Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 19 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
Smoking ban heralds great sigh of relief
Published Thursday, October 2, 2008
We have a custom of remembering life-changing events by celebrating every year. Oct. 1, marks the anniversary of the state-wide smoking ban, but there probably won’t be a parade.
When you’re grateful all year long, you don’t need one.
Just imagine fresh air to breathe. Imagine children with fewer tears, coughs and doctor visits. Imagine fewer fire hazards. Imagine increased productivity. Imagine more exercise and healing. Imagine the health benefits of millions of people.
We don’t have to imagine any more, do we? These things are a reality, thanks to the voices who cared and they inspire hope for even greater gains in every community. That’s the type of leadership and vision we value.
The kind that exemplifies a legacy worthy of our children’s future. God gives us the foresight and blesses our efforts. We get the priviledge. He gets the glory.
Forget the parade on Oct. 1. Just listen for the great sigh of relief.
Robert John Noah - Underwood
Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Witty is great. Abusive is not. If you think a post violates these standards, don't escalate the situation. Instead, flag the comment to alert us. We'll take action if necessary. It's not hard. This should be a place where people want to read and contribute -- a place for spirited exchanges of opinion. So those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post at all.Posted by timetotalk (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 12:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I guess it is only appropriate that this letter is published the same day as the article regarding the smoking ban hurting charitable gaming.
October first is not a time for celebration. It is a time that Joe Bartender lost his job and small, privately owned businesses that once thrived, began to see a decrease of business and prepared to close their doors.
October first is a day that, I personally know, was the beginning of the end of several local jobs and many jobs around the state.
I realize there are pros and cons to everything. I am simply stating the facts as I see them.
Posted by JAnderson (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think anytime health is involved it is a non-issue. If it is for the betterment of ones health (2nd hand smoke), it's a no-brainer. Would you take the chance (I give smokers the benefit of the doubt by using "Chance") of harming your own childs health for the opportunity to increase sales? Maybe policians or Wall Street people would...that's about it.
Posted by ckint1975 (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think they should of made it the bars choice and the peoples choice to to have a smoking ban in the bar. The gov. should not have made it a law. Too much control in the gov. already. Most people do not even see how much this has affected state wide in non-profit funds.
Posted by mgdbottled (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 2:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I think we should ban cars and electric plants and fat people. Wait, we wouldn't have any fat people if we banned cars and electric plants. Disregard that last point.
Posted by goingfishing (anonymous) on October 2, 2008 at 3:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
They should have been realistic and could have eliminated smoking in places other than bars. While doing that they could have had bars provide non smoking areas.
Mr. Noah, just how many kids do you see in bars?
I know of 4 bars that have closed due to the smoking ban. I also know of 2 restraunt/bar situations that closed after the ban. Also know of 2 that have cut their hours in an effort to stay open. Now, if there had not been a total ban, all of those business owners and their employees would still have an income and if the smoking would have been restricted in those places, Mr. Noah would still be able to drink and eat smoke free.
Posted by potatosup (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I, for one, am very please with the smoking ban. Previously, everytime we were deciding where to go out for the evening the pro's and con's would always fall to that gross stench we faced when we came home at night, if we went to a bar, as well as the cough and tight lungs that wouldn't clear up until the following afternoon. This past year I have been able to go to bars, listen to great music and party with my friends and even pull on the same jeans in the morning that I had on the evening before, without the stench. Our social lives have seen freedom. The bars have gotten more business from our household at a result of this ban. On the bigger economic picture, I think that maybe specific "smoking bars" labeled as such may be practical for those who do smoke, but then aren't all the doctors telling every smoker to quit before they or their friends and family end up with cancer, emphazima(sp?), etc?. If there were "smoking bars", do you really think they would stay in business very long considering how many people are waking up and quitting smoking?
Posted by jojo (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I was once a person that got really sick from going into a bar and getting sick because of the smoke. So I only went when I had to for the ocassional birthday or wedding dance. I have lost family members to lung cancer and I know first hand what it looks like after years of smoking. So before the smoking ban I went to different businesses to spend my afternoons. YES there where OTHER places to go.
Posted by bornhere (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Power to the People. Timetotalk, Joe Bartender is a friend of mine and Joe Bartender did not loose his job. He is breathing clean air now and will not have to leave his job because of all the freakin smoke. Go blow your smoke on people in your own home!
Posted by bornhere (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 3:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"First they take away our guns now they take away our cigarettes. What on earth is this country coming to?"
Profamily, nobody took away your precious guns and your precious cigarettes. We just don't want you precious guns and your precious cigarettes in our face.
How odd that your screen name is "profamily"!
Posted by robbie (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 4:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
bornhere "Power to the People" the bar owners are the ones paying the bills of their business not you or the government. If it was better for them to have a non smoking or smoking establishment they would have done what ever to make a profit for sure. I think we would have ended up with some none smoking and others full fledge smoking. The decision would have been with the person writing out the checks each month. Which is the way it should be.
Posted by bornhere (anonymous) on October 3, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Robbie, The bar owners pay the bills but the bar patrons are the ones who give them the money, not the government.
The market prevails. We do not want smoke.
Posted by mgdbottled (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Funny how these conservatives bitch and complain about socialism and then they go and socialize all the bars and restaurants with government invention by banning smoking. Free market would dictate "let the bar owners and restaurant owners decide".
They had the votes in the legislature to ban smoking in bars and restaurants out here in Michigan; but the non-smoking advocates wanted to exempt the Casinos in SE Michigan and smoke shops so as to not put them at a disavantage with the Indian owned Casinos and smoke shops. Health turned out to be a secondary concern over economics. I'm still laughing my arse off over the hypocracy every time I light up in a restaurant.
Posted by bucksteel (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Funny how the liberals, who want government intervention in all aspects of our lives, bitch and complain when they go and socialize all the bars and restaurants by banning smoking here in MN - I'm still laughing my arse off every time I watch another of the liberal crowd whine as they go outside to feed their habit.
Posted by mccain08 (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 8:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
actually it is the conservatives that enjoy "government intervention in all aspects of our lives" they censor everything, tell you who to marry, tell you what to smoke, and they are working on telling you what religion you are allowed to practice. if you're voting for conservative on 11/04, you better stock up on playboys and dvds that dont star larry the cable guy. and if you believe jesus was the prince of peace, you will probably get thrown into gitmo until you concede that jesus invented to m-16.
Posted by bornhere (anonymous) on October 5, 2008 at 5:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm laughing ever time I see both liberals and conservatives go outside and freeze their "arse" off to suck on their cigarettes! May they suck on 'em until they are blue in the face and leave the rest of us with clean air. Power to the people.
Posted by robbie (anonymous) on October 6, 2008 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well then bornfree "market prevails" get in there and keep them alive. Donate to charitable gambling!!
"May they suck on 'em until they are blue in the face and leave the rest of us with clean air" Listen to yourself I hope you don't live here-we don't want thinker/talkers like you. Do you drive a car? Are you just as nasty to the guy that chooses to be a mechanic and work in such exhaust and chemicals. Or the guy that chooses to work in the coal mines to bring you electricity. We can be nice about our fellow man and still have an opinion.
Posted by Callie25 (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm not sure how many children went into the bars either. It would only be common sense to go without them. There are many many different sides to this subject and it is very very true that many bars are suffering from the smoking ban. I say leave it up to the bar owner to do what they want to do, they have had time to decide if the impact on their business has been positive/negative, and go from there. I don't see why it is necessary to be so cruel to people who smoke, it is not against the law..I wonder if some of you are so proactive against other things that are.
Posted by Callie25 (anonymous) on October 7, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Incidentally, lots of things cause lung cancer...exhaust, radon (that's a biggie folks), a new study suggests air fresheners, certainly household cleaners can damage the lungs..
Posted by Jerry (anonymous) on October 8, 2008 at 1:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dead Man Walking in Michigan!
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)