatever you're there to try, or 3) If you do not like any of those sensations, then leave.

For the record, I am NOT a smoker. Jack, best I can tell, is NOT a smoker. We're just a couple of dudes speaking out for the vast majority of Southeast Virginians that get sick of idiot libs trying to legislate morality across the Tidewater.

You guys are all missing the Big Picture. The reason York County passed on the smoking regulations could be because there is a Phillip Morris Plant in York County. Don't want to piss off a big corporation that is generating big tax dollars.

Newport News and Hampton don't have a big Tobacco Co. operating in there city limits.

Smoker, Non-Smoker the County does not care, all they care about is Big Business and Tax revenue.

SMK wrote:

<quoted text>
Putting our cards on the table about owners' rights doesn't involve patrons dictating those rights. Patrons get their choice when deciding whether or not to patronize the owners' venues.
Patrons currently have an excellent means at their disposal by which they might choose whether or not to frequent any business. In fact, here's a neat test that even you, Lexxy Poo, should be able to administer to yourself: 1) Walk into the restaurant or business, 2) take a whiff of the air around you, 3) if you like what you're breathing, seeing, feeling, etc., then stay and try the food or whatever you're there to try, or 3) If you do not like any of those sensations, then leave.
We're just a couple of dudes speaking out for the vast majority of Southeast Virginians that get sick of idiot libs trying to legislate morality across the Tidewater.

For the record, I am NOT a smoker. Jack, best I can tell, is NOT a smoker.

That's correct. I don't smoke. I do frequent restaurants and sometimes a bar that allows smoking. No problem for me. A lot of times when only smoking section is available we choose that. It all comes down to personal choice. Not the government.

I Agree Smokers Have Rights. I think If a Smaoker Wants to Smoke You should do so till your hearts content. Smokers help our local and state economies. The heavy taxes they pay help fuel local economies. Smokers are also benificial to the Medical industry. Smokers have much higher rater of Cancer and heart disease. This fuels the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society to Strive to find Cures for there associated diseases. The longer a smoker lives the move taxes they can pay.

So next time you feel offended by a smoker, stop and remember these people are paying extra taxes for roads and schools. So stop and thank them for cutting short there lives, and paying extra taxes.

God Bless American

Eugene Sharpe wrote:

I Agree Smokers Have Rights. I think If a Smaoker Wants to Smoke You should do so till your hearts content. Smokers help our local and state economies. The heavy taxes they pay help fuel local economies. Smokers are also benificial to the Medical industry. Smokers have much higher rater of Cancer and heart disease. This fuels the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society to Strive to find Cures for there associated diseases. The longer a smoker lives the move taxes they can pay.
So next time you feel offended by a smoker, stop and remember these people are paying extra taxes for roads and schools. So stop and thank them for cutting short there lives, and paying extra taxes.
God Bless American

That is correct. Smokers will most likely spend less time in a nursing home when their minds are gone but their heart are still ticking as well.

I do believe that if someone owns a resturant, pays their taxes, they should have the right to decide if their establishment is to be totally non-smoking. What if they smoke themself? Do they not deserve the right to smoke in something they OWN?

I can't even go to church without choking up and often have to leave. Let alone a show - because of cologne. But, because it chokes and stops me up, and causes breathing problems I don't feel I have the right to tell people what to groom with.

Lighten up people. Enjoy the freedom and don't try to force your likes and dislikes on others. If you don't like smoke, you don't have to patronize a resturant no more than you have to visit a smokers home.

We've been down this road before on numerous other threads.
Since the end of the civil war, all citizens of this country have had the right to choose whether or not they want to work in a particular place.
If the establishment allowed smoking at the time of hire, there is no question of workers health rights.

Don wrote:

<quoted text>
What about his employees right to work in a safe work place free of this kind of hazard?

John Baake wrote:

We've been down this road before on numerous other threads.
Since the end of the civil war, all citizens of this country have had the right to choose whether or not they want to work in a particular place.
If the establishment allowed smoking at the time of hire, there is no question of workers health rights.
<quoted text>

To me, that's like saying that someone who works in a medical lab shouldn't ask for lower level radiation standards than when they started 20 or 30 years ago. Many people, believe it or not, don't know that second hand smoke can harm their health until they do some research.

I did some research and found out Elvis is still alive and living with bigfoot inside the crater of mt. st. Helens.

That doesn't mean it's true.

Anonymouse wrote:

<quoted text>
To me, that's like saying that someone who works in a medical lab shouldn't ask for lower level radiation standards than when they started 20 or 30 years ago. Many people, believe it or not, don't know that second hand smoke can harm their health until they do some research.