Ohio Supreme Court Rules Smoking Ban Constitutional

May 23, 2012 Full story: Cincinnati CityBeat 1,192

Since 2006, the Ohio Smoke-Free Workplace Act has banned indoor smoking at public establishments and places of employment, making Ohio the first Midwestern state to enact a state-wide ban.

Full Story
Need A Light

London, Canada

#24 May 24, 2012
Need A Light wrote:
There is also birth control pills ....welfare should provide as a condition of collection.
"Frisbee wrote"
That would be good. Shot would be better, except it makes some people sick.
Need aLight Writes
I can see in your own case your mother ran out of coat hangers and did'nt own a gun.
Kyboy

Ft Mitchell, KY

#25 May 24, 2012
There are many bars in Ohio that have quite enforcing the smoke ban. Business that are just bars were losing to many customers and had to make a choice of shutting down the bar or allow smokers to smoke to stay in business.

I am a smoker and have not had any problems finding bars that allow smoking in most of ohio's cities.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#26 May 25, 2012
Kyboy wrote:
There are many bars in Ohio that have quite enforcing the smoke ban. Business that are just bars were losing to many customers and had to make a choice of shutting down the bar or allow smokers to smoke to stay in business.
I am a smoker and have not had any problems finding bars that allow smoking in most of ohio's cities.
So, you drive to Ohio from KY to go to bars. And then you get shitfaced and drive home.

Bully for you.

BTW, they are starting to take away the licenses of repeat violators.
Kyboy

Brunswick, OH

#27 May 25, 2012
I DO NOT SMOKE wrote:
<quoted text>So, you drive to Ohio from KY to go to bars. And then you get shitfaced and drive home.

Bully for you.

BTW, they are starting to take away the licenses of repeat violators.
I work out of town and stay at hotels. I Don't get shiftfaced and most places I stay at have smoking bars within walking distance so no driving involved.

BTW taking licenses away has not stop the drunk driving repeaters. Maybe increasing jail time for them would help curb the problem.
ItsAFact

Frederick, MD

#29 May 25, 2012
I DO NOT SMOKE wrote:
<quoted text>
So, you drive to Ohio from KY to go to bars. And then you get shitfaced and drive home.
Bully for you.
BTW, they are starting to take away the licenses of repeat violators.
Hey shitface, Kyboy didn't mention anything about him being like you so go crawl back in your hole.
Frisbee

Renton, WA

#31 May 25, 2012
Need A Light wrote:
I can see in your own case your mother ran out of coat hangers and did'nt own a gun.
You've obviously never heard of Depo-Provera. Look into it if you ever lose your virginity.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#32 May 25, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me ask: Should I be able to come to your house, and insist I be able to smoke in it? If not, why do you think it's okay for you to walk into another mans bar, bowling alley, or workplace, and insist that nobody smoke?
The great economist Walter E Williams put it best. He said that smoking bans violate property rights. Air itself has no owner. I don't own the air on the streets, on the lake, in the park or in a stadium. Owners are responsible for their own air, and they should be allowed to do with that air as they desire; no different than what you do with your air in your house or garage.
Voters (and apparently the Oho Supreme Court) decided that the owner of their property is not allowed to decide what to do with their air. Instead, what they do with their air is the decisions of others who do not own that property and thus the air in it.
Freedom means choice. The less choice one has, the less freedom one has. Freedom also means tolerance. There is no such thing as an intolerant free society. Freedom and intolerance are direct enemies of each other. You either have a free tolerant society, or a captive intolerant society; but you can't have both.
Now that the precedent is set that the public can dictate what the owner is allowed or not allowed to do with his property or the contents in it, I guess the public will be able to tell the owner what kind of food he can serve, the strength of his drinks, the intensity of his lighting, and where he can or cannot keep his dumpster in the back of the business.
After all, isn't that what property rights and freedom is all about?
You're argument fails because it is based upon an absurd premise, i. e., that because society as a whole "owns" the air, any one individual, or group, or business entity may pollute it to their heart's content without any governmental interference or regulation whatsoever.

I suggest that if I, contrary to legally enforceable legislation were to set up shop right next door to your home and start a business that emits toxins into the air that filters through your walls and windows on a regular basis you would most likely be upset, and take legal action to get me to stop.

Or if you owned a pond that was fed by a stream on my adjacent property, and I started discharging toxic heavy metals into the stream feeding your pond...same result.

Contrary to your suggestion, this has absolutely nothing to do with the red herring of overly intrusive governmental regulation. There's no slippery slope here that would suggest that any governmental entity will start telling owners what types of food they may serve etc..

The legislature acted at the request of a large number of people statewide and the Supreme Court upheld the ban as a proper and enforceable act of the state legislature.

I frequent a few establishments that abide by the ban, and other than during the first few months, they have not lost business as a result, that I can see. People have adapted to it, and still fo out and spend their money drinking in bars.

The smoking ban battle will get resolved over time, the way it should..through the courts and the legislature.

woof
ItsAFact

Frederick, MD

#33 May 25, 2012
Another Brain Washed wrote:
<quoted text>
ahole i am.
It's a fact.

Since: Feb 12

United States

#38 May 25, 2012
Good why should other people suffer for smokers disgusting habits? The other people suffer more breathing it in when they walk thru a cloud of smoke or it carries over. Then the smokers. Unless your on a reservation casino. That's except from mandatory state law they set the rules!!
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#39 May 25, 2012
Need A Light wrote:
<quoted text>
There is also birth control pills ....welfare should provide as a condition of collection.
Except for the fact that pills are optional to take, and most of these women have children on purpose.

Our liberal society set it up so that we penalize success and reward failure. When welfare queens have more kids, that means a larger welfare check, more food stamps which many of them sell for cash, a larger HUD home, and in some cases, in the suburbs. Government will give less resistance to a woman with children who applies for aid than if she applied just for herself.
Frisbee

Renton, WA

#40 May 25, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
Our liberal society set it up so that we penalize success and reward failure.
So are YOU a success or a failure? Please set aside the talking point, simplistic rhetoric and tell us how you've been personally punished/rewarded?

Do you have anything to say about the huge flaws that have been pointed out in your "there is no difference between personal property rights and the rights of people who operate a business open to the public" assertations?
pops

Cincinnati, OH

#41 May 25, 2012
CityBlue wrote:
Good why should other people suffer for smokers disgusting habits? The other people suffer more breathing it in when they walk thru a cloud of smoke or it carries over. Then the smokers.
I have never understood this claim. How can a person draw on a cig or pipe or cigar, take in toxins & tars that that build up in their body but somehow the 2nd hand smoke is harder on non-smokers?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#42 May 25, 2012
Frisbee wrote:
<quoted text>So are YOU a success or a failure? Please set aside the talking point, simplistic rhetoric and tell us how you've been personally punished/rewarded?
Do you have anything to say about the huge flaws that have been pointed out in your "there is no difference between personal property rights and the rights of people who operate a business open to the public" assertations?
Yes I do, but I didn't get to it yet. I work for a living so I can only dedicate so much time to Topix. That being said, I am a success because I earned everything I own. Therefore I get penalized by taxation which goes to welfare lowlifes some of whom never worked a day in their lives.

But since you are so impatient: government does regulate businesses, but never told them how to operate. They have regulations on food, times of serving alcohol, and various other items that may be a hazard to unaware public. Smoking is very obvious and needs not to be regulated. If you don't like smoke, don't go to the business. It's not hidden from you.

Government stopping owners from allowing smoking in their establishment is similar to government telling the owner what direction his tables and booths must face, what kind of table cloth they must have on the table, and the size of salt and pepper shakers. It's none of governments business.
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#43 May 25, 2012
pops wrote:
property rights & freedom had a mentionable amount to do with the founding of America. WE dissolved a monarchy (simular to dictator) to create & then preserve PERSONAL FREEDOMS & consequently create the greatest freedom loving country in history that has attracted & welcomed more people from more countries than ever B4 in history. There is something to be learned from that & every effort should be made to perpetuate that same level of achievement.
In fact, after the 13 colonies broke from England, they treated every other colony/possesion differently so that England would (& Spain & France) would not lose more power. America set the bar & now idiots are trying to lower that bar or even destroy it. So I could hardly agree with you more.
Unfortunately, we live in a "me, me, me" society. Men are not men anymore, they are more like spoiled children. Of course, I think you understand that given your name implies you are a bit older, and remember the world that I do.

I mean, imagine a grown man in the 50's or 60's crying about smoke in a bar. Back then, a guy like that would have gotten the hell beat out of him for being a sissy. Today, it's your standard man.

This is our changing country. It reminds me of a quote from a Joan Collins editorial: "I remember as a child when my grandfather took me by the hand and led me to the circus when it came to town. I especially enjoyed the freak tent. There you could see the fat man and the tattooed woman. Today they are all around me."

Today, being tough means that Starbucks ran out of your brand of coffee, and you had to tolerate a different brand. Or perhaps your neighbor is cutting his grass on an ozone alert day. Really, WTF happened to our men in this country?
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#44 May 25, 2012
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me ask: Should I be able to come to your house, and insist I be able to smoke in it? If not, why do you think it's okay for you to walk into another mans bar, bowling alley, or workplace, and insist that nobody smoke?
Du-u-uh, Gee, maybe 'cuz it's against the law to smoke in there?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#45 May 25, 2012
pops wrote:
<quoted text>Not sure if this is applicable but I had my 'tubes' tied after 3 kids because I couldn't afford any more. One is a very fine auto mechanic, one has been in the navy for 9 yrs with 5 to go on this hitch & one is in college to be a psychologist. I think that I did OK. And I got food stamps twice in my life. Once for 1 month & once for 2 months. The key is AID NOT SUPPORT. Glad that the AID was there when I needed it.
Proud of it!!!
And so you should be. Give my thanks to your son for serving our country.

The knee-jerk reaction when conservatives criticize our social programs is that we want everybody to die, and only allow the wealthy to survive. Of course, it's a gross exaggeration. It's just that the liberals have allowed the lazy to join the poor, and now we must support them all.

I had a cousin who had to go on welfare. She met this great guy who was a manager at a nearby nuclear plant. They got married and had two children. Everything was fine until he found drugs. From there, he was worthless and my cousin had to divorce him.

There she was, a stay at home mother with two small children, and no way to support herself and her family. So, she went on public assistance. She stayed on public assistance until her children became school age. From there, she went to college part time while raising her kids. Today, she is a productive member of society, her children went to college, and everybody is doing fine. She repaid her debt to society by contributing, and that's what these social programs are for.
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#46 May 25, 2012
Kyboy wrote:
There are many bars in Ohio that have quite enforcing the smoke ban. Business that are just bars were losing to many customers and had to make a choice of shutting down the bar or allow smokers to smoke to stay in business.
I am a smoker and have not had any problems finding bars that allow smoking in most of ohio's cities.
Well, the ruling in this case may well alter that somewhat. There is no longer any rational way to pretend that the government might back down.

There is no longer any reason for the health department to even consider holding off on their enforcement proceedings.

There is no longer any reason to think that racking up unpaid fines won't put a bar comPLETELY out of business via the back door of refusing to renew the liquor license.

Sooner or later, too, people are going to begin calling in complaints against individual smokers. I don't know what the means of inspection/enforcement would be for that, but I betcha the state would be okay with having some money from an out-of-stater coming around to flout the law.
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#47 May 25, 2012
Kyboy wrote:
<quoted text>
I work out of town and stay at hotels. I Don't get shiftfaced and most places I stay at have smoking bars within walking distance so no driving involved.
BTW taking licenses away has not stop the drunk driving repeaters. Maybe increasing jail time for them would help curb the problem.
Taking LIQUOR licenses away will pretty soon reduce the number of bars willing to indulge you addicts.
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#48 May 25, 2012
frisky wrote:
<quoted text>look at this retard thinks he has something of value to add,.....yesterdays news.
Somebody explain to her that we can't actually SEE her?
xxxrayted

Cleveland, OH

#49 May 25, 2012
Frisbee wrote:
<quoted text>That would be good. Shot would be better, except it makes some people sick.
<quoted text>If only it were that easy.
If the procedure was reversible and the reversal was free after you had been supporting yourself for a year or so, you might be on to something. Not all of those on assistance are chronic abusers, especially in these economic times. Punishing those who use the system as it was intended with infertility is extremely oppressive coming from a guy who was preaching freedom in the other post.
<quoted text>Exactly the guy I'm referring to. We couldn't very well force him to get sterilized for taking a 3 months worth of food stamps. I chuckle when I hear the oppressive, totalitarian things that come out of self-professed freedom lovers.
So you define "freedom" as a person being allowed to procreate as often as possible, and then sending the bill to the taxpayer? You have an awfully perverted definition of what freedom is.

It's very simple: if you don't want to agree to the terms of the public giving you money, then get a job and don't go on public assistance. If you have no choice, then any responsible person would agree to those terms, because even after they got off of the system, they probably couldn't afford a larger family anyway.

Public assistance should be looked at as a gift--not a right. It's just like having a drivers license. It's a privilege. Because it's a privilege, it comes with certain terms you must adhere to.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ohio Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Creationism coming to Ohio classrooms? Not with... 8 hr nobody 7
Ohio and U.S. companies in demand for truck dri... (Nov '12) 10 hr xxxrayted 15
Mike DeWine's decision to join Texas immigratio... 23 hr Cricket 23 3
Democrats, Obama part on $1.1 trillion spending... Fri Earl 15
Congress presses Obama on Russia sanctions Dec 18 Go Blue Forever 13
Caleb Miller Baltimore Ohio Dec 16 Voted Number what 1
Inmate found dead at Lebanon Correctional Insti... (Apr '12) Dec 16 hambone 43
More from around the web